Undeleted forest in changeset/55504353
changeset/55504353

Hello!
I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great!
Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55377106

Hello!
I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and it looks great!
Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55286123

Are the areas you have drawn as grass really grass? My interpretation of the satellite imagery is that they are probably gardens. I can see what looks like boundaries (hedges?)

Why have you deleted the block of forest in Happy mount park?

Please add a comment to your changesets as it helps other mappers to understand what you were trying to do

Fixed in 55493235
changeset/55493235

Don't tag buildings with landuse=residential.

Landuse=residential would be applied to an area such as the entire housing estate

Thanks for your edit. I see you have added a width to the stream. The default unit for width is meters, and Artle beck is not 30m wide. If you could correct this, that would be great.

width=*

Thanks for your edit. When you draw new buildings, you probably want to square the corners. Using the iD editor, select the building and then use the button to square the corners

Hi. If you are going to add features to openStreetMap, please tag them correctly.

The wiki has a lot of information about how to tag things such as trees.

See natural=tree

Landuse=residential is normally used for entire housing estates or districts within a town/city.

See relation/4007363

These buildings should be left with building=house

That all makes sense. Perhaps you could add a landuse=construction area in the meantime until the construction is finished

I was just wondering why you've removed the car-park. Is it no longer there?

Where the building contains two houses, it would be good to draw each as a separate rectangle tagged as building=house. Then details such as addr:housenumber can be added to each house

Did you carry out a survey when making these changes to the map?

Are you sure the buildings are detached houses? From the aerial imagery (and other similar properties in Lancaster) they look like they might be semi-detached.

If the buildings are rectangular, they should be drawn with orthogonal corners. There is a tool in the iD editor that will square the corners for you

Resolved in changeset/53488407

Good spot, - I'd agree with this on a consistency basis and what you say about the outline. Anyone should be able to see that most of these are two house numbers in one building = semi-detatched house

Why `path` as opposed to `footway` ?
From memory there are three cairns in at least one of the locations. They are more like carefully constructed rock pillar than a pile of stones

Changed in changeset/52418986. Does that seem ok. The other side of the road, the pavement is immediately adjacent to the road

Hi Don,
Thanks for your edit. I see that you have edited the footpath that joins on to Sunnyside Lane.

I don't know if this is still the case, but there used to be a fence between the road and the parallel footpath. I feel the way the path was drawn previously may represent better the layout on the ground.

What are your thoughts on this?

JohnO

way/188940204