<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-GB" link="blue" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">I was looking at some junctions local to me this evening and I came across a series of edits made by the user robw about 10 days ago which are for the most part problematic.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The junctions in the area had been mapped to show turning lanes etc and had been done in fair level of detail, mostly by me. So I was most perturbed to find that multiple junctions in the area had been edited by this user in a most destructive
manner. Geometries were wrecked, turning restrictions removed and generally the mapping quality of the area’s larger road junctions has been significantly reduced. For example the junction of the A445 and B4099 had changeset 100415093 applied to it. Now instead
of two separate ways, going the correct way around a traffic island, there is a single way 99073970 which has its end at node 8246592206, slap bang in the middle of said traffic island and also at the point where a GB:610 sign has been put into the way to
show that traffic along way 14475007 should go the correct side of the traffic island.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have commented on changeset 100542700 and received what I consider to be an unhelpful response, which amongst other things claims that only “signposted” turn restrictions should be put in place, whilst completely failing to acknowledge
that at least for the A445 Binswood Street the turn restrictions ARE signposted! Yes they are noted by painted road markings diagrams 1038 and 1039 from the
<span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">
Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, but in those rules governing traffic signs no distinction is made between upright sign posts and painted road markings. Both are traffic signs in law.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">So I would very much appreciate it if an eye could be cast over changesets 100289235, 10028989377, 100289685, 100358754, 100415093, 100490605,
100503743, 100503838, 100504272, 100541584 and 100542700. Ironically enough there have also been a number of actual improvements made to junctions in the area, namely changesets 100541784 and 100542143 with traffic islands taken account of at those junctions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">David Newton</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sent from <a href="https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986">
Mail</a> for Windows 10</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>