It seems like "access=private" should be added to the tags of the foot path.

What is your reasoning for downgrading part of this road from tertiary? The highway=tertiary Wiki says "Outside urban areas, tertiary roads are those with low to moderate traffic which link smaller settlements such as villages or hamlets", which is an exact description of this road.

💯

Related to your review request, the foot path (way/630726452) that you tagged as "access=no" would be better tagged as "access=private", with an additional tag of "private=employees". Tagging it with "incline=down" as well would improve the data further. It's also an isolated routable feature, and should be connected somehow to the service road leading up to the pier. Otherwise, everything looks good to me.

The address for Rock Creek Campground is a Highway 101 address. I changed it back. The USFS named the access road "Rock Creek Campground" in their data, but that is not used for addresses.

North May Road as well.

It happens. Had you not made that edit, I probably wouldn't have noticed that the park was still on the map in the first place. That's one benefit of the collaborative nature of OSM.

This property has not been a state park since 2017. The website you added is actually for a similarly named state park about 40 miles away. I have made corrections in 162981466.

As well as East Tidewater Road.

Yes, that is me. I set up an account a while back and completely forgot about it. I'll have to get back on there.

Always glad to contribute what I can. I'm a little disappointed in myself that I did not do this sooner. Been way too focused on buildings and addresses, but at least I can cross hydrants off of my "eventually" list now.

Good looking out. In the 5 months since my comment, I have become aware of such restrictions. For what it may be worth, I used street view imagery only to confirm something like an unclear surface tag, not to create or place features. I am working on re-editing all such features anyway based on on the ground data collection.

Going through old emails, I saw that I missed the notification for your comment. I appreciate the kind words.

Thank you for the clarification. I will remove the tags.

I have only added these tags to driveways. My understanding is that driveways must have specified access tags for them to be considered routable by certain software using OSM data. I would be happy to know if that is not the case.

@ZeLonewolf, My understanding is that driveways must have specified access tags for them to be considered routable by certain software using OSM data. It also is not incorrect, as one certainly could access a driveway by horse to reach a destination.

@Mateusz Konieczny, sources for my edits are any one or combination of the following: GIS data from the State of Oregon, GIS data from Lincoln and Lane counties, GPS tracks that I have collected, decades of imagery (including LIDAR) from various sources, street level imagery from Google and Bing, surveys, and easement agreements.