bigbear3764 wrote:

Fredo-p wrote:Also,

What do you call that new/extra icon to be able to move the entire place area?

Grab handle perhaps?

Previously it was called, I think, a Move Handle.

I'd like to propose, since it is being done already, that "Residence/Home" be updated to for use for apartment buildings, retirement/rest homes, etc. Not for use with single-family, du-/triplexes, etc. Could be used for apartment complexes, too.

Thoughts?

qwaletee wrote:A proposal to get more detailed about this:

Good stuff.

qwaletee wrote:* Any single building occupying more than about 10 acres (structure footprint), even if not a high rise, should be marked with an area place

Not sure about this measurement. A single apartment building could take up an entire suburb city block, but that's nowhere near 10 acres. With that type of structure, an area gives flexibility in terms of entry location, though something this large undoubtedly has more than one. I'm just not sure

qwaletee wrote:Exceptions can be made where there is a separate reason for marking the place (e.g., an historic area that is a destination on that merit alone might warrant an area place)

We should make sure to differentiate/clarify that Historic Area/Residence is not the same as a simple historic marker which would be categorized as an Information Point.

Fredo-p wrote:Also,

What do you call that new/extra icon to be able to move the entire place area?

Grab handle perhaps?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It should also be noted that if an editor was to use the move icon to transfer the entire place area in one move, that the endpoint marker does not follow. This could be a problem if editors are new or not paying attention and cause unnecessary UR's on "wrong locations".

Would this actually be a bug to file?

Also,

What do you call that new/extra icon to be able to move the entire place area?

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:I'd like to propose, since it is being done already, that "Residence/Home" be updated to for use for apartment buildings, retirement/rest homes, etc. Not for use with single-family, du-/triplexes, etc. Could be used for apartment complexes, too.

Thoughts?

I agree. The criteria should be something along the lines of a/many multi-housing units. One or more buildings/units that house residences/families. Retirement/rest homes tend to be attached to a retirement community of sorts so it can be confusing when trying to apply a type.

Best example is here in Arizona. The actual city is Sun City. However, a large portion is known as a retirement area, and has been given an unincorporated name of Sun City West. Nearly all of it is nothing but retirement homes/communities.

In regards to apartment complexes, would it be given a point or area? Would the size determine this? Also, if it is a private/gated area, would that meet the criteria to be considered a place?

Glad we got that back since the change from landmarks.

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:I'd like to propose, since it is being done already, that "Residence/Home" be updated to for use for apartment buildings, retirement/rest homes, etc. Not for use with single-family, du-/triplexes, etc. Could be used for apartment complexes, too.

Thoughts?

Agreed, though the line between multi-family "house" and apartment building is always going to be subjective. A proposal to get more detailed about this:

* Smaller developments, with several buildings, can be marked with this type of place

* High rise apartment buildings should always use this type of place, but using a point marker, unless the building is very broad (see next point)

* Any single building occupying more than about 10 acres (structure footprint), even if not a high rise, should be marked with an area place

* Very small developments, with less than around five structures or 20 individual units, or less than 5 acres, should not be marked

* Very large development with their own internal road network (private or public) should not use an area place, because it would occupy too large a map area to be useful. The main entrances can be marked with a point place, and consideration given to other entrances if they can be differentiated. Exceptions can be made where there is a separate reason for marking the place (e.g., an historic area that is a destination on that merit alone might warrant an area place)