text: " it is an "urban green space open to public recreation" 
  
  So Fen Way is a private road. The place where you mapped the path is clearly someone's driveway and yard. The path you mapped goes through a planter box with some bushes and there's clearly a curb. There's no hint of it n the satellite photos where the grassy area is either and the grassy area is just some grass between and behind the yards. There's also access to any of it from Soquel Avenue and from there it appears to a gully with a good drop off. Which makes sense because of the stream. There wouldn't be a park in an extremely wooded, over grown gully that know one can get into. SCCCGIS clearly made a mistake in this case or they had intended to build a park there at one point, never did, and just didn't update the files for it. Which happens all the time and they  clearly did in other cases (as is also evidenced by the miss mapped industry area, or are you going to tell me that's accurate to and the stream/gully is an industrial zone? Like the other place, I'm fine with it being mapped as a protected area if that's what it actually is until they build a park here if it ever gets built. But you should map things that clearly don't exist because they might at some point, especially based on a single source that's obviously been inaccurate in other areas.
  
  The fact that you mapped a clearly none existent path to support your argument clearly shows you don't have a more legitimate source to do it with. It also shows that you didn't take the time to use the tools OSM provides to confirm these things before you mapped them. It sense that you wouldn't if you're more concerned about being right then map accuracy. And in the meantime your using the SCCGIS information as a form of black and white, singular, tool of confirmation bias. Otherwise, you wouldn't map paths that clearly aren't there. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   
  