piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MarcoR (2025-06-03 20:06:15+00:00): Just a reminder that if you want to map a toilet inside a place, maybe the key toilets=* is more suitable (for more information see the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:toilets)

Happy mapping,
Marco.
Mappy21 (2025-06-04 11:24:48+00:00): Hey, you're right! Thanks for the tip :)
BPTT (2025-07-02 20:15:07+00:00): Hi there. This roadway and way w651014475 must be highway=primary because they are part of WI-32 and are a state trunk roadway. They are residential, true, but not predominately.
surveyor54 (2025-06-04 09:00:18+00:00): Hi,
Objekte (demolished:.....) sollte man eigentlich erst löschen, wenn sie auf dem Luftbild nicht mehr zu sehen sind.


https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Nichtexistierende_Merkmale#Nicht_mehr_existierende_Merkmale_mappen

Gruß
surveyor54
matze089 (2025-06-04 17:10:22+00:00): Hi Surveyor54. Ich war vor Ort. Da gibt es absolut von der alten Bebauung nichts mehr. Nur Schuttberge. Macht also keinen Sinn ein bzw evtl. zwei Jahre auf dem alten Stand zu bleiben. Oder sollte ich mich da irren? 

Gruß,
Matze089
surveyor54 (2025-06-04 17:22:36+00:00): Ich bin heute zufällig auch dort vorbeigefahren, da sind nur noch Schuttberge.
Es geht aber darum, dass andere Mapper diese nicht wieder von Luftbildern abzeichnen.
Woher sollen sie wissen, dass die Objekte abgerissen wurden.
Das erkennt man nur an dem Tag
"demolished". 

Gruß
surveyor54
matze089 (2025-06-04 17:26:26+00:00): Jo. Das ist ein Punkt. Der ganze Bereich ist allerdings als Baustelle eingezeichnet. Man könnte einen zusätzlichen Hinweis geben, das das Areal neu bebaut wird.
surveyor54 (2025-06-04 20:18:23+00:00): Ich halte mich halt in solchen Fällen ans Wiki.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Nichtexistierende_Merkmale#Nicht_mehr_existierende_Merkmale_mappen
surveyor54 (2025-06-04 20:37:17+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/gebaude-in-der-karte-geloscht-weil-abgerissen-info-in-die-karte-damit-es-nicht-neu-gezeichnet-wird/100222
matze089 (2025-06-04 21:47:37+00:00): Danke. Da ich JOSM nicht verwende, ist es schwierig fü mich ein undelete zu machen. Soll ich das Gebäude noch mal einzeichnen und in einem zweiten Schritt als abgebrochen kennzeichnen? 
Danke
Matze089
surveyor54 (2025-06-05 07:26:30+00:00): Hi,
kein Problem, den Revert kann ich gerne für dich übernehmen.
Weiterhin frohes Mappen.

Viele Grüße
surveyor54
matze089 (2025-06-05 09:05:15+00:00): Danke,
Matze089
JPhoenix11 (2025-06-04 12:59:51+00:00): Vad betyder pt? Extremt otydligt.
archie (2025-06-04 13:15:08+00:00): Vad otrevlig du är. Tänk efter så kommer du på det. Ligger ju nära till hands.
JPhoenix11 (2025-06-04 13:18:03+00:00): Varför tar du till en sådan ton omedelbart till kritik? Jag vet inte vad 'pt' betyder men det spelar ingen roll, vem som helst ska kunna förstå. Ignorerar du varningen i JOSM att din changelog är för kort?
archie (2025-06-04 13:32:17+00:00): Ja, förlåt, jag borde ha förstått det, du har givetvis inte läst osm-wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Public_transport
JPhoenix11 (2025-06-04 13:44:24+00:00): Är det något särskilt jag har gjort som irriterat dig? Det ber jag självklart om ursäkt för.

Givetvis har jag läst osm-wikin. Det jag syftar på är att du har en changelog helt utan information. Att det är något "public transport" du har ändrat ser man ju, men vad har du gjort? Detta är objekt jag håller på med mycket nu också så det är värdefull information för mig. I detta fall verkar det som, inte utan respekt, att du inte har läst wikin: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments. Citat: "using changeset comments is a very good habit and not using them may be considered impolite, especially if you are a long-time mapper or if you are mapping a lot".

