Changeset reverted since it does not exist. Fantasy mapping is not permitted on OSM. User has been referred to DWG.

changeset/182128546

please don't attach landuse to roadways.

Ah, yes, you would be correct. I'm going to self-revert.

access=private#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20in%20at%20least%20some%20parts%20of%20the%20United%20States%2C%20a%20%E2%80%9CNo%20Trespassing%E2%80%9D%20sign%20would%20also%20be%20required%20to%20prohibit%20entry%2C%20while%20%E2%80%9CPrivate%20Road%E2%80%9D%20would%20not%20prohibit%20entry.

Looks good. If it is a drainage basin where water is intermittent, make sure you select that box or tag it as "basin"

Thanks and welcome to OSM!

Thank you for the feedback. Yes, I have already been contacted. When I initially looked, there were no ALPRs in the vicinity. I apologize if I missed it.

Notes are closed accordingly. If you are a part of the flock movement, please try to come up with a better method in enauring notes are not placed in the woods and new notes aren't created where an ALPR already exists. In aome cases, ALPR notes are being created and that same user is then mapping an ALPR but leaving the note open.

Individuals who leave ALPR/Flock notes do not reapond when pressing for more details, and due to the shear volume of random ALPR notes, it can be tricky to spend the appropriate time and attention mapping them. Again, with no response or additional info from note generators.

Please don't glue/attach landuse to roads and railways. It makes it an absolute mess to update!

please don't attach landuse to roads.

When adding parking lots, please try to address or merge the nodes so there aren't duplicates.

I know, note is older, and your mapping is probably much better now. :)

Refer to:

https://www.alltrails.com/trail/us/washington/country-joe-s-to-nisqually-river-cliffs

Please just update the node that is already there. Please don't create a new node and then leave a note on the old one. It creates confusion. The new node for Teriyaki Madness has been removed and readded correctly.

Were all the driveways permanently removed? Or is this temporary due to construction?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177136183

Reviewed your change as part of regular reviewing. Changeset looks good! Thanks for the contribution.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177146822

I'm not sure how adding a building from imagery is considered "private"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177235582

Guess I forgot to upload the changeset before changing locations. Or I wasn't aware I made an edit before changing locations.

Couldn't tell ya. I know, large bbox and all.

There is imagery from 2021 that shows the sign still present on Goose Road.

Honestly, whatever. Doesn't matter. Regardless of how it is mapped here, it is only a matter of time before another delivery driver comes speeding through your driveway and gets stuck. Better maps with better data yield better results and better directions.

Please provide photos if you have any. All recent imagery shows it connects. The name was utilized based on a physical sign posted on Goose Road that was captured on streetside imagery.

don't use name=(vacant) to describe a feature. Please use shop=vacant

As discussed before, all features mapped are observable and confirmed from aerial imagery. Access tags were added based on the information provided that the driveway was private.

We have no say in what people do on the ground, regardles of what is mapped. Routers will not utilize a driveway as a shortcut. One would argue that by having it correctly mapped with the correct tags, it will provide better results than none at all. It was recommended you install signage or a barrier. Instead, you've taken to straight up vandalism by deleting features that exist and were correctly tagged with private access.

Please review the following before further deletions of validly mapped data:
osm.wiki/Mapping_private_information#:~:text=Mapping%20private%20buildings%2C%20private%20roads,houses%20is%20also%20considered%20acceptable.

Please try a little harder to put this next to a road. You put it way out in the farm field, which I assume is incorrect.