I'm going to chime in here:
Colorado Address Imports: osm.wiki/Import/Colorado_Addresses

I do _not_ believe that rsavoye is using my preprocessed data, however, if he is using the same data source ( https://data.colorado.gov/State/Statewide-Aggregate-Addresses-in-Colorado-2019-Pub/n7je-akky ), the data is in the Public Domain. It looks like it was updated March 20th, though, so I'm going to need to update my copy of the dataset.

As far as Mesa County goes, I'm using _the county's_ data -- I'm giving them feedback on any issues I spot, so that is a different data source.

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

JOSM also has access to the 2019 aerial photos as "Mesa County GIS 2019" (it doesn't look like you have ever used JOSM though).

While it doesn't look like you do many edits inside Mesa County, Colorado, I hope this helps in the future.

Thank you for your contributions,
vorpalblade

I've had issues with iD not being responsive before.

Its one of the (many) reasons why I use JOSM.

You might want to look into using JOSM. Its a bit more complicated than iD, but if you are editing for more than an hour or two a day, it is well worth learning.

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

JOSM (which you used for this changeset) also has access to the 2019 aerial photos as "Mesa County GIS 2019".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Source is actually MapBox Satellite

OpenStreetMap is a public map. Everyone can see that this house is your house (since you added "my house" as its name). It would have been better to add the `addr:housenumber` and `addr:street` tags (iD should have fields for those, so you don't have to remember the tags).

Just an FYI, the "name" tag is for objects with a sign (e.g., "Random Name Farms").

Also, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

I'd forgotten that I added this road as a road under construction. I'll go ahead and remove the construction tag (you just changed the highway tag from construction to residential without also removing the construction=residential tag -- maybe there should be code that auto-removes the construction tag in popular editors?)

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

It seems odd to have the same addr:street (32 Road) when they are not, in fact, directly off of 32 road and are instead on a different path. That being said, that is what the county assessor has, so hopefully that is right.

Also, as an FYI, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Since you have requested a review, here we go:
1) The building should have been squared (keyboard shortcut "q" in iD, which is what you are using, the other method is to right-click on the building and select "Square").
2) You should have continued the "Lang Drive" road instead of creating a new road with no information.

If you want to square the building yourself and add the road information, let me know. Otherwise, I'll (try) to remember to do it in a few days myself.

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". You may also want to take a look at "Mapbox Satellite".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Just an FYI, if you already have `access=private`, you don't (also) need `bicycle=private`, `motor_vehicle=private`, and so on. The only access tag that I see that is needed beyond `access=private` is the `horse=permissive` tag.

That being said, I think access=destination or access=permissive would be better for this road (I don't recall seeing a private sign last time I was on the road).

Overall, it looks good. That being said, I would have liked it if you had taken a little more time on outlining some of the parking lots. From experience, I can tell you that it is more trouble to correct poorly drawn geometry than it is to make new geometry. I still do that, to keep the history of the geometry, but that is something to keep in mind.

Also, just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Imagery" menu button in JOSM and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018". (The other Mesa County GIS <XXX> imagery layers cover more area, but are older/lower quality).

While I don't expect to see more edits from you in the future in Grand Junction, CO, I figured I would let you know that there is relatively new high resolution imagery available here,
vorpalblade

This looks good (and it appears you corrected your typo from changeset/72256121 -- thanks for doing that).

Just so you know, in cases of points of interest like Ute Water/Grand Valley Power using entire buildings, it is preferable to have the "point" of interest as the building, instead of just the point (or duplicating the information on a node inside the building).

Also, just so you know, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade

Just so you know, the appropriate tagging for an "alley" is "highway=service" with "service=alley". iD should have a preset for that.

Also, you probably intended to connect it with Elm Avenue.

I've gone ahead and fixed both issues, but I hope this helps your mapping in the future,
Thanks for mapping,
vorpalblade77

Hello, when you say "Apartment" in you changeset comment, I thought you were adding one, not modifying one. While I highly doubt you were trying to correct the geometry, you probably were trying to add an address. A good changeset comment for that would be "I added an address to an apartment in Grand Junction". In this case, it looks like you accidentally messed up the building outline for the apartment. I hope you don't mind if I fix it.

Also, Mesa County GIS has allowed us to use their (much more) up to date imagery for tracing in OpenStreetMap. You can see it by clicking on the "Background Settings" button in iD (keyboard shortcut "b") and select "Mesa County GIS Valleywide 2018".

Thank you for contributing, and I hope to see more edits from you in the future,
vorpalblade77