Thank you. Not sure how I managed to duplicate the stop. Carelessness, probably.

I like that speedwalk tool (from first quick play). That'll prove useful.

See for example this strange routing. osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_valhalla_foot&route=51.894623%2C0.936405%3B51.895199%2C0.936582

Where I have mapped separate ways (e.g. where there are lots of verges along a road) I also map driveways to give routing lots of options to cross

"also add" to the roads (I forgot to add that bit before commenting)

Hi. I noticed you're mapping sidewalks as separate ways. In the Tendring district (where I've added them) I've used the sidewalk tags on the roads themselves, as that is usually better for pedestrian navigation. The recommendation though is if you do use separate ways you also add sidewalk:both/left/right=separate (though I don't know how many routers use that). See e.g. osm.wiki/Guidelines_for_pedestrian_navigation

Oh that's interesting. I might dig around a bit to find out where it came from. Also interesting that Robert's page lists it but he was the one who added the original =no tag on this box.

I'm not sure royal_cypher=crown is documented? Parcel postboxes don't usually have one I don't think. royal%20cypher=*?uselang=en-GB

From a pedestrian routing perspective it is better to add the sidewalk tag to the highways, rather than mapping them as separate ways. sidewalk=* Some of Clacton (though not centrally) has already been mapped this way.

Thanks David. The footpath actually went around the locked gate until this changeset decided to change things (which I didn't notice at the time). https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=169491422

I think rather than removing it, the tagging should have been updated perhaps? area:highway=*

I don't remember the details of this change, but highway=living_street has been used on many ways that don't necessarily have signs in the UK, usually a street designed with the interests of pedestrians and cyclists, as per the wikipedia definition linked from near the top of the OSM wiki tag page. I've also seen it used in new build estates with lower speed limits where the entire ways are shared space rather than having separate pavements. This is different to designation=home_zone or designation=quiet_lane tags that do reflect signage.

I think it is still vacant. It has outline planning permission to be converted to flats https://idox.tendringdc.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=SJWDWXQB0RE00
and what looks to be an old outstanding application for redevelopment https://idox.tendringdc.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=R3DT2DQB0EL00
I'll try and drive down there at some point and check. Most recent Mapillary image is September 2024 though I walked past it last August and it was still empty then. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=904175351560595

Doesn't this supercede the special road order? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1736/contents/made

I checked one edit near Harwich, and the change seemed to be to add addr:county, but counties haven't been part of postal addresses for many, many years now, so I don't tend to include them, and this page in the wiki includes addr:county in the tags to avoid section
osm.wiki/Addresses_in_the_United_Kingdom

I think you might have broken this track (that was): way/93572903/history

Thanks. I'll just mark it open then. I only saw the headline on Facebook and locals moaning that it was pointless without additional improvements on Bramford Road.

Ipswich Star is reporting ribbon has been cut, so this might now be open?

Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap. I've removed this test path (it worked - I could see it), and also tweaked the tagging on the tennis courts. Play structure doesn't really work for the lines, and some sites already automatically show them if the individual pitches are mapped (as they are now). See for example this from Openstreetmap France https://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=19&lat=52.45933&lon=13.62264&layers=B000000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
If I can help with anything let me know.

Thank you. I think from the changeset they might relate to this note note/2325384 If I'm correct, can the note be closed do you think?

Hi, should the permissive path perhaps be foot=permissive rather than access=permissive, motor_vehicles=no (or can bicycles and horse drawn carriages also use the path)?