| Note | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Event | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4376322 Category: unknown | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | opened | gvwaal ♦120 | There are trails within around 50 meters of this note that are diffulicult to map due to poor visibility on aerial imagery. Suggest use of a GPS. |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | closed | gvwaal ♦120 | Added trails using USGS 3DEP hillshade. | |
| 2096597 | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | opened | --- | PolyMet Mining - NorthMet |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | commented | Hypsometric ♦4,299 | Updated the name. I am leaving this open because I came across MN DNR's page (https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/polymet/permitting/index.html) about court process/rulings on the permit to mine here. The latest update is March 2023. It was ruled that "...after review of the recommendation of the administrative law judge, the DNR will make a final permit decision on the permit to mine application." It could be that the permits will be revoked if the mining operation is negatively effecting the water in the area. | |
| 3 | ~ 10 months ago | commented | gvwaal ♦120 | I don't love the current condition of the area but it's hard to edit in iD and wonder if it'd be easier for someone familiar with JOSM: - landuse=quarry is only applicable to the area where something is currently being mined, but no mining is occurring here - landuse=quarry is currently applied to man_made=spoil_heap and man_made=tailings_pond and shouldn't be - landuse=industrial could be applied to the whole area encompassing the spoil heap, tailings pond, and processing plant - landuse=brownfield isn't particularly because it assumes a formerly developed area, which it wasn't; it's in the same state it was when the former operator went bankrupt Figure 3.2-23 has more info on what would be considered the plant (not mine) site: https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/input/environmentalreview/polymet/feis/007_chapter_3_proposed_action_and_alternatives.pdf | |
| 4 | ~ 6 months ago | closed | Easton_17Mikki_93Aurora_22_* | ||
| 5 | ~ 6 months ago | reopened | dannmer ♦18,942 | ||
| 6 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | Hypsometric ♦4,299 | Good catches. - landuse=brownfield has been removed or retagged. - landuse=quary has been updated with disused tags to start the lifecycle. The others, I don't know enough about mining to confidently do. I did also update many roads that have changed or are nonexistent. I think this is cleaned up enough for now since it looks like other changes will be happening as they start development/work in the area again. Think we can resolve this for now? | |
| 4707839 Category: StreetComplete | 1 | ~ 11 months ago | opened | lmum ♦983 | Sidewalk connecting road to lot via StreetComplete 60.3 |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | closed | gvwaal ♦120 | Added sidewalk. | |
| 4709282 Category: StreetComplete | 1 | ~ 11 months ago | opened | lmum ♦983 | Add pond via StreetComplete 60.3 |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | closed | gvwaal ♦120 | Added ponds. | |
| 4056253 | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | opened | lmum ♦983 | Check highway type designation for this segment (possibly mismatched with rest of highway) via StreetComplete 56.0 |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | closed | gvwaal ♦120 | Good catch! Seems to have been primarily because these were highway=trunk but should have been highway=motorway like the surrounding road. |