Hi, I've removed these three highways as they are duplications of existing highways that are part of relations:-
Way: Ashwell Street (1315770427), Way: Ashwell Street (1315770428) Way: Ashwell Street (1315770426)

Duplicated highway removed.

Hi, I've removed long lengths of duplicated footpaths you added and corrected all of the warnings given above.

Please don't draw a highway on top of an existing highway, it disrupts routing. I a highway needs correcting please correct/amend the existing highway.

Regards Bernard.

Way: 1315295747

Duplicated features removed

Hello David,
I've reverted the changeset so all is now well with routing, there are no duplicated highways.

As for the query about segregated cycleway. Regarding Way: Sheffield Road (449060625) which has the tag cycleway:both=track, (and any similarly tagged highway), the tag sidewalk=both could be added. This would then indicate that the road has a separated cycleway track and a seperated/segregated sidewalk on both sides. The tags can be adjusted (left, right, both) to suit the circumstances, the road would need to be section up to allow for any changes in sidewalk or cycleway. Please see: cycleway=track and sidewalk=* for more details.

I don't have local knowledge so can't attempt such changes. If you want to have a go keep in touch via email by clicking on BCNorwich above.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I now see that your new cycleway Way: 1314420827 is tagged as layer=-1 which means it's below ground level. Please see layer=*

Regards Bernard.

Hi David, The cycleway section you refer to has been drawn on it's right and separate from the main carriageway. Woodburn Road is not tagged as having a cycleway on either side.

To make your Sheffield Road Cycleway similar to the Attercliffe Cycleway you would have to amend the relevant sections of highways that are tagged as osm.wiki/Tag:cycleway:both=, cycleway:left= and/or osm.wiki/Tag:cycleway:right=. You would also have to amend/correct the Relation: Rotherham Local Cycle Network (17613385), relation/17613385 . You would have to amend/correct all the places where the Sheffield Road Cycleway crosses over other highways, making the correct crossing description tag if possible. Bear in mind also that there might be complaints from the folks that mapped the existing cycleway, which I don't see as incorrect.

I wouldn't want to do the above, thus my suggestion to revert the changeset.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I wonder has the warehouse and the parking building been built? If so, there are problems in that the buildings are partly on top of highways, roads and a footpath.

Or is this a proposed site?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've retagged the premises disused:amenity=school as per OSM practice.

Hi, You have 90 warnings about highway problems here as stated above. Also you later drew a building directly on top of some of the footpaths.

Can you please correct these problems?

Regards Bernard.

Node removed, the islet is already mapped, and I've added your new tags to the existing islet.

Reverted, the hotel and the several bars/restaurants are already mapped.

Reverted duplication.

The boundary already exists and the relevant relations hold the descriptive tags. I've reverted/removed.

Deleted highway reinstated.

Requested Review, There are many problems mostly your addition of fiction. I'll revert the changeset.

Please don't add fiction or corrupt the database.

Regards Bernard.

Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I know you have good intentions for adding Sheffield Road Cycleway but unfortunately, there are many problems. There are 18 warnings of crossing highways as stated above. This is because a large part of the new highway (SRC) is placed on top of the existing cycleway. Also in places the cycleway presence is tagged of the main highway, (cycleway:both=track). You've drawn the cycleway crossing several roads without a joining to them. Also the cycleway has been joined to underground cables.

For these reasons I think it's best to revert this changeset. I can do the revert for you if you wish?

Regards Bernard.

The changeset was reverted as FP 5 was already mapped.

Hi, I've reverted this changeset as FP 16 is already mapped.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've reverted this changeset because the highway you added was already mapped. Thus, the new highway was a duplication that could disrupt routing.

Could you explain what you were trying to do, perhaps I could help.

Regards Bernard.