Hi FlowerHillPerson, I just took a look at NYS_Streets and see that the DOT gave this street an Arterial Classification Code (ACC) of 4, which we've been generally been mapping to highway=secondary across the state. Screenshot of this area from NYS Streets:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13ZC2iyoOvxpmup5GToHucg3sm3bC5XPP/view?usp=sharing

In cases like this where this where the road is divided and limited access we use the the expressway=yes tag to indicate the improved physical construction, leaving highway=trunk for inter-regional connectivity importance.

In the Americana map view you can see a few cases of lower-classed expressways around Albany:
https://zelonewolf.github.io/openstreetmap-americana/#11.63/42.6914/-73.7584
Most of these (the Cohoes Boulevard and NY-85) happen to be expