Inadvertent changeset comment. Should have been something about correcting alignment and turn restrictions

Phil, that's specific enough! I'm fine with improvements of course, I had noticed that the state data left some things to be desired but hadn't been so sure which database was authoritative.
Agreed about that land database bit with regards to roads. I suppose we should say that if the park exists on both sides of a regular road, it includes it. I-70 is tougher but I think it probably could apply since a driver might see a sign that they're entering the park, and the ROW isn't really used for anything else besides the road a park. The ROW width usually has to do with the slope adjustments around the major elevation changes.
The only exception I would take is for power lines insofar as it is useful to tell park users that these are private property (if that is indeed the case).
I have some paper plats I can send you if you're interested.
Also did you want to join our slack chat?

Hey Phil, what were the changes you found? Just wondering :)

What's this changeset about?

I thought that looked odd in the app. I'll change it!

Thanks for the comment! I think you're right. This was a suggestion in that Pushpin app while I was surveying some stores here. I can remove this tag.

What does this have to do with Rocks SP? I am only seeing 1423 new buildings without any attributes.

What does this have to do with cleaning up Gunpowder Falls SP?

For instance, this building and the ones around it are not visible on Bing. osm.org/way/378341801

Hello there. This changeset seems to include imported data. While the project appreciates these contributions, there is a process in place for importing data.

There are buildings in this import that could not have been traced because they're not visible in Bing.

Do you have any documentation in place? I have been planning a similar import, but the plan includes the inclusion of addresses and building attributes. I'd love to have your help, but we need to go through all of the proper steps. Please respond.

Thanks for tagging this David! I have always wondered about the access there.

I think you inadvertently changed the name of the street to "C" :)

This is incorrect. You have improperly altered the boundaries of JHH.

This is not Dunbar Apartments. Those were torn down and replaced by the new building here. Please revert.

It is not even a real police station. It was used as a police station on a TV show.

What is this about? there are no buildings like this on this block.

Please provide a comment about this. Why did you change the types of many roads?

What is this changeset about? Please leave a comment.

Alright, I fixed the boundaries in JOSM making them nice and connected, and removed the unnecessary bits. osm.org/changeset/27424053

@4rch: sorry to break the boundary! Basically that little triangle is a part of Hampstead that is inside of Baltimore County. I guess I really shouldn't have made it an enclave in the county relation because it is still in Baltimore County.