Thanks for adding your business.
I think the main issue is that you probably want to tag this as a "corporate office" so it shows up as a business. Other issue is that any type of opinions, like what is written in the description, is out of the scope of a map, and should not be entered there - your URL that's there will link to your advertising.

Did you move from Midpoint Dr?

I know it says Presbyterian church, but the sign in street view says Baptist so I wrote Baptist.

Okay I think the correct course of action is this driveway be marked 'private' as that is the correct designation.

Also I think I may have inadvertently threatened this resident so he ended up deleting his OSM account after attempting to delete his residence and the associated driveway. It was meant to be a tongue in cheek joke - he said he lives here and I parrot back that I know where he lives, well, yeah it is threat meme, alas no harm intended if he's still reading this note, but I still stand firm this should be mapped.

However the ultimate problem in this conundrum is his desire to make it seem like there's nowhere to park around this location. I'm sure Amazon and any other delivery drivers will still see parking there when driving by and still attempt to park. So, he has just decreased the quality of the maps and had no benefit to himself. I told him that he needs to work with all delivery drivers directly to solve the problem, including erecting signs that indicate no parking for non-resident/guests, asking them to park on Peterson or Mathews St, since there is no parking along Mulberry.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm implying you or any other Amazon mappers that are causing OSM mapping problems, it's purely this resident that's trying so hard to stop a problem by making things worse for everyone using these maps, and this is my concern. In fact I think the original mapping of this driveway was (correctly) done by Amazon and he deleted it...

(Also as a joke, if Amazon gives a tribute delivery to the guy every time they park there, I'm sure he wouldn't mind them parking there... It's another "Get off my lawn unless you're working for me" kind of deal.)

He has admitted to me that he merely renting the property and not the actual owner. In my opinion the right call is to let him suffer the consequences of his choice of living arrangement, but if you can somehow alert your drivers to not park in the parking lot next to his residence, that would be appreciated.

As can be seen I did some more research on this particular property and found it to be a historical building, and also includes a warning not to disturb the tenants. But I believe this was referring to actually entering the premises to inspect the historical nature of the building versus parking in the lot.

I cannot control what he or the actual owner ultimately do with their building. I also cannot control Amazon drivers. All I wish is the OSM edit war is over with the proper and correct tagging and artwork, within reason of course. In fact I've been correcting errors he has been introducing in order to make himself disappear from the map - he has been the person deleting everything he doesn't want on the map and lies that they don't exist. As I am likewise local to the neighborhood, I can inspect the property on a daily basis. His persistent lying upset me greatly, and I hope this is not causing me to bias against him as he has been deleting my work.

As said, he does not own the property. All of us OSM editors, including people who haven't edited this house owns OSM, the fact that the building and road are there will not change until something drastic happens like house teleportation. If not me, someone will draw, someone will tag, this will never stop.

Ultimately my preference is that it's tagged correctly. Marking the road access as 'no' or simply deleting the road are both 'wrong'. I agree if this road was actually used for traversal by the general public we could do things like add a gap, but this is not the case. As far as I can tell his sole complaint is for Amazon workers parking their trucks in the private lot to deliver packages to other people in the neighborhood. My suggestion is that he or the owner needed to erect "No Trespassing" signs on the property and that would be the end of this problem, this would be more clear to drivers that parking/standing in that lot is not acceptable / appreciated.

I don't know what other clues are given to Amazon drivers to not use specific roads for parking or even standing. Given the fact that it seems delivery people have so little spare time I can understand why they use this lot. Perhaps the other solution is to give more time for delivery so they can find other parking spaces.

To be honest I do not want to get into the politics here. However I do want OSM to be reflective of the correct status of all structures on this map. The specific case that I am worried about is if there was a legitimate guest who was invited to drive here and having this marked as 'no' precludes it, while having it marked as 'private' - the guest will know a private party invited them - and is okay.

While Amazon can also be considered a guest, however if they are not making deliveries to the specific units this parking is allocated for - this is trespassing. This particular "local resident" is being particular to this issue, whether they are being unreasonable or not. Ultimately this is the issue at hand here. OSM should not get involved in this "war."

Now that the complete politics of this is laid out, I'm merely trying to keep OSM accurate to what's on the ground and not what people "want" it to be. We have had situations where there are conflicts such as short cuts taken through private property, this has been taken care of in the past through other means. However this appears to be a trespassing issue and not a routing issue and has nothing to do with how we tag things on the map.

Having the road marked 'private' should be the correct tagging. If this "local resident" wants to put up a sign "NO TRESPASSING, VIOLATORS WILL BE SHOT" or something to that extent, that ultimately is what they want to do. However it still is simply a private access road, not a "no" access road.

I have been talking to this "local resident"as well. The original tagging of 'private' is correct as 'no' access means even residents are not allowed to use the road. The problem is the issue of amazon drivers disturbing the residents. I am not happy if amazon requires specific tagging to prevent its drivers from parking on a private street. Please do not use custom tagging for personal(in this case corporate) needs.

Looks like this has self resolved, for reference:

This house is a historical house and clearly still there from 1882, where the former Fort Collins mayor James Arthur. This house definitely exists and is being preserved as a historical landmark. Though this apparently this house is used as an apartment building, it deserves to be fully mapped as a landmark though its relevance is only to Fort Collins.

I'll take a picture of the area within the next month or so to verify for sure, but all the times I've driven past this area, looks correct.

Inspecting some of the new ways added, I agree, need to question the source of these additions - else it's possible a revert is needed. I could only check against the imagery available.

also note that both this building and the building to the north are the same motel complex. The POI was used to have some semblance that both buildings are part of the same motel. (Data from: drive by local visit within 4 months)

phone number appears to have been lost when moving the POI to the building itself. Please make sure you transfer all information if you are making moves like this, and when you do make a point to building transition, please also verify the information.

Looks like you and a bunch of others are doing a tag team edit on hotels and motels, thanks for the updates. However El Palomino Motel is actually the multiple buildings around this edited position (the office is marked on the map about 25m to the north), this position is actually a dilapidated swimming pool.

Thank you for your addition to Open Street Map. However this addition does not map out your business and conflicts with an existing business. Please move your POI to your building of business operations, else we may have to revert this addition. Thanks!

Thanks for checking, I feel like I've made so many edits that I'm bound to make a mistake somewhere but surprisingly don't see much feedback. Agreed there are still a lot of edits needed in Maine around here, this is just partial, feel free to continue, I'm out of here for now until I spot more broken turn restrictions or something else catches my fancy :)

Found your deletion. It looks like Amazon added it to get shipments their destinations better. Again I would suggest a revert.

Typically driveways are mapped, though calling it a service road may be a stretch. It's better to have them marked as private than deleted.

I'm not sure of the value of these bus ways. The ways aren't even part of the relation so I'm not sure if it would be used. IMO explicitly drawing these out isn't necessary and just makes the map messy, what is your opinion?

I'm not sure of the value of these bus ways. The ways aren't even part of the relation so I'm not sure if it would be used. IMO explicitly drawing these out isn't necessary and just makes the map messy, what is your opinion?

Hello, welcome to OSM!

While everyone needs to practice somewhere, please refrain from uploading your experimental changes. If you were trying to experiment with metrics tracking, I'd refrain from that, there are plenty of real errors that need to be fixed! Thanks!

I noticed a few areas marked as "landfill" in south Loveland and I don't quite agree these are truly landfills (that are used for municipal waste), rather people who seem to be car/vehicle/??? packrats and fill their property with things that appear to be "trash" where they view as "treasure". What do you think?