piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-12 04:28:43+00:00): That wouldn't apply to buffered lanes, like Mass Ave from Cambridge St to Everett St in Cambridge, Washington St or Broadway near Ball or College Ave or Holland St in Somerville, which were mapped with lane tags (and often still have the buffer tags, which are not included on the cyclepath ways)

I still prefer to map cycle tracks via the cycleway=track tag rather than as cycle path, as they are different from off street paths, and it preserves the metadata that can be shared with the street. These sorts of "cycle lane mapped as cycle path" generally are not part of relations, and so there's no way for data consumers to associate with the tagging on the primary way.

You also did map "cycle paths" on Cambridge St in Cambridge?
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-12 05:23:22+00:00): I only made the cycle paths more accurate on Cambridge as new imagery was available.
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-19 16:04:02+00:00): My inclination is to set up maproulette with an overpass query like this one: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Rpe and use it to go through and clean up some of the mistagged things. I'd like to clarify a bit of the standard before than, my inclination is:
- off street, shared paths should be mapped separately
- cycletracks _can_ be separate, but can be tags. There's some fuzzyness here, where e.g. parts of Beacon St in Somerville have a cycle track with a sloped curb, so there is no hard separation
- buffered bike lanes must have tags indicating buffer. I believe this necessitates not mapping separate, as I don't believe there's a standard for that ( I also don't think these should be separate per the OSM wiki definition of "on street")
- non buffered bike lanes should never be separate

This would add more information in  terms of what is/is not buffered, reduce the number of places where there appears to be an off street path that doesn't exist, and associate more cycleway tagging with already named street ways
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 16:27:31+00:00): OSM wiki states that any bike lane that has physical separation should be a cycle track.
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-19 17:21:22+00:00): The wiki also states that `highway=cycleway` should not be used for lanes that are inherently part of the road, and proceeds to include no examples of on street facilities as `highway=cycleway`. In other places, the wiki reccomends using the `separation` tag for on street facilities with separation.
 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Separation seems a much cleaner way to define this than "call every lane with separation a track", and "treat every track as a cycleway". I think it's much more useful to tag separation and indicate the functional amount of protection in different facilities that are attached to roads, as that surfaces much more usable information to routing tools, data analysis, and renderers.
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 17:29:50+00:00): That’s a proposal, it has not been adopted. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway This wiki page says that a cycle track is a class IV bike facility which is defined as a bike lane protected with curbs, flex posts, or planters.
commented by lmum (2024-09-19 17:30:03+00:00): Sounds like a good plan. I have no preference to state about which representation is better for in-road protected bike lanes. But agree that de-duplicating is right and crowd-sourcing could work. Would recommend tagging as 'intermediate' or 'expert' task on StreetComplete
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 17:40:52+00:00): You can tag a drawn cycle track with a separation tag, in fact it’s written in the wiki page you shared.
commented by lmum (2024-09-19 17:42:00+00:00): Don't have anything to add about the better approach to mapping protected bike lanes, but agree that MapRoulette could be a good way to fix the duplicated representations. I would set as an "expert" task. 

Just to restate the issue as I understand it: across Cambridge/Somerville, bike lanes currently represented in both the roadway tags and as a separate way. Where mapping separate cycle ways, bike-related road tags need to be removed and the tag "cycleway=separate" needs to be added. Is that true?
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 17:47:53+00:00): Yes
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 17:48:45+00:00): It’s mostly done, there might be a few examples where there is overlap
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-19 18:27:33+00:00): That is not how I would describe the issue. There's a number of places where things are mapped as though there is protection where there is not. See for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1297816226 which doesn't exist south of Milk St. This is something I had fixed 4 months ago https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152294610 and have resurveyed today, and will update later. If I find picture hosting, I will share photos, otherwise I am happy to share them by email.

