The revert looks good - thank you for doing that so quickly and with exact coords. The story, more 90%-likely-true lore than hard fact, is that it used to be the normal stone (required to be 4' at installation) but was hit by a snowmobiler long ago (80s?) and that the top is somewhere in a town building in Harvard. I added a height tag at 4 cm as a guess from memory -- but it's lower than the usual height of the grass. The law says that it must be replaced if below 2 feet -- but you know how well government does at following the law when it's inconvenient.

As for offset, the convention is that the boundary nodes match the 1890s survey data, as more accurate then we can do with GPS today, but I've been using RTK GNSS data for the stones. They are not that far off - the differences have been submeter.

Most of the rest of the stones are well above grade, except for one on Red Acre road that's maybe 10-15 cm, and the tritown one in ARNWR that's flush, but in the middle of trail and easy to spot.

Why did you delete this? If it's just because you looked for it and didn't see it, that's not a good enough reason as it is very tricky to spot, being almost flush with the ground. Even for me, who knows what it looks like and has visited it as a town official, I need to use RTK GPS to find it.

Also, if it was part of boundary ways, the node shouldn't be deleted, just tags adjusted if truly not present. Please be super careful when touching anything about boundaries.

You already removed it, but I believe the claim that this camera is operated by Acton Police to be entirely incorrect. I have seen no evidence that Acton has any flock relationship.

More importantly, it's not a Flock camera; it's Vue Robotics. Those are environmental/longer-term monitoring, and don't do ALPR according to the manufacturer. It's also in a parking lot not viewing the street. I've redone most of the tags, based on an on-the-ground survey (as in looking at it from 1m away :-).

As the more local, would you like to delete the other OSM node for the same camera now? (Sounds like you'll be checking all 6; news says 4 including this one gone already and last 2 on sep 8 and 9, I think.)

Your edit looks 100% fine so this is not a complaint. I noticed another user (via the deflock app) added a camera in pretty much the same place. I am guessing that other addition is a dup of one camera:

changeset/183783199#map=19/42.555935/-71.485559&layers=N

but I don't want to remote-edit without looking on the ground, and I'm a few towns away. I wonder if you go by there and could check to see if there is 1 camera, 2 cameras, or if it's been removed. (I asked the same of the other user.)

Welcome to OSM; I see you are pretty new.

In june you added an ALPR here, and there is also one added in March: changeset/180424307#map=19/42.556006/-71.485602&layers=N

It seems likely there is only 1 camera, not two. I wonder if you remember adding this, and if you could see two, or if somehow the deflock app wasn't showing the other one.

Also, I've heard that Littleton is physically removing ALPR cameras and I wonder if you have been by, or if it's easy to swing by and check. If it has been removed then we should delete it from the map.

Thanks for the note - I read the wiki again. While I can see the logical consistency of the wiki, it's contrary to common usage and thus easy to lose track of. With any luck I'll remember :-)

Awesome - thanks for following up.

Looks like a local issue; I think I fixed 27 just south of 20.

While a passenger :-) I got a big red speed sign warning because the 45 km/h the van was driving at was way in excess of the 25 km/h speed limit!

But seriously, I think you left off the mph and thus the 25 is defaulting to metric. Happy to fix, but I wonder if you know what other things you might have similarly edited and be able to catch them all.

Sorry for the empty comment. This changeset adds Minnow Brook, flowing from Minnow Pond to Blue Mountain Lake, based on hydrography from the National Map, with naming and confirmation of national map data based on discussion with a local who has traversed it.

I was recently at Brilla and think I saw Meola's, but two things about this edit don't make sense to me. One is that if the POI is the only thing in the building, we usually just put it on the building. Plus, the address is for the building, vs a part, unless there is a unit.

The second thing is that it looks like 1134 might be a Meola's production facility, and that is the addr on their website.

I'm guessing you are local so maybe you know?

note/5152429

Just visited, and was glad to see it mapped already! I have disconnected the parking from the driveway and added a separate drive-through lane.

One question about bike parking - it says access=yes, but surely the public does not have a legally-protected right to use the bike parking. I think it should be access=customers, just like the car parking.

This node is seriously in the wrong place. Was the restaurant really on the corner of Washington and Washington Court in May of 2018?

I have moved it to the actual location based on on-the-ground survey.

What "city map"? What is the copyright status/license of it? How can I look at it?

According to the MassDOT data set as shown in MassMapper, Meadow Pond is a public road, with a 35' right of way. It may be that the marking is improper, which would not change access. I'll see about contacting Concord, after finishing up with Acton :-)

L3 parcels shows Anthem Way and the other 3 as a public right of way. I intend to inquire of the town; it seems that either L3 parcels is wrong or the signs are improper.

Can you link to "Meadow Pond"? I can't find it. I will check the signage on Anthem Way next time I go by.

OSM has a confused doctrine, visible on the ground out of one side of its mouth, and a strong focus on the English "public rights of way" out of the other. In the US (at least in MA), public rights of way are verifiable at the registry of deeds. So I think access tags should follow what the actual legal situation is. OSM also has a tradition of tagging signs, representing exactly what the sign said, whether or not what is on it is true, and whether the person who put it up is acting properly or not.

The case of Anthem Way is curious, and I'll follow up with the Acton Planning board. It could be that L3 is wrong here, and it's easy enough to request the subdivision plan, special permit, or comprehensive permit as those are all public records.

In this case, the Ridgewood and Westview in Stow are shown as carved out from the condo property.