vectro's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 36114364 | 2 months ago | Regarding way/387225253, do you have any local knowledge about this facility? I couldn't find any information online about a playground here. |
| 139367982 | over 1 year ago | I'm not sure what route relation/16153529, created in this changeset, is for. Is this route supposed to correspond to a particular cycle route? |
| 70678658 | over 1 year ago | Do you mind if I ask why these roads were marked as private? I don't see any signage to that effect. |
| 146040040 | almost 2 years ago | Thanks Arianna, that makes sense. I don't think the parcel maps really handle the situation where there is more than one house number on a parcel. I went ahead and split the relation into two buildings. |
| 146040040 | almost 2 years ago | Hi there, I see that you mapped 529 Catalina as a two-building relation; but looking at the streetview, don't the buildings have different addresses? I see 527 Catalina and 529 Catalina. |
| 121990630 | over 3 years ago | Hi SBM3, I agree the roads here are accessible but according to the OSM wiki, access=yes means "The public has an official, legally-enshrined right of access", which I don't think is right here? What do you think about access=permissive instead? The wiki defines that as, "Open to general traffic until such time as the owner revokes the permission which they are legally allowed to do at any time in the future.", which I think does describe the situation here. What do you think? |
| 77359824 | over 3 years ago | Hi, I noticed you updated the Trestles Beach Trail to be a cycleway instead of a track. Do you mind saying a few more words about this change? It sure looks like a path or track to me. |
| 96713489 | over 3 years ago | Hmm, interesting. I came in from the other side and didn't see this sign. Despite the text on this sign this a commercial complex with retail so I think in practice it is definitely open to the public. Do you think access=permissive would be more appropriate? |
| 96713489 | over 3 years ago | Do you mind commenting on why these ways are marked as private? I didn't see any access restrictions when I was there. |
| 80056041 | over 3 years ago | I see, thanks for clarifying. I had assumed that the unpaved bit was just the shoulder. |
| 80056041 | over 3 years ago | It looks like this changeset creates duplicate ways along the Aliso Creek Bikeway. Is there a reason for that? I would expect to see one way representing the geometry on the ground plus possible relations describing the different routes there. |
| 64176065 | about 7 years ago | This changeset is based on the linked PDF, which shows a bike lane on Frankfort Street. I will survey this area next month, but if you are confident that this changeset is wrong, feel free to revise. |