There's also an issue where there is more information in the tags on the roadway than the separate cycleways, and the increasing prevalence of the mapping of separated cycleways has degraded the map for viewing, inspecting, querying, and routing. Specifically, the tags that were not carried over mean that querying the map yields less information. The separation of cycle lanes from the roadway also separates them from the name of the roadway. This in combination with some of the cycle lanes mapped as cycleways that depart and rejoin the roadway repeatedly make creating cues for routing very strange
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 18:59:39+00:00): I haven’t had a routing issue when using the “transit” app. It simply tells you to “slight right onto the protected bike lane” and merge back onto the road when the bike lanes ends. I feel like with making all protected bike lanes tagged as “standard bike lanes”, routing will be degraded quite a bit as routing apps will think that bike lanes that are protected by flex posts are just paint bike lanes which would result in wrong routing.
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-19 21:33:18+00:00): With routing, I often use cue sheets that are by road to help navigation, especially where GPS can be a little off or some of the intersections around here where there are 6 different ways you could turn right. If I route from Memorial Drive @ JFK St to Central square, along JFK St, Mt Auburn St, and Mass Ave, the cue sheet ends up being
* Turn right
* Keep right
* Slight right onto Massachusetts Ave

In places where the drawn cycleway repeatedly enters and departs from the road, it makes the cue sheet very noisy.

I take rather the opposite view from you, if we tag every flex post protected lane where the flexposts have been run over enough that they aren't remotely white anymore the same as the Somerville Community Path, I see that as much more degrading routing. Flex posts don't offer the same protection as hardscape.
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-19 21:56:13+00:00): You can tag separation on a cycle path. If a cycle path is separated by flex posts, it can be tagged as such. If it separated by curbing, it can be tagged as such. Look at other cities, they have tagged bike lanes that are protected by flex posts as cycle tracks and stated the separation tag. If we tag all flex post protected bike lanes in the Boston area as standard bike lanes, the point of using bike routing apps will be heavily impacted as they will not be able to differentiate the difference between flex posts protected bike lanes and painted gutters. Also, it wouldn’t be consistent with other cities around the US.
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-19 22:12:18+00:00): I also think we should use the separation tag! I don't like what mapping everything as cycleway does to routing, and that they render in a way that seems to very much imply they are off street, but I very much want to include more information rather than less
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-20 05:01:40+00:00): Here is what I propose:
Bike lanes separated by curbs or hardscape should be mapped separately, and the cycleway should be tagged with the "separation=*" tag. I say this because these bike lanes usually have weird geometry and crossings that would not be shown using the "cycleway=track" tag. This also differentiates hardscape-protected lanes from flex post-protected lanes.
- Bike lanes separated by flex posts should be mapped as cycle tracks using the "cycleway=track" and "cycleway:separation=flex_post" tags.
-Buffered bike lanes should be mapped with the "cycleway=lane" and "cycleway:buffer=yes" tags
- Non-buffered lanes should be tagged as "cycleway=lane".
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-20 13:23:01+00:00): I mostly agree, though I have some distinctions for flex posts. If a lane is such that the flex posts provide no barrier to moving between the bike lane and the auto way, and there is no other barrier, I view that as being a part of the street, and would mark it as an on street lane, not as a track
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-20 15:31:51+00:00): Could you elaborate more on what you mean by “no barrier between moving between the bike lane and auto way”? Do you mean the flex posts are too spread out?
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-20 17:40:55+00:00): Yes, most flex posts in the area are deployed in such a way that a bicycle can move into the auto lane trivially, and many of them I can actually slalom between. For a person on a bike, lanes that have this (Mass Ave as an example) aren't separated from the auto network in terms of navigation. There are some cycle tracks that behave somewhat like this, Beacon St in Somerville Northbound is the only one that is coming to mind locally.

Lanes like this don't behave like curb or greenery separated cycle tracks, nor like off street shared paths
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-20 18:19:45+00:00): What I proposed is the standard that is used in a lot of other cities and is in line with the OSM wiki. I feel we should use the standard other cities use. This would also benefit tourists and visitors who want to bike around the area as routings would be of similar safety to routings from where they are from. If we tag flex post lanes as standard bike lanes, routing apps will not be able to tell the difference between a flex posts protected bike lane and a painted gutter and would route using the shortest way. This would jeopardize safety to cyclists as they would not be routed on the safest route. Also, a cycle track does not mean the bike lane is off the street. That is a cycle path. The “cycleway=track” tag is specifically designed for on street bike lanes.
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-20 18:25:44+00:00): The “cycleway=track” tag is not a separate way. It is tagged on the road itself so your point that the Mass ave bike lane should not be a separate way is invalid if we convert mapping flex post lanes as cycle path to cycle tracks mapped on the road which is what I was proposing.
commented by cubbe8 (2024-09-20 18:55:59+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156882746

This is a test I have done to show how tagging flex post-protected bike lanes would appear and how bike routing apps would interpret it.
commented by KiloThree (2024-09-21 01:06:24+00:00): I definitely think your proposal is an improvement!

