|
I am working with a community committee that is developing plans to re-develop an abandoned rail line into a cycle/walk rail trail. I would be very helpful in our development process to be able to add the proposed rail trail route into OSM as a (tagged) proposed infrastructure. I'm aware of the general OSM principle to map what is actually on the ground. We would be happy to remove the feature if the rail trail development fails to proceed. Would this use of OSM by our rail trail committee be acceptable to the wider OSM community? |
|
I would say "map as railway=abandoned,proposed=cycleway", and change to "construction=cycleway", eventually "highway=cycleway" (if it happens to proceed). See also the "proposed" tag. If this proposed trail is a major feature, I wouldn't hesitate to map it: proposed major roads are also mapped in OSM. |
