Hey there!

Good eye on noticing the basketball hoops around the edges of the southern tennis court bank.

Tagging the entire entire bank as leisure=pitch + sport=basketball caught my attention though instead of landuse=recreation_ground like the other bank.

I looked to the wiki and found something that might work well here. Check out the "Court without markings" section on this page (sport=basketball). It says we might want to just tag a node in this kind of scenario. I went looking for examples and found you've actually used that approach before such as in changeset/98478011.

Then we can tag the bank with landuse=recreation_ground to be consistent with the other.

What do you think?

Cheers!

Greetings. Thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that you set the number of lanes for the street you edited in this changeset to 1. Since this was your first edit, I assume this was unintended or you made the very common mistake of entering number of lanes per direction instead of total number of lanes for the highway. So the value here should be 2 and, as it approaches the north heatherwilde boulevard intersection, 3 instead of 1.

Would you be willing to make the necessary update to fix this? Let me know if not or if you have any questions. If yes, note that when lanes are not split evenly between directions on a bidirectional way, you'll use the tags lanes:backward and lanes:forward to indicate how many lanes per direction. See lanes=* for more info.

Greetings and thank you for your contributions.

Some feedback on this changeset:

1. Generally you would not map landuse on a block by block basis unless each block has in fact different landuse classification. Often the area mapped as landuse=residential is a meaningful contiguous residential area or alternatively may cover a particular residential neighborhood if it has a distinct identity and/or boundaries.

2. The name tag on an individually mapped tree is generally incorrect. It should not be used when the object is unnamed or only has a generic non-specific name.

3. Please try to keep edits localized to one particular area. Splitting up changes between distant geographical locations into separate changesets is a best practice.

I also recommend checking out the following wiki pages: osm.wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions and osm.wiki/Good_practice

Based on some of your other recent changesets, I also want to encourage you to check out osm.wiki/Using_aerial_imagery - specifically info on offsets.

Welcome and thank you for your contributions.

When things change in the real world, editors are empowered to be bold and edit the map to reflect the current situation. But be aware that OpenStreetMap stores the editing history of an element and it is generally worth taking a few extra steps to help preserve this history. For example, instead of deleting elements such as buildings or landuse and redrawing them anew, it is generally better to update the geometry of the existing objects, retaining their editing history.

See osm.wiki/Keep_the_history for more informaton.

You mapped the sidewalk along section of Lee Dildy Boulevard twice. Also, there is no low water crossing here.

Thank you for your contributions.

Parts of this edit related to 290 have been reverted due to incorrectly introducing links for turn lanes as previously described on another changeset. Please kindly let me know if you've received this note and if you have any questions.

Hi there. A parking lot should be mapped as a contiguous area (see One feature, one OSM element) as much as possible. You can include in the area parking aisles and footways between parking spaces. Any greenery such as grass strips or trees can also be included within the parking area.

Individual parking rows should not be mapped as separate parking areas.

Please see amenity=parking

I've noticed this issue in changeset #1176912856 and #136427303 as well.

Please let me know if you have any questions, to let me know if I'm missing something, or if you need any help in correcting this.

(Otherwise, the standard method to draw parking of a complex size - ones that consists of disjointed areas, or because the area consists of multiple disjunct parts, or has holes is to use multipolygons.)

You've accidentally mapped the entire Circle Brewing Company Farm area as a building floating in the air. I've gone ahead and fixed this for you.

3. Additionally, comparing the geometry of the houses mapped in this changeset (and older changesets authored by you in this area) to the aerial photography used, rectangular buildings should be mapped as rectangular. By pressing 'q' or right clicking and then clicking square from popup menu you can have the iD editor automatically help square up your polygon.

I wanted to bring to your attention an issue I identified while reviewing this change. Let me know if you have any questions or if I misunderstood anything.

1. The _link tags are used to identify slip roads/ramps and "channelised" (most commonly physically separated) at-grade turning lanes connecting the through carriageways/through lanes of highways to other roadways. Normal turn lanes without channelisation should not have a separate way drawn at all. If a link had been appropriate, classification should be the highest of the two ways typically. In this changeset, you used a higher classification then both ways.

2. If you map sidewalks separately, it is a good practice to tag the corresponding highway to indicate such. e.g. sidewalk:both=separate if you map sidewalks on both sides of the highway separately.

Thank you for your contribution!

Looks good to me!

Good work! :) It appears this section of the road was dismantled between 2011 and 2015.

