OpenStreetMap logo OpenStreetMap

Changeset When Comment
173474708

Based ,on your reported imagery used I can't see any evidence that this road connects through, so I've split the way and updated the tags to driveway.

173476014

I've updated the tags to be a driveway

173476128

I've updated the tag here to mark it as a driveway.

173477259

I've updated the tags on these to be Shared Driveways

173563166

I think to meet cyclestreet=* it must be a road that is signposted/marked to be explicitly for bicycles as the primary road users with motor vehicles as secondary users.

173568549

the tag nudism=yes already implies this so no need for a note

173656081

to be honest this looks more urban than rural, given the small block size, dense housing and the road network layout...

173695831

thanks for merging the address nodes with your new building outlines correctly.

173740940

hi this is the footpath not a bridge, therefore I've reverted this change.

173817319

way/758025663 is not representing the lot boundary, it's representing the trees, the south east corner looks like grass only so shouldn't be included unless it's been reforested.

173822964

I've restored the address node node/12411966515 which was deleted in this changeset.

170701671

I've restored the address node node/12411966515 which was dragged to the wrong location in this changeset.

173823693

I've restored the address node node/12419092614 which was deleted here

173777581

Yeah I think it's not right to add this to watercourses outside of a golf course.

173828740

I've reverted this change since added layer=-1 to seemingly ground level buildings which seemingly was done to silence editor warnings.

173828992

I've reverted this change since it removed the building type.

173831518

sorry I didn't see your change here, I just reverted the problematic change.

173829084

I've reverted this change since it deleted all the tags per each semi, and regardless it's better to have each semi mapped individually.

changeset/173857036

173829902

layer=* implies one building is over or under another, but if both are at ground level then it's unlikely adding a layer=* is the correct way to resolve overlapping buildings.

changeset/173856994

173829113

from the imagery this building does appear to exist so I've reverted this deletion, though it needs a survey to confirm.