Please be more careful in merging features - the roundabout at US 19/GA 26 was split into segments for a reason (to ensure relations were contiguous).

Also, please stop promoting residential streets and dirt roads to primary/secondary w/o verifying importance in field.

This changeset was largely in error, as can be seen using current NAIP imagery that shows a five-lane configuration of the Cochran bypass (and could have been verified from GDOT's own plan sheets).

You would need to refer to the TIGER 2008 documentation for the meaning of those tags.

See http://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/data/tiger/tgrshp2008/TGRSHP08.pdf and https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/data/tiger/tgrshp2008/tgrshp2008rl.pdf for details.

As the "dope" involved, here's my explanation:

Since there are reversible lanes, a single way with oneway=no with lanes:both_ways=2 is a more appropriate tagging format than a note on each directional way that it may have 2, 3, or 4 lanes depending on how the lanes are set up.

Since there is no physical barrier and there is a reversible lane, oneway=no with lanes:both_ways=2 is a more appropriate tagging format than a note on each directional way that it may have 2, 3, or 4 lanes depending on how the lanes are set up.

First, the description of this changeset is incorrect (Macon isn't Atlanta). Second, and perhaps more importantly, I'm not sure why you moved the alignment of this road since it hasn't actually moved in reality...

There is no need to add turn restrictions to block access to roads already tagged access=no.

These roads off Newell Road South do not appear to exist in reality. If they are platted, they should be highway=proposed.

Hi. This road does not exist yet and is unlikely to ever exist for environmental reasons (the Ocmulgee National Monument is being expanded into the area of the proposed route), so it should not be mapped in OSM, except possibly as highway=proposed. A route that has not been built should not be tagged with anything *except* highway=proposed (or if under construction, highway=construction).

I will retag appropriately.

I think it's all fixed now, along with a short segment of the road that was tagged access=no.

The boundary of Fayetteville. Now boundary relations are widely supported the corresponding multipolygons probably can go away.

Proposed road - shouldn't be tagged as if it is open to traffic.

Again, not open to traffic...

This route isn't open yet; please keep it tagged as "highway=construction" until open to traffic.

This route isn't open yet; please keep it tagged as "highway=construction" until open to traffic.

This route isn't open yet; please keep it tagged as "highway=construction" until open to traffic.

Paul: It was *your own edits* that deleted the lane counts. Reverting this changeset wouldn't fix that. See way/45846830/history and changeset/32790788

I concur with rickmastfan67. The lack of any pedestrian restrictions would also suggest this isn't a motorway. While pedestrians are occasionally permitted along a motorway-type facility (most commonly on bridges), it's almost always using a segregated pathway.

To wade in here a bit, I don't think the North American usage of the "highway=motorway" tag has ever required that a road have freeway characteristics from end to end, merely that the segments tagged as motorway have those characteristics for a reasonable length. I really don't think an appeal to "common usage" flies here.

In WA 500's case, it appears the freeway is interrupted by a segment with two at-grades for maybe 15% of its length from I-5 to Fourth Plain Blvd. This seems somewhat analogous to the case of US 71 in Kansas City, where NIMBY opposition has left a section of the route without full access control. How is it tagged? See osm.org/#map=14/39.0107/-94.5474

Fixed.