Hello, thanks for the contribution.

Are you sure that the height is right? Note that the measurement unit for height=* is meters, not feet.

Hello, thanks for the edits!

In this case I believe access=private is a more accurate value. access=no implies it is illegal for _anybody_ to use these service roads, while really it is perfectly fine for mine employees to use them (ie dump trucks and other mining equipment). This is a pretty small distinction though, and probably counts as me just being pedantic 😅

Looks really good!

I noticed that on https://indoorequal.org/#map=18.6/39.6302304/-77.6693418&level=0 the women's bathroom isn't showing up. I believe this is because it is missing a level=0 tag.

Sounds good, thanks!

Hello, thanks for the changes. Two comments:

1. If the road's alignment is approximated, it is better to leave this in a `note` or `fix_me` tag on the road itself, as the changeset comment is likely to get lost.
2. In the future, since the houses are still visible in Bing imagery (which is pretty popular for mapping) I would recommend keeping them and changing `building=*` to `demolished:building=*`. This prevents other mappers from accidentally re-adding the buildings. In this case, I don't believe it is a problem since the new road clearly goes right through one of the houses.

Thanks!

Awesome, thank you.

For what it's worth, Frederick City claims they do not (and have never used) Flock ALPRs (https://www.cityoffrederickmd.gov/1976/Automated-License-Plate-Readers). They do use Axon ALPRs, which I have seen elsewhere.

Okay, awesome! Thank you for your work.

Hello. What was your source for removing the ALPRs? From the changeset data, it appears you only used aerial imagery (which was last updated in 2023). Did you verify these locations in person via a survey?

Hello, thanks for the contributions.

You've deleted a number of cameras over several change sets, some of which were only recently added (within the last two weeks or so).

Would you mind explaining what your source was for determining these cameras weren't there?

Hello and thank you for the contribution.
Please refrain from advertising on OpenStreetMap; the description reads more as a marketing tagline than an impartial description of the facility. See osm.wiki/Spam#SEO_Spam
I've removed the offending description.

Hello again!
I believe way/452127261 is mistagged; amenity=college is meant for the entire area of the college, rather than a building that is part of the college. I believe instead tagging building=college is more appropriate.

Hello, it looks pretty good to me! Per the buildings you added (way/1559356849):
First, I recommend using Bing aerial for tracing buildings in MD because it has a better top-down perspective. This helps better estimate the buildings footprint, rather than its roof shape.
Second, since this a duplex, the buildings share a wall and should thus share the nodes between them (you can drag the nodes together in iD to reuse them).
Lastly, since most buildings are built to be square, it is usually a safe bet to press 'Q' to square the building once you're done tracing it.
Thanks for improving the map!

I also noticed that node/14183799649 appears to be a duplicate of way/452127261. If the whole building is called the Learning Support Center, please remove the node. If the Learning Support Center is only a part of the greater building, the name should not be on the way.

Hello and thanks for the contribution! I support your changing the buildings in Hagerstown Community College to their full names rather than abbreviations. I recommend adding short_name=* to some of the buildings whose abbreviations are not immediately clear from their names, like the CBES (Center for Business and Entrepreneurial Studies), for example. This way navigators can find the buildings using acronyms and renderers can choose to use the short names on lower zoom levels.

Hello and Welcome! Thanks for your contribution.

How certain are you that these cameras are ALPRs? Given that Community Park Road isn't a through road, this is seemingly a very strange place to put ALPR cameras.

Welcome, and thanks for the contribution!

If I may, please make sure your changeset comment is relevant to your changes; I spent an embarrassing amount of time trying to figure out why an ALPR is in the park before I realized that these are just regular security cameras. Thanks!

Hello, I surveyed this location today and could not find this flock camera, so I have removed it in changeset/188797483.

There is an Axon camera just up the road, but I found no evidence a Flock camera was ever at this location.

I removed this ALPR in changeset/188740066.

This is a traffic detection camera, not a license plate reader.

Looks good to me, thanks for the de-duplication!

Is there anything in particular you felt unsure about?

I believe you are correct that the camera on the other side of the light is indeed a red light camera (node/14144711404). I've updated the traffic enforcement relationship for both.