Hi, "Christopher Columbus Highway Local Roadway" is not an acceptable name per osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

If we want to have a multipolygon that has both parcels in it, name it Oscawana Park or equivalent, and tag it as a protected area with the relevant ownership/operator tags, I suppose I could support that. It should have a description about how it includes both the Oscawana Island Nature Preserve and McAndrews Estate. But the east parcel would keep name=McAndrews Estate on its way.

The parking area has a sign in front of the entrance to the west parcel, yes. And that reads "Oscawana Island Nature Preserve". And the trail map that was at the entrance to the east parcel was not phrased in any way to suggest that it was only talking about the history; it explicitly said "Welcome to the McAndrews Estate".

I was there last week, and there is no signage to indicate that the east parcel is named Oscawana Park. In contrast, at the information board at the teal trailhead, there previously was a trail map that said "welcome to the McAndrews Estate". Since the park has been somewhat neglected, that information board is now blank, but the east parcel is consistently referred to as the McAndrews Estate.

Legally, it is the case that both the west and east parcels are owned by the county together as "Oscawana County Park"; however the situation on the ground is that the two parcels are treated somewhat separately.

Reverted in changeset/181024481

Hi,

Did you consult the community for this large mechanical edit? It appears unlikely that you checked every single piece of roadway and made sure that this name was actually commonly used.

Hi,

I've just bumped route 15 back to primary because it is part of the NHS. Often times these routes get mapped as trunks, as was the case here prior to your edit. However, since I am unfamiliar with the area, and since this looks like a more minor NHS route, primary could be acceptable too. Secondary is probably too low though.

Hi,

The general rule is that lanes should only be mapped as separate ways if there is a physical separation between them. If they are only divided by paint, there should just be one way for the whole road; to map a turning lane, split the way and add lanes=* and turn:lanes=* as appropriate for the section with the turning lane.

I see now, that's good. The way refs should still probably only be CA 99 though, especially in this case where the possible Interstate designations are not really very far along.

Hi,

This probably shouldn't go in ref=*. fut_ref=* on the ways should be fine, but the ideal way to do this would be a route relation with network=US:I:Future

Also see discussion here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/planned-edit-to-re-tag-descriptive-names-in-road-route-relations-in-the-united-states/108454

Hello,

I see that you moved "New York State Route 9A" from the description=* tag to the name=* tag. For road routes, there is some amount of agreement that name=* shouldn't be used like this, since it is just a description of what is in the ref=* tag. See more here (the "Interstate 5" example): osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Hello,

Please be sure to only map turn restrictions when they are actually signed on the ground. Some of the restrictions you've created look like you just figured that cars shouldn't do that, but this is usually not enough to add a turn restriction.

Generally, in cases like the I-91/CT-159 interchange, I feel that it is better to not change the classification of the connecting road (Meadow Road in this case). The ground truth is that CT-159 is the primary road, and you have to get off onto a side street to access it. If we tag the side street as primary, this information is lost, or at least obscured. I would be more okay with giving highway=tertiary to this particular segment, but if it was really a residential street with houses on either side, I think it should stay as highway=residential.

In contrast, I am okay with tagging the side street higher if it is the beginning/end of a route of that classification. For example, this segment connecting I-84 to the primary route on CT-34 should stay as-is: way/411203807 . This is especially the case if a numbered route of that classification is signed along the ramp and side street.

I don't know if I agree with highway implying line geometry; I think it's just usually true. In this case, highway=rest_area is only supposed to be used on nodes and closed ways, so it seems kind of redundant to include area=yes. Data consumers should just refrain from using objects with tags that they don't understand, even if they have a general rule for the key (i.e. don't treat a rest area as a routable highway)

You are still responsible for the data that you upload. If you see a conflict resolver then you need to actually try to resolve the conflict instead of just overwriting good data that others uploaded.

If you want to avoid edit conflicts, then try to edit fewer things at a time and try to not take too long from the time you download the data to when you upload. In this case, you could have done one changeset per route, for example.

Hi,

Running through a town like this does not disqualify a road from being trunk. If the road should be trunk on both sides of the town (in this case US-206 on the north and NJ-54 on the south), then it should probably be trunk inside the town too, even if traffic would normally go slower.

Hi,

Overall, this looks good. I did change the end of PA-33 from trunk to motorway_link, which I think is more appropriate here. I also changed the short segment of PA-423 leading to I-380 back to secondary; in most cases I think it is better not to upgrade these kinds of short segments just because it leads to a highway, but especially so in this case because people following the primary route would continue north to the next interchange instead.

I am not from the area, so I'm not familiar with the road you upgraded from tertiary to secondary. From the tags on it, it seems like TIGER thought it is a state route; is this the case? If so, then yes, it should probably be secondary. Otherwise, I would make it secondary if it is a particularly important local or county route.

The one last thing is please try to keep your changesets contained to one area. In this case, you edited a road in Maine in addition to the main edits in Pennsylvania. If you made the Maine edit a separate changeset, it would have made the bounding box much smaller and wouldn't grab the attention of people monitoring recent changesets as much.

Hi,

What was your motivation for using highway=living_street for the streets in Delilah Terrace?: way/28664205

From aerial imagery at least, these look like pretty normal residential streets.

Hi,

Looks like you created this node which doesn't look quite right: node/10827927927

Were you getting this data from some other source?