I am gradually removing the cycling route relation for the Tour de Manche. The following link to forum explain reasons, and approach.

https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/itineraire-velo-tour-de-manche/13154

I am gradually removing the cycling route relation for the Tour de Manche. The following link to forum explain reasons, and approach.

https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/itineraire-velo-tour-de-manche/13154

I am gradually removing the cycling route relation for the Tour de Manche. The following link to forum explain reasons, and approach.

https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/itineraire-velo-tour-de-manche/13154

I am gradually removing the cycling route relation for the Tour de Manche. The following link to forum explain reasons, and approach.

https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/itineraire-velo-tour-de-manche/13154

Yes, land movement is happening inland of the road. Discussed in my email to Talk-GB mailing list. A few posts later there's discussion about the new route of "English Coast Path". It's been rerouted to the south along the footpath but we don't have a OSM suitable source yet. Bus route is a problem because it doesn't appear to be a public bus route and there's a lack of publicly available route data.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-March/030133.html

Issues with pedestrians getting around initial barrier, so it has been heavily f

Hi Sec147, I sent a message to you about this type of changeset. Where you move address from node to building, ignoring local style of address adding. Could you please respond.

Hi sec147. Can you give more details. whether there has been a recent change to sign. From my knowledge the highway signage, supported by the Traffic Order, were correctly mapped in OSM in that they allowed all uses of the road, but the road was for motor vehicles a "dead end" if travelling from east or west due to a short section being made "no motor vehicles".

From looking at google maps (not a useable source) a yellow sign is present at either end stating "access to school only". If these signs are the source of the change, I feel that change is wrong. The signs are not statutory traffic order signs that enforce rules on how to use the road. The information is also clearly wrong.

I'd suggest that yellow signs are added clutter to make more visible the fact the road in no longer a cut through rat run.

If the yellow signs are what you're referring to, and is taken literally, then it applies to both sides of Hollow Lane, and to cyclists, and residents and visitors to approx 7 houses.

This is more of a general topic, rather than a changeset topic. I'll send you message through the "message" system.

Hi, I recently made edits to this junction that may have caused the issue you fixed. Using the video from recent visit (cycle cam), and images I've previously submitted to Mapillary. I'm confident I can spot the stickers on posts. Made some slight changes to move walking route from carriageway to footway (pavement) indicated by stickers. I'll have a look next couple of weeks to confirm stickers.

Hi sec147. You're recently adding huge amounts of useful address info, but you're also moving addresses from points to buildings. Your style of adding all addresses to buildings conflicts with style of address "adding" commonly used in this area. Addresses are commonly added as points. I'd suggest giving consideration to how other local mappers have added addresses and not change without initial talking?

Hi sec147. You haven't responded yet, and the change conflitcts with what I know about this road. I have changed it back to it's previous access in this changeset

osm.org/changeset/132221245

Sorry, looking again, it appears you didn't add them as bus stops, but Naptan data has been there for a while? Still not sure about use of tag bus=yes and public_transport+platform

Hi, sec147. The bus stops you've added in this changeset do not exist. Not physically present, but more importantly there are no buses using them. There is Naptan bus stop data for these sites, but the Naptan data does not necessarily means the bus stop exits in the OSM meaning.

Hi sec147. In this changeset the eastern half of Hollow Lane has been given the restriction vehicle=private

osm.org/way/1132721898

I'm not aware of a traffic order changing access to this road? Are you sure this is correct. And if so what is the signage?

Hi sec147. In this edit you changed a footway (crossing) to cycleway. The way is linked to below
osm.org/way/819038103

Assume change done because it's part of a cycle route. But this section is a footway, An example of poor cycling infrastructure. I changed the way back to being a footway in changeset 131618190

The historical background is, from my local knowledge, complex. A very quick check shows that the definitive source for street names, National Street Gazetteer, has junction where I said, but is not a usable source. The recycling bank has an address on Topsham Rd. Not something I can follow up now, I'll revisit this in January.

Hi, I believe the road name here was correct. The junction between Topsham Rd, and Exeter Rd, happens at the "The Retreat Drive" But, there is conflict with the official road name and OS maps. I am away from home so can't access data. Created personal note for myself to double check this local anomaly in the New Year. Did you have a source for the change?

The mapping of Cycle Ways in Cranbrook is a problem. More surveys needed to unravel what is meant to be there and what has actually been provided. A network of "pavement cycle tracks" where meant to be constructed by developers of this new town, but currently only exist as 3m wide pavement. Signage & textured paving not constructed. Devon County Council has on their mapping service shown cycle tracks that should be there, but does not match what's on ground.

I will try and revisit and get more data for cycle tracks that actually exist on ground.

That last "this should been check" was a copy&past error.

The wikidata ID is for the entire sports ground, not just the central activity area. The sports ground is mapped and already has the wikidata ID. osm.org/way/106053639#map=18/50.61332/-3.40577

Adding it twice is unnecessary? The the object you attached it to is not area the Wikidata ID is referring to.

Adding the wikidata ID when already present should be managed within the maproulette activity, and I don't know why it suggested adding to the internal activity area, rather than the whole ground.

This should been check