I don't think we can have any definitive solution here. People will interact with the LGU of their preference or practicality despite what boundaries on paper or laws state.
Long-time OSM mapper Rally have plenty of stories regarding people choosing Taytay vs. Cainta. My personal preference is to go with what laws state in absence of any additional info. (Note that laws creating or converting LGUs almost always have a "disclaimer" about boundary disputes.) Next in preference is a variation of the "on-the-ground" rule: check what residents consider their LGUs to be: where they vote, which LGUs they get their cedulas, or register their businesses in, or file real estate taxes, etc. ~Eugene On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 4:06 AM Jherome Miguel <[email protected]> wrote: > In light of previous incidents where there have been attempts to shoehorn > some land developments (usually subdivisions or planned developments) into > one LGU (usually a city or municipality, or a barangay) where legally it > straddles two or more, e.g. the CCP Complex between Manila and Pasay, The > Glens at Park Spring between San Pedro and Dasmariñas, I would want to > start a discussion about dealing with legally-defined LGU boundaries where > there have been a recent development built above it. I'm noticing there has > been a tendency to place a certain land development across a long-existing > legal boundary within one LGU, and I also admit I had that temptation in > the past as well. _______________________________________________ > talk-ph mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph >
_______________________________________________ talk-ph mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
