[Talk-us] parcel data in OSM

Jason Remillard remillard.jason at gmail.com
Fri Dec 28 21:16:22 GMT 2012


Hi,

I am not sure this has been discussed before.

We have decided that we don't want parcel data into the US OSM
database. I agree with this decision. However, looking at the map in
Mass, the situation is not so cut and dry. The open space layer from
MassGIS was imported several years ago. This has encouraged people to
map out many of the hiking trails. Surprisingly, I think that OSM is
currently the best/most complete map of hiking trails in Mass. In fact
many of the mappers in Mass came to OSM from the local trail
committee's (myself included). So reality is that we do have some
parcel data data in OSM and its inclusion has been a net positive.

So the question is, what should the exact criteria be for including an
"open space" parcel in OSM. Consider some of the various types of
property.

- True conservation land, land that is owned by a private non-profit
or owned by the town that is supposed to be never developed, the
public is allowed to use it for light recreation activities, and
that's it.
- Town land that is open to the public, but is not developed.
Watersheds, parks, undeveloped tracks etc.
- Playgrounds
- Public Schools
- Private land that is open to the public as long as people stay on
the marked trails.
- Private land that has development restrictions, but is not open to the public.
- In between, places like the "New England Forestry Foundation", that
harvest tree's, so the land is in fact a "forest", but encourages the
public use the land and who's mission is conservation.

Basically, what I have settled on is that the parcel is included if
the land can't be developed and the public is allowed access. If
either test is false, it does not go in.

Looking for peoples thoughts on this.

Thanks
Jason.



More information about the Talk-us mailing list