[talk-au] Classifying settlements (Was Re: Filling in blank space (Was Re: Tagging towns by relative importance, not just population size))

[Warin]

On 3/10/23 19:41, Andrew Davidson wrote:
> On 2/10/23 21:53, Little Maps wrote:
>> As I understand your message, we have and/or can get population data
>> for a small proportion of places in Aus (probably with comprehensive
>> data for most larger places and less data for the many smaller ones).
>
> There are two classes of problems:
>
> 1. Urban centres that have gown so much that they have coalesced with 
> neighbouring urban centres. Some of these are easy to assign the 
> population to a single place node (Gold Coast, Nowra - Bomaderry, 
> Shepparton - Mooroopna). Others are not clear where you would put the 
> population (Central Coast, Blue Mountains, Ocean Grove - Barwon 
> Heads). There are about 90 of these out of 1800.
>
> 2. Settlements that are so small that the ABS doesn't consider them 
> worthy of their own mesh block (the smallest geographic unit they 
> report on). If a settlement doesn't rate a single residential mesh 
> block I'd say it's not really a candidate for anything above hamlet.
>
>> This means that, if we develop a guideline based primarily on
>> population data we then have to develop a simple way to extrapolate
>> the guidelines to places without pop data. Yes?
>
> If you can't get population data that kinda suggests it's either tiny 
> or, grown so big that you have to start worrying about how to 
> subdivide the urban area into suburbs etc.
>
>> As a simple starting point, I’m curious whether it’s possible to
>> first try to get agreement on general cut-offs for
>> villages/towns/cities etc using only the places that have pop data
>> (i.e. those you’ve mapped). We could present some different scenarios
>> so that everyone could see the implications of different decisions
>> for areas that they know.
>
> The ABS uses a threshold of 1000 people in an urban area to identify 
> an urban centre. In OSM speak this would be a town or city.
>
> At the small end the old Natmap standard was not to show any 
> settlements smaller than 200. Maybe that's the threshold for 
> hamlet/village. Although I get the impression people would like to 
> adjust that for the level of services available. Perhaps we could 
> apply the Fitzpatrick adjustment:
>
> add on or take off 50 people for each one of the following is or isn't 
> available:
>
> pub
> shop
> servo
> a government service (PO/Hospital/Police)
>
> So a settlement with pub, shop, servo, and school with a population of 
> 4 would be a village. A rural residential development with no services 
> and a population of 750 would be a hamlet.
>
> The cutoffs are going to be arbitrary. The important thing is to just 
> choose some and make sure that there's some reasoning behind them.
>
>

The 'government/community services' might be ordered by there total 
numbers?

PO (including local PO agents)

Police

Doctors (theses seam scarcer than Police?_

Hospitals


Outliers?

The Ilkurlka Roadhouse is on the Anne Beadell Highway. Next fuel .. east 
771 km Coober Pedy or west 550 km Laverton.

Population? 1? ... ~200 at Tjuntjuntjara. the nearest aboriginal community?

https://www.ilkurlka.org.au/


Possibly these kind of places only go on certain types of map .. Hemma 
does a good job with highlighting such places with fuel/store symbols 
... and usually some contact details.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20231003/c6f48eb7/attachment.htm>