piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2025-10-24 13:29:59+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
 Please solve the issues shown by the issue triangle on Ideditor.
A: Inaccurate mapping. 
C: Collecting adjacent buildings and mapped it as 1 building.

E: Buildings not squared or rounded.
High building(s) incorrect mapped. 
Check this footage how to map high buildings

https://youtu.be/dsfUcslLtVc?si=yH6eWDbsb_ILAVb9
 Or See par 20 chapter About Buildings


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
SomeoneElse (2025-09-24 22:17:55+00:00): It looks like one of the node drags here made a dozen or so relations invalid, including "10709165 | Monkstown Parish".  I've dragged that back in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172414229 so that the relation is now https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10709165#map=19/53.258073/-6.197441 , as opposed to self-intersecting (which made it an invalid polygon).  This also affected "10709158 | Kilternan Parish", "13062149 | Glencullen ED 1901", "13061513 | Ballybrack ED 1901", "12491333 | Ballybrack ED", "12430312 | Glencullen ED", "4608457 | Tully", "2236209 | Kilgobbin" and possibly some others.
You can use Josm's relation validator to check relations (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/406398 ) even if you don't edit relations in Josm.
Best Regards,
Andy
gogorm (2025-09-24 23:07:26+00:00): Sorry for causing this problem and thanks for fixing it. Thanks also for the detailed explanation and guide, I'll make use of that validator from now on.
felipeeugenio (2026-02-13 14:17:44+00:00): This is for filling blank spaces only. These editions make no sense.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172319575
Frans S (2025-11-05 09:30:16+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
About complex buildings. Especial the high rise (multi story) buildings and buildings which shows their side views  as well. Check this footage how to map these buildings 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsfUcslLtVc
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13RTwH7sChRWrG5bIjysF2ripBgh3F5l4/view?usp=sharing 

Lower buildings, showing theire sidewalls as well, can be mapped on the same way by moving the mapped roofline to the groundplan.

Best regards and keep mapping
あじさか (2025-09-30 08:10:34+00:00): Hello,  
I mapped the ground-mounted mega solar plant here.  
This site used to be a golf course, but it has now been converted into a solar power facility.  
According to Esri aerial imagery, the clubhouse has been demolished.  
Therefore, Esri seems to be more up-to-date than Bing in this area.  
The small surrounding structures appear to be related to the solar facility equipment,  
so mapping them as buildings is not appropriate here.
Frans S (2026-01-04 16:06:09+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Your mappings are far below the quality standards of HOTOSM.
Check the changes I had to make.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=176825130
Issues found on your mappings

A: Inaccurate mapping. 
C: Collected adjacent buildings and mapped it as 1 building.

D: Connecting nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared or rounded.

High building(s) incorrectly mapped. 


Explanation can be found in this document which  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
aharvey (2026-01-20 11:00:12+00:00): I think healthcare=medical_imaging from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Medical_Imaging would be a better fit for https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13164289072
Unikitty (2026-01-14 22:09:32+00:00): Hi, I was taking a look at the State Library station mapping and I noticed one of the indoor footpaths you added (which you stated was based on the survey drawings) doesn't seem to match whats on the ground. 

In particular for way 1424946362 that goes from the Swanston Street concourse to the lifts leading to platform level, what I observed is that the myki barriers are located directly next to the lifts (both those coming from surface level and those after the barriers leading to the platforms).

There is also way 1432171794 which appears to lead from the paid area to Melbourne Central, however this does not actually seem to exist in real life (unless I am missing something) as the Melbourne Central connection is closer to the customer service counter.

Since your data is coming direct from DTP, I don't want to break anything so could you help verify that the paths are indeed correct?
022 (2025-09-23 03:08:37+00:00): 3 Remaining Municipal Zones:

- Town of Tantramar
- Southeast Rural District
- Rural Community of Straight Shores
NeisBot (2025-09-23 03:16:46+00:00): Hi erwin  leonardo choc, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Updated residential and secondary road attributes including names and traffic details"
Metzor (2025-09-28 14:12:31+00:00): Hallo Tourism_info,

Ich glaube, du hast da etwas falsch verstanden. Ja, man braucht ein highway=steps für das Routing. Aber als separaten Pfad. Der ist ja schon hier eingetragen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1279606159/history

Es will ja niemand in der Mauer laufen ;-)

Ich würde deine Änderung rückgängig machen, wenn du keine Einwände hast.

