No arguments here, just looking to standardize. I think the city bike map (not the Citibike map!) is a good enough authority unless it's explicitly contradicted by conditions on the ground.

I updated the tagging on the =yes sections of Center Drive and Wellhouse Drive to =designated to match.

(I didn't know the Citibike map was using OSM. Neato.)

Howdy TBI, what criteria do you use for bicycle=designated? I left this as =yes because I didn't see any bike-specific signage or lane markings.

Hi utkap, do you know why you marked this road oneway? I don't see any oneway markings in any of the imagery you've mentioned.

Fixed, good catch!

see comments in changeset/96987406

see comments in changeset/96987406

see comments in changeset/96987406

see comments in changeset/96987406

Hello EZRouting, I've reverted this changeset. I've also reverted, fully or partially, your other recent changesets in Ulster county: 96988257, 96990057, 96992155, and 96992894.

The biggest problem here is the reclassification of service and track roads to residential, which you have not explained. There are also roads you seem to have added by guessing.

There are also some instances where you've mapped correctly, fixing errors and correcting names. It's tricky but I've done my best to remove your mistakes without damaging the good data. This takes a lot of work.

In the future please don't make any changes to the map if you aren't willing to discuss why you've made them. OSM is a group project and cooperative mapping is what makes it work.

Thank you, Jmapb

Hi there EZRouting... you seem to be changing a lot of service roads to residential in this changeset. May I ask why?

I'm guessing this is a playground associated with PS 41. You could map it as leisure=playground. Sometimes school-adjacent playgrounds are open to the public, but I don't think this one is, so it would be good to add access=private and maybe draw in the fence.

Happy 2021 Solongago -- I'm doing some work around Sundown and was looking at this way: way/20224768

You added "Red Bush" as an alt_name tag and I'm wondering -- is this just a conversion of the name_1 tag from the TIGER import, or do you have additional info that this name is in use for this road?

Personally I've found no trace of Red Bush Road on any signs or in any records, and I'd be inclined to use Sundown Road as the alt_name because it's used as the address of some of the parcels around here: https://ulstercountyny.gov/maps/parcel-viewer/?mapX=-8286411.733054578&mapY=5144183.926214974&zoom=17&basemap=UCParcels

Let me know what you think, thanks, J

Hi there POB!

When closing a POI that's combined with an address node, please consider removing the outdated tags and leaving the addr:* tags in place, instead of simply deleting the node. Especially if that address isn't mapped elsewhere in the building. That way we won't lose the address info.

(I've already restored this one.)

Thanks, jmapb

Good catch, not sure if it was somehow human error or a bug in Go Map!! but it looks like the "addr:housenumber=758" tag was replaced with "opening_hour=758". Fixed now.

Hi George, thanks for adding these old roads!

For these sorts of roads, "old road" is better tagged as a description than a name, so they can be differentiated from roads that really are named "Old Road" like way/20702555

Thanks, Jason

Gotcha. Too bad, nice park.
I see the semi-official interactive map ( https://aqueduct.org/interactive-map ) shows the trail bypassing the catty-corner Nelson Sitting Park as well. I wonder what's up with that.

Was the OCA rerouted along the sidewalk instead of going through Nelson Park?

Hello Teslanyc, welcome to OpenStreetMap! I just noticed this change you made in Lief Ericson Park, in particular the portion here:
way/185022030
Has this been changed to a water park? It doesn't look like it on satellite, and it's not mentioned on the park's website.

Thanks for the reply. I recently spent a lot of time on those bridges in particular, and it does feel a little harsh to have them bulk-reclassified from remote, whether it's you or Fluffy doing it. (You can see my brief conversation with Fluffy in changeset/88278035.)

Part of *this* changeset has already been reverted in 93876737, and I'll be working on the bridges.

In the future I'd appreciate it you could make smaller changesets with more informative comments, and with sources listed. And possibly consider discussing with local mappers beforehand.

Thanks, J

Hi there Roadsguy ... I see you've been recalssifying some roads. What's your source for this info?