Sorbus_x_kewensis (2015-05-10 12:09:11+00:00): Hi Pmailkeey,

For transparency, could you respond back to me in the changeset comments and not by direct messaging please.

"As far as I'm aware I'd fixed the 146 route - going round the tree."

No, the routing was and still is broken.

"as you can't drive thru the tree, the road here has to split to show you can go either side of the tree and then rejoin together. Going round in circles around the tree is possible and indicated by the circular road - in fact, what the 146 does but only half a revolution. On The Ground - Drivers may be inclined to pass the tree on the wrong side of the road if coming from Luxted Road and turn right. This is physically possible and legally permitted unless signage indicates otherwise. To prohibit drivers from doing that, the council would need to erect unpopular traffic signs - I'm not sure a pair of no entry signs would be appropriate but they possibly would but the tree 'island' could have a a blue circular sign with white arrow to do the job."

There would be barely enough room to turn (~2m) without overlapping Luxted Road plus cars would have to cross the painted chevrons. I've never seen, nor would want to see, road users crossing these and the 'no entry' road markings. Questions of legality aside, most reasonable road users follow road markings. The markings, island and chevrons *are there* whereas evidence of your hypothetical and questionable road use case is not. I'm all for mapping what is present, not for hypothetical situations.

Regarding High Street Downe meeting Luxted road in two places

"No it doesn't."

Again, If you very reasonably take into account road markings after the island, it does. As I stated before, the road is not circular in shape, or circular in how traffic flows around it. Drawing a perfectly circular section of road does not better represent what is on the ground.

"Please understand that the problematic road is an ordinary road with a tree stuck in the middle of it - that is what is there. If you've photos of proper traffic signs (stuff written on the road surface isn't legal - so ignore that).
If you're not happy with the way I'm showing the junction on OSM I could put a request in to the council to have the junction changed. My recommendation to them would be to formalise the tree island, extending it all the way to Luxted Rd and adding an illuminated bollard facing Luxted Road and a further possibly illuminated bollard the other side of the tree opposite the church gates. I don't think it'd be popular with the council and I'm sure it wouldn't be popular with the residents but legally it's not right as it is.
As it happens I've a similar thing about a mile and a half from me. Not a tree but a street light on a circular raised base - sort of like it's got a pavement right round it. The other difference is that it's at a cross-roads, not a T junction. But like the Downe tree, the street light is just on one arm of the junction. Most people around here are confused by it - not helped by strange white painted lines and an arrow which shows how they'd like drivers to use it (as in 'roundabout' style) even though going the wrong side of it works just as well ! Have a link: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=54.19711&mlon=-3.28824#map=19/54.19711/-3.28824 but note where the kerbs are showing the road width!"

I'm sorry, but suggesting if I disagree with your mapping *that the physical road layout in real life should be changed* is quite frankly the most bizarre suggestion I've encountered on OSM. By the way, "I don't think it'd be popular with the council and I'm sure it wouldn't be popular with the residents" comes across as a veiled threat - please don't say things like that.

I will revert these changes later today. I hope you will respect these changes.