I'm sorry for my difficulty with "track", I've had a very hard time with reconciling my experience of infrastructure and the different categorizations I've seen in projects with the buckets of the wiki described tagging scheme, I'm hoping the separation proposal will help a lot with that.
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 01:45:17+00:00): New? Building on corner

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 01:45:26+00:00): In context of overlay "Buildings" – house number 41 – https://osm.org/way/1302769289 via StreetComplete 58.2:

This building demolished
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 01:49:33+00:00): In context of overlay "Buildings" – house number 104: Apartment Building – https://osm.org/way/1175786759 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Villa Rosa
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 01:52:50+00:00): In context of overlay "Buildings" – house number 142: Detached House – https://osm.org/way/1175786772 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Building moved to the west of block
opened by  (2024-07-22 01:56:52+00:00): Via al Ponte Medioevale
closed by Paolitosss (2025-06-23 19:32:09+00:00): corretto nome, chiudo
opened by  (2024-07-22 01:56:54+00:00): Ija-I
closed by mavl (2024-07-22 09:14:57+00:00): This note does not contain a useful information for OpenStreetMap.
opened by  (2024-07-22 01:57:54+00:00): Via Pietro Mainero
opened by  (2024-07-22 01:59:50+00:00): Via Ernesto Bacchetti
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:02:09+00:00): Via Pietro Gerolamo Maineri
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 02:02:19+00:00): Unable to answer "What surface does this road have?" – inside: Pedestrian Street – https://osm.org/way/108705175 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Not a pedestrian street
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:04:05+00:00): Via Giovanni Battista Parodi
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:04:47+00:00): Via Braida
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 02:05:24+00:00): Unable to answer "What surface does this road have?" – inside: Pedestrian Street – https://osm.org/way/108705176 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Not a pedestrian street
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:07:39+00:00): Via Sant'Antonio
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:11:55+00:00): Via degli Orsolani
commented by Paolitosss (2025-12-13 17:43:38+00:00): corretto
opened by thjrribeiro92 (2024-07-22 02:15:02+00:00): Juá
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:15:12+00:00): onosm.org submitted note from a business:
Name: Fast Track Swimming
addr:housenumber=18003
addr:street=Shaw Road
addr:city=Tomball
addr:postcode=77377
Phone number: 281-547-7604
Website: https://fasttrackswimming.com
Social Network: https://twitter.com/fasttrackswim
Opening Hours: Mo-Fr 9am-8pm, Sat 9am-1pm
Wheelchair accessibility: yes
Category: Swimming Lessons/Schools
Accepted payment methods: Cash,Cheque,Mastercard,American Express,Visa
takeaway=no
closed by JPAKx4 (2024-07-22 02:36:03+00:00): Added Business
opened by  (2024-07-22 02:20:29+00:00): This is the French Broad Overlook
closed by rivermont (2024-07-23 13:19:22+00:00): No, this is a private driveway. Google baselessly says it is the French Broad Overlook.
opened by Leosdany (2024-07-22 02:22:44+00:00): Hola mi ubicación es esta no estoy en cuba
opened by SlaveKnightGael (2024-07-22 02:22:45+00:00): Parada duplicada

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 02:24:48+00:00): Missing path

via StreetComplete 58.2

GPS Trace: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/David%20Dean/traces/11406790
opened by Davie Dean (2024-07-22 02:33:10+00:00): Unable to answer "What basic shape does this building’s roof have?" – Detached House – https://osm.org/way/543897188 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Hipped & gabled
opened by volkerti (2024-07-22 02:44:27+00:00): Unable to answer "What number or code identifies this stop?" – Train Replacement Bus Stop (Bus Stop) – https://osm.org/node/5129589224 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Just a train replacement bus stop, temporary use only.
closed by Ewen Hill (2024-08-12 10:21:55+00:00): closed - no action required it appears
opened by jarpandres (2024-07-22 02:46:50+00:00): GAS ANDRES TEMUCO
opened by Beryl❀ (2024-07-22 02:51:15+00:00): I don't remember seeing this - does this post box still exist?
commented by robrown (2026-05-02 14:21:35+00:00): Yes, post box is still here

Attached photo(s):
https://streetcomplete.app/p/342319.jpg
opened by 00u (2024-07-22 02:58:36+00:00): In context of overlay "Things" – Bench – https://osm.org/node/9784191746 via StreetComplete_ee 58.2:

Doublon
closed by Syl (2024-07-22 05:55:52+00:00): Je viens de corriger
opened by Vaderaj (2024-07-22 03:04:36+00:00): Unable to answer "Is there tactile paving on this curb here?" – Lowered Curb – https://osm.org/node/11051035087 via StreetComplete 58.2:

There is something similar to a curb, since I do not know how it is useful at a bus stop, I cannot say much. 

