[Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin_level 9?

OSM Volunteer stevea steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Fri Aug 25 19:18:44 UTC 2017


> Jerry Clough <sk53_osm at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Further to this thread, this fascinating article came up in my twitter timeline: The Legacies of Redlining in Pittsburgh
> 
> The Legacies of Redlining in Pittsburgh
> Devin Rutan reveals how Pittsburgh's current geography is still defined by historic housing discrimination. ...

Thanks, Jerry, fascinating read and excellent research by Devin Rutan!

Earlier this month Albert and I discussed off-list how Pittsburg seems to be a US city (admin_level=8) with more than a single distinct administrative subdivision below 8: neighborhoods were tagged 9, but I changed them to 10, as there is no argument that they are the lowest-level administrative subdivision.  It is not clear what entity receives 9 in Pittsburg, it might be wards, it might be council districts.  So, how do we additionally tag Pittsburgh beyond its neighborhoods getting admin_level=10?  I have no idea!  We continue to discuss.

The point of admin_level is that each member in the hierarchy is a distinct "government" offering specific government services by the consent of the governed.  (By several-years-ago OSM consensus, special-purpose districts like parks, schools, COGs or MPOs don't get tagged with admin_level).  I very much like the way Minh Nguyen describes "Municipal Subdivisions" (below Municipalities or cities/towns) in WikiProject_United States/Boundaries:  "Where these subdivisions serve as a system of general-purpose units of government with well-defined boundaries, they are tagged boundary=administrative admin_level=10."  SOME cities (we agree, and virtually all of them relatively large) truly do have two such levels, such as New Orleans which has wards AND neighborhoods, both well-established.  Good we have 9!

In short, larger cities MIGHT have truly administrative neighborhoods, which it is emerging in the USA should be tagged admin_level=10.  For cities with two administrative subdivisions below cities (like New Orleans), we have and should tag both 9 and 10, obviously the lower/lowest gets 10.  In smaller cities, especially suburbs, consider mapping (sometimes homeowner association–managed) residential subdivisions with landuse=residential ways (often closed polygons), omitting admin_level altogether.  Admin_level tagging (especially below 8) continues to become better-defined in the USA, and I am pleased to see us continue to discuss it well right here.

SteveA
California
(a big fan of "let's get admin_level as correct as we can in the USA")


> From: Peter Dobratz <peter at dobratz.us>
> To: Albert Pundt <roadsguy99 at gmail.com> 
> Cc: "talk-us at openstreetmap.org" <talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 27 July 2017, 18:29
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] Pittsburgh neighborhood boundaries mapped with admin level 9?
> 
> (Appologies as I was in the middle of writing my reply when inadvertantly hitting send.  Here's the whole message)
> 
> Boundaries below admin_level=8 are still being discussed.  There was some discussion on this list as well as the OSM wiki
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap. org/wiki/Talk:United_States_ admin_level#Nine_state_ improvement
> 
> Having lived in Pittsburgh, I remember that the neighborhood boundaries are well defined and many of the street signs have the neighborhood names printed across the top of them (epecially on more major roads with bigger signs).
> 
> If you were to divide up Pittsburgh into smaller administrative units, how would you do it?
> 
> Pittsburgh resides within Allegheny County.  Allegheny County is divided into Wards and districts, some of which could be used to divide up Pittsburgh:
> http://apps.alleghenycounty.us/website/MuniPgh.asp
> 
> Pittsburgh city council is made up of 9 people who each represent a council district of the city.  It looks like each council district covers a group of neighborhoods (that might lend itself to making the council districts admin_level=9 and the neighborhoods admin_level=10).  For example, council district 5 contains the neighborhoods, Hazelwood, Glen Hazel, Greenfield, Hays, Lincoln Place, New Homestead, and Regeant Square
> http://pittsburghpa.gov/district5/about
> 
> Pittsburgh is also divided up into 32 wards, each being divided further into a variable number of districts each.  These wards and districts are separate from the Allegheny County wards and districts.  I'm not sure how the cities wards relate to the neighborhood boundaries.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Peter Dobratz <peter at dobratz.us> wrote:
> Boundaries below admin_level=8 are still being discussed.  There was some discussion on this list as well as the OSM wiki
> 
> https://wiki.openstreetmap. org/wiki/Talk:United_States_ admin_level#Nine_state_ improvement
> 
> Having lived in Pittsburgh, I remember that the neighborhood boundaries are well defined and many of the street signs have the neighborhood names printed across the top of them (epecially on more major roads with bigger signs).
> 
> If you were to divide up Pittsburgh into smaller administrative units, how would you do it?
> 
> Pittsburgh reside within the Allegheny County
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:36 PM, Albert Pundt <roadsguy99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I noticed that the neighborhoods in Pittsburgh are mapped as administrative boundaries with admin_level=9. Is this proper? The wiki page for U.S. admin levels doesn't list any use for admin level 9 in Pennsylvania, though this seems appropriate if Pittsburgh neighborhoods are true administrative divisions. It just needs to be documented, or perhaps used elsewhere in the state, like with the fairly distinct neighborhoods in Philadelphia.




More information about the Talk-us mailing list