Hey, I'm a local mapper from Folsom. I saw that a review was requested, so I'm giving a review.

It looks like Greenback was changed in this section from being a divided road or in other words a dual carriageway (osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway). The only time it's appropriate to map roads as a dual carriageway is if there is a physical barrier that prevents vehicles from turning across the road. At this section, I think it is actually possible for vehicles to turn left across the road, so this section of the road should probably be changed back to not be a dual carriageway so that driving directions can be given that shows it is possible to make a left turn across the road and into the various business areas.

changeset/185384468, lol, I don't know how to link to changesets

See changest 185384468.

Hello there. It looks like this changeset deleted 2 ways that were a part of country borders. I partially reverted this changeset and restored the 2 deleted ways in 185384468.

According to the OSM Wiki (foot=*), the foot tag should be used when there is a legal restriction on walking. A more appropriate way of tagging this would be to add tags such as "lanes", "maxspeed", "width", "sidewalk" or "traffic_calming" that indicate the overall level of traffic stress of a road.

Reverted in changeset/184034508.

This is an interesting edit. I biked on the road without issues a few months ago and don't remember seeing any signs saying foot or bike travel was prohibited on the road.

Source: https://southgaterecandpark.gov/wp-content/uploads/Southgate-Facilities-Map-2022.pdf

This is exciting to see you working on rivers! I'm been addicted to improving stuff by looking at https://waterwaymap.org/, but have mainly been focused in California. There's a lot of work to do up in BC, so happy mapping to you!

Source: https://data.sacog.org/datasets/SACOG::sacog-regional-centerline/about

Source: https://data.sacog.org/datasets/SACOG::sacog-regional-centerline/about

Source: https://data.sacog.org/datasets/SACOG::sacog-regional-centerline/about

It looks like some cycle lanes are added as separate ways, but they aren't necessarily separated from the rest of the roadway. Also some of the roads are already tagged with cycleway=lane. I think some of these ways should probably removed according to how things are described in cycleway=*.

Hello again. Just checking in about this. I'm wanting to make some mass edits to remove the "bicycle=yes" tags on various service roads where this value is implied. I'd be happy to chat if you feel strongly about this.

Oh cool, you're also a Wandrer user! I just signed up this month.

I think there may be a difference of opinion here on what counts on Wandrer and what doesn't. According to https://wandrer.earth/filters, it says "...generally highway=trunk, trunk_link, footway, service, and bridleway are removed [from the list of roads]".

I think it'd be good to have some alignment around whether these particular roads should count or not on Wanderer. You're right that they allow riding, but it seems like a better remedy here is to try to change Wandrer's algorithm instead of making these edits. The data in OpenStreetMap shows up not only in Wandrer but all other applications that consume OpenStreetMap data too, so this may have some other unintentional side effects.

Btw, there's a discussion on Strava about this if you want to jump in: https://strava.app.link/1Nv0R2qzrUb

Hi there. I see in a lot of changesets you are adding explicit bicycle=yes and foot=yes to roads where the implied values for these are already "yes". Is there a specific reason you're adding these values? Seems like it may not be necessary.

Haha, ok. I'll try to keep the edits somewhat light.

I hadn't heard of this editor before, so I tried it out and it's pretty neat! Thanks for mapping in my area!

Hello fellow local building mapper! I like your edits!

Keep up the good work! It's so fun to see another local mapper pick up where I left off!

Nice work! The USGS 3D Elevation Program is a game changer for mapping streams in forests!