piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
kornad (2024-06-05 08:14:57+00:00): Hej, dzięki za wiadomość. W sumie to się zastanawiam właśnie czy to aby na pewno jest dublowanie. Shelter jakby nie patrzeć to jednak osobny obiekt, a bus_stop wyznacza tak naprawdę tylko słupek/znak przystankowy, a shelter=yes jest trochę czysto informacyjnym znacznikiem. Wiat z kolei może być więcej niż jedna na danym przystanku, więc z tego punktu widzenia warto byłoby je oznaczyć.
Marek-M (2024-06-05 08:41:50+00:00): Cześć, dzięki za odpowiedź.

W sumie też mam zawsze wątpliwości jak to zrobić ale jeśli jest jedna wiata i jeden przystanek albo każdy przystanek z oddzielną wiatą, to unikam dodawania oddzielnego amenity.

W sytuacji kilku słupków przystankowych z jednym zadaszeniem dodatkowe amenity postrzegam jako poprawne oznaczenie.

Trudno dojść do konsensusu :) Ten changeset jakby nie było dalej jest poprawą tego co było wcześniej :) Dzięki :)
kornad (2024-06-05 09:31:02+00:00): Jasne, to co jest pewne to będę unikał łączenia amenity=shelter z highway=bus_stop. Również dzięki za wymianę zdań :)
eggie (2024-06-04 10:43:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback  Eigenlijk is algemeen access=no voldoende. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
IpswichEdits (2024-06-04 13:49:20+00:00): Hi ndrw6. I've noticed your 2 recent updates to Hadleigh. Thank you for your your work. Improvements and updates are always welcome! I notice you're a very experienced contributor to OSM. So I hope you don't mind me just querying a few changes you made. I nearly didn't write this or mention anything because I thought the changes were minor (and in many ways, they are), but after further careful review I just need to ask about these changes and why they were needed. I totally respect your personal preferences in moving landuse areas (residential, grass, etc) away from roads, but there are good reasons for and against both methods. I know the previous landuse areas were in need of improvement, but unfortunately we now we seem to have lots of (correctly positioned) buildings crossing landuse boundaries when they weren't before, and quite a few inconsistent gaps between landuse areas. I totally respect your style, but can't help feeling it looks a bit messy and inconsistent now. I may be missing something, so please feel free to explain your reasoning for while you feel these changes are needed. If it's just your personal preference then I totally respect it, but would you please at least consider either going back in and making the new landuse areas more accurate so they incapsulate all the buildings fully, or if it's easier and preferable to you, simply revert your change in order to make things neater? If neither of these are possible, please say and I'll try to neaten things up next time I edit this area. Thanks again for your contributions to OSM. :-)
IpswichEdits (2024-06-04 18:11:49+00:00): Hi again. I've done further research and can see that separating the landuse=residential from roads is generally preferred, so please ignore my previous comment about reverting. I'd still suggest the edges of these landuses need tidying up, however, since the buildings overlap them. If you're not able to do this, don't worry, as I'll tackle it and tidy them up another time.
user_5173844 (2024-06-04 21:17:27+00:00): Hi IpswichEdits, first of all, apologies, I did not realise it was your preferred mapping style. I blindly assumed these landuses were mapped long time ago. I should have researched the local area more before jumping in. If you prefer the previous convention I am happy to revert my changes.

Regarding alignment - I used OSMUK Cadastral Parcels, which as I understand are supposed to produce a definitive alignment. This indeed resulted in an offset between new landuse boundaries and buildings. As the amount of changes was quite large I opted for the "correct" alignment. If you are OK with this style of landuses, please let me know if you want me to align buildings to cadastral parcels or align landuses to buildings. I did notice the existing data were mapped very precisely indeed, albeit at a different offset.

Regarding conventions - I prefer mapping landuses away from the roads, as tends to match the actual use better (although legal status sometimes differs) and allows more freedom in allocating different landuses types to different plots of land, without all the complexity of multi-polygons etc. In my opinion having landuses connect to roads can be also more difficult to maintain (both roads and landuses accumulate a lot more points than they really need). Also, this is purely philosophical and debatable, I prefer to keep 1D and 2D objects as separate data classes that don't mix.

