OpenStreetMap Note Activities of JannesBraet for the last 12 Months
Overall Activities | 12 Months
Opened: 4 (67%) Commented: 2 (33%) Closed: 0 (0%) Reopened: 0 (0%)
Stats per month
Latest | Limit 250
Latest | Limit 250 | The colored events are made by JannesBraet
Note#⏱️ Last updatedEventContributorComment
4928004
Category: Unknown
1~ 7 months agoopenedIIVQ
♦771
Wegensituatie busbaan en aansluiting op Burgemeester Stramanweg wordt anders (maar ik kon geen plannen vinden). In deze vijver komt een truckparking. Volgens mij is het pand van Hedin Automotive (Burg. Stramanweg 110/110A) gesloopt maar ik weet dat niet zeker.
2~ 7 months agocommentedIIVQ
♦771
Grotendeels ingetekend, als het klaar is oude busbaan verwijderen en nieuwe van construction op busway zetten.Ik heb de busroutes al omgezet.
3~ 6 months agocommentedJannesBraet
♦21
Er is hier nu een probleem dat de weg 823599012 eigenlijk ontoegankelijk is geworden. Het is een oneway en door https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11278258 mag hij ook niet afslaan naar de weg 823599013. Klopt die relatie dus wel ? Ik kan ook geen indicatie vinden dat er verkeersborden zijn die dit afdwingen
4~ 6 months agocommentedIIVQ
♦771
Ik zie niet in hoe https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/823599012 ontoegankelijk is geworden, via https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/708309849 etc kan je er nog gewoon naartoe. Wel kan je momenteel neit verder naar Stern Auto. Dat is ook correct, het pand van ex-stern staat leeg, is ontdaan van alle reclame en heeft een andere toegang via de Keienbergerweg. Of begrijp ik niet wat je bedoelt?
4814467
Category: unknown
1~ 10 months agoopenedJannesBraet
♦21
Why is way 1227013791 not the same way as 639654691 under this location ? In reality this is the same way, except that it should be segregated for foot and bike. Also I believe that before the change of 2 months ago this was not the case
2~ 10 months agocommentedkabelhaai
♦2,449
Please attach a picture if possible. Nothing is visible on aerial due to trees.
3~ 10 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
Mapillary images should be available
4~ 10 months agocommentedkabelhaai
♦2,449
Looking at mapillary it has one footway and one cycleway. Could be combined or not (?) in a specific double tagged cycleway. But then marked crossings don't fit. Why is there a "path" here on the wrong side of the cycleway? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1227013791 It's gonna need a bit of tweaking to get right without a good image in cadastre or aerial
5~ 10 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
you can use this way as an example > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1101438034
6~ 9 months agoclosedbxl-forever
♦5,631
Yes, it is the same problem reported in an earlier note: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4718239 A user had single-handedly decided to remap all footways and cycleways to merge them, apparently because they like the iD preset. This was a very bad idea, in particular when crossings with roads are not exactly on the same location. In dense urban areas, it is okay to map them separately. We had already fixed the northern part of the site but not the part here. I did it yesterday. It should be all right now.
7~ 9 months agoreopenedThierry1030
♦6,183
8~ 9 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
https://panoramax.mapcomplete.org/api/pictures/0fe95ab4-68b1-42df-af49-549a476e6395/hd.jpg
9~ 9 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
cycleways (in green) run further to the west (until the parking area for cars) > https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=829518106027873
10~ 9 months agocommentedbxl-forever
♦5,631
True, but this was not the purpose of the task here, about repairing a previous edit. I will see if I can spend some more time to draw the rest of the cycle infrastructure, then.
11~ 9 months agocommentedJannesBraet
♦21
I still don't understand why these roads need to be seperate ? at least from under the intersection to where they converge they can be a single road with segregated=yes. Two ways this close together just feels like clutter
12~ 9 months agoclosedkabelhaai
♦2,449
I understand it can feel like clutter but it is what it is. The more detail the better I suppose.
13~ 9 months agoreopenedThierry1030
♦6,183
14~ 9 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
missing cycleways are not yet drawn ...
15~ 9 months agoclosedbxl-forever
♦5,631
I added them earlier this week: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411351156
16~ 9 months agoreopenedThierry1030
♦6,183
17~ 9 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
Thanks! Just to be complete: there's also a oneway cycleway southern of Av. de Laerbeek
18~ 8 months agocommentedkabelhaai
♦2,449
which street is that
19~ 8 months agocommentedThierry1030
♦6,183
Laarbeeklaan
20~ 8 months agoclosedThierry1030
♦6,183
added missing separate cycleway > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411351155
4817444
Category: unknown
1~ 9 months agoopenedJannesBraet
♦21
Isn't this domain private? I passed here today and it all seemed very inacessible, with closed gates. But maybe that's just in the weekends ? I just want to make sure before I start modifying all the roads here to be private
2~ 9 months agoclosedbxl-forever
♦5,631
Indeed, there are multiple restricted access signs (see Mapillary pictures in the source of this changeset). Updated thanks. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/167962035
4796026
Category: unknown
1~ 10 months agoopenedJannesBraet
♦21
Shouldn't there be a way here to indicate that this pier is in fact accesible ?
2~ 10 months agoclosedwaterced
♦4,430
Indeed, done!
4767228
Category: unknown
1~ 11 months agoopenedJannesBraet
♦21
In reality you are forced to take the loop to get on top of the bridge, however the way it is currently mapped routeplanners think you can skip the loop. I'm just not sure how I can detach the nodes in a good way to make this happen, can anyone help? Similar on the other side of the bridge
2~ 11 months agoclosedbxl-forever
♦5,631
You are right. A mapper attached both ways together, which is a mistake. And the same problem on the eastern side, indeed. It should be all right now. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/439212943