See changeset/178689582#map=22/40.7494986/-111.8614482&layers=V for those edits.

I think we're both partly right?
In this case, the building does in fact have two separate entrances, so semi_detached makes sense - but it would have to be side-by-side and not one street-facing and one in the back.

I often see buildings that are built as single-family houses converted to frankenstein apartment buildings, with one entrance giving access to the different apartments. Sometimes exterior stairs have been added to create a separate enrtrance to a second floor apartment. Those are usually one address with 1,2,3 or a,b,c for the individual apartments. Those are usually not split like this unless they have separate addresses.

So what I will do here is re-create the dual polygon and tag them as semi-detached, but properly side by side.

Thanks for catching me here.

Wonder if we can use https://deflock.me/map#map=12/40.738933/-111.860218

How do you recognize these? I’d like to keep an eye out for them.

Thanks tcarlisle. I've seen your edits around and they've been great so I was a little surprised.

I am curious how you found out about our meetups - I hope you can make it sometime! That would be great!

Hello tcarlisle,
From an experienced mapper like yourself, I would expect to see a more thoughtful and welcoming approach to judging a new mapper's first changes made to OSM. While I am sure there are mistakes made, it is obvious that this person has made a serious effort to add useful information to the map, and it seems clear that they spent quite a bit of time on this particular changeset. By dismissing all these changes without any comment or guidance, you have accomplished two things:
1. This mapper is unlikely to continue to contribute to OSM, and we are losing their unique knowledge and perspective they might otherwise contribute to what is our collaborative map.
2. The potentially useful parts of this new mappers efforts are now lost to all of us.
As the organizer of the OSM Utah meetups, I care about welcoming new mappers to our community, and it is actions like these that make my work all that much harder. I would love it if you would consider what impact your actions have on people taking their first steps contributing to OSM. Perhaps you can reach out to this mapper and explain what you think they did wrong and how they may contribute their knowledge instead? I have no particular knowledge of backcountry skiing nor the tagging involved, but I am sure there is a way to capture this data on our map.
Also, please consider joining our meetups sometime, we are at osmutah.org and meet on the first Tuesday of the month in Salt Lake City. We would love to welcome you there.

Sorry about the comment, it was supposed to say "many sidewalks around richfield"

Also check https://osmutah.org/ for local events if you're ever interested :)

Thanks for responding and no worries. I'm sure there's people who would offer to help if it's a lot of work to undo

"Managed forest" is not an appropriate tag for isolated urban trees. It would be better to just tag the individual trees as nodes. Please see the Wiki for guidance on forest tagging: landuse=forest

Fair enough. Thank you!

What's the status of the school of medicine demo / construction? Is demolition / construction already ongoing?

Hi,
Thanks for editing OSM!
In this changeset, you added parking areas based on older imagery (Bing). In most cases, the Esri World imagery is more recent in the Salt Lake City area. Please always check

Your edits overlaid on the older Bing imagery:


The newer Esri World imagery showing a new apartment building:


Thanks! If you're local to Salt Lake City, perhaps you would like to join our OSM Meetup sometime? We would love to have you. See https://www.meetup.com/openstreetmap-utah/ for the next one. Happy Mapping!

Hello,

I deleted your contribution as it does not add anything useful to the map. If you are new to OSM, please take some time to learn the basics of mapping by going to osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide

Thank you.

oops! thanks, I fixed it now.

That was careless of me. I re-drew the roads and did some other refinement in changeset/145424304#map=15/32.8301/-108.0831

good point, I changed it back in changeset/143982486

I agree that it is generally in very good shape and thank you for being a great steward of our shared OSM data!

I don't think 2100 S should be primary, I agree it's an important E-W corridor but it just doesn't have the significance or road layout a primary should have in my opinion. Also, it's not a state maintained road—of course this is not the primary criterion but I do see it as a supporting reason. For example 700 E north of 400 S is also not state maintained but I would not consider downgrading it for that reason alone.

Regarding 300 W / Beck Street - do you think it should be secondary rather than primary? I think I could live with that, the traffic volume is not that high in spite of its generous layout. It's still US-89 but its heyday is long behind us.

Related, I can't really decide where to have the cutoff between primary and secondary on the northern end of Redwood Rd, right now it's 700 N but I don't know where else would be better cutoff point.

Finally, are you keeping an eye on Bangerter? There's still a lot of upgrading going on but I have a feeling people keep changing parts of it from trunk to primary to motorway.. I haven't been paying attention since I'm not in that area very often, but it's worth keeping an eye on. Looking at it right now, I see it's motorway all the way up to 47th South. At least it's consistent, in the past it has been a patchwork of different classes.

Thanks for the discussion, enjoying it.

I mean keep it as secondary :)

Thanks for giving this some thought. I'm fine keeping it as tertiary, you're making good points. I am waiting to see what happens with the northernmost section of 500E.

Reconstruction of 200 S between 7th and State is almost done, reducing the road to two travel lanes, two dedicated bus lanes, and two bike lanes. I think it's currently a tertiary and I am inclined to keep it that way in spite of the reduced # of travel lanes—and probably a lower speed limit, although that hasn't been posted yet. It's still "more" than an unclassified I would say. Thoughts?