Why did you move the tags for the Emery from the landuse=residential polygon to the building polygon?

Also, you across the street, you may have combined two Ways with highway=service, so now you have the tag service=driveway;parking_aisle. It should be one or the other and not both. Pick either service=driveway or service=parking_aisle. iD does not warn you when combining ways.

I think the number is actually wrong. I think roads are assumed to have at least 16 or 17 feet of clearance unless otherwise signed. I'll make a note to double check for signs sometime.

The maxheight tag on the Broadway bridge is specified as: 16'12"
Is there a reason this is not just?: 17'
JOSM was throwing a warning and then I realized that there are 12 inches in a foot.

We might as well leave it as-is. It doesn't really fit exactly with any of the highway classes. After poking around I did find some other bus-only roads in North America that are marked highway=tertiary.

No worries. I'll merge the data at some point. There's a utility plugin for JOSM which adds a "Replace Geometry" function which can be used to easily merge tags from a Node to a closed Way.

If you search for "busway" on the main OSM site, it looks like most of the results are highway=service.

It looks like you've got some duplicate data here. I've added a few building polygons with addr tags on them and then you've put a point inside them with duplicate information. Please merge the tags from the nodes to the closed ways.

I'm not sure why the Transport Map has a lot of route ref's missing. They were there a few months ago and the route data hasn't changed much since then. I sent a message to Andy Allen (the creator of the Tranport Layer) to see if he knows what's going on.

There's another public transport map which shows more detail:

http://www.openbusmap.org/?zoom=15&lat=45.51434&lon=-122.6853&layers=TBTTT

What's the rationale for marking these roads as tertiary? It seems counterintuitive to have a road that is limited to bus traffic marked as tertiary.

This import added a lot of duplicate water features. Is there any plans to merge the duplicate data?

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

Reverted in changeset/33962020 per discussion on changeset/33931834

The Transport layer is aware of the new public_transport tagging. It does take a day or two for the transport layer to be updated, so changes are not immediate like the standard and humanitarian layers. Last time I checked, the ref tag on the route relation was used by the transport layer. For some roads that have a lot of bus routes, you might not see all of them. I'll revert the changes and then we can reexamine the transport layer in a few days.

Adding additional bus routes is on my todo list (SMART, C-Tran, TCTD, YCTA, etc).