This is not to convince you this is the right method of mapping landuses (it has its own limitations too), just explain my logic. Having others enjoy mapping is far more important, so if you would like me to revert or clean up my changes in any specific way just let me know.
IpswichEdits (2024-06-04 22:48:27+00:00): Hi ndrw6!

Thanks so much for the quick response. No need to apologise! I have a lot to learn and I can totally appreciate the advantages of your methods too, especially after doing a bit of research into it. I feel I have a better understanding and feel a bit bad for querying it now. :-) Really hope my message didn't come across as rude.

You're totally right about the Cadastral Parcels and alignment accuracy, too. It's something I wasn't fully aware of when mapping this area previously. Thankfully it's not a huge offset, and I'm sure you're right to favour the Cadastral Parcels alignment. I'll look into perhaps moving the buildings to match your alignment at some point. Please don't worry about editing it yourself. I'm more than happy to do it in time. Thanks for the alignment tips!

That's a really good point about keeping the landuses separate and thanks for explaining it kindly. As I said already, I realise I have a lot to learn! You're very kind to offer to clean up, but since I'm now realising much of the overlaps are caused by the small offset, I really don't want to trouble you with it. In fact, at some point I'd like to start mapping separate 'sidewalk' footways in this area, so it really can wait until then, and I'll probably fix the alignment to match the CPs at the same time.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond and explain. There's a great community on OSM!
silversurfer83 (2024-06-04 09:17:30+00:00): Hi :)

Hinweis: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history

happy mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152232378
tastrax (2024-06-04 11:28:15+00:00): Hi Folks – Unit numbers should be added to addr:unit key rather than combined with the addr:housenumber key. I have just updated a recent edit you made. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Addresses
Cheers
cs09736 (2024-06-04 23:01:58+00:00): My bad! Thanks for the heads up
tastrax (2024-06-05 02:31:20+00:00): No problems at all. Its pretty common but we have just done an Australia wide cleanup so we are looking to keep new edits in the preferred format - Enjoy your mapping.
PZP3610 (2024-06-04 09:50:08+00:00): Proponowane drogi zawsze powinny mieć źródło (w tagu source=*) i jaki rodzaj drogi ma powstać (w tym przypadku pewnie proposed=residential). Uzupełnij, jeśli możesz.
NeisBot (2024-06-04 08:57:24+00:00): Hi Jez Gibb, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 94% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 highway(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
Jez Gibb (2024-06-04 09:01:16+00:00): Hi NeisBot
Yes, all the changes were intentional - some private tracks were marked as highways. 
Thank you
Jez
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-04 09:20:41+00:00): Thank you for your reply, Jez Gibb.

Some of the paths you have removed are still visible on the satellite imagery I checked. If a path is private, it should be marked as such and not removed.

More details about this changeset can be found here: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=152232985#12/51.7964/0.5770
rskedgell (2024-06-04 09:21:15+00:00): Yes, they were correctly tagged as highways. You may be conflating the legal concept of a highway with the OpenStreetMap highway=* object tag.

As these highways exist and are visible on the aerial imagery, the correct approach is to add the access=private tag, not to delete them from the map.

Please read the following wiki articles before you proceed further:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

Some of these track are also shown on OS OpenMap Local, which does not provide for marking them as private access. There is absolutely no prospect of you convincing OS to delete these.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152234116
Syl (2024-06-21 09:50:24+00:00): Bonjour, pourquoi ne pas avoir également enlevé "amenity=doctors" ?
Zekovski (2024-06-21 13:49:03+00:00): Qu'est-ce que tu suggères à la place ?

Je t'invite à regarder les liens que j'ai mis dans la note dédiée :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3598677
Syl (2024-06-21 13:56:05+00:00): Je propose de ne rien mettre en plus de healthcare vu qu'il n'y a visiblement pas de docteur en médecine ici.
Zekovski (2024-06-21 14:25:38+00:00): OK, je t'invite à faire la modif' si tu as le temps.
Syl (2024-06-21 14:35:49+00:00): C'est fait.
ceirios (2024-06-27 16:44:02+00:00): Hi gomedia91

Please don't tag trees as natural=wood ways and instead use natural=tree.

You can use additional fields on natural=tree for the size and height.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwood#Tagging_mistakes

Cheers
Ceirios
maro21 (2024-07-02 18:25:23+00:00): Naprawa telefonów to craft=electronics_repair + electronics_repair=phone + mobile_phone:repair=yes.

