Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential
Mark, Regarding dealing with high density areas, the issue has been discussed in some detail over on the LA Buildings import repository on GitHub. Check out the discussion and maps: https://github.com/osmlab/labuildings/issues/9 -Elliott On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 8:43 PM Mark Bradley ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm planning to import all the addressed buildings in Indianapolis into OSM. Others have done similar things in other places. I have an advantage, in that I have access to Indianapolis' GIS data, so the building outlines are already created. The addresses are attached to the buildings too. So I wouldn't worry about having too much detail. Mark Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 10:59:56 -0700 From: Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com To: Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas Message-ID: ade6e936-2a55-4747-b554-5fcc116a3...@fitchdesign.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I’ve been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points –vs- house outlines? . . . What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? What we focus on mapping depends on our individual interests. For myself in built up areas that will be things that make automobile routing better (addresses, speed limits, turn lanes, road surfaces). I do, however, map buildings fairly often when adding addresses. I prefer outlines but don’t always use them. Usually I’ll put in points after my initial walking survey as it is fast and easy. Using OSMpad and JOSM it only takes a couple of minutes to upload address points. But it takes time to trace the building outlines from MapBox or Bing imagery so that comes later or not at all depending on my interest in the area. 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? If I am taking the time to do a building outline then I like it to be as faithful to the actual outline as I can make it. 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N I’ve only bothered adding driveways in a suburban area if there were a cluster of houses with a shared driveway away from the street where they are officially numbered. That said, I like the look of the area were you put in all driveways. In terms of clutter, I don’t consider the level of detail you have put in here clutter at all. I rather like the level of detail even if I don’t go that far myself. Cheers, Tod ___ 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
[Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
Hi all, Ive been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points vs- house outlines? Originally I had gone in to add points with building=house all over, but until an address is added, they simply don't show up *at all* on OSM, so I'm not sure that house points really help much. Adding an address means they show up as numbers, which I think is ugly, and this is probably all that's required for routing to work properly. I do understand that interpolation can work by pegging the addresses at each end, but around here when roads go around curves, there are holes in the sequences that individual numbering fixes. Example: all along Toulon Place (points, not outlines) http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68761/-117.65302layers=N [it still may be rendering those tiles] What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? a) House outlines are really helpful, thank you b) Outlines not necessary, the address is what matters, but knock yourself out c) please don't do outlines, it's clutter d) adding all these house outlines approaches vandalism e) something else? 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? So in my area I've been making the outlines look actually like the house, as best as I can, but there's no way I'm going to do this to every house in America. For other areas, assuming house outlines are warranted, I can use the building tool in JOSM (what a *great* tool) to make strictly rectangular outlines that vaguely approximate the shape of the house. What are the thoughts on this? a) A rectangular outline is great, thank you b) It's better than nothing, but only marginally so c) drawing squares on non-square things is inaccurate d) something else? I like a lot of detail 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N But in some neighborhood I've added driveways to all the houses just for consistency. I can see several schools of thought here: a) you don't need driveways in residential areas at all b) only include the driveway if it adds clarity that's not obvious c) adding them all isn't really a good use of time, but hey, knock yourself out d) holy crap, this makes things way too busy, please don't e) adding them everywhere approaches vandalism. f) something else? Thanks for any guidance or discussion. Steve --- Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant | UNIX Wizard | 714 345-4571 st...@unixwiz.net | Southern California | Windows Guy | unixwiz.net ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, Ive been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points vs- house outlines? . . . What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? What we focus on mapping depends on our individual interests. For myself in built up areas that will be things that make automobile routing better (addresses, speed limits, turn lanes, road surfaces). I do, however, map buildings fairly often when adding addresses. I prefer outlines but don’t always use them. Usually I’ll put in points after my initial walking survey as it is fast and easy. Using OSMpad and JOSM it only takes a couple of minutes to upload address points. But it takes time to trace the building outlines from MapBox or Bing imagery so that comes later or not at all depending on my interest in the area. 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? If I am taking the time to do a building outline then I like it to be as faithful to the actual outline as I can make it. 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N I’ve only bothered adding driveways in a suburban area if there were a cluster of houses with a shared driveway away from the street where they are officially numbered. That said, I like the look of the area were you put in all driveways. In terms of clutter, I don’t consider the level of detail you have put in here clutter at all. I rather like the level of detail even if I don’t go that far myself. Cheers, Tod smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