A quick review of available imagery including street level photography suggests the road extends further then where you've truncated it. Here is a good resource for this particular location, try viewing a few different available surveys to get a sense of the road's true geometry: https://gis.pottcounty-ia.gov/Nearmap/?x=-95.842&y=41.2713

Hi there. It appears you accidentally recreated the road (aka way) overtop of itself a few times instead of modifying the existing ways. Do you need help fixing this? Be sure to check out the editor tutorial if you haven't already. Wiki is also great source of information as is I'm sure local OSM community chat group or channel. Cheers!

The description for this changeset is grossly different from what was actually added or changed which makes it difficult to know if some changes were intentional or by mistake.

Hi there. Your edit has been reverted. (1) It appears you accidentally dragged certain nodes out of place by accident. (2) The access=no tag indicates that the object is not to be used by the general public which is incompatible with a primary highway and motor_vehicle=yes is already implied by highway=primary.

In reviewing some of your other edits, it appears you may have a few misunderstandings regarding the meaning and use of several tags. I would highly recommend getting involved with a local user group or via Slack for assistance and support. An indispensable resource will also be the wiki located at osm.wiki/ which contains documentations for almost all tags used in OSM.

Right. Having done further reading, my understanding is that what's tagged as the culvert (which should be tagged waterway=pressurised + tunnel=flooded instead of culvert I suspect) is the outlet which is horizontal pipe permitting flow through the dam controlled by a drain gate near bottom of the reservoir. There is a riser with a trash rack which is what is visible there in the water. It is the service/primary spillway and connects to same pipe to regulate reservoir releases additional to the outlet.

As for the featured mapped as spillway: Reviewing FEMA Watershed Models and Floodplain Mapping, at each of the damn sites Milroy1812 has mapped a spillway that corresponds to a Special Flooding Hazard Area zone leading me to believe that they are the auxiliary/emergency spillways. From my reading, earthen damns built during the era these were often just used vegetated / earth emergency spillways like this that can best be approximated by a broadcrested weir.

Milroy1812 is the original mapper and might have more insight. It looks like he has mapped a number of spillways at local dams.

I don't think this is/was the primary spillway but perhaps the auxiliary / emergency spillway? Milroy1812 also mapped a spillway for Site 7, which appears to be an auxiliary spillway, though it isn't explicitly labeled as such. It's worth noting that their mapping of the other spillway doesn't seem to entirely match the designed flow from what I can determine via media reports from when it was constructed but I'm no expert.

For this site, I found a reference in Upper Brushy Creek WCID's "Dam Portfolio Prioritization Summary Report" that reads "the City of Cedar Park constructed the Buttercup Wastewater Interceptor and Reclaimed Water Line through the auxiliary spillway. The line was installed within the auxiliary spillway and the top of the excavation was covered with a 2 foot concrete cap." I reviewed GIS data from Cedar Park and found the engineering plans for the project. It suggests this feature as mapped is at least somewhat or in part correct as it intersects with the aforementioned lines.

Perhaps we can reach out to the city and/or Upper Brushy Creek WCID.

Also, see diagrams at https://www.ubcdams.org/193/Typical-Dam-Design for what we should be looking for typically.

Some feedback on your change:

1. I may be misunderstanding the direction tag so apologies if that is the case but I believe it is suppose to indicate the facing orientation of the feature. With traffic signs, they face against the direction of travel so if you encounter a traffic sign when traveling north then the sign is facing south. So the maxspeed sign added to Shetland Case, drivers encounter the sign as they travel northbound (confirmed via bing streetside imagery) so the orientation would be south but you have it tagged direction=N.

2. It appears you may have duplicated traffic signs by creating standalone nodes for some stop signs that were already tagged via a node on the way. The intersection of Shetland and Pony Chase being an example. I believe this is considered undesirable per the one feature one osm element guideline.

3. I noticed that the maxspeed is not tagged on the ways themselves in some cases where you added maxspeed traffic sign. Most software that use osm data for routing or turn by turn navigation would likely not take into consideration the maxspeed information from the traffic sign when mapped as a single node like done here. For this reason, it is usually desired when mapping a speed limit sign to always add a maxspeed=* tag to the way / section of road applicable.

4. I see in another edit you did tag maxspeed:forward on ways in this general area. However, a quick look through streetside imagery suggests that it should be just maxspeed as the speed limit affects both directions of travel on the road.

Hope you found this review helpful. If you have time, I'm looking for folks to review my changes. Let me know if you spot any potential issues in my changes or otherwise have any suggestions or tips.

The changes from residential ➜ tertiary do not seem to match classification criteria. I'd like to suggest reverting highway classification changes made in this changeset. Let me know what you think. Happy to discuss in more detail.