On the wiki page for amenity=parking, amenity=parking , you can see in the "Used on these elements" section that the only two valid uses are on nodes or closed areas - not simple ways.

So the choice is really between whether to map the parking as areas along the street, like way/1463506566 , or directly on the street centerline like way/1201582529

There's a brief discussion of the tradeoffs at the top of osm.wiki/Street_parking#Tagging

But basically, mapping it separately allows more precise detail and has the benefit of not needing to split the street centerline. But it is much higher "effort" than mapping on the street centerline, since you need to accurately draw each area.

Centerline is probably easier to start with, at least.

And to handle different rules on the left side and right side, you can use parking:left or parking:right and the subtags, combined with splitting the centerline where you need to when the rules change on one side or the other.

It may also be helpful to take a look at osm.wiki/Street_parking/Advanced_examples if the rules are particularly complex.

With the "tagging on centerline" approach, I think your current tags would become:
parking:both=lane
parking:left:markings=yes
parking:left:orientation=parallel
parking:left:maxstay:conditional=15 minutes @ (8:00-21:00)
parking:left:restriction:conditional=no_parking @ (Tu 02:00-07:00)

(also, remember, the times are in "military time" to that currently means 2AM to 7AM - not sure if that's intentional or not)

Hope that helps!

jfyi, there were two little improvements made to the tags in following changesets: changeset/181055519 and changeset/181097664

Both were very small fixes of things that are really easy to get a little wrong. Keep it up!

Hey, thanks for the change! I imagine the property/address 797 Grand Ave is still present, even though the business there closed? It would be best to leave the node there, at least as an address, maybe marked as a shop=vacant. That way, if something does move in and someone searches for that address in the future, they’ll still find something there.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181054534

Amazing Thailand does have outdoor seating! It’s in the cute little alley with the rickshaw hanging over the entrance. Course, it’s probably not open during the winter, but I used it last summer.

Hey, welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for the changes! I just wanted to share that they inspired me to add more details to these nodes :) changeset/179497201

Happy mapping!

This whole changeset was reverted: changeset/178609337

Hey Brian,

Just so you know, there were two tags I had set previously that were still on this node, ‘construction:amenity=cafe’ and ‘construction:name=_’ (following osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix). Unfortunately I don’t think iD does a good job of showing those (https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6168) so it’s easy to miss.

The idea with those prefixes is that it keeps data consumers from showing whatever’s under construction, until construction is done and the prefix is removed, making the node a ‘real thing’.

Anyway, I removed the extra tags in changeset/175156696, though they weren’t really hurting anything.

Thanks for the improvement to the map!

Hey maggot32footoot,

Just to elaborate - many of these ways had different tags, such as representing which sections are in flyover bridges or not. That means that they are deliberately separate details between the different sections of the way, and that we lose that detail by merging them together.

Thanks for the revert, iandees.

Hey maggot32foot,

Just to clarify what was wrong with this changeset - if you follow the course of the way looking at aerial imagery, it becomes clear that this way doesn’t correspond to any physical object/structure. It jumps from one highway to another and doesn’t have any physical correspondence.

If you look at the way’s relations, you’ll see that it’s part of what makes up an administrative boundary (boundary=administrative) for Normandale Park (relation/5393324).

While it’s weird that the way doesn’t have any tags, the wiki says that’s acceptable. The wiki also says it’s acceptable to duplicate the boundary=administrative tag on the way, which I think might help avoid confusion like this.

Anyway, thanks for trying to make the map better, but thanks iandees for reverting this change.

Wow, this is awesome, thanks for doing this. For my own learning, I’m curious - how did you identify which ways needed this change? Some QA tool? An Overpass Query? JOSM Plugin?

I hope for your sake it wasn’t a matter of clicking on every way in the area haha

Reverted in 174675506 after discussion with strongthany

Reverted in 174675506 after discussion with strongthany

Looking at this, I just noticed that we have two Uptown Theatres (both the node and the building), both with address 2900, and there’s now also a third node with addresss 2900 - the disused shop in the corner.

I think that’s the ticket office now?

So maybe we should:
- Remove the “Uptown Theater” name from the building to avoid confusion
- Delete the disused shop in the corner
- Keep the uptown theater node as the main thing

WDYT?

Thanks for the change! But I’m not sure access=private is the most accurate in this case. Barbette’s website (https://www.barbette.com/parking) directs customers to use this lot for parking, suggesting to me that access=customers would be more accurate.

I’m going to go ahead and make that correction.

Also, and this is a nitpick, but the changeset comment could be a bit more relevant to the change :)

Whoops, thanks for fixing my mistake!

Ah that's good info, thanks for sharing. Maybe that's what they're doing. It's not obvious what the best answer is, but yeah, I think let's lean towards marking this as open. Especially, like you said, since it should be done on May 2nd.

Just to confirm - the Hiawatha LRT Trail was closed when you surveyed it around the date of this changeset?

I ask because I biked it last night (4/24) from 15th to the Midtown Greenway, and while it was dark so I didn’t see much, it definitely wasn’t closed. I do remember there being some construction barriers that were set to the side at one point.

The site you linked in your next changeset does suggest it will still be closed until May 9th, but it was definitely bikeable last night, so I’m inclined to mark it as open, but wanted to check in first.

Whoops, the comment got messed up accidentally. Was supposed to say: “Refined parking lot and existing foot paths around castle”

After discussion, I removed the way I added and tweaked the tags on the existing ways: changeset/154374874

Oh thanks for pointing that out, I didn't notice that when I added it. Yeah, I tried to find guidance on the wiki about adding something like that but it's so specific I didn't really manage to. I'll reach out on the OSM US slack. Thank you!