These are private driveways that shouldn't have a name

Oops, this is Dry Creek Ranch

I think some of these are townhomes, not apartments, like way/1239161753#map=19/43.54786/-116.31669

At this point I'm blaming iD for introducing these duplicated nodes

🎉🥳

Tagging as a path implies motor_vehicle=no. You should only tag access if there is a sign posted. I am guessing no signs (or maybe a sign allowing bikes), so no access tags needed (or maybe bicycle=yes).

access=no means it is illegal

You should not tag things like way/1238485225 with horse=no unless there is a sign posted that forbids horses. I know this is not the case.

Congratulations on your 2000th changeset!

I definitely make sure to disable features I'm not working on. I'll turn off streets when checking my work next time. I'll also draw the portion of sidewalk fronting each road separately. In my area, I just keep drawing until I make a loop or come across a gap. It works fine for us, but it does result in ridiculousness like way/884016012

I am new to mapping sidewalks in this level of detail and don't yet have a workflow for ensuring I remember to split the sidewalks along each street. If Cropsey was in the area for this task I must have somehow missed it when checking completion.

Relation with no type or tags relation/16794387

What is the meaning of highway=yes on way/817308429?

What is meant by leisure=*?

Upon further inspection, it does not serve Viewmont, but it does not appear to be owned by the HOA

Then the residential streets should be tagged ownership=private. I am pretty sure that the alley is public because it serves Viewmont.

Accidentally overwrote my changeset message and submitted before I meant to

I think it is okay to tag like:

name=Brown Jug
ref=251
branch=Muldoon

But branch name is not so important... can probably leave it off

98444

Is it really a private alley, with a "no trespassing" sign that is legally posted? It appears to be a public right of way.

No, it is a private residence and should be deleted