[Talk-us] Proposal: delete census-designated place polygons

Daniel Sabo danielsabo at gmail.com
Fri Nov 12 04:23:57 GMT 2010

I would oppose deleting them. They do have real world significance because they represent community boundaries in unincorporated areas, and the name that you would use to search for an address these communities. McKinleyville, CA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinleyville,_California) is as much a defined community as Arcata or Eureka to the south of it even if it only exists on the map as a CDP.

Place nodes are worse than useless as demonstrated by the associations Nominatim generates from them. (e.g. it thinks my home street is part of a trailer park several miles away). If you think the boundaries are wrong move them (or even better ask people on the ground what the name of the place they live is, which is probably how the census ended up with them in the first place).

On Nov 10, 2010, at 3:54 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:

> http://www.census.gov/geo/www/cob/pl_metadata.html
> "Census designated places (CDPs) are delineated for each decennial
> census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places. CDPs
> are delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of
> population that are identifiable by name but are not legally
> incorporated under the laws of the state in which they are located.
> The boundaries usually are defined in cooperation with local or tribal
> officials. These boundaries, which usually coincide with visible
> features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or other
> legal entity boundary, have no legal status, nor do these places have
> officials elected to serve traditional municipal functions. CDP
> boundaries may change from one decennial census to the next with
> changes in the settlement pattern; a CDP with the same name as in an
> earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary."
> In other words, CDPs have no real-world significance, and are intended
> only for statistical purposes. In addition, my experience has shown
> that they're defined rather arbitrarily (and sometimes incorrectly:
> Holden Heights CDP doesn't include the neighborhood of Holden Heights,
> which is an enclave of unincorporated Orange County surrounded by the
> city of Orlando, since the census boundary for Orlando doesn't have
> that area punched out).
> I'm proposing to delete the polygons (in Florida only for now) *if a
> corresponding place node exists* or it can be shown that the name is
> only used for census purposes ("West and East Lealman"?). Does anyone
> have any comments? Any benefits to keeping them?
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

More information about the Talk-us mailing list