[Talk-us] Heavily-wooded residential polygons

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Jun 3, 2020, 06:09 by steveaOSM at softworkers.com:

> Mateusz Konieczny writes:
> "OSM is not a place to map property rights.  And landuse=residential is certainly not a tool for mapping boundaries of owned areas or property right boundaries."
>
> I don't wish to start an argument, and I ask with all the politeness I can muster, but Mateusz, how can you be so sure?  Quoting our wiki, "land use...describes what an area of land is used for e.g. housing..., etc."  On the land that property owners own, and live on, can you truly say they are not "using the entirety of their land for residential purposes?"  Of course, some of that might have a house or apartment building, but the rest of it, is that land not also residential?
>
Depends on a case. If you have a tree-covered area next to house, then it is likely a landuse=residential
and it likely terminates where your owned area terminates.

But if you have 2000 acres of forest, wetland and whatever else - with your house there, it
does not mean that the entire area becomes landuse=residential.

I agree that landuse=residential often matches property area (as people typically use
their entire property).

But I would strongly against matching residential areas to property boundaries.

And I am strongly opposed to basing OSM mapping on people who think that
landuse=residential mapped in OSM defines their owned property and affects
their legal rights.

>   "the remainder of land which is used for residential purposes which does not strictly contain the footprint of a building (hut, apartment, tent, hogan, mud daub dwelling)?"  Something other than residential?  It is residential!
>
Yes, this is residential. But I have seen cases (and though that you are talking about it) of people
tagging private forest/wetland/whatever as landuse=residential till their property boundary

For example things like
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lush_undergrowth_Bj%C3%B6rnlandet_national_park.jpg
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lawthorn_wetland,_Irvine,_North_Ayrshire.jpg
were marked as landuse=residential solely because were on the same legal area as a house,
despite not used for residential purpose in any way (except some sightseeing/walking,
like it happens with any other forest).

For example, area should not be marked as landuse=industrial just because someone
has legal rights to drill for oil there or legal rights to build factory there.

It also is not landuse=industrial if it is forest next to currently operating factory, with a planned
construction there.

Only once a construction starts it can be marked as a  landuse=construction and
later once the factory is actually there it will be a landuse=industrial
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20200603/0993cbae/attachment-0001.htm>