Jag säger inte något av detta för att vara otrevlig, jag har respekt för dig som mappare och din erfarenhet är mycket värdefull. Om du inte vill dela med dig av din kunskap till någon som lär sig, säg det.
archie (2025-06-04 14:03:52+00:00): Mina edits är ofta mycket omfångsrika. Jag är långt ifrån den ende mapparen här i Sverige som använder just "pt" som kommentar i dessa avseenden, dvs när public_transport editeras. 
Vill du låta bli att hetsa mot mig, tack.
JPhoenix11 (2025-06-04 14:21:15+00:00): Jag förstår det. Jag tycker dock inte att det är best practice och en lite mer utförlig kommentar med dina edits hade uppskattats mycket. Tack
MikeN (2025-06-03 18:48:05+00:00): Aerial from NAIP
silversurfer83 (2025-06-04 19:09:14+00:00): Top :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167148564
Elizen (2025-06-11 09:49:59+00:00): Аналогичная ситуация этому пакету правок: osm.org/changeset/167240130
Глеб (2025-06-11 10:07:43+00:00): Вернул
Tekn (2025-06-03 19:33:56+00:00): These change adds CCT codes to a few schools. To explain what these are, they are "Work Center Codes" (Clave de Centro de Trabajo [CCT]), which are unique identifiers for every single school in Mexico for which they operate. Without this number, they cannot issue official certificate for their students.

The code is divided into the following:

- 2 Numbers (Federal Entity)
- 3 Letters (Classifier [1], Identifier [2,3])
- 4 Numbers (Progressive Number)
- 1 Ending letter (Verifying element)

For this, I'm inserting the data for these codes into a new reference value, that is called ref:MX-CCT (or could be renamed to ref:MX:CCT), which would encompass every single one of these.

For more info about the system that handles this program:
https://www.siged.sep.gob.mx/SIGED/index.html

For the entire list of codes, divided by each state:
https://www.siged.sep.gob.mx/SIGED/mapas.html
Mattias Wadman (2025-06-03 21:18:18+00:00): Nice! att den fattades har jag stört mig på många ggr i andra program när man ska möte löplängd etc :)
aharvey (2025-06-03 22:29:50+00:00): ok, but we can't use Google Street View for mapping in OSM, just your local knowledge, surveys or sources we can legally use.
NieWnen (2025-06-04 15:50:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:aerodrome

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:aerodrome:type

Nie widzę powodu, że zmieniać tag na ten nieudokumentowany z mniejszym użyciem.
pavvv (2025-06-04 15:56:58+00:00): Najlepiej użyć tego z największym wsparciem, ale zauważyłem, że chyba nic nie wspiera żadnego z tych dwóch tagów, tylko robi rendering po IATA i ICAO.

Możesz tam zmienić tag na którykolwiek chcesz. Ja wolałem zmienić na ten, który był proponowany w proposalach, ale najlepiej by było, gdyby w końcu zatwierdzono któregoś z tych tagów.
dzamper (2025-11-18 13:29:18+00:00): A jaki jest problem żeby dać oba?
Dawid2849 (2025-11-18 22:46:47+00:00): ^
NieWnen (2025-11-18 22:53:59+00:00): Ja tam nie widzę sensu w dawaniu tutaj obu.

To trochę jak duplikowanie `phone` i `contact:phone` z tym samym numerem, więc wybrałbym klasycznie ten co ma więcej użyć, żeby nie podtrzymywać tego pierwszego sztucznie w użyciu jeśli nie przynosi to żadnej korzyści dla której warto go trzymać.

Ten drugi na taginfo wciąż rośnie i ma więcej użyć w projektach, ten pierwszy się zatrzymał.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/aerodrome

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/aerodrome:type
NieWnen (2025-11-18 23:00:59+00:00): Natomiast zgadzam się z tym, że najlepiej by było, gdyby któryś został zatwierdzony, albo odwrotnie przestarzały, ale jak nikt takiej akcji nie podejmuje to w "naturalny sposób" można się do tego przyczynić, właśnie unikając stosowania wybranego tagowania :P
NorthCrab_upload (2025-06-03 20:10:46+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4068252763
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/257767301

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
APneunzehn74 (2025-08-21 11:56:51+00:00): Hallo, diese Mitfahrbank in diesem Chargenset ist das vielleicht eine https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dhitchhiking wie im Wiki beschrieben?
Grüße APneunzehn74
Comino (2025-06-03 22:36:31+00:00): Hi Bendito Brechó,

In your edit you use the deprecated tag "payment:bitcoin=yes".

Please DELETE the payment:bitcoin=yes tag !
Only use "currency:XBT=yes" instead.

