[Talk-us-massachusetts] Should I write a wiki proposal to revert landuse=reservoir_watershed import

[Wayne Emerson, Jr.]

I would not be in favor of permanent deletion. In some cases it might 
make sense to delete what is there now and re-import newer/better data. 
But I think each would have to be checked individually. In the situation 
where many adjacent parcels all have the same tags, they should be 
melded into one big area.

One of the situations previously described sounds like the typical thing 
where like 60+ years ago some ambitious developers planned to build near 
water, streets were laid out but then the laws changed. A lot of times 
the state ignores these paper streets laid out on the parcel map when 
they draw conservation borders.

I think for?? a typical water supply protection area one would draw a 
simple line around the outer border, as these are usually simple 
straight lines. Then make a relation with the shoreline, so you wouldn't 
have to draw the shore again.
With the Alan's example picture it looks more complicated. That looks 
like it could be reduced to 4 separate areas though. I have seen some 
people draw new borders that cross existing streets but I don't like that.

Someone should also update the wiki to describe the current way to 
update MassGIS tags. When I first started mapping I tried going by the 
instructions in the wiki and ended up turning land into water. I left a 
comment here: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:MassGis_Layer_Openspace

Someone could also create a MassGIS fixup matrix in a google doc and 
leave a link in the wiki. Like a chart with towns on left column and 
tasks at the top. If you want to work a town put your name on the cell 
in the chart, when you're done mark it in the chart. Of course the 
MassGIS wiki pages should clearly state how to update the tags. Afaik 
that would be:
boundary=protected area
protect_class=12

There was a proposal for protected_area=resource but I don't think it 
was adopted.

We shouldn't think of these as watersheds per se, since all land is part 
of a watershed. They are conservation areas for the purpose of "water 
supply protection." By definition access should no. This was tightened 
up after 9/11 with fears of terrorist poisoning the water, but my town 
just opened a nature walk around our reservoir.

There is a lot to think about so I wouldn't be in a rush.

-Wayne Emerson [OSM-Rassilon]


On 7/13/2019 9:23 AM, Alan & Ruth Bragg wrote:
> Please take a look at this screenshot of typical reservoir_watershed 
> polygons?? (red lines)
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/rWWb22Syq5k3RPWh7
> What I see is a proposed housing development and plot plans.
>
> 2,732 of all 2,740 landuse=reservoir_watershed polygons are in MA.
> There is one OSM wiki for the tag but it says nothing. 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q17545
> There is no system to maintain or validate the data.
> Access to the land is unknown.
> There is no way to identify the boundaries on the ground.
> It's a spaghetti??mess of lines making it hard to distinguish and map 
> real objects.
> Makes OSM less friendly for new users.
> The imported data doesn't match current MassGIS L3 overlay in most cases.
> There is no rendering that displays the data.
> All this data, and much more is available from MassGIS?? on the OLIVER 
> site.http://maps.massgis.state.ma.us/map_ol/oliver.php
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us-massachusetts mailing list
> Talk-us-massachusetts at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us-massachusetts




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20190713/8b7b77ec/attachment-0001.html>