Thanks. I'm not an expert in tree mapping, but according to osm.wiki/tree and osm.wiki/Key:diameter, it seems it's not always clear what the unit for this tag is, but it's typically in millimeters.

Based on streetside imagery, however, the north tree looks much larger than 7.6 cm diameter. Is that correct (imagery could be old?), or am I mismatching units here. (or are you measuring, for example, circumference in centimeters??) I would appreciate clarification here.

Thanks again for the contribution.

Hello, thanks for the contribution. The website you linked to shows conflicting information from what you tagged. Specifically,
* The website shows phone number (425) 671-0316. You tagged (206) 682-7900. Which is correct?
* The website shows the official name as "Moritis & Shin Dentistry", but you tagged "Moritis Shin Dentistry of Seattle." What's the official form (e.g. what's labelled on the entrance of the office?)

Note that I also removed the `description` tag because it contained both redundant info (e.g. the operator, already tagged separately), and marketing content. See osm.wiki/Description for more info about the `description` tag.

Thanks, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Looks good to me; thanks for the contribution and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Hey there,

I'm not an expert, but shouldn't these driveways be connected to the buildings & the sidewalks they cross?

Thanks

Thanks. I noticed you didn't add a name for this business, but the website you linked to inconsistently stylizes it both "net-tech" and "Net-Tech". Do you know the official name?

Thanks again, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Cool, thanks for the contribution! If the building's footprint has changed, you could update that as well (or wait for new aerial imagery to come out). Thanks again, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Thanks for the contribution. In iD, you can select an object and press `q` to square its corners to 90 degrees, which is usually correct. I've done that in osm.org/changeset/164657071. Thanks again and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

No problem! It looks like the Los Tinos restaurant is actually closed, and has since been removed from the map. OpenStreetMap can be confusing at first, but feel free to reach out to local mappers if you ever need help. Thanks again!

Your edits look good to me. Thanks for the contribution and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thanks for the contribution. I noticed that you removed the cuisine=mexican tag from "Los Tinos Mexican Restaurant". Was this unintentional, or is it a different restaurant now?

Arrivé apartments already tagged on main building at osm.org/way/360389739. Reverted this changeset, but thanks anyways!

Arrivé apartments already tagged on main building osm.org/way/360389739.

osm.org/changeset/163388376

Thanks for the contribution.

Usually a survey:date isn't needed, but if you want one, I assume you meant 2025, not 2024!

Thanks again, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Here's how I got the numbers I did:

According to a 1980 Seattle Landmark Board record on seattle.gov [^1], the towers on the southwest side of the building are 165ft (50.2m). The document also states that the concrete stepson the SW side are 20ft tall. By OSM `height=` rules, those 20ft are included in the height of the tower (165ft from street level, and the SW side is the lowest side of the building [^2]), but I assume the numbers in the document already include those 20ft. Therefore, we can tag the towers as `building:part=tower` and `height=50.2`.

Now the tricky part. The main building (i.e., everything but the towers on the SW side) is *mostly* flat [^3]. However, I can't find any official (or even unofficial) numbers about the height of that main building section. Referencing an official image of the southwest side of the building [^4], however, we can see that the distance between the top of the concrete stairs and the base of the main roof is approximately one-third the distance between top of said stairs and the top of the towers. Because we know the distance from the stairs to the tower-top to be 165-20=145ft (see previous paragraph), we conclude that the base of the main roof is around 48+20=68ft above street level. We add an additional 5 or so feet for the (low-angle) main roof, and get 73ft (22m) height for the main building.

That means we can tag the main building outline with `height=22`, and then to acknowledge the fuzzy estimation we did, we can also add `height:accuracy=estimate` and `height:source=image;extrapolation`.

Thank you for reading. Feedback is always welcome and would be much appreciated here.

[^1]: https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/Neighborhoods/HistoricPreservation/Landmarks/RelatedDocuments/st-james-cathedral-designation-nomination.pdf
[^2]: Local knowledge
[^3]: Key word here is mostly. Notably, the corners on the northwest side of the building are significantly shorter, as the bulk of the cathedral is cruciform, but that can be updated later.
[^4]: https://www.stjames-cathedral.org/Tour/images/stjames-penney.gif

Thanks for the contribution, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

I see the new buildings aren't in any aerial imagery yet, which makes it difficult to trace them. However, we can still add metadata about them. If you know the addresses of the new buildings, for example, feel free to add new address points in the buildings' approximate locations.

Thanks again!

Thanks for the feedback, I've separated the features.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap! I noticed that you added a non-standard tag "building=car_repair", so I've updated it with another changeset, and added some more metadata. Thanks for your contribution!

Hi! I noticed this changeset also adds a driveway in the Renton area. Con you confirm if this was intentional & if the driveway added is accurate? It looks from aerial imagery like perhaps the driveway continues around the house, but I'm not confident on whether that should be tagged or not. Thanks for your contributions!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159643327

Hi! I noticed this changeset also adds a driveway in the Renton area. Con you confirm if this was intentional & if the driveway added is accurate? It looks from aerial imagery like perhaps the driveway continues around the house, but I'm not confident on whether that should be tagged or not. Thanks for your contributions!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159643327

Yes, I don't know the park's official boundaries (don't know where to find them either-- can't find the layer on county iMap nor any info on seattle.gov). I just narrowed them from the large rectangle to match the retaining wall around the sides and the boundary of the forest on the back. Not sure what the recommended practice is here.