Thanks for adding. Sorry though - looks like we collided, I ended up merging your data with the building with other info, just in case you noticed your addition disappear.

I think you got the speed limit right in a previous changeset but this one looks broken. Going to revert it.

Thank you for the data. Yeah this is confusing, seems the city has changed their minds on the direction. Just hoping they add signs that direct traffic in the right direction as it would seem due to meadow lane and the possibly private unnamed service road ( way/802949936 ) that all traffic should turn south on electric when heading west on nason, but it doesn't appear signed either. Oh well. Confusing!

Hi, in respect with Nason Parkway way/12307028 curious what was the source data, looking at 2025 satellite imagery this road was 2-way . Was it changed within the past year and a half or so? What I don't get is whether traffic is all supposed to go south on Electric or something?
The road looks about wide enough to support 2 way traffic though if people want to park on the side, that's another story...

What was the point of the empty object node/13951236102 ?

node/12699172377 - if it's "permanent" what is its name? Same as node/13226666144 ?
ugh will I need to drive here and look?
Usually food trucks are not mapped.

IMHO the names are not really names, they're references when someone is buried in a specific section... so perhaps it should be ref=15 vs name="section 15"?

Hi I noticed you have barrier=no on way/593277687 and perhaps on its other carriageway which IMHO not very good style. Usually these barriers are on points, and if it's on a way, it's a fence. But this is neither a point or a fence, it's a road, probably should not tag it as =no. Yes this is just my opinion but it's the same reason we don't have building=no on non-buildings.

There was a note about this note/5298126 - I'm unfortunately not in this area so I don't know what the locals call it, but I've never heard it called an island and thus this can be confusing. What was the source of this designation?

Hi, was inspecting way/1510382977 and as the note note/5266355 said, this is a mini-roundabout and should not be split up with flares or a circular path because ...well, they don't exist, and this probably should be reverted. Was this not the case and there was a non-traversable circle in the roundabout?

This is a bad edit and will be reverted.

IMHO I don't think trees should be part of a relation for a residential area even though it might not be a place to live. By the fact that the tree area is "inside" the polygon for the residential area, by default they are related since they can't move...
Also the two springs park is now no longer a residential park as it's "not part" of the residential neighborhood (implying people not part of the neighborhood are free to drive there and use it) so I'd also leave that out of the multipolygon relation. But that's my two cents.

Isn't this duplicate of node/8089966550 ? Perhaps need to merge the two or something

forgot to also indicate for reviewers: also removed some roads that aren't showing up in recent satellite imagery.

Chances are it will not be residential in a retail area...

I'd probably not have the name of the establishment on the building since it's also on the landuse, it's assumed that all buildings inside of a landuse is related so it's redundant (and carto renders it funny with the name listed twice)... just a comment about naming...

I just noticed that the "bank" at way/1265437036 (see note tag and https://locators.bankofamerica.com/co/fortcollins/atm-fort-collins-111015.html) that was merged into a building is only an ATM, and probably should not have been made into a way and kept as a POI... revert?

Thanks! Sorry I started making some changes but then noticed you got some so I abandoned my edits so we don't collide.
Thanks again for taking care of it all!

urk. Should use ref=x instead the "descriptive name" of name="building x"

Just wanted to let you know that King Soopers near Drake & College was already mapped and you added another duplicate POI... did you have data where it didn't exist?