Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
I agree with Rich Welty- if you know the area and the CDP boundary makes no sense, then remove it. The issue in the past has been where some people wanted to remove all of them. - Serge On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it does not exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node. There doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most likely be annex by Lake Stevens. Before I do I'd like to hear people opinion about deleting these admin_level=8 for CDP boundaries. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
Brad, Thank you for reminding us of what the Census office says that CDPs are. I would just add that CDPs are used in some places as de-facto cities or towns, which is why we've rejected proposals to remove them all. - Serge ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
Just to reinforce what has already been said, here's what the Census thinks of CDPs: Census Designated Places (CDPs) are the statistical counterparts of incorporated places, and are* delineated to provide data for settled concentrations of population that are identifiable by name but are not legally incorporated* under the laws of the state in which they are located. The boundaries usually are defined in cooperation with local or tribal officials and generally updated prior to each decennial census. *These boundaries, which usually coincide with visible features or the boundary of an adjacent incorporated place or another legal entity boundary, have no legal status, nor do these places have officials elected to serve traditional municipal functions*. CDP boundaries may change from one decennial census to the next with changes in the settlement pattern; a CDP with the same name as in an earlier census does not necessarily have the same boundary. CDPs must be contained within a single state and may not extend into an incorporated place. There are no population size requirements for CDPs. https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtc_place.html Actual local administrative entities tend to be Places and sometimes County Subdivisions, but it really varies by state. If you want to dig that deep, you can view info about each state's census geography here: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/geoguide.html Brad On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with Rich Welty- if you know the area and the CDP boundary makes no sense, then remove it. The issue in the past has been where some people wanted to remove all of them. - Serge On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us wrote: I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it does not exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node. There doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most likely be annex by Lake Stevens. Before I do I'd like to hear people opinion about deleting these admin_level=8 for CDP boundaries. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
That is what I thought as well. It is now gone. If I didn't screw up the boundary multipolygons everything should be correct. (I hate boundaries!!!) Thanks for the help, Clifford On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Steven Johnson sejohns...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, U.S. Census Bureau treats them as statistical, not aim boundaries. --SEJ Sent from my electronic tether. On 2015年5月19日, at 21:33, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: On 5/19/15 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: they probably shouldn't be in an administrative boundary category anyway, as they don't have any sort of local governance function. Agreed, +1. I've been similarly locally blurring out (away from importance or relevance in OSM) and/or diminishing CDP boundaries as I do listen here. Many of these are in OSM yet they might be seen as they are, especially as/when combined with administrative boundary. In short, census delineations are not administrative, rather, more like a statistical approximation. What that particular census formula purports to denote might be debated, though that seems tedious. At a certain point we start to do cartwheels around Monte Carlo simulations regarding Constitutional questions getting asked. Let's check that and continue. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Removing a CDP
I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it does not exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node. There doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most likely be annex by Lake Stevens. Before I do I'd like to hear people opinion about deleting these admin_level=8 for CDP boundaries. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
On 5/19/15 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it does not exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node. There doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most likely be annex by Lake Stevens. Before I do I'd like to hear people opinion about deleting these admin_level=8 for CDP boundaries. i think deleting CDP boundaries that don't make any sense is not unreasonable. i've deleted a couple on that basis. also, the boundary import that brought in the CDPs is kind of out of date; the census bureau has updated quite a few of them, which i noticed while cleaning up borders in eastern NY. they probably shouldn't be in an administrative boundary category anyway, as they don't have any sort of local governance function. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
The nodes w/ place names are good to have to support a healthy gazetteer function. Much harder to make a case for keeping CDP boundaries. --SEJ Sent from my electronic tether. On 2015年5月19日, at 20:47, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: On 5/19/15 8:35 PM, Clifford Snow wrote: I would like to remove Machias, Washington admin_level 8 since it does not exist as a city in Washington. It has been there for a number of years apparently added by a bot. I plan to leave it as a CDP locality node. There doesn't seem to be any chance that it will become a city and will most likely be annex by Lake Stevens. Before I do I'd like to hear people opinion about deleting these admin_level=8 for CDP boundaries. i think deleting CDP boundaries that don't make any sense is not unreasonable. i've deleted a couple on that basis. also, the boundary import that brought in the CDPs is kind of out of date; the census bureau has updated quite a few of them, which i noticed while cleaning up borders in eastern NY. they probably shouldn't be in an administrative boundary category anyway, as they don't have any sort of local governance function. richard -- rwe...@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking - GIS IT Consulting OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux Java - Web Applications - Search ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Removing a CDP
Yes, U.S. Census Bureau treats them as statistical, not aim boundaries. --SEJ Sent from my electronic tether. On 2015年5月19日, at 21:33, stevea stevea...@softworkers.com wrote: On 5/19/15 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net wrote: they probably shouldn't be in an administrative boundary category anyway, as they don't have any sort of local governance function. Agreed, +1. I've been similarly locally blurring out (away from importance or relevance in OSM) and/or diminishing CDP boundaries as I do listen here. Many of these are in OSM yet they might be seen as they are, especially as/when combined with administrative boundary. In short, census delineations are not administrative, rather, more like a statistical approximation. What that particular census formula purports to denote might be debated, though that seems tedious. At a certain point we start to do cartwheels around Monte Carlo simulations regarding Constitutional questions getting asked. Let's check that and continue. SteveA California ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