Thanks
closed by Ewen Hill (2024-08-12 10:28:55+00:00): add tactile paving from aerial and mapillary
opened by svne (2024-07-22 03:05:59+00:00): New development being put in here. Townhouses or similar.
commented by svne (2024-07-27 05:35:06+00:00): For reference, you can find the construction permit here: https://cv.westkelownacity.ca/CityViewPortal/Planning/StatusReference?referenceNumber=PL20210000096
closed by svne (2024-08-19 05:26:58+00:00): Updated area to a temporary state in changeset #155442469
opened by svne (2024-07-22 03:06:13+00:00): City building here is demolished.
commented by svne (2024-07-27 05:34:39+00:00): Demolition permit can be found here: https://cv.westkelownacity.ca/CityViewPortal/Permit/StatusReference?referenceNumber=PRDC20240234

Construction permit for a new fire hall: https://cv.westkelownacity.ca/CityViewPortal/Permit/StatusReference?referenceNumber=PRBDC20230807
closed by Rhodez (2024-07-28 23:15:48+00:00): fixed
opened by MapsByEX (2024-07-22 03:06:35+00:00): 27 lanes? What happened here?
closed by manuel-128 (2024-09-18 04:59:09+00:00): correction faite
opened by svne (2024-07-22 03:07:25+00:00): New winery building is being constructed here. Needs mapping.
closed by svne (2024-08-19 05:13:10+00:00): Fixed in changeset #155442143
opened by vasony (2024-07-22 03:10:03+00:00): Őzika utca vagy Ifjúság utca szerepel az utcatáblán?
commented by vasony (2024-07-22 03:19:57+00:00): https://www.etdr.gov.hu/Nyilvanos/202300043015
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:12:18+00:00): 6

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by SerjFF (2024-07-22 03:14:10+00:00): "Яхт-клуб «Звёздный»"
OSM snapshot date: 2024-07-02T13:27:57Z
POI has no name
POI types: building
 #organicmaps ios
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:14:28+00:00): Condominio Eden

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:16:55+00:00): Parcheggio

via StreetComplete 58.2

Attached photo(s):
https://westnordost.de/p/226217.jpg
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:18:23+00:00): Condominio Perseo

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:19:16+00:00): Condominio Al Mare

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by  (2024-07-22 03:20:15+00:00): 這一小段和平路
 駛向東北單行道
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:20:58+00:00): Hotel Victoria 3*

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Nancy Devine (2024-07-22 03:22:42+00:00): Unable to answer "What’s the name of this street?" – Residential Road – https://osm.org/way/30455340 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Culdesac off adjacent street
closed by dugfresh (2024-08-05 15:51:55+00:00): NE 13th Place
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:24:01+00:00): 3

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:24:26+00:00): Villa Gabi

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:24:37+00:00): Villa Nina

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:24:55+00:00): Villa Isolda

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by  (2024-07-22 03:25:01+00:00): Vijayaganapathy Nagar 1st Street
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:25:06+00:00): Villa Ketty

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by VicoSen (2024-07-22 03:28:13+00:00): Arthur's Cafe and Cafe on Shelley both no longer exist. Instead this appears to be a two story purely residential building now.
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:28:32+00:00): Villa Mariucci

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:29:14+00:00): Villa Liliana

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by _Ilyasych_ (2024-07-22 03:29:23+00:00): Гора BikeТау (2630)
commented by _Ilyasych_ (2024-07-22 03:36:50+00:00): От перевала песчаного по гребню можно выйти на данную вершину.
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:29:29+00:00): Villa Rita

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by _Ilyasych_ (2024-07-22 03:32:36+00:00): перевал Песчанный (2500)
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:35:19+00:00): Condominio Centrale