W shop=bed już się zawierają produkty do sypialni takie jak kołdry, pościele i poduszki.
seattlefyi (2024-06-04 15:06:02+00:00): Hi, noticed this edit and thought I should mention- the ‘A’ unit was already noted, using the addr:unit key. Thanks!
Lumikeiju (2024-06-05 22:35:41+00:00): I've gone ahead and fixed these addresses (Changeset: 152306850)

Take a look at these pages on the wiki for more information on how addresses are stored in OSM:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:*

Happy mapping!
InsertUser (2024-06-04 23:15:19+00:00): An internet search suggests that the website is : https://www.capesantamaria.com/ 
Does it have any affiliation with the site you have linked?
Fedor Filimonov (2024-06-05 08:59:16+00:00): website changed to 
the right https://www.capesantamaria.com
kapazao (2024-06-04 11:46:24+00:00): Hola, por favor al añadir este tipo de elementos hazlo como un nodo y no como área con forma que no tiene nada que ver con la realidad.
Un saludo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152237135
Frans S (2024-06-05 08:14:36+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
Please use the correct tag where traces leads just into farmland/wood areas.
Track is the default tag in those cases
Where traces leads off a highway to a single house, farm, business they need to be tagged as highway=service

Please consult this wiki.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways
Best regards
kapazao (2024-06-04 11:49:42+00:00): Hola, ¿puedes explicar qué es este elemento?
Claramente no es un parque, que es como lo etiquetaste. Por favor usa el etiquetado correcto y da referencias si es posible.
Un saludo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152237261
kapazao (2024-06-04 11:53:12+00:00): Hola, para el uso de horarios deberías revisar la wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours
De esta forma no está correcto y otras aplicaciones no podrán reflejar el horario.
Por otra parte trata de posicionar los elementos en su lugar correcto. En este caso no creo que la ferretería quede en la calle. Ten en cuenta la inclinación del edificio.
Un saludo y gracias por tus contribuciones.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152237310
kapazao (2024-06-04 11:56:50+00:00): Hola, el etiquetado de bares en España debe ser amenity=pub y para los pubs al contrario, amenity=bar. Es cosa de la traducción inglesa y el uso que se hace en España.
En el editor iD verás que si seleccionas pub aparece (Pub (latam) / Bar (es)), donde se indica que estás poniendo un bar para España.
Un saludo y gracias por tus contribuciones.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152237391
eggie (2024-06-04 10:55:43+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback  Het veld staat hier al op het vlak. Dan hoef je niet nogmaals een node toe te voegen met dezelfde tagging.
Wat bedoel je met 	Basketbalveld Coen

Ik zal de node weer verwijderen.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-06-04 10:58:35+00:00): Je info heb ik overgezet naar het vlak.
Gr eggie
NicaTopo (2024-06-04 15:43:06+00:00): Hi Noor,

Please square out all building shapes. It's easy, just select a shape and press the "Q" key.

Thank you.
VictorIE (2024-06-06 09:52:58+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11955627119

How come the gate isn't on a highway?
yrtimiD (2024-06-04 12:20:13+00:00): הי וברוכים הבאים!
השינוי שלך נראה חשוד, מה רצתה לשנות?
yrtimiD (2024-07-14 18:55:06+00:00): this changeset was reverted: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152241682
BilibiliDaqiboQi (2024-06-05 09:02:36+00:00): 您好 不好意思打扰一下 就是稍微提醒您一下 您可否将操场跑道变更回来 它不是商场或者市场哦 也请您以后不要面向渲染绘图了~ 谢谢！
tux67 (2024-06-05 07:58:44+00:00): Hallo MDau,
willkommen bei Openstreetmap und danke, dass du mithelfen möchtest, die Kartendaten zu verbessern.
Du hattest ein Review angefordert. Ich nehme an dieser Artikel beschreibt den Hintergrund des Changes: https://www.kreis-heinsberg.de/startseite/beitrag-lesen/neue-wache-fuer-rettungsdienst-und-kreiseinheiten-in-hueckelhoven.html

Sind alle 3 neu enstandenen Gebäude Teil der Wache? 
Je nach Nutzung könnte das ganze Gelände dann als fire_station (wenn es das denn ist) getaggt werden.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dfire_station

Prima, dass du deine Änderungssätze mit aussagekräftigen Kommentaren versiehst.
Eine gute allgemeine Einführung zu OSM gibts z.B. hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf

Solltest du Fragen haben oder Hilfe benötigen, dann kannst du dich gerne bei mir oder im Forum melden:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de/56

Für eine Qualitätssicherung, an der sich alle Mapper in der Gegend beteiligen können - bitte antworte - wenn notwendig - immer hier im Änderungssatz mit der Kommentarfunktion.

