[Talk-nz] Format of land use areas. Trace around all roads or just the main drags?

[Andrew Douglas-Clifford]

Hi James,

I've seen the application vary quite a bit. As you say, sometimes it will
just be large areas including roads inside them, which is fine assuming
there aren't any different land uses inside the area, it saves plenty of
time and still feels correct to me. If it's a wider than usual gap between
areas, perhaps it merits separated areas though.

In the situations where it does border features like roads and parks etc.
for existing ones, I tend to tidy it up for aesthetic purposes so that it
goes along the approximate fence line of the property and excludes the
kerb, as the footpath and kerb area aren't really part of the 'residential'
area. When rendered in the OSM tiles it makes more sense that way as it is
parallel to the road feature.


Cheers,
Andrew


On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 8:36 PM <james at tfg.nz> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
>
>
> After making updates to the Jville/Newlands/Tawa/Welly area over the past
> couple weeks. I’ve wondered what opinions there are on drawing out land use
> areas like residential, commercial, industrial, etc.
>
>
>
> Wellington seems to follow the pattern of tracing around every single
> road. While Christchurch seems to have things done as large blocks with
> major roads being the borders. And I found both in Auckland.
>
>
>
> So what do people think/prefer? Avoid any road overlap or only avoid major
> roads? Or even just ignore roads entirely?
>
>
>
> My personal view is either to either stop at the main roads or just ignore
> the roads when laying out the areas. The roads are already are labelled as
> being primary, secondary, and tertiary. So it’s pretty clear when they’re
> acting as a border. Also for many of the major roads they’re going to
> create their own border by being an area of primarily commercial land use.
> Meanwhile trying to trace around every single road adds a lot of overhead
> of not only updating road alignments but then a way on either side that
> needs updating. Then are you including the footpath and berm as part of the
> area or do you say that’s council owned so not included?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> James.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-nz mailing list
> Talk-nz at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-nz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nz/attachments/20210801/bf099821/attachment.htm>