How is discouraged accurate here when it's a do not enter? Am I misunderstanding the way the wiki describes "legal right"?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152409947

Please do not map buffered bike lanes as cycleways. This is removing data and degrading bicycle mapping and routing
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152398182

I'm confused how this is permissive, is it not busses only?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152397571

Why mark the davis busway as permissive? It's authorised vehicles only
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152394069

If you advance the street level imagery up College Ave, you'll be able to see this crossing. The signalised crossing in the imagery you linked is Highland Ave, while the crossing that you edited here is the Davis Square Busway. The crossings across College Ave, adjacent to this edited crossing, are signalised, but the Busway crossing specifically is not.

These are actually signalised crossings. In the future, rather than delete the tag off the node, I'd reccomend to update the tags to make the node and the way agree. I've updated the tags on all the crossings in this intersection changeset/152304756

How did you conclude this is a signalised crossing? I don't believe the city changed this crosswalk this spring, I believe it still matches imagery and is an unsignalised crossing marked with zebra/longitudinal bars

That map just lists parcels, it doesn't touch at all on what is/is not a private way? The canonical list is the one in ordinances

Where are you seeing it as a public way in city GIS? I'd like to report that as a data issue to the city given it's listed as a private way in ordinances

And looking closer at these, there is no particular signage beyond the private way signage. This I believe under MGL would make these access=permissive at maximum

Does access not denote legal restrictions?

This is signed explicitly that it has restrictions?

From what I can see, this includes buffered lanes, not an off street cycle track https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0d292dbd1932495fae4be15c124229c6

I don't believe there's plans for a hardscape, grade, or fully offroad cycle track prior to the grounding?

What's the source of this construction:cycleway you've mapped over the McGrath bridge? I wasn't aware there was a current project
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152263635

Please se https://library.municode.com/ma/somerville/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=APXCCIST_ART1LOLEWIPUPRST, this is a private street

How are you using the Cambridge GIS to determine whether ways are private? That map shows parcel and asset details, but does not go into details on individual streets.

Farrell Way for example is on a private parcel.

Even if you were to rely on "does this street cross into a private parcel", that doesn't accurately reflect the conditions on the ground, as that map does not show what streets are marked as private

Oh, apologies, misread the changeset, looks like that is what is mapped here

I believe the segment from Mass Ave to Oxford St is in fact a 1 way? it's been about a week since I rode this, so I can't say authoritatively

Somerville Ave doesn't have a cycle track at any point, it's all on-street lane, at some points buffered.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152220019

To my knowledge, these are signed as private
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152221321