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by svne (2024-07-22 03:37:04+00:00): This section has new (separated) foot/bike paths that need mapping.
commented by svne (2024-07-26 20:58:57+00:00): Progress made, but not solved, in changeset #154461240
closed by svne (2024-07-30 05:39:27+00:00): Resolved in changeset #154588878. The farther North section could probably use separated sidewalks still, but that's low priority.
opened by Đuro Jiří (2024-07-22 03:38:58+00:00): Condominio Battistutta

via StreetComplete 58.2
opened by uvi (2024-07-22 03:41:24+00:00): ausgewiesene Badestelle "Zauchenwiese"
opened by Endy_ (2024-07-22 03:47:06+00:00): bee valley
opened by Matthew Mahnke (2024-07-22 03:54:35+00:00): There is a flood light (pointed at the baseball diamond), but I'm unsure how it gets turned on
opened by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 03:58:34+00:00): Unable to answer "Is there a shelter at this stop?" – Canberra Hospital after Gilmore Crescent (Bus Stop) – https://osm.org/node/1894110395 via StreetComplete 58.2:

does not exist anymore
closed by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 06:50:03+00:00): Done
opened by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 03:59:18+00:00): In context of overlay "Buildings" – Administration (Hospital Building) – https://osm.org/way/91855379 via StreetComplete 58.2:

demoloished and now a building site
closed by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 06:50:44+00:00): building removed
opened by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 04:00:42+00:00): Unable to answer "Is there a shelter at this stop?" – Canberra Hospital before Gilmore Crescent (Bus Stop) – https://osm.org/node/1892689997 via StreetComplete 58.2:

bus roure
closed by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 06:52:24+00:00): THis is not a bus stop but a stop on a bus route
opened by ciaoQuentin (2024-07-22 04:00:56+00:00): Unable to answer "How many car lanes does this road have?" – Route de Veauchette (Minor/Unclassified Road) – https://osm.org/way/246760519 via StreetComplete 58.2:

Une seule voie peinte à double sens : chaucidou.

Attached photo(s):
https://westnordost.de/p/226218.jpg
commented by Syl (2024-07-22 05:50:24+00:00): Ce marquage doit être récent, je ne le vois pas sur les images aériennes.
Pour modifier il faut soit attendre de nouvelles images soit vérifier sur place où commence et fini ce marquage.
closed by ciaoQuentin (2024-07-22 08:55:35+00:00): Oui je suis passé sur place. Il y a bien un "chaucidou" qui est mis en place.
En fait demande le type d'aménagement cyclable. Mais si la réponse est chaucidou, alors demander ensuite le nombre de voies (pour voitures) peintes est inutile. Car par définition, avec un chaucidou, il n'y a plus de voies peintes pour voitures.
closed by Syl (2024-07-22 09:35:37+00:00): Dans la doc il est dit de quand même préciser qu'il n'y a qu'une voie pour voiture et d'expliciter que la route n'est pas à sens unique : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Bandes_cyclables
Je viens d'ajouter ces tags.
Et sinon ça pourrait être quelque chose à signaler à StreetComplete d'ajouter automatiquement ces attributs lorsqu'on ajoute un chaucidou.
opened by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 04:02:51+00:00): Unable to answer "Do these steps have a handrail?" – Steps – https://osm.org/way/762572901 via StreetComplete 58.2:

steps here have been removed
closed by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 06:51:10+00:00): steps removed
opened by  (2024-07-22 04:06:36+00:00): In riferimento alle due note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3380518 e https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3380519
Il tag name dei civici deve essere lo stesso nome della via, altrimenti non va bene e ad esempio i navigatori non trovano il numero civico.
commented by ivanbranco (2024-07-22 07:26:08+00:00): Ciao, non sarebbe forse piú semplice se tu contribuissi attivamente? Vedo che tieni d'occhio le note, conosci le convenzioni ecc. ci metteresti due secondi a sistemare cose cosí. Se non fossi in grado puoi anche scrivermi per consigli
opened by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 04:09:39+00:00): In context of overlay "Buildings" – Building 23 (Hospital Building) – https://osm.org/way/179070050 via StreetComplete 58.2:

demolished and now building site
closed by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 06:50:55+00:00): building removed
opened by  (2024-07-22 04:17:58+00:00): There are no steps inwards like this, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNdQcorPiD8
opened by nookkorawan (2024-07-22 04:18:16+00:00): Little sea kids cafe
closed by nookkorawan (2024-07-22 04:19:23+00:00): คาเฟ่เด็ก มีสนามเด็กเล่น
opened by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 04:18:54+00:00): this windy path no longer exists

via StreetComplete 58.2
closed by user_21492486 (2024-07-22 06:50:21+00:00): OK - retaining wall