OSM note activities of Bearcinnamon for the last 12 months
Copyright © Pascal Neis | Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors | More? See ResultMaps | Notes overview worldwide | Autoreload 5:00 min
Overall activities (12 months)
Opened: 0 (0%) Commented: 0 (0%) Closed: 1 (50%) Reopened: 1 (50%)
Stats per month
Latest activities
Latest activities | The colored events are made by Bearcinnamon | Limit 500
Note#Tmstmp UTCEventContributorCommentAuto-translation
408248312024-01-23 01:48openedCurlingMan13
♦51,134		This "proposed" light rail has not broken down. Unsure if it will ever be built. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1080861081
22025-01-15 20:47closedBearcinnamon
32025-01-15 20:47reopenedBearcinnamon
42025-05-11 20:29commentedkaleidoscopica
♦347		It's unclear what needs to be done here.
52025-05-29 03:45commentedmewhenthe
♦66		I believe they wish for this to be removed(?) Not sure. The Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Line_(CapMetro)) reports that it's planned to open as early as 2029, along with attached sources. As far as other sources apart from Wikipedia, http://publicinput.com/71029 is another one that shows the actual meeting and material used in said meeting. I don't think anything really needs to be "done" per se.
62025-05-29 12:49closedkaleidoscopica
♦347		I think I agree. There's some grumbling that proposed features don't belong on OSM since they are not (yet) physically there. For example, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed and the discussion page - which still has no consensus. But in this case, it is a major project, and clearly verifiable source-wise, so that's not the real issue. Being a major and probably THE most major proposed line of Project Connect, with the way it will go to the airport, it will almost certainly be built, even if a ways out (and more expensive). So on that, I personally find a lot of value in seeing the outlines of future roads and railways - I find it useful information. If others agree (and judging by the way Austin as a local community often maps proposed features like this, I suspect enough agree to make this make sense), then leaving it is fine. So, I'm good to resolve this, for now.