What is this based off of? There's a total of about 2 benches in this whole area
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152440441

How does this reflect the "do not enter" "authorized users only", and "no pedestrians, active busway" signs, unless those have been taken down recently?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152438667

Hello, please try to keep changesets locally constrained. It looks like you've gone and changed all 3 instances of `hammerw` even though they are on separate continents

This is a busy pedestrian plaza
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152432124

This is a plaza with some sitting areas and trees, not a building
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152432521

There's no building here? This is a plaza, variably with a tent on part of it
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152432546

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