Not that I’m aware of. The path is question is the way that extends from the off ramp to the on ramp should a driver need to get back onto the MP freeway.

There is a marked crossing further south at a set of lights for pedestrians and cyclists

I understand where you are coming from from the Wiki perspective but makes no literal sense.
A pedestrian nor cyclist can use the off ramp as they are not permitted on a motorway. On this basis any link from a motorway to another road even across another road like the Springvale Rd Intersection is permitted only for motor vehicles.

These ways are are definitely part of the on/off ramp for the MP freeway as it permits the driver to get off the off ramp and get back onto the MP via the on ramp.
Motorway link is the more appropriate tag and is consistent with mapping of similar intersections including on/off ramps from motorways

Refer to east link off ramp to greens Rd as an example

way/458112468

OSM wiki suggests that this way should be tagged as a motorway_link rather than trunk as its part of an off ramp which by default has bicycles and pedestrian access = no.

The pedestrian crossing indicated at the MP freeway and Springvale Rd intersection is slightly south of the off-ramp and on ramps. To be able to use the off-ramp, access needs to be permissible i.e. Car or truck. I don’t see that you can use the off-ramp from MP freeway and cross over Springvale Rd and back onto the MP freeway if you do not explicitly have permission to use the MP freeway as a pedestrian or cyclist.
Tagging way/198521879 with bicycle and footway = yes make no sense at all.

A vehicle coming off and re entering the MP Freeway would be allowed to use it to cross Springvale Rd.
Agree that pedestrian would also not be allowed to use it.

The Mapillary link you provided included a big picture of a bike with a cross through it painted on the ground indicating that bikes are not permitted. Not sure how you have have come to the conclusion that bikes are permitted.

The bridge way that diverts north and follows Yarra Boulevard is not part of the Main Yarra Trail.

Please revert the change.

Bob42nd we shouldn’t be mapping based on a Strava heat map as it doesn’t not determine that transiting in permissible. The heat map indicates that people have used it but we should be mapping on the ground with what form of transport is permitted.

Hi there, was in the area recently and it appeared that there wasn't any signage to indicate that bikes are permitted along the Harrap Creek Trail however is denoted as a shared path.

Previous changeset/120621671 has been reverted. Corrections discussed above now made under changeset/120651582

Thanks Vadmium. This changeset was only intended to capture the non-cycle path West of Sir Kenneth Luke Boulevard along the south side of Wellington Rd as you have pointed out.

I visited here yesterday. Saw the way on OSM but could not see a formal or informal track as shown at Braeside. Has this been verified on the ground?

I double checked my gps data and realised got my cross streets incorrect. Agree that it is Ellis Park Avenue where the shared path starts in a northbound direction. I think the way needs to be split south of Ellis park drive as a foot way and north of it to be retained as a shared path.

Mapillary data noted. I did not see signage heading east along Rivergum Place hence the change.

Good idea to split the way.
I don't necessarily agree on the path connecting St Andrew Court and McKay Avenue having bicycle=yes but I'll leave it be.

I agree this needs to be reverted. The colour of the court surfaces threw me off when I road along Wedgwood drive.
Refer to changeset/119498451

Mapillary data is acknowledged.
I rode past the Monash Freeway Onramp northbound up Gate Seven Drive, where there was no signage present. The Mapillary data you provided link to is much further north than I ventured, hence I believe the way needs to be split so that part footway up to Gate Seven Drive and be retained as a shared path further north.

I visited this location today after your initial link to Mapillary. The road markings heading north only last about 20-30m, which leads me to believe that perhaps that it intended to only go as far as way/95886163 which is also mapped as a shared path. There is definitely no shared path beyond the bus stop as there is only footways.

From the Mapillary info provided, there doesn’t appear to be any signage permitting bicycles on said road.
Given it forms part of a designated bike route perhaps bicycle = dismount might be the most appropriate.

I visited the area today and could not find any signage to indicate that way/788369313 is a path that permit bicycles. How have you concluded that this path permits bicycles?
This way appears to be a footpath was bicycles are not permitted.