[OSM-talk] Error in Google-Maps

D Tucny d at tucny.com
Thu Jan 29 01:28:54 GMT 2009


2009/1/29 Adam Schreiber <sadam at clemson.edu>

> On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 7:27 PM, D Tucny <d at tucny.com> wrote:
> > Of course, OSM isn't perfect...
> >
> >
> http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=11&lat=29.60689&lon=112.12921&layers=B000FTFF
> >
> > I'm pretty sure there's no grid of motorways there... :/
> >
> > There might be a grid of roads though, so seems like a new mapper
> > potentially needs some prodding towards the documentation... I'll go do
> > that...
>
> If you switch to the Google sattelite imagery, they are still pretty
> big roads at zoom 14 which is the lowest google has imagery for.  They
> may not be motorways as we think of them, but they're something big.
>

They probably are reasonably big access roads for a future development... a
3 lane each direction dual carriageway with nice wide garden filled central
reservation with trees and/or other plants to each side seperating the wider
than a normal lane cycle ways on each side from the main carriageway
wouldn't be unusual for a slightly out of the way development (e.g.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=30.183743,120.206845&spn=0.003269,0.006866&t=h&z=18)...
And they aren't much smaller in city centers when new roads are built, or in
some cases, where existing roads are upgraded, which, with all the
demolishing of buildings that accompanies it, probably makes it a lot more
expensive than just making massive roads in the first place when they can,
leading us back to the probable logic behind building roads wider than two
motorways for access to and within a small development...

d
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090129/099364c3/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list