Sorry for the delay, been busy the past few days. No need to apologize! I do prefer using the wiki over Slack since it's way more transparent and leaves a permanent record of what's decided so that others can reference it later. Will take a look at the discussion there and respond when I have some time to look it over.

So far I finished Oregon and received no pushback at all (I don't think I got a single changeset comment in well over 200 changesets tbh). I take the lack of pushback as a sign that I'm doing something right :)

Do you have any specific concerns about any road? It's a very manual process and if I'm doing it right I should be able to answer why I upgraded any road that I did; it's not an automated upgrade with no thought put into it.

BTW I know that changing the classification of roads to and from trunk is controversial, hence I'm avoiding these too, although generally the trunk network in the western US is in a good spot already and I wouldn't make many changes at all even without this.

For rural areas and even some smaller urban areas, there are often no mappers who have ever gone through and looked at road classification at all. This led to inconsistent, nonsensical, or other classifications that were pretty clearly wrong. So this is more of a "first pass" in these areas just to get something on the board beyond automated tiger classifications or large bulk classifications. Will I always be right? Of course not; open to any modifications that anyone makes as long as it's justified.

Tertiary (again in Yakima proper only) is done. The outskirts still need work, but Yakima itself west of the river should now be pretty consistent with how the roads are classified relative to how they actually function (rather than how they "feel" or "look", which is not how we should be classifying).

One other primary change: probably one of Yakima Avenue between 16th and I-82, or the Lincoln/MLK one way pair between 16th and I-82, should be upgraded to primary. I'm not sure which though. I generally favor one-way pairs since they're almost always more efficient at moving traffic, but there are certainly arguments for Yakima too. Interested in your thoughts on if one, both, or neither should be upgraded.

In another changset here changeset/185197164 I've taken a stab at secondary in Yakima itself (I haven't worked through any roads near Naches or Tieton yet or similar). I still have to do a tertiary changeset, and I can already see there are a lot of residential or unclassified roads that will need upgrading.

Seems like roads were pretty generally underclassified here ever since the change was made to the road classification rules that the long-distance through routes should be upgraded to trunk. This freed up primary to be used for the most important roads in the cities, secondary for the next tier of roads, and tertiary for the next tier above residential/unclassified.

I also need to go through and re-examine secondary classification in a future changeset later today; I agree that secondary/tertiary isn't consistent right now but that's because I haven't gotten to it yet :) Roads like Ahtanum Road should certainly be upgraded to secondary too and I will later.

I'm totally fine re-upgrading 1st to primary; that's a pretty borderline one for me and certainly wouldn't be upset either way.

The reason I split Summitview at 40th is that Summitview east of 40th only really serves as the access road to a few neighborhoods there. However, Summitview west of 40th is THE major access road to all of Yakima west of 40th: it's the fastest way to get there from pretty much anywhere else. It serves a much more important purpose (and has higher traffic counts to support this) than any of the other surrounding roads. It's also the road between Yakima and all the communities to the northwest like Tieton, being more direct than highway 12 to most of them.

On your continuity comment, all of the others that I upgraded seem pretty continuous? The exception is Washington, which I made primary only between 40th and 16th since that part is the main route to western Yakima from I-82 (along with Valley Mall Drive). The part east of 16th is not part of this route, and the part west of 40th isn't either; secondary feels right for those parts.

Joseph R P is entirely correct here. Flap Slimy Outward, we are repeatedly having to advise you on the same things over and over again. Please take the advice you've been given in multiple changeset comments by multiple people to heart. We all make mistakes, but it's important that you learn from those mistakes, and I'm not seeing that learning over time.

...and I believe that wraps up a multi-month first pass across all of Oregon to fix up road classifications! I certainly didn't get it all right and open to any changes that people have, but should be in a much better shape than before.

https://geology.utah.gov/map-pub/survey-notes/rock-glaciers-reminders-of-a-glacial-past-and-dynamic-landforms-in-a-warming-future/ here's a source that details more

Yeah this is more of an OSM rendering thing. So these aren't "true" glaciers but rather rock glaciers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_glacier gives a good intro to them. These are glaciers in the sense that there is indeed flowing glacier ice, but it's buried under a layer of talus. Note the glacier type tag that I added of "rock", which is designed to capture this.

Ideally the OSM renderer wouldn't render these like actual "true" glaciers, because like you say they're not visible from the surface. But that's more of an issue with the OSM rendering than with the tagging, which is accurate.

And once you know what you're looking for, rock glaciers have pretty telltale signs on satellite imagery. The rock glacier under American Fork Twin Peaks probably shows this best: there is a clear toe/moraine that you can see at the end where the ice flow ends, and you can see what look almost like ripples on the surface of the rock.

The Lexington/Heppner area is probably big enough that it should be served by a primary road. OregonDOT traffic counts data indicate that OR 207 from the north is by far the most common route into the area. The OR 19 route also makes a lot of sense coming from the west (more-so than the direct OR 74 route since the latter is very slow and winding).

I had trouble avoiding a primary spur into Heppner though. The only real possible candidates are OR 74 to the east (way too circuitous and curvy to the point that going around via OR 207 is faster), Forest Road 53 to the east (a seasonal road that's closed most of the year), and OR 206/207 to the south (also both very circuitous/windy with almost no traffic). None of those make any sense to upgrade to primary, so a primary spur it is.

Whoops! Appreciate you catching that and fixing it; thanks!

Whoops, meant to say didn't exist, not did exist in my first sentence

If I-84 did exist, I would agree that US 30 would be trunk. However, I-84 does exist, and fully bypasses it for any through traffic. And I agree that the road is the only one going through the town...of 500 people. A town of 500 people is not a destination that needs to be served by a primary road at all. There's not a precise cutoff, but generally I use around 1000-2000 people as the cutoff for whether a town should be served by a primary road.

Take the town of Sumpter, Oregon as an example. It's a town in the middle of nowhere with a population of 200 people. I don't think anyone would argue that the one highway serving it should be upgraded to primary. And this is a similar example.

Could you explain why you upgraded a route that only serves a tiny town of 500 people to primary? US 30 here is absolutely not a major cross-country highway; it's been fully supplanted by I-84 for cross country travel.

Once I work through to this area in the Oregon highway classification work I'm doing right now, I will be downgrading this to secondary again.

This was a really hard one to get "right", as western Bend has a bunch of roads with roughly equal importance, quality, and traffic. I tried my best to make the primary/secondary/tertiary distinction in the area, but any and all refinements from others would be super helpful and welcome.

Wikipedia is not a reliable source for information on exact highway routings. Ground signage and state databases (https://maps.udot.utah.gov/uplan_data/documents/HRO/ for Utah) are much more reliable, although still not infallible.

Exactly. The only reason this stretch of road is primary is that it serves as the northbound off-ramp from I-15 to 3300 S. In fact, the fact that we have incomplete interchanges here is the only reason why it's primary. If there were an on-ramp to access 3300 S directly from I-15 northbound then that would be the primary route.

The reason this road is primary is that there is no corresponding interchange to 3300 S from northbound I-215 to the one from southbound I-215. 3300 S is the primary road in the area, and this part of Wasatch Boulevard serves as the access to 3300 S from I-215. Reverting this change as it breaks this primary connectivity (and the related change that upgrades 3900 S to primary since it doesn't serve a primary function here)