Skip to content

ADR 006: Choosing OpenStreetMap as Map Tiles Provider

Date: 2026-03-25
Context: Mapping and Geospatial Services
Status: Currently accepted

1. Context

Our project requires a reliable map tiles provider for displaying geospatial data. The key requirements include:

  • Map tiles API for rendering interactive maps
  • Global coverage with good detail
  • Cost-effective solution with no vendor lock-in
  • Customization options for map styling
  • No API key requirements or usage-based billing

We evaluated several map providers to determine the best fit for our requirements.

2. Decision

We decided to adopt OpenStreetMap as the primary map tiles provider for our application.

3. Rationale

Benefits of using OpenStreetMap:

  • Cost-Effective:
    • Free to use with no API key requirements
    • No usage-based billing or rate limits on public instances
    • Multiple public tile servers available
  • Open Source & Community-Driven:
    • Community-contributed data with extensive global coverage
    • Transparent data sources and methodology
    • Continuous improvement by thousands of contributors
  • Customization:
    • Multiple render styles and themes available
    • Ability to host custom tile servers if needed
    • Full control over map appearance and data
  • Privacy-Friendly:
    • No tracking or data collection requirements
    • No vendor dependency for core functionality
  • Good Technical Integration:
    • Standardized tile API compatible with Leaflet, MapLibre, OpenLayers
    • Multiple public tile providers as fallbacks
    • WMS support for advanced use cases

Alternatives considered:

Option Pros Cons
Google Maps High-quality tiles, extensive APIs, global coverage Requires API key with credit card, usage-based pricing, restrictive ToS
Apple Maps Good quality, native iOS integration Limited API access, primarily Apple ecosystem focused
Yandex Maps Strong in Russia and CIS countries, good APIs Weak coverage outside primary regions, Russian data sovereignty concerns
Bing Maps Good global coverage, Microsoft integration Requires API key, usage-based pricing, less intuitive API

Google Maps was rejected due to mandatory API key requirements, credit card registration, and usage-based pricing model that could lead to unexpected costs at scale.

Apple Maps was not chosen due to limited API accessibility and ecosystem focus that does not align with our cross-platform requirements.

Yandex Maps has insufficient coverage outside Russia and CIS regions, making it unsuitable for our global use case.

Bing Maps requires API keys and has a more complex pricing structure compared to the free options.

OpenStreetMap provides the best balance of cost, coverage, customization, and privacy for our project.

4. Consequences

Positive Outcomes

  • No API costs or billing complexity
  • Full control over map infrastructure and data
  • Privacy-respecting mapping solution
  • Easy integration with popular JavaScript mapping libraries
  • Multiple fallback tile providers available

Tradeoffs and Considerations

  • Tile quality and freshness varies by region (community-dependent)
  • Public tile servers have fair-use policies; high-traffic apps may need custom server
  • No built-in geocoding or routing services (separate integrations needed)
  • Less polished default styling compared to commercial alternatives

5. References