Viele Grüße
Metzor
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1279606159/history
Metzor (2025-09-28 16:30:14+00:00): 
Hier das gleiche:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172322406#map=19/48.537333/9.279150&layers=N

Die Treppe fürs Routing ist bereits separat eingetragen.
Metzor (2025-11-29 12:46:17+00:00): Leider keine Antwort, daher revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175273881
felipeeugenio (2025-09-23 11:52:21+00:00): Hello. Is the connection between Aurora de Chile and Avenida 4 poniente real?
In the imagery, it seems that it is an informal passing at best, and certainly not paved.
I really doubt even that oneway´s streets.
But perhaps you have more information.
regards
ArcticDesert (2025-09-24 09:08:59+00:00): Hello felipeeugenio,

I added this because this appears to be drivable, and Strava traces indicate it to be fairly well trafficked. However, I see what you mean by this being informal in looking at Bing Streetside imagery (https://www.bing.com/maps/?cp=-33.50451%7E-70.791506&lvl=19.1&mo=om.1&pi=-28.4&style=x&dir=127.6) as there is a curb separating the parallel sections of road separated by the dirt median. I will restore it to a disconnected service. Thank you for pointing out that inconsistency. Best.
felipeeugenio (2025-09-26 11:41:20+00:00): ok, thank you very much. 
Please be aware that strava has foot and bycicle traces included. I not sure if this is the case, but I,ve seen a lot of places where the only way to understand the traces is to assume that they were not made by people in cars.

There is a way to filter them, but the cases are so few.


regards
ArcticDesert (2025-09-29 04:01:47+00:00): That makes sense. I will keep that in mind regarding Strava moving forward. Thanks for your input here!
perfectdoctors (2025-09-23 14:50:30+00:00): Phone Number: 04 611 2000
Jonathan Ng@ (2025-09-23 09:58:59+00:00): 请不要滥用ai来画residential道路，谢谢
t_ja (2025-09-30 19:17:56+00:00): Ahoj,
aký má význam pridávať "source:ref" na cesty, keď tie cesty nemajú tag "ref", napr. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1432190029 ?
Ak by si používal editor Josm, tak by ťa validátor na to upozornil varovaním "chýbajúca značka - source:ref bez ref".

Prosím oprav si všetky výskyty.

T.

P.S: S kreslením plánovaných ciest radšej opatrne, niektorí mapperi sú na to hákliví, lebo to nespĺňa "on the ground rule". Mne osobne to nevadí, lebo takáto informácia je užitočná v prípade, že si chce niekto kúpiť pozemok a nechce mať o 10 - 15 rokov hlavnú cestu hneď vedľa domu. Väčšina z tých plánovaných ciest sa nezrealizuje najbližších 10 rokov, preto len zbytočne zavadzajú pri kreslení iných objektov. Viď napr. plánované rozšírenie ulice Vysokoškolákov na štvorpruh až po Rosinskú vrátane kruhových objazdov - už možno aj 10 rokov sa o tom hovorí ale nič viditeľné sa v tomto prípade nerobí ☹️
NeisBot (2025-09-23 04:42:40+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-09-28 10:20:47+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/172325497
Taya_S (2025-09-23 13:37:32+00:00): Hello mapper3002282 and Welcome to OpenStreetMap,

Unfortunately Google does not permit us to use their map or their streetlevel imagery. Because of that I had to revert this edit.

If you live in the area, then you can always survey the speed limits yourself and list source=survey. Additionally we do have permission to use Bing and Mappillary streetlevel imagery.