Viel Spaß beim Mappen wünscht
tux67
Tomas_J (2025-07-22 18:23:15+00:00): Zdar, pred stanicou sa neometria ulice Stanicny obvod nezhoduje s najnovsou ortofoto. Nevies nahodou poradit, ci to mozem prekleslit? Dik.
Filip009 (2025-07-22 18:39:00+00:00): Geometria je dobre, musíš počkať na Ortofoto 2024 ;)
arkarjun (2024-06-11 15:40:33+00:00): #Reviewed_Good #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152240717
eggie (2024-06-04 12:57:25+00:00): Dag S limonade,

Je bedoeling is uiteraard goed, maar we tekenen niet zelf gebouwen in. Dat is allemaal periodieke import vanuit het Kadaster (BAG import)

Je kunt dei import vervroegen door gewoon een verzoekje te doen op het forum in het draadje BAG importverzoeken.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/nl/43


Doe je dat zelf?

Dan komen alle juiste gegevens mee. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-06-05 07:43:21+00:00): BAG importverzoek loopt https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bag-importverzoeken/3394/2211
eggie (2024-06-05 17:40:12+00:00): Opnieuw geïmporteerd
Superlimonade (2024-06-05 17:58:37+00:00): Super bedankt!
martien-176 (2024-07-18 13:41:15+00:00): Hi,  thanks for mapping. 

I notice you added a layer=1 tag to this highway. And also to a few other highways in this area.

Afaics there is no reason that these highways have layer tags.

Please recheck your mappings (HOT project #16556), specific as to these layer tags.

Thanks so much for your contribution, Martien, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152240945
felipeeugenio (2024-06-04 12:44:35+00:00): Hola. Borraste un jardín infantil como nodo para agregarlo como área, lo que está bien, pero dejaste fuera la dirección. 

Además, si el jardpin termina en la pared, dejarlo unido.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152241016
Jaller (2024-06-11 09:30:47+00:00): Duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3257735557
Jaller (2024-06-11 09:31:20+00:00): Manually reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152533450
Nathan_A_RF (2024-07-15 21:53:52+00:00): maxspeed:type=construction is not a valid tag
eggie (2024-06-04 13:09:43+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
Sandal man (2024-06-04 14:14:25+00:00): Hello,
Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing :-)
But please make smalle change sets, this helps others in tracking changes. 
Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thank you.
skyper (2024-10-15 12:41:47+00:00): Hallo ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme,
da Du wohl schlecht die Informationen von Luftbildern hast, fehlt hier eine Quellenangabe. Woher hast Du die Information und welche Schilder stehen denn da? Ist jegliche Zufahrt (bis auf Fahrräder) verboten oder nur die Zufahrt für motorisierte Fahrzeuge (wie Du es eingetragen hast)?

Weiterhin vermisse ich im Benutzerprofil einen Link zu Eurer Wikiseite, wie bereits vor Jahren gefordert: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5388. Bitte erstellt zu erst die Seite und beschreibt Eure Änderungen im Voraus, z.B. im Forum, bevor Ihr weiter Änderungen vornehmt. Danke.
Grüße skyper

