Hi, The two cycleways you added, Way: 1205513310 and Way: 1205513325 are already mapped as cycleway:left=lane on both sections of Alderman Road. Your cycleways are duplicating the existing cycleways so I've removed them. They also duplicated sections of the roundabouts as well.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your new road duplicates the line of an existing highway thus disrupting routing. It's OSM practice to amend/correct the existing object, not draw over it. I've removed your duplicated highway.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, part of your new way, Way: 1205241348, duplicated an existing highway and also joined to the highway above the tunnel, The footway from Old Warren is situated on the existing track, it's also a PRoW not a permissive footway. I've made amendments to correct this.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Can you please explain why you've mapped areas of footway over gardens, hedges, and buildings?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, your new track duplicated an existing highway so I've removed it. I've transferred your tags to the existing highway. That section of Monkton Lane is a public highway and can be used on foot, cycle, and by horse, so to say it's impassable is subjective.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Thanks for responding, I haven't made any changes, (while awaiting your response). From what you say though, I think the changeset should be reverted which I've now done. If I can help further please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, These three footways are placed on top of and joined onto an existing highway. The existing highway is tagged as layer=-1, this would not make for correct routing. The existing highway is tagged as foot=yes. So I wonder if the footpath and existing service highway are a single-way? Thus the footpath should not be mapped as a separate object. In any case there is now a duplication of highways that should be resolved.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Just to let you know that a house name is not derived from the number and road name. Therefore names like 11 Larkin Close are incorrect and should be removed.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that you inadvertently duplicated some sections of highways here. This also resulted in the duplication of some route relation sections. Namely Way: Barton-upon-Humber Junction (682638461), Way: Barton-upon-Humber Junction (682638455) and Way: Ferriby Road (151043135). I think I've got it all corrected so no problem. You have to be extra careful when relations on highways are involved.

Regards Bernard.

Reverted to re-align many dragged highways

Hi, Land use should be mapped as areas, not nodes. Thus these nodes are meaningless. The nodes should be removed and the areas should be mapped.

Regards Bernard.

Regards Bernard.

Hi Many roads are dragged out of alignment and many road sections are duplicated. As this disrupts routing I've reverted the changeset.

Regards Bernard.

Roads dragged out of alignment, so I've reverted the changeset.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You dragged Launder Close oa long way out of proper alignment. This was highlighted in the warnings given above. Please heed these warnings as often the problem highlighted disrupts routing as this one did.

I've reverted the changeset.

Regards Bernard.

Duplicated highway removed and existing highway joined to Church Road.

Hi, I didn't dispute the existence of a road, it can clearly be seen on imagery used legitimately by OSM.

As I said by all means add it without any reference to Google Maps. I see you have now done this, thanks for your contribution.

The reference to Google Maps as a source would have left OSM in breach of Google Maps copyright.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You state a source as Google maps.
We are not allowed to use Google Maps as a source of data for OSM as that would violate Google's terms of service. Their data is copyrighted, so that you must not use it for other things without an explicit agreement with Google. Thus I've reverted this changeset.

If you know the area and have walked by to gain knowledge of the road, this would be the best possible source of data to add to OSM.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I wonder is the new road connected to Church Road? If so then the end node should be joined to Church Road. It also looks like there might be a gate on the imagery just in The Paddocks. If so it should be added with any restriction tagged.

Regards Bernard.

Hi yes you are correct. double left click at the point to be sectioned, (this creates a white dot), while the cursor is over the white dot right click, use/click the scissor icon to split in two the highway line at that point. Repeat as necessary, make/amend the tags on the new section. This action works to split any linear or polygon line/outline.

If I can help further please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I saw your help forum post and took a look here. Your speed limit tags are OK, but there are other problems. There are now three sections (triplication) of the North Lecanto Highway that you edited.

It would be very difficult to explain in writing so I'll just make a correction to remove the extra way sections. I'll make sure the route relation on it is maintained.

One question though, does the 45mph maxspeed extend south to the Gulf To Lake Highway? If so this should be tagged as well.

Regards Bernard.