Hi Tom. You changed the bit of trail that traverses private land to Snake Hill Rd as "access=private". Last time I was there, I don't recall seeing any NO TRESPASSING signs or anything that prevents general public access. Per the wiki, "access=private" is when "Access is only with permission on an individual basis". I think "access=permissive" or "access=yes" is the appropriate tag here unless there has been a recent change from the landowner.

Note, "access=private" has nothing to do with ownership.

osm.wiki/Tag:access%3Dprivate

Please let me know your thoughts on this. Thanks.

Hello. I noticed you've been converting "tracks" to "paths" in a few locations. Have you familiarized yourself with the OSM track wiki page before doing this?

osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack

Being part of the "Belmont Street listing" is not a necessary criteria for a way to qualify as a "track".

Like many things in OSM, there is a lot of room for interpretation. For me what makes it a track is:

- it is very wide
- 4WD vehicles could traverse it now (and definitely have in the past)
- there is a wide "vehicle style" swing gate near the intersection with Pleasant St which suggests occasional truck access by the town for maintenance of fire protection. Else, much cheaper large stones could have been placed to prevent vehicle access.

Please review the wiki and let me know if your mind has changed. Thanks.

"Route 17" is on street signs in the area. By the "For disputed areas, please use the name as displayed on, e.g., street signs for the name tag" from OSM "Name" wiki page, the road does have a "name".

Hello. Thanks for mapping in OSM. I further spruced up this area and refined the tagging you did on Whitney Hill Park. It's not really a "forest" as OSM defines it. Tagging in OSM can often be unintuitive. I adjusted to better match similar parcels nearby in the region. Happy mapping...

FYI: I removed private CR altogether. IMHO, these should have never been added in the first place. They were included on the MassGIS OpenSpace import from a decade ago. They cause confusion as they are often mapped like "public lands".

That being said, the trails here appear to be heavily used (from Strava heatmap data). Do you know if the landowner allowed the use of the trails? There may be an informal "permissive" use of the trails like I know in other areas adjacent to public conservation parcels. If so, this would warrant keeping them mapped in OSM. Thanks.

Hello. It looks like on this changeset part of the Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge was renamed "Callewaert-Agabedis National Wildlife Refuge". I can't find any references to this name anywhere. Do you have any web links to support this name change? Thanks.

Hello. FYI this parcel is actually owned by the town. There was a couple of other parcels nearby with the same name/status according to MassGIS OpenSpace. I combined, retagged, and stripped out the MassGIS tags.

MassGIS OpenSpace has this area as "Pheasant Brook" but I've seen on a town map that has it as "Butterfield Conservation Area. https://www.lexingtonma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif7101/f/uploads/2020_across_brochure_20-08._final-2-fullsizemap.pdf

I kept it as the former. But LMK know if you know any better. Cheers.

Yes, my family and I were there this weekend. We particularly liked the pastoral field views from Lincoln Road. Amazing fall colors and sun! I asked my question imprecisely: I meant if this was an established route published in some trail guide by a land manager, etc. No matter either way. Thanks.

Hi Alan. Is this specific route referenced somewhere? Is there a reason this point-to-point was put in? Thanks.

Please stop going around the world renaming buildings without any firsthand knowledge. How do you know that this building is not named "Greenhouse"? Please engage the local mapping community first.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112844607

Hello. There is a map from the land manager that label the building like this. There is also a "Greenhouse" and a "Community Garden" labeled as such too. Are you planning to remove those labels too? https://www.massaudubon.org/content/download/2984/34082/file/habitat_trails_2016.pdf
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112831483

an oversight. fixed. Thanks for the catch.

No worries. I mostly use the JOSM editing tool that I find easier to do such changes...however, it's a much steeper learning curve to get up and running.

The "digital gate" should really be the parcel cadastre aligned correctly. If there is something physically on the ground, then that can get represented as a barrier or a sign. Also, the trail can get split and the "old" section tagged with "access=no" or removed altogether if it's clearly "removed" on the ground.

I had a chance already to spruce up the parcels in that area. Yes, some were misaligned (at least according to the latest MassGIS parcel data...which isn't always correct). I combined some of the parcels to the south to create a larger "Wylde Woods" for the town-owned land. Please let me know if anything looks amiss. I can use strava heatmap data to better align the trails.

If you like, I'm happy to collaborate with you more closely to get everything looking good. Perhaps we can have a screen share sometime or a call? Also, I hope to make it down that way soon enough to hike and explore with my son. We've been making our way around many conservation properties in greater Boston.

Hello. I saw you requested a review. Always good to see "public" land managers directly engaging with the data.

You added a couple of features that are "non-standard": a line added with a landuse to indicate boundary with private property.

I see this whole area's public parcel could use some sprucing up. I've never hiked these lands and am not familiar. But I have access to MassGIS parcels data and OpenSpace layer to guide me. I've been slowly making my way through "public parcels" throughout the state. Many had not been touched since the initial MassGIS OpenSpace layer import from 10 years ago.

I'll send you a message when I've done for your review. Check out my edits to see what I've been up to elsewhere. Will be in touch soon...

Ok, well that certainly sounds like "ground-truthing" that OSMers strive for. However, as it's not an "official" name, I'd urge you to reconsider adding this non-family-friendly name. These things get sucked up by the trails apps (Gaia/Alltrails/etc). Thanks.

Hello. Do you have a reference to support naming this trail as you did? Thanks.

Do you have a second reference to support adding this trail to OSM besides Strava? Or have you seen this first hand? This "trail" is not on any trail map I've seen.

This trail has been closed years ago. There is no longer a bridge over the river here.

A broader discussion for the OSM community: does horse=yes tagging implies some sort of suitability of being able to ride a horse on those trails? ...especially without additional "horse_scale=*" tagging My direct local experience is yes it does. Though it may be "technically" correct, I think it's confusing and misleading. And though we're not supposed to tag for the renderers, the likes of Gaia are representing these trails differently.

Thanks, really appreciate seeing the reference. I didn't even know that site existed. Perhaps you could include this reference in subsequent changeset comments.

On most of the trails, in decades of hiking there, I have never seen a horse or mountain bike. I don't think you could even physically get a horse or mountain bike UP those trails unless you were carrying either on your back.

I have yet to find an online reference saying they are NOT allowed, but I thought I recalled seeing some signage but not recently. I'll continue to look. In any event, I think you'd get a chuckle from some local folk if they saw horse=yes on some of those trails.