Best regards,
Taya Snijder

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172345313
nevw (2025-09-23 08:43:43+00:00): Hi, Canning Street is already mapped. Your method of naming a residential landuse "Canning Street" covering several streets is not a correct method of mapping. The residential landuse is already mapped correctly here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/583070479#map=16/-37.78611/144.97029
trial (2025-09-23 08:57:31+00:00): Je croyais que tu étais contre les découpages.
J'en profite pour susciter ton avis : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171565150
mga_geo (2025-09-23 09:49:16+00:00): Le cas de l'avenue François Billoux était intéressant, je l'ai signalé à Toni (PTNA) : https://github.com/osm-ToniE/ptna/issues/163
Il vient de livrer une correction.
Et j'ai découpé l'avenue (et non le rond-point) car sinon à la fin de la way en tournant à droite en entrant sur un rond-point ce n'était pas terrible.
trial (2025-09-24 09:40:49+00:00): Oui, mais entrer sur le rond-point tout droit, ce n'est pas terrible non plus. Si ce n'est pas prévu (mais en général c'est que tu es bourré, qu'il y a du givre, bref hors cartographie OSM).
Blague à part, dans le coin il y a des trajets Izilo qui me semblent bizarres, des bus n'empruntant pas la voie bus dès le début :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12307597#map=18/47.762142/-3.344748&layers=N (il y en a plusieurs, aussi des correctes)
i2004 (2025-09-23 14:58:33+00:00): https://tucolectivo.info/178
AgusQui (2025-09-23 16:33:57+00:00): ?
i2004 (2025-09-23 16:36:02+00:00): es por el recorrido de los demas ramales del 178 que te arme
AgusQui (2025-09-23 17:45:39+00:00): No se puede usar esa página para mapear por cuestiones de copyright. Recuerda que solo podemos usar fuentes de datos abiertos o preferentemente relevar nosotros mismos.
Unarmored5156 (2025-09-23 05:24:55+00:00): Already tried minimizing changeset size, see prior two: 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172324147
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172324142

Couldn't see any natural split for this changeset so said "screw it" and did the island in one
felipeeugenio (2025-09-23 11:59:15+00:00): Hola. Escribimos con capitalización normal en OSM . Por favor no pasar los nombres a mayúsculas.

Saludos
Totor (2025-09-24 05:42:55+00:00): Hi Julcnx,
Thanks for improving the map in the Philippines !
Just a little note that ESRI imagery is usually more up to date here in Cebu.
In case you didn't know, you can see the dates with B (Backgrounds) and "Show Background Panel"
Cheers,
Totor
woodpeck_repair (2026-01-07 00:09:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 176923814 where the changeset comment is: revert power infrastructure edits by user who deleted their account when questioned about the source
fs_LT (2026-04-27 07:40:00+00:00): Du hast mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19639237 ein Duplikat von https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8182616 (das seit 8 Jahren besteht) eingetragen?
fs_LT (2026-04-27 07:45:42+00:00): ahhh, Ortsteile ... alles klar
osmviborg (2025-09-23 07:20:43+00:00): Hej, jeg har ændret vejen til service og tilføjet 'access=destination' (Gennemkørsel Forudt). Det passer bedre til de faktiske forhold.
Josef73 (2026-04-21 05:56:10+00:00): Der Laden Tchibo in Degerloch wurde nur renoviert. Kann man den Änderungssatz: 172326721 reverted?
Ze0zohk1 (2026-04-25 13:09:31+00:00): klar
❤️‍🔥 (2025-09-23 10:38:38+00:00): Hi, can you please explain the reason behind these changes?
AusYou (2025-09-23 10:46:03+00:00): Expressway status doesn't start at Bayfair flyover. It starts at Te Maunga interchange.
❤️‍🔥 (2025-09-24 09:46:37+00:00): I think you should start a discussion on the forum about this (https://c.osm.org ), currently in NZ, the start point for motorways uses the point where grade separation starts, not where the official sign is. 

Whether this is a good idea, I'm not sure. so it would be good to start a discussion on the forum and then be consistent nation-wide
AndyB_66 (2025-10-09 07:49:54+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Dobr%C3%A9_koment%C3%A1%C5%99e_sad_zm%C4%9Bn
local_user (2025-09-23 07:21:47+00:00): alpr
StC (2025-09-23 09:34:59+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité de trois itinéraires pédestres qui passent par là. Je pourrais tenter la correction, mais vous semblez mieux placé pour la faire.
gurglypipe (2025-10-02 08:30:29+00:00): Hiya, thanks for continuing to try and sort this out. I don’t think the changes in this changeset are correct from a tagging point of view. The tagging as it was before looked correct.