I’ve been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. 1) Address points –vs- house outlines? The Orange County GIS data, including the parcel database, probably with the associated addresses has recently been released into the public domain. If there isn't a specific point address layer, I'm sure there are some of in the Seattle OSM group that can generate one for you from the parcel centroids to assist with an import. Also, some of the individual cities may have building footprints, but you would have to identify those, I didn't get that far into the weeds. https://media.ocgov.com/gov/pw/survey/services/lis.asp and http://geospatial.blogs.com/geospatial/2013/08/orange-county-parcel-file-now-freely-downloadable.html Michael Patrick Seattle OSM ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas
On 03/31/2015 01:07 PM, Steve Friedl wrote: 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? So in my area I've been making the outlines look actually like the house, as best as I can, but there's no way I'm going to do this to every house in America. For other areas, assuming house outlines are warranted, I can use the building tool in JOSM (what a *great* tool) to make strictly rectangular outlines that vaguely approximate the shape of the house. What are the thoughts on this? a) A rectangular outline is great, thank you b) It's better than nothing, but only marginally so c) drawing squares on non-square things is inaccurate d) something else? Focusing just on this one, I often approximate buildings by rectangles when they're not technically but are pretty close. Lots of buildings seem to be a rectangle with a part of one wall that sticks out by a meter or two, or to have a bay window, or any other of an endless number of tiny variations. If it's close enough that a rectangle is the right shape at a lower level of detail, then there's absolutely nothing wrong with mapping it at lower detail. Sometimes, like for a clearly L-shaped building, it's just better to add the two more vertices though. --Andrew ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential
I'm planning to import all the addressed buildings in Indianapolis into OSM. Others have done similar things in other places. I have an advantage, in that I have access to Indianapolis' GIS data, so the building outlines are already created. The addresses are attached to the buildings too. So I wouldn't worry about having too much detail. Mark Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 10:59:56 -0700 From: Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com To: Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net mailto:st...@unixwiz.net Cc: talk-us@openstreetmap.org mailto:talk-us@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Best practices for high-density residential areas Message-ID: ade6e936-2a55-4747-b554-5fcc116a3...@fitchdesign.com mailto:ade6e936-2a55-4747-b554-5fcc116a3...@fitchdesign.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Mar 31, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Steve Friedl st...@unixwiz.net mailto:st...@unixwiz.net wrote: Hi all, I've been doing OSM for around a month, and have been mainly focusing on my local neighborhood in Foothill Ranch (Orange County in Southern California). As a kind of showcase I'm going quite hyperbolic with detail, far more than I'd do anywhere else, and it's been helpful to understand the tradeoffs of effort vs results. My area: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.6851/-117.6514 - it's the whole set of tracts that form a thumb above Bake Parkway. 1) Address points -vs- house outlines? . . . What are the thoughts on points vs outlines? What we focus on mapping depends on our individual interests. For myself in built up areas that will be things that make automobile routing better (addresses, speed limits, turn lanes, road surfaces). I do, however, map buildings fairly often when adding addresses. I prefer outlines but don't always use them. Usually I'll put in points after my initial walking survey as it is fast and easy. Using OSMpad and JOSM it only takes a couple of minutes to upload address points. But it takes time to trace the building outlines from MapBox or Bing imagery so that comes later or not at all depending on my interest in the area. 2) Are rectangular house outlines good enough? If I am taking the time to do a building outline then I like it to be as faithful to the actual outline as I can make it. 3) Driveways? Most houses are obviously on one street or another, but some houses are on a corner, or are with multiple houses sharing a common driveway, so adding the actual driveways helps make it clear how it's laid out. Example: the houses at the north end of Calotte Place: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/33.68120/-117.64836layers=N layers=N I've only bothered adding driveways in a suburban area if there were a cluster of houses with a shared driveway away from the street where they are officially numbered. That said, I like the look of the area were you put in all driveways. In terms of clutter, I don't consider the level of detail you have put in here clutter at all. I rather like the level of detail even if I don't go that far myself. Cheers, Tod ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
