Landuse in Detroit area

Communities United States
,
1

Hey guys,
I’m currently filling some landuse gaps in Metro Detroit and reached the “empty” areas. Where a lot of building got demolished (see: OpenStreetMap). Those empty residential plots are mapped as landuse=grass. If you view the area with Mapbox aerials, you notice there are actual more of them than mapped.

How do you guys think about adding the whole area as landuse=residential even though in many areas the plots are empty? I’m struggling a bit due to the “primary” criteria of picking the landuse

2

Depending on how well it’s cleared, I do either landuse=grass or landuse=brownfield for empty lots within a city. I specifically want underutilized areas to be colored different. I often don’t do it when it’s an empty lot in a subdivision.

3

I guess my question is, would you consider the whole subdivision still as landuse=residential even though 40% are empty plots.

4

Depends on whether it is named and signed or has any functioning HOA amenities. My inclination in these older-style suburban neighborhoods would be to map unused plots as grass or brownfield.

5

are empty plots abandoned or unused grass areas and disused or used as recreation areas/parks etc?

Poland has areas that have similar patterns of buildings (for entirely different dysfunctional reasons) and we map patchwork of landuse=residential in such cases.

6

I’m a long-time Detroit area land use mapper who has worked with the city’s data team. Great to have other editors working in the areas!

Based on regional conventions on the US side, and what I know to be helpful for local uses, my recommendations are:

  1. Include formerly residential, vacant lots within residential areas. Tag adjoining abandoned lots with grass tags, rather than excluding from residential land use.
  2. Wherever possible, align residential land use areas with platted subdivisions.
    The canonical source is Michigan’s plat map database, but these maps are not georeferenced. Many municipalities have local sources, but the City of Detroit does not, which is one reason its land use coverage is patchy.
  3. Do not attach land use areas to streets (I believe OSM conventions are not consistent here, but that is the regional convention)
3 Likes
7

That’s how I ended in the area. Stumbled about “glued” landuses in Hamtramck and started to separating them from the highways.

Sounds reasonable. So far I tried to fill either open patches or added them by block.

8

I’ve moved past accepting this (do not glue landuse to centerline features EXCEPT features that are themselves boundaries e.g. fence) and debating whether the landuse should go to the road kerb or to somewhere past the public sidewalk – I have ended up currently in favor of going to the road kerb because the garden strip between the sidewalk and the kerb is still part of the resident responsibilities

9

Convention for Detroit metro is to stop at the parcel boundary. The Hamtramck land use predates efforts to standardize.

Here are two useful services to trace with:

  1. Georeferenced plats and parcels (best subdivsion data)
  2. Current parcel boundaries
1 Like