Nice additions! Just watch out, it looks like one of the sidewalks snapped to a boundary feature. Unless you're actually meaning to edit boundaries, it's usually best to go into iD's settings and uncheck the box so that those features don't display. Other than that, it all looks great!

Hey there! I always appreciate folks trying to work on admin boundaries, especially ones that are straight-up missing from OSM. I was out of town, else I'd have noticed this sooner, but this isn't quite how admin boundaries work.
Forgive my presumption, but I'd guess you probably just didn't know quite what you were doing with JOSM's relation editor?
I'll probably start a thread on the Discord server to walk through this when I get a chance, but some notes for the time being:
1. Admin boundaries should be relations, not ways.
2. The relations are made up of member ways that are often shared with *other* relations. Such as the eastern boundary of Township A is the same way as the western boundary of Township B.
You've already imported the townships as ways, so there's no need to remove that data; we can use it to build the proper relations. I'll ping you on Discord when I do that.

Cleaning up boundary relations is a task too often overlooked. Thanks for doing this kind work!

1. I digitized them from hi-res imagery (~3in. pixels) so I think they were pretty well mapped, but I am doing this from a ways west of here, not in person. If you feel you are improving them, then by all means do so, but just edit the existing feature.
2. I thought I removed the building tag from the fences, my mistake.

Hi there! Why did you delete and re-add various sport pitches? And why delete the fences? They're definitely visible in imagery.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110128738

I was nearly about to start in on this thing, but updated my JOSM layer just after your edits posted. Thanks for taking care of this thing!

I closed up what I could. Some other gaps got narrower, but are still there.
I really wish developers wouldn't do it this way, but I suppose it makes sense with the heavy equipment going in and out of a build site. Still, there are areas over in Kendall County where there have been 1 or 2 lot gaps in the sidewalk for over 10 years.

Hey there!

I don't know if it's publicly available. We use a proprietary imagery provider in Kendall County (I work there), and while I have permission to map things using the imagery, I do not believe I can share the imagery itself.

If you'd like, I can make a quick sweep of this area and close up any other sidewalk gaps I see. The imagery was just flown last month, so it's quite current.

PS - I'm already working on fixing those boundaries, so no worries.

Hey there! Thanks for making so many great additions to the map!
One bit of advice: I see you're using the iD editor. iD is a fantastic tool, but it can often lead to objects being snapped to one another that shouldn't be. Some of your landuse additions got snapped to Plainfield's administrative boundary. In general, admin boundaries shouldn't snap to anything but other admin boundaries.
In iD, you can open the Map Data menu and turn boundaries off, and that will prevent you from accidentally editing boundaries.
Happy Mapping!

JOSM seems to have sent my changeset even though I was still typing...
What the changeset comment should also say:
removing landuse=forest, tagging FP areas as nature_reserves. removing duplicate/overlapping features and dissolving arbitrary internal boundaries. adding some natural features, making other fixes to adjacent features. naming parking / picnic areas rather than nature reserves following public domain FP data from Cook County.
source: Cook County Open Data, local knowledge, aerial imagery.
more to come!

forgot to add: also removed "Kentland" hamlet point. It's a GNIS feature that has *long* since stopped referring to any legitimate populated place.

If you *really* wanted to do it that way, you can use josm-tested.jar w/ a command-line argument (use a batch file or shell script) to load a custom preferences XML.

That way, you can have one shortcut for Account A, and one for Account B, even open both simultaneously.

Hey there! I was browsing around the state, cleaning up some admin boundaries, and these caught my eye. I'm not a local, but is Frat Park really a place? And if it is, it it really an *administrative* unit? Or just a neighborhood?

Hey there! While I always appreciate seeing other folks editing the area, we prefer to maintain businesses as POIs, rather than merging into the building features. There are a variety of reasons for this, which I'd be happy to elaborate on, but simply put, it's not the preferred method of the local mapping community to merge these features.

Hey there! Nice to see new users in the area. The shape you drew would be fine for a retail area, but the building itself is smaller than that. Also, the web editor does a good job picking up brand names, and will auto-suggest the right tags for you, so in the feature type menu, you could just search "Casey's".

It does make a difference, as OSM maintains all the old data, even if it's deleted, in what's known as the "attic". Being able to see the history of an element is quite useful.

Preserving and modifying features is preferable in most cases, especially when the replacement object is essentially the same thing.

See: osm.wiki/Keep_the_history

More generally: osm.wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions

Sounds good. I hope I'm not discouraging you from editing; most of your edits are valuable additions, and I'm glad to see another active user in the area.

Merging adjacent boundaries between res/farm and things like that are generally a good move.

Since you're using iD, take a look at the Map Data tab (press the F key). You can turn off certain categories of data, like boundaries, in order to avoid editing other features inadvertently.

Happy Mapping!

Also: PLEASE don't just snap nodes together willy-nilly. Not all features should be joined together, even if their nodes are close by.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104079082

Doesn't have a name, unless the local residents nearby call it something. Per USGS / County records.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104056004