Awesome, thanks for the edit! Based on aerial imagery, it looks like that 3rd lane is a center turn lane, like it is south of the segment you edited. I added some more tags to indicate a center lane, but let me know if that's not the case anymore.

Thanks again, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Note: more than 7 mapwithai-derived features in this changeset. The JOSM plugin had trouble with tags when uploading to an existing changeset.

Thanks for the contribution. Is "Consign Design" furniture shop still here, or was it replaced?

Okay, I moved leisure=playground to the line and deleted the relation. In my experience iD often isn't great about adding unnecessary relations automatically. I think this sometimes happens when you hit "combine features" with an area selected. Not sure.

Happy mapping!

Awesome, thank you for confirming. I updated the business.

Happy mapping!

Thanks. The menu you linked suggests that this place might be called "OMG! Burger"

Could you review this?

Thanks, welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Hey, I noticed that you mapped the playground as a single-member multipolygon relation, and the outer line as a sand surface. Was that intentional, and if so why? Can't you apply the playground tags directly to the way, along with surface=sand? Or am I missing something?

Thanks!

Hey there! Thanks for all the contributions you've been making.

Your changeset comment caught my attention because you mentioned "street view". To clarify, Google's Street View unfortunately cannot be used to add data to OpenStreetMap under most circumstances due to licensing concerns.

However, Microsoft has granted permission for Bing Streetside imagery to be used for OpenStreetMap. iD can show Bing imagery within the editor (Map Data > Photo Overlays > Bing Streetside).

Can you confirm whether or not you are using Google-owned imagery? Or are you referring to Bing imagery as Street View?

Please see osm.wiki/Legal_FAQ#Contributing for more info.

Thanks again for the contributions, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Oh, never mind, this looks like it was fixed. I had the wrong changeset number. My apologies.

I updated this trail to abandoned:highway=path.

Thanks! If the trail is still there, though, it probably should be replaced with a disused:highway=path or abandoned:highway=path tag instead. That way, OpenStreetMap will be true to what is on the ground (one of the policies), while also not displaying the trail in most renderers. See osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F for further reading if you're interested.

Thanks again for your contribution, and please let me know if you have any questions!

Hey @VLD280, what leads you to believe this is an informal crosswalk? It looks like a legal crosswalk to me.

Thank you for the information, this looks good! Welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Thank you for this information. Contributions from locals with local knowledge are very valuable for improving the map.

Since this is an abandoned trail, not a removed one, it's more appropriate to mark is as abandoned (abandoned:highway)=* than to delete it. I've added the trail back as an abandoned trail.

Please see osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F and osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix for more info, and feel free to ask any questions here.

Thanks again, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Thank you for your concern about the local environment. However, deleting a trail in OpenStreetMap is unfortunately not the correct way to address this issue.

Is this trail publicly owned/operated (i.e. managed by the local government), or is this private property? Depending on the situation on the ground, there may be better ways to help this issue.

Please see osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F for more information.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Thank you for your review @Cookie Guru and thanks for the edits @Fatimah Abanur. If you provide more details, we would be happy to help get this mapped correctly.

Looks like you swapped the building and address unit tags on the node and building. I switched those around for you, thanks for the info!

It doesn't look like address coverage is very good in this apartment complex (though it's generally fairly good within Seattle, so I'm not sure what happened here). That unfortunately means the delivery drivers' maps might not be using OpenStreetMap (though they might be combining OSM with another data source...), so I'm not sure this will drastically improve your delivery service.

But thanks for the contribution anyway! Welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Hey there! I haven't gone through and done a full review, but these changes look okay so far. That said, in the future, it's helpful for other mappers if you try to keep the changes you make in a single changeset within a relatively small area, and limit the number of changes in a changeset.

Are you new to OpenStreetMap?

Happy mapping!

Several months later, as a more experienced mapper, I now realize that this changeset was in error: micro-mapping of parking stalls is a real thing. Sorry!

changeset/171857575

haha, it took a while for somebody to notice way/1414386787 (see note/4952611). But please don't map made-up things in the future, we don't want to start a trend of vandalism.