For more information please read : https://gitea.btcmap.org/teambtcmap/btcmap-general/wiki/Tagging-Merchants

Happy mapping,

Edwin
KTim (2025-07-20 08:01:32+00:00): Moin,

mir ist aufgefallen, dass du hier meine Änderung des Radfahrstreifen von advisory zu exclusive rückgängig gemacht hast. (wieder zu advisory). Der Streifen hier auf der Kreuzung bleibt ein Radfahrstreifen, auch wenn er kurz gestrichelt geführt ist. Ausschlaggebend ist die Breite der Linie (25cm und nicht 12cm wie bei einem Schutzstreifen). Das ganze ist auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:cycleway%3Dlane im ersten Absatz ganz gut erklärt.

LG, Tim
kadiwa (2025-07-20 10:20:58+00:00): Ok, das mit den Strichbreiten wusste ich nicht, sorry.
eggie (2025-06-03 20:43:02+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Goed om zaken actueel te maken, maar beter geen persoonlijke info toevoegen aan adressen. 
Die kan beter worden verwijderd.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
A67-A67 (2025-06-04 19:19:51+00:00): This it office was already in OSM. I'm merged it with the existing node.
Guido2412 (2025-06-07 15:09:32+00:00): Thanks!
gendy54 (2025-08-21 18:09:48+00:00): Bonjour,

Je vais devoir annuler tes changements car tu as fait une double erreur: supprimer un tag important (emergency=moutain_rescue) pour la description de la structure pour le remplacer par un tag inapproprié (amenity=police). Je te laisse aller voir dans le wiki ces 2 tags.
Xvtn (2025-06-11 15:53:44+00:00): Nice! Thanks!
stst415 (2025-06-03 21:29:51+00:00): TYPO:  I meant South Beach, CA, as the third alternative name.  A fourth and much less common name for the area is Yerba Buena, CA.
literan (2025-06-04 19:47:23+00:00): неверный тег, вы обозначили места где из брандспойта лодки наполняют. Исправлю
Glassman (2025-06-04 23:23:12+00:00): #TIP: It is good to leave the address on the node since it will likely be reused when a new business opens up.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167153171
Mazda05 (2025-06-03 22:30:05+00:00): Greatings. What is the reason for this reverting? What is the editing conflict? I don't observe a single comment https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166614563 + https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166616744. How is this consistent with the DWG resolution https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DWG_2014-06-05_Special_Crimea? Please cancel this edit of yours as incorrect
Mazda05 (2025-06-04 00:45:44+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/districts-in-crimea/130964. I ask you to cancel this rollback as soon as possible, as well as henceforth carefully deal with complaints sent to DWG.
Glassman (2025-06-04 18:47:54+00:00): As the block on your account says, please follow the DWG guidelines for edits in Crimea. Looking at your tags, let me suggest that you add them to openhistoricalmap.org. If you are interested in OHM,  I can connect you with one of the founders.
Mazda05 (2025-06-05 03:39:40+00:00): As the post says, boundary=historic have been retained as the new districts were formed based on the boundaries of the old ones, and the old boundaries have been changed since 2014 and need to be rechecked against the cadastre when it is opened. What does openhistoricalmap.org have to do with this?
Mazda05 (2025-06-05 05:13:50+00:00): All changes were made strictly in accordance with https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DWG_2014-06-05_Special_Crimea. Which was communicated to you and detailed as much as possible in the topic. I have not received any specifics from you regarding this. If you have any remarks, please elaborate on them
BCNorwich (2025-06-04 04:58:00+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStretMap.

I've reverted your changes because they dragged lots of features out of alignment and introduced data of dubious quality attached to existing genuine features.

Please check your editing before uploading.

Regards Bernard
Quality Escorts London (2025-06-04 06:30:42+00:00): Thanks, and apologies about that
EfreetSK (2025-10-28 13:17:39+00:00): Pozerám teraz na fixme pre uzol 12863150662 a tam je drôtený plot ale ľudia v ňom urobili dieru a chodia cez to. Keď budem mať cestu okolo tak to preverím ešte v akom je to stave teraz a či to náhodou aj nezastavali (tá parcela je totiž súkromná). Príp doplním aj ten plot/múr za domami vedľa Bottovej nech je to jasné
aceman444 (2025-11-29 10:45:23+00:00): Super, dakujem
jb54osm (2025-06-04 10:35:44+00:00): 👍
tordans (2025-06-05 13:11:35+00:00): Hey kjon, FYI ich denke wir können in Berlin "marked" und "uncontrolled" als Synonyme verstehen. Es gibt Mapper, die "marked" lieber mögen. 
VG
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167153972
Marek-M (2025-06-04 07:44:27+00:00): Cześć, tworząc linie z drogami (`highway`) staraj się unikać tworzenia na nich nadmiarowych węzłów. Wiele dróg, szczególnie dojazdowych, które tutaj dodałeś można zredukować z 6-8 do 3-4 węzłów bez utraty informacji o ich geometrii. Niby to niewiele ale jest to jednak 2 razy mniej zbędnych danych na mapie.