siehe auch:
* https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/90267
* https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/120127
ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme (2024-10-15 16:09:24+00:00): Hallo Skyper, wir editieren nur, wenn lokales Wissen vorliegt oder uns eindeutiges Bildmaterial zur Verfügung gestellt wird oder Beweise aus Quellen wie z.B. Mapilarry vorliegen. In diesem konkreten Fall liegen uns Beweisfotos von der Beschilderung vor (Anfang und am Ende des Segments) sowie wurde dies auch über Mapilarry gegengecheckt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152244150#map=17/49.357372/8.137575). Dies ergänze ich gerne noch.
Wenn uns keine Beweise vorliegen, legen wir Hinweise zur Überprüfung vor Ort an.
ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme (2024-10-15 16:12:12+00:00): https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=49.356498200002&lng=8.1355237000026&z=19.9&focus=photo&pKey=3809200812632273&x=0.040733228962802126&y=0.49846031298236804&zoom=1.5018773466833542
skyper (2024-10-15 18:08:01+00:00): Hallo,
danke für die schnelle Antwort. Bitte gebt doch in Zukunft alle verwendeten Quellen im Änderungssatz an, entweder unter `source=*` oder in der Beschreibung.
So wie es aussieht (leider ist bei mapillary nur das Schild im Süden lesbar), sollte das wohl als `horse=no`, `vehicle=no`, `bicycle=yes`
eingetragen werden, da hier jegliche Fahrzeuge und auch Pferde ausgeschlossen sind und nur ein Zusatzschild für die Ausnahme von Fahräder vorhanden ist.

Am wichtigsten ist aber die Wiki-Seite, wo Ihr Euch vorstellt und Eure Arbeitsweise darstellt.

Grüße,
skyper
skyper (2024-10-16 12:33:09+00:00): Hi,
das `horse=no` war leider falsch: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/120237.
Danke für Deine Angaben der Quelle und Änderungen in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157928239. Leider ist es noch nicht ganz richtig, da es statt `motor_vehicle=no` `vehicle=no` heißen sollte, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:traffic_sign=DE:250.
Viele Grüße,
skyper
ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme (2024-10-16 13:39:22+00:00): Hi,
ja, horse=no, wäre falsch, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:traffic_sign%3DDE:250. Änderung ist gemacht und Wiki-Seite angelegt https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/ADAC
Viele Grüße
skyper (2024-10-16 18:12:58+00:00): Super, danke.
Kannst Du bitte in Deinem Profil (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ADAC%20Touristische%20InfoSysteme) noch einen Link zur Wiki-Seite einfügen.
Ciao skyper
Arlo James Barnes (2024-06-07 21:51:28+00:00): Thanks. Is there somewhere on the wiki I can read about the correct formatting?
infeeeee (2024-06-07 22:47:28+00:00): This capitalized version was the most common, it's not documented in the wiki:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=inscription#keys
AndreaDp271 (2024-06-04 14:08:47+00:00): small editing area??
infeeeee (2024-06-04 14:18:55+00:00): Separated this to 6 changesets, I hoped this would be small enough.
EdLoach (2024-10-07 15:29:16+00:00): Hi Robert. Do you think https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11955885761/history/1 might be the same post box as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1387341180
Robert Whittaker (2024-10-07 15:57:11+00:00): Oh yes, definitely. The location of the node I added is correct. I'm not sure why I didn't notice the existing postbox node when I added it. I've removed the duplicate now. Thanks for spotting that.
EdLoach (2024-10-08 09:40:34+00:00): I only noticed because when I walk post postboxes with Mapillary running I tend to take a photo of the royal cypher in case it is missing, and was checking when I got home (it wasn't missing). https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=848234287500341
GinaroZ (2024-09-05 15:16:25+00:00): What is barrier=coupre? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11955881547
zuzak (2024-09-06 14:58:49+00:00): It's a mis-spelling of barrier=coupure.
Marcos Medeiros (2024-06-04 13:49:34+00:00): Roads ending in area, attribute with multiple spaces, duplicate nodes, overlapping amenities, and adding natural=wood
lasagna (2024-06-08 17:28:57+00:00): The new commercial area 1289369703 is not a correct use of landuse=commercial ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=commercial ) and is probably not verifiable ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability ), so I propose deleting it.
If this the area that some business serves, it belongs in some other database that you can overlay on top of the OpenStreetMap data.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152245561
clay_c (2024-06-10 19:21:12+00:00): I went ahead and removed this polygon: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152512865

A business service area is generally not suitable to be added to OpenStreetMap. If your business has a physical location that's open to the public, I suggest mapping that instead.
Scottie0001 (2024-06-08 23:09:47+00:00): Hi, I am reverting changes that you made to the Logisitcs Bay where the new layout came into effect in May 2024 however not yet visible on areial images. Please contact me if there is any concerns.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152435086
Scott Fitzpatrick (2024-06-09 12:00:31+00:00): Hi there,

Thanks for that, you're correct that I was going off aerial imagery, as well as the ERSA for Brisbane, dated June 2023. I wasn't aware of the new changes - despite working just up from there!