[Tagging] [Talk-us] Heavily-wooded residential polygons

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Mon Jun 8 12:16:07 UTC 2020




Jun 6, 2020, 06:20 by 61sundowner at gmail.com:

> On 3/6/20 7:22 am, Mateusz Konieczny      via Tagging wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jun 2, 2020, 20:16 by >> steveaOSM at softworkers.com>> :
>>
>>> "this IS residential landuse." (Not COULD BE, but IS). Yes,          this land might be "natural" now, including being "treed," but          I could still build a patio and bbq there after perhaps          cutting down some trees, it is my residential land and I am          allowed to do that, meaning it has residential use, even if it          is "unimproved" presently. 
>>>
>> It is a residential property, not a residential landuse.
>>
>
>
>
>
> I have a few trees on my residential property. I use then for;      shade, to sit under, to have a BBQ under, read a book under, think      about things. People park their cars, caravans and boats under      them.
>
>
> They are part of my home ... they are used by me ... as my      residence. 
>
>
> If trees are to be excluded from OSM residential landuse, will      grass and flowers be removed too? Are only buildings to be mapped      as residential landuse in OSM? I think that would be ridiculous. 
>
>
>
>
>
>>> These facts do add to the difficulty: OSM doesn't wish to          appear to be removing property rights from residential          landowners (by diminishing landuse=residential areas)
>>>
>> Are there people somehow believing that edits in OSM affect        property rights and may remove them?
>> That is ridiculous.
>>
>>> but at the same time, significant portions of these areas          do remain in a natural state, while distinctly and presently          "having" residential landuse. 
>>>
>> For me and in my region (Poland) it would be treated as a        clearly incorrect mapping.
>>
>
>
>
>
> Parks here can have scrub, trees, grass and /or flowers - that      does not mean they are not parks because of the land cover. 
>
>
> I would contend similar consideration by held for residential      landuse. 
>
>
Yes, landuse=residential may include areas with tree, I fully agree here.

But "portions of these areas          do remain in a natural state" with residential status limited
solely to legal status (land ownership, legal right to build something there and start using
this land as landuse=residential) cases seem quite dubious to me.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200608/ec7ee72e/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list