Possibly the problem now is the apps people are using to navigate, or their interpretation of the map. Unfortunately neither of those can be sorted by editing OpenStreetMap! Your next step would be to find out which apps people are using which are telling them to take this path, and get in touch with the app authors to say they’re giving incorrect directions.
Hufkratzer (2025-09-23 17:41:15+00:00): Hi,
Why did you retag https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363088526 ? I think it was tagged correcty before your changed it. See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)
https://www.lecollinebergamo.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Foto-secondo-paragrafo-1-1024x1024.png
eggie (2025-09-23 09:08:24+00:00): Dag DeBert,

Het is getagd als footway... dan hoef je geen foot=yes toe te voegen. Dat is default.
Wanneer afstandmeten niet routeert is dat een probleem van die app.
Dus een bericht naar afstandmeten.nl

Afstand meten is niet snel met z'n updates. Daar zou het ook aan kunnen liggen.
Dacht dat de route-engine wel heel laat wordt bijgewerkt. 
De kaart die je in afstandmeten ziet staat los van de routering van die app. 

MVG
eggie
silversurfer83 (2025-09-23 18:40:48+00:00): Hi :)

zwei kleine Anmerkungen zum "Radweg":

- das östl. Ende sollte an einen anderen "highway=*" angebunden werden damit das Routing auch funktionert

- Wie ist denn die Beschilderung?

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172330238
eggie (2025-09-23 08:34:15+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-23 08:38:06+00:00): Feedback.. Het voetpad heb ik laten aansluiten op de hoofdrijbaan.
Het zal anders niet routeren.
MVG
eggie
Taya_S (2025-09-23 08:41:38+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18760
rempshaener (2025-09-23 16:06:51+00:00): Hallo,
folgende Anmerkung zu dieser  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13164718945 Ergänzung:
Wenn es sich um eine fest verrohrte Saugstelle handelt, passt fire_hydrant:type=pillar nicht, das wäre fire_hydrant:type=pipe. In couplings:diameters wird die Größe der Storz-Kupplung im Buchstabenschema angegeben, hier also „A“.
Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
MuellerF (2025-09-23 19:58:51+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, werde ich ändern.
Viele Grüße
eggie (2025-09-23 08:43:23+00:00): Dag Tohunga

Svp geen motor_vehicle=no op paaltjes taggen.
Dat geeft in ieder geval op reguliere wegen problemen.

MVG
eggie
Tohunga (2025-09-24 13:11:09+00:00): Heb het aangepast. Bedankt voor het advies. 

mvg,
T
Mathias_ADAV (2025-10-21 13:30:44+00:00): Bonjour, je viens de voir votre intervention sur les relations du réseau Vélo+ 4 4a et 4b. Les réseaux 4a (VDA cousinerie) et 4B (VDA Sart) n'existent plus ? https://lillemetropole.fr/le-reseau-velo-plus-dans-les-communes-de-la-metropole
ljouglet (2025-10-21 13:38:52+00:00): Bonjour,
Effectivement, les lignes 4A et 4B n’existent plus et ont été remplacées par la ligne 4 reliant Lille Flandres à Villeneuve d’Ascq Cousinerie.
La carte publiée sur cette page web n’est plus à jour, mais elle est actuellement en cours de maintenance afin d’y intégrer la version actualisée.
J’ai vérifié et mis à jour l’ensemble du filaire Vélo+ sur OSM, qui sera désormais à jour en fonction de la carte prochainement publiée.
Mathias_ADAV (2025-10-28 09:22:02+00:00): Bonjour, merci j'ai fussionné les trois relations en une seule : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17998773#map=14/50.64171/3.11377&layers=CN et j'ai mis à jour la page wiki dédiée : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/R%C3%A9seau_cyclable_de_la_MEL
MEL_lom (2025-10-28 09:39:49+00:00): Nous disposions de trois relations permettant de distinguer les différents états du réseau :
state = propose : sans identité visuelle Vélo+ ;
state = active : avec identité visuelle Vélo+.
Ces états facilitaient le suivi des différentes phases de déploiement du réseau Vélo+.
À ce jour, l’ensemble de la ligne 4 n’a pas encore été doté de l’identité visuelle Vélo+ ni de son jalonnement.
La fusion effectuée ne permet plus de distinguer les aménagements déjà intégrés au réseau Vélo+ de ceux restant à équiper.
Mathias_ADAV (2025-10-28 10:08:07+00:00): Je viens d'annuler le changeset et j'ai bien récupéré les 3 relations..! https:// https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17998773#map=15/50.64460/3.11677&layers=CN https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19578144#map=13/50.63546/3.09952&layers=CN https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17998771#map=15/50.64463/3.14136&layers=CN   En effet je n'avais pas fait attention au tag proposed
zstadler (2025-10-23 21:04:09+00:00): Hello Flayer,

In this changeset you have modified 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9602782 - a landuse=forest multipolygon

The outer member of the polygon - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/966155213 was deleted, and now https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/691031950 is both an outer member and an inner member.

