Reverted in changeset/179520789

Reverted in changeset/179520789

Added turn restrictions in changeset/179520960

Reverted changeset/179519979 and changeset/179520071. In those changesets, I split Greenwood Ave N into two one-ways at the intersection with N 83rd St, since a median island was added at this location. However, I decided this representation of the intersection was overcomplicated and using turn restrictions (with except=bicycle) would be a simpler way to represent it.

Not totally happy with how this turned out. While the way I mapped it is accurate to what's on the ground, perhaps I included too much detail. In particular, I worry that this representation will result in confusing turn-by-turn directions for people biking.

An alternate way to map this would be to revert to a single way for Greenwood Ave N, then introduce turn restrictions with an exception for bikes (i.e., except=bicycle on the turn restriction relation).

Rode by here today and confirmed there are no directional signs or markings.

Partially reverts the following:
changeset/173393644
changeset/173430026
changeset/173435379

See comments on changeset/173297770 for background.

Partially reverts the following:
changeset/173245428
changeset/173251709
changeset/173253115
changeset/173294075
changeset/173297770
changeset/173337846
changeset/173346676
changeset/173347247

See comments on changeset/173297770 for background.

It is. Painted bike lanes that are part of the roadway are always mapped using the `cycleway=lane` tag on the road itself. Separated or protected bike lanes that run alongside a road can either be mapped as a separate `highway=cycleway` or as a `cycleway=track` tag on the road itself.

If you aren't sure which to use, consider whether a cyclist could easily switch between the bike infrastructure and the main travel lanes while riding. If so, it should generally be mapped using the `cycleway` tag on the road.

There's a more detailed guide at osm.wiki/Bicycle#Cycle_features

Is there actually a separated cycle path running next to 132nd Ave NE/Slater Ave? Last time I was here a month or two ago, it was just a regular bike lane.

Removed the oneway:bicycle=no tags because these streets no longer allow contraflow bike traffic—both have a one-way protected bike lane on the left side that flows in the same direction as the general purpose lanes. Removed cycleway:left:oneway=-1 because, on streets with oneway=yes, cycleways on both the left and right side are assumed to go in the same direction as the general purpose lanes. Adding cycleway:left:oneway=-1 would make it a contraflow bike lane, which it's not. See cycleway:right:oneway=*#Implicit_values for details.

Not sure about the others, but 11th Ave SW (way/6329093) definitely does have a name. I'll check the street signs and re-add the names next time I'm over here.

See note/4664278

I noticed that the street running between West Morris Boulevard and Morris Boulevard is referred to as Kitson Street in the county assessor records, but in this changeset it was renamed to Kitsap Street. Do you happen to remember why it was renamed?

Per osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway, roads shouldn't be mapped as a dual carriageway if there's no barrier. This road used to have a barrier, but now just has a painted centerline.

Bus layover area will need to be aligned with aerial imagery once available. King County will likely release new imagery this summer.

It looks like the "highway" tag was accidentally removed in changeset/161822967

I went ahead and marked the last bit of the desire path as private (changeset/161551794), since I do remember seeing the no transit center access sign on 60th Ave W.

As of two months ago, there was a gap in the fence next to the fire hydrant. Is that no longer the case?

I'm not sure the name Salish Fjord is actually in common use. As far as I can tell, it was just one person campaigning to change the name. I'm not local to the area though, so I won't remove it myself.