How do I tag a bike park?

By that I mean a large forested area known as a center for mountain biking and containing several official MTB-designated paths.
This will be used in this MTB oriented map, and can be used in several others like it.


For I went with leisure=pitch; sport=mtb. It really is called “Bike Park”, so that’s not just tagging for the renderer.

Wouldn’t it turn the whole forest into a light green lawn-like area in most renderers ?

It depends on the renderer…

There are lots of different map styles in use (there are four different ones on the website alone). I wouldn’t worry about how one particular renderer handles it - try and tag “what is there” as accurately as you can, and let the renderers figure out what to do with it.

With pitch I imagine a limited area, like a football field or a tennis court. A bike park is more like a ski resort in scale.
Would landuse=recreational_grounds work?
This probably wouldn’t accept a sport tag, though.

The “bike park” example I gave was about the size of a football pitch only. As for “landuse=recreation_ground” (or even “leisure=recreation_ground”) it would fail the “duck test” for me; leisure=pitch has been used in OSM for various sorts of sports “pitches” for some time, whereas a recreation_ground to me would suggest a recreation ground only (a patch of grass which might have a football pitch laid out on it or might not, and people might walk the dog round the outside, and the local kids will no doubt gather for a sly smoke somewhere there too).

leisure=sports_centre + sport=mtb for the bike park and leisure=pitch or highway=* for the mtb tracks?

I would tag this as natural=wood or landcover=trees and then just tag the ways with all the mtb suitable tags.
Any cleared areas with shelters where the bikers meet I would tag as leisure=park

This is a similar large forested area that is well known for mtb use

If it is more of a managed mtb recreation area, instead of naturally treed area where mtb freely engage in their sport, then i think landuse=recreational_ground or sports_centre is more appropriate plus a landcover=trees.

Those are a number of planted forest areas, each one a few dozen square kilometers in size. Each contains several designated single tracks for MTBs built by the foresting authority in charge of these areas. All attract a large community of bikers who use them free of charge, but also hikers.
The OSM community here has mapped all the paths already and tagged them for MTB difficulty. I would like though to name the areas so that they can appear in low zoom version of the maps and direct the users to possible destinations. All this without disrupting the appearance of OSM street maps.

I don’t think what you have in mind is easily accommodated in OSM.
You could split the polygon that defines the forestry area so that the area you wish to define has its own polygon, probably having it’s outer boundary aligned with the outer tracks. This would be tagged the same as the other adjacent forestry polygons but also tagged as a mtb recreation area.

Ensuring that they appear at low zoom levels is not something for the mapper. It is something you should take up with the people rendering the data. You should map the area accurately without regard to how it will be rendered.

The default map rendering on is not aimed at end users; it is aimed at mappers.

Bike parks are neither sport centres nor pitches nor recreation grounds. I suggest using a separate tag for them, for example leisure=bike_park.

Regarding the tracks, leisure=track seems inappropriate, as this tag is defined to be used for tracks for “non-motorised racing”. Also, highway=path doens’t seem to fit well, especially for tracks that are separated from other highway=ways (e.g. pump tracks) or for tracks that feature obstacles.

Guaranteeing that they show up at low zoom levels isn’t something for the mapper. It is something you should take up with individuals delivering the information. You should plan the territory precisely regardless of how it will be delivered.

The default map delivering on isn’t focused on end clients; it is focused on mappers.