[Talk-us] State of the map in Iowa / Athletics data

[Karson Sommer]

Over the past month, I have mapped across the state of Iowa, attempting to
add athletic facilities which were absent from the map. I went county by
county, using Overpass to identify where likely locations were, ie parks,
schools, etc. I checked each of these locations and added any pitches that
were not already present. Additionally, if I came across any major or easy
to correct issues, I went ahead and fixed the problems.

My objective was to improve the quality of athletic facilities across the
state so that I can use the data for a school project.

Since I visited pretty much every incorporated city in the state, I had the
opportunity to gauge the state of the map across Iowa.

Some of my general observations:
1. The vast majority of cities have had 0 edits other than imports and
mechanical QA edits.
2. TIGER did not include alleys. Many cities did not have their alleys
drawn in. Waterloo/Cedar Falls has a population of ~120,000 and still did
not have their alleys drawn in.
3. There are still tons of nodes that should be converted to areas. Some
schools, cemeteries, parks. The majority of protected areas are still nodes
despite the DNR owning significant quantities of land. Compare OSM to
https://iowadnr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f9161b90cddb4fcfb35a96901882a4b7/

Some sport specific observations:
1. There are still tons of unpaved running tracks in Iowa, mainly at small
schools. In my years of running, I have only ran on a single cinder track.
2. Most rubberized tracks are black, then red, then blue. There were a few
purple tracks. A very unusual colored green track,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/783085755
3. There are very few irregular shaped tracks. Here is a rubberized,
rectangular track, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/773898697
4. Baseball fields come in all sizes and shapes. Some small towns of 100
people have high quality fields.

Just thought I would share my notes in case anyone was interested.

Thanks,
Karson
karsonkevin2
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] place=neighborhood on subdivisions?

[Karson Sommer]

I agree with the way it was already mapped. Subdivisions should be mapped
as areas tagged with landuse=residential, place=neighborhood, and name=* if
it is named.

Looking around the area of the edit, there is a lot of stuff from my
perspective that seems fishy. There are a bunch of place=hamlet nodes? I
certainly don't see anything that should be tagged as a hamlet, they all
look like place=neighborhood to me. Each of these nodes should be mapped
onto an explicit residential area.

I'm not sure why the people in the changeset comments seem to think that a
subdivision != neighborhood. Per the OSM Wiki definition,

A *neighbourhood* is a named, geographically localised place. It may be an
area within a place =suburb
 or place
=quarter
 of a larger
settlement (such as a large place
=city
) or an area within a
smaller settlement (such as a place
=town
 or a place
=village
).

A subdivision just means a residential area with one developer. This means
all the houses will be in the same architectural style, same age, and can
be located using the subdivision name. This is the textbook definition of a
neighborhood.


On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 7:16 PM Mike N  wrote:

> Thoughts on use of place=neighborhood for subdivisions?
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/91255294
>
>Note that there are many thousands already tagged this way (5000 plus
> in a section of the southeast alone).
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Cooper Country State Forest in Keweenaw County, MI

[Karson Sommer]

https://mgis.coleman-engineering.com/web/ shows the parcel in question
being privately owned.

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020, 12:27 PM Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> the DWG has been asked to remove this bit of land
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/146418027#map=13/47.3306/-88.4441
>
> from the "Cooper Country State Forest" protected area since it has been
> purchased from the state by private individuals in 2006 and "the recent
> plat books show this".
>
> I have been unable to find an online resource to corroborate this claim.
> Googling for "plat books" turned up some very pretty scans of 1800's
> surveyor records ;) Perhaps someone more knowledgeable in the US public
> records landscape can help?
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us