See note/2828304

Thanks, I saw those updates. Another thing you probably know based on local knowledge is what the new S Division St intersection looks like now that cars cannot cross the tracks there at Washington Street. I added the OSM Block tags, which are typically used when there is some sort of obstruction like a rock. Can pedestrians still traverse that area?

These bicycle lanes just need to be added to the street as a lane and this will be good to go.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109952559

Looks good here. Be sure to give a reason (just like you did here) when changing roadway classification, as these sort of things can be sensitive due to their subjective nature. Keep up the good work!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110478132

This changeset has been reversed by the author in changeset/110478409 thus fixing the issue. Thanks!
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109952343

looks good. I've added bollard to further delineate this. Have a look as an example. These are useful things to add for bike/ped routability

This edit looks generally good. The one feedback I'd have is to make it so that the greenway lanes are added as a tag on the street, rather than a separate way, just like with Lake Street
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109952138

Here is an example of how the data looks when complete: way/914122739
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110474952

Is this a regular road that has bike lanes on either side? The way to do that is to add the cycleway=lane tag as an *additional* attribute to the roadway tags. So in this case, you wouldn't want to change the residential tag of the road, just add that there are bicycle lanes. In ID editor, you hit the "add field" area and choose Bike Lanes. Then choose if there is a left, right, or both-sides lane.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110474952

One question I have is if this is indeed a bridge and part of the network: note/2828393

Thanks again. Alright, this one is updated. I split it up so that the crossings have the right tags and, as a bonus, added it as a cycle route which will enhance how it shows up on sites that use OSM cycle route data: relation/13148453

Got it. I will leave the bridge since it will open very soon. Does it have a real name or designation yet?

also, further down the riverwalk, where it goes under division, it looks like the riverwalk is just along the water, and the roadway goes overhead. no tunnel per se, is that right?

Thanks! At the Mill Street intersection, two questions: Is that ped bridge online yet? And, does the riverwalk require going across Main, across Mill, and back across Main (in a big U) or can they cross direct across Mill?

Tell me a little more about this Riverwalk. It is a paved path along the water, right? Like a promenade? And it is signed for bike/ped access?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109950611

Looks good!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110474165

Added this back

way/977933839

way/977933838

Thank you. I have added the sections where it is a regular lane, near Small Street, and a Sharrow over the bridge. I will restore the protected lane per your description here! Have any photos of the facility? I want to get down there and check it out.

OK. Thanks for the response. The way to add this information is not to convert these to marked crossings. That information goes on a separate point, where the crosswalk intersects the street. Can you try and remove the lights again where applicable? You can add highway=stop to the intersection points that are now governed by a stop sign instead.

This changeset looks good generally. I fixed the spelling of a park by removing abbreviations.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109950220

According to the SBY GIS site, the sections along Division St are Sharrow only. Is the website wrong here? https://salisbury.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=c10e82df2db74447a7e997cac0aa2f63