motor_vehicle=yes means the public can drive their car through there, if there's a locked gate then it would be motor_vehicle=private.

Imagery isn't clear but there looks like there may be a gate near Acacia Road.

Is this a shared path that both bicycles and pedestrians can use? We should set the access tags, `foot` and `bicycle` access=* to provide both access if that's the case on the ground.

was it intentional to remove highway=track on this one https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/538859620

relation/16094298 there does not appear to be a Nature Reserve named Kogolup Lake Nature Reserve. Where did this name come from?

Thomsons Lake Nature Reserve is already mapped and named at relation/12942872

hi, please see osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property for why we don't delete roads on private property.

In this case I've updated the tags to mark it as a private driveway.

It seems like it should be "Cubbie" not "Cubie"?

the operator values shouldn't include square brackets

why are there bbq's at the station exit?

the full length can be left, but the way can be split and tagged with access=private if there's no public access at all...

way/1448328912

I think if it's natural woodlands over a larger area but the nature of the trees there is that they are sparse then it's fine, but in a metro park or in this case a cemetery where there are graves underneath I think a natural=wood area like this is incorrect and mapping for the renderer, and it should be done via natural=tree nodes for each tree.

note/4971581 says there's no barrier where you added one, but no photo, so might need another survey....

I've removed the duplicate road, and split the original way where you describe the 50 limit change and set that for the town section. Feel free to take a look and improve if needed.

you've already set the speed limit on way/462198936 which is where it needs to be set.
way/1447829950 created a duplicate road

I've finished restoring the original highway ways here to retain the history osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history and restore the lost tags (like maxspeed etc).

Bing imagery isn't aligned here, please check the GPS traces layer for alignment.

Bing imagery here has an offset, which needs to be accounted for if mapping against it, this can be checked via the GPS traces layer. Furthermore I believe service=alley was correct per service=alley

due to this I've reverted this changeset.

...also chiming in. It looks like you're trying to split roads into dual carriageways (two oneways) where they are physically split but in OSM they were previously mapped as a single two way, but in doing so many of the existing tags were lost and in some instances the original ways were deleted in place of new ways which looses the history. Is best to retain the existing ways for the history.

Furthermore enabling the GPS traces here it seems that Bing imagery has an offset and ESRI imagery is better aligned, but the ways have been mapped to match Bing.

Because of the lost way history I'll revert the problematic changes, we can continue to work on improvements from there.

how do you know the building height and building levels from aerial imagery?

In the iD editor there is a "Driveway" preset which should be used for driveways, the tags should be highway=service + service=driveway.