I have a mild preference for `amenity=parking` over `parking=street_side` as this is on a `highway=service` directly in front of buildings that are off the main public roadway, but this is not a strong preference. If you feel `parking=street_side` is better suited (with removal of the parking area), I would be okay if you want to make that change.

Yes, that was a typo. Fixed to be `parking=surface` in changeset/187537457.

New features in this changeset are offset by about (-0.36, 1.58) since I forgot to align aerial imagery before creating these new features.

Meant to link these:

[1] osm.wiki/Guidelines_for_pedestrian_navigation#Routing_on_areas

[2] area=*#Routers

My first changeset comment from a name I recognize in the area, a nice surprise! Are you asking about the footways within area 1289147022 specifically?

I added the internal paths since the OSM Wiki recommends it: "Area routing can improve and should be combined with linear routing" [1]. Since "Routing through areas only is hardly possible" and "Most routers naïvely route around the perimeter", these ways should help routing through this moderately sized (190m perimeter) pedestrian area.