Can you please fix it?

Thanks!
zstadler (2025-10-24 06:07:07+00:00): In https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173701141 I have removed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/691031950 as an inner member of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/966155213 and kept it only as an outer member.
martien-176 (2025-09-24 09:05:54+00:00): Hi, thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. You requested a review of your mappings. 

The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Most buildings do have right angled corners and we need our mapping to reflect that. Accurate building footprints are important because building sizes are often used to estimate population sizes for an area to conduct humanitarian activities. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. 

Please check out these sources for more info: 
- Buildings--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o
- Roads--> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBLwb2nisJQ 
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit

Thanks so much for your contribution, Martien, HOT global validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172331795
HellMap (2025-09-26 16:31:56+00:00): Sveiki,

Tu nezini, vai šeit šī mototrase vēl vispār ir? Jaunākajos ortofoto tā ir nolīdzināta ar visiem kokiem. Pēc Mapillary grūti no attāluma pateikt, bet man liekas tās vairs nav.
Anrijs Terauds (2025-09-26 18:39:01+00:00): Sveiks, jā, pa tīro. Šķiet vēl nesen vietējā veikparka čaļi tur braukāja, bet nu izrādās gadus 3 tur tikai pienenes un plāni par apbūvi.
Filip009 (2025-09-26 12:54:13+00:00): Zdravím, pokiaľ máte fotografie, je super, keď pridáte aj nadmorskú výšku a operátora.
VáclavS (2025-09-27 05:35:41+00:00): Doplnené, ale oproti tur. smerovníku sa nadmorská výška javí ako čistý nezmysel. Porovnal som fotografie: tur. smerovník 865 nm, cyklistický 704 nm.
Filip009 (2025-09-27 07:02:17+00:00): SCK si bohužiaľ veľmi na tých nadmorských výškach nedáva záležať.
FroschForscher (2025-09-27 11:03:53+00:00): Hallo Ilgenru,
du hast hier an zwei Fahrradparkplätzen aus capacity=10 capacity=5 gemacht. Das wirkt etwas verdächtig, darum der Hinweis das capacity die Anzahl der Fahrräder die dort abgestellt werden können angibt, nicht die Anzahl der Fahrradständer. An einem Fahrradständer kann i.d.R. links und rechts ein Fahrrad abgestellt werden, also 2.

Es kann natürlich auch sein das bislang einfach doppelte gezählt wurde, und die gesamt Kapazität von beiden Fahrradparkplätzen an beiden gesetzt war.
Wenn du dich noch erinnern kannst oder noch einmal vorbeikommst, prüfe es doch einfach nochmal.

FroschForscher
Ilgenru (2025-09-27 11:20:51+00:00): Hallo FroschForscher,

es waren 5 Stangen vorhanden pro Parkplatz. Meines Erachtens nach wäre der Platz zwischen den Stangen zu emg um jeweils 2 Fahrräder problemlos an jeder Stange zu befestigen. Es kann aber auch sein dass ich da zu vorsichtig agiere in Bezug auf den verfügbaren Platz. Im Nachhinein fällt mir auch auf, dass man mit meiner Sichtweise sogar 6 Fahrräder pro Parkplatz befestigen könnte.

LG
Ilgenru
FroschForscher (2025-09-27 12:25:11+00:00): Danke für die schnelle Antwort.
Du hast dir Gedanken gemacht, das ist schon mal das Wichtigste. Von daher sehe ich jetzt keinen Handlungsbedarf.

Aus Erfahrung kann ich sagen das selbst an so etwas https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:BicycleParkingWave.jpg 10 Fahrräder platz finden. Ob man die Fahrräder dann noch verletzungsfrei rein/raus bekommt …
Ilgenru (2025-09-27 12:29:28+00:00): Alles klar. Dann kann man das ja auf 10 wieder zurück setzen. Dann hab ich es auch für die Zukunft im Kopf ab wann ich es als zu eng zählen soll. Danke für die Aufklärung.