[Talk-us-massachusetts] Landuse Landcover

[Bill Ricker]

On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 11:12 AM Alan Bragg <alan.d.bragg at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm enjoying all this talk about coloring the map.
> Here's a site that just displays that data https://osmlanduse.org
>

Oh thank you.

The lack of both landuse and landcover tags for e.g. Boston is striking.
"Urban Fabric" includes "Residential", which appears to only be applied to
organized developments.

One could be forgiven for thinking there was no arable / commercial farm in
the City of Boston, as for some reason it declines to render Allendale Farm
until zoomed in - does it drop any categeory below 0.5% ?
https://osmlanduse.org/#15.776085670738018/-71.14182/42.30705/0/

The distinction between Allandale (3 a's instead of 2 a, 1 e!) Woods as
Forest and Arboretum as Park=Artificial non ag Vegetated is an interesting
choice, centering land*use* *qua *form of preservation and kind of
stewardship as opposed to land*cover*, which ought to be the same for most
of both parcels?

There's a cluster of conservation parcels in Dedham
<https://osmlanduse.org/#15.284891024600025/-71.19876/42.23276/0/> just W
of 128/95 and 1 that aren't tinted so don't have needed use or cover tags
even though named tracts with a conservation-y thick boundary. Odd.

-- 
Bill Ricker
bill.n1vux at gmail.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20220724/50d461ca/attachment.htm>