Tutaj trochę poprawiłem część Twoich dróg: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=167164508#20/54.20088/18.49925 usuwając niemal 400 zbędnych węzłów.
Srdjan023 (2025-06-13 09:51:58+00:00): This is wrong, if cycleway and footway are separated by one object we still map it as one please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway
maro21 (2025-06-04 17:50:05+00:00): Jeśli coś nie ma nazwy to jej nie dajemy i nie wpisujemy do tagu [name] nazw ogólnych takich jak "Fryzjer", "Rowery", "Plac zabaw", czy "Owoce i warzywa".
maro21 (2025-06-04 17:48:48+00:00): Jeśli coś nie ma nazwy, to jej nie dajemy. Plac Grunwaldzki to ulice bięgnące od mostu Grunwaldzkiego do mostu Szczytnickiego, a kawałek esplanady należy do spółdzielni mieszkaniowej i nie ma nazwy.
IpswichEdits (2025-06-04 06:58:27+00:00): Apologies for the large bbox. I don't control where the different features are selected on Pic4Review. I only noticed once I see the finished changeset.
Gregory Peony (2025-06-04 01:31:08+00:00): All footprints valid and accurate. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167154593
eggie (2025-06-04 06:55:35+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback. Goe om die fietspaden actueel te maken...  Kijk even hier hoe de verschillende fietspaden getagd kunnen worden.
G11: mofa=yes, moped=no, traffic_sign=NL:G11
G12a: moped=designated, mofa=designated, traffic_sign=NL:G12a
G13: moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
felipeeugenio (2025-06-04 14:59:17+00:00): Hola. =Unclassifieds es un camino vecinal público normalmente. Algunos de los que agregaste los cambié a =service, que es la entrada a un predio con edificios productivos. Además, todo parece indicar que tienen un portón de acceso.

Saludos
gurglypipe (2025-06-03 23:18:34+00:00): Bing offset to OSMUK Cadastral Parcels: -3.64,-0.72, measured in Keswick near the River Greta tunnel portal. Kept the same Bing offset across the edit, so I guess it might have drifted as I headed north west
gurglypipe (2025-06-03 23:22:11+00:00): Bing offset to OSMUK Cadastral Parcels: -3.64,-0.72, measured in Keswick near the River Greta tunnel portal (from changeset 167155274). Kept the same Bing offset across the edit, so I guess it might have drifted as I headed north west
eggie (2025-06-04 07:03:05+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 (2025-06-04 07:05:19+00:00): Svp geen adresnodes verwijderen. 
Please don't remove addressnodes.
Just remove the shopinfo.
Restored addressnode.
Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2025-06-04 08:42:40+00:00): Je vraagt feedback.. review_requested
  	yes

Lijkt me oke zo
Gr eggie
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-06-04 10:13:59+00:00): thanks so much for fixing this!
diamondarmorsteve (2025-09-07 02:14:30+00:00): Adding the name tag to route relations that do not have a name distinct from their reference goes against current community consensus. Please see discussion here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/planned-edit-to-re-tag-descriptive-names-in-road-route-relations-in-the-united-states/1
EuleKC (2025-09-07 05:35:40+00:00): I have been naming these according to the "Missouri state highways" wiki, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Missouri_state_highways . I have sought clarification from the authors of that wiki page on this issue.
b-jazz (2025-06-05 07:19:56+00:00): RE: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1391964098

Hello HobbieWoman,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Thanks for contributing changes and working to improve the map.

The lines that define fairways, greens, bunkers, water hazards, and tees should never intersect (partially overlap) each other and we noticed that they are overlapping in one or more of the feature pairs in this changeset. If there is no obvious fringe around the green, the fairway should butt up against the green and every node between them should be *shared*. If there is a fringe around the green that is similar to the fairway, the fairway should extend around the green and the two objects should be merged together into a multipolygon (See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon for how to create them with your map editor).  Please read the wiki for instructions and examples of how to better map golf courses: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls. If you have any questions, please reply here and I'll gladly help clarify things. Thanks!
B252697 (2025-09-22 00:44:13+00:00): I think some of these roads might be parking spaces for cars. Would be great if service=parking aisle can be added for these roads. Thanks!
aduxas (2025-10-27 23:42:37+00:00): The sign says Private Property; not that access is forbidden.  I did not see a No Trespassing sign there.  I rode my bike there a couple of times and was never told access was forbidden.  Not that there is one parcel (#12) that is private land and that has a no trespassing sign.
ZeLonewolf (2025-10-27 23:57:27+00:00): This is the sign that is posted at the entrance:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Haffenreffer_Grant_of_Mount_Hope_Sign.jpg

Did you see differently?

See also this discussion:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/more-gray-areas-in-private-access-tagging/134255/4
aduxas (2025-10-28 02:26:50+00:00): Yes, this is the sign.
- The "No Trespassing" sign in the background is meant for the forest adjacent to the road; not the road itself.
- The Title 31 definition of "Private road" is to be interpreted as the definition in the context of Title 31 only.  Wherever "Private road" is used in Title 31, it must be understood as defined here  (e.g. 31-17-5).  There is a priori no connection between a physical sign and what is used in Title 31.
Note that the location of the sign approximately coincides with the limit of parcel 135-3...  which is owned by the Town of Bristol.  As such, the section of the road on Town land should not be designated as private.  Further down, the road crosses into land owned by the Pokanoket tribe (#135-2).  It is possible that this section is inaccessible to the public.
I am not a lawyer but I wish we had more clarity here.

Thanks.
Gregory Peony (2025-06-04 03:15:30+00:00): I think that the vast majortiy of footprnits added here do not likely represent buildings.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167157659
5m4u9 (2025-06-06 05:51:00+00:00): hmm... la dirección está presente en un cartel en la esquina con la adrián patiño, la dirección hacia el este.

Pero si es usada de otra por el transporte pública, en lugar de cambiar es mejor añadir la etiqueta oneway:psv=no o oneway:bus=no... mucho más específico.
Warin61 (2026-01-17 01:09:27+00:00): Hi.
What makes relation 19209644 Memorial Ave West Path a 'route'? It looks more like simple cycling infrastructure to me.
Timmy_Tesseract (2025-06-04 23:44:37+00:00): Good morning and thank you for these edits! Everything looks good now.

Just one little question, which other map sources are you referring to? 

For example if it's a map from the city government it would be good to explicitly mention this as a source. 

Especially when there is no street name sign on the ground (for example Depita Road) other mappers appreciate it to know where the name comes from.
StreetSurveyor (2025-06-08 23:46:44+00:00): Hi there! Curious, is there a new "no trespassing" sign? I surveyed this pretty recently and the only sign aside from the road name was a "beware of turtles" on each end.
ZeLonewolf (2025-06-09 00:59:39+00:00): Hi Nick. Yes, there is a no trespassing sign, at least, on the Fishing Cove Road side. No, it is not a new sign. It was there when I surveyed it a year ago, and it was there a half hour ago when I went to check.

Here is the photo I took of it:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:No_trespassing_sign_lit_with_headlights.jpg

It was late in the day, so I apologize for the lighting. It is geo-tagged so you can see the exact location.

Given how prominent this sign is, I'm surprised you didn't notice it in your survey.
StreetSurveyor (2025-06-09 16:31:50+00:00): Thanks! Should this be a residential road instead of service?
ZeLonewolf (2025-06-09 16:43:15+00:00): I haven't gone past the sign, but I think you could make an argument for either. It has attributes of either type. It's really narrow and looks like it goes to only one house. I'm not sure the distinction matters too much.
CENTSOARER (2025-07-05 18:42:36+00:00): Hi ratrun.

Could you please revert this changeset? A local mapper had already fixed it this false connection. The local mapper states in the previous version of some related highway that "Huemyla street does NOT (sic) connect with Segunda cerrada de Franciso I. Madero, both are deadends.
ratrun (2025-07-06 04:17:04+00:00): Thank you, adopted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ratrun/history#map=2/16.3/-101.2
CENTSOARER (2025-07-07 18:44:50+00:00): Thank you, ratrun
kevinp2 (2025-06-10 22:14:00+00:00): Hi tcarlisle, I recommend to not modify the way Ogden Valley (1388570643) which has come from the Weber County GIS system and will be modified in the future again when they publish final changes.  At that time, I will replace this way or modify its nodes and will not be able to reconcile whatever work you did to it.  It's also a legal boundary for a new city, so we can't just modify it to whatever we want.

Would also request to try to break up your commits so that they are limited to a small geographic area or (even better) a single feature at a time.  That allows me to revert a commit if necessary without wasting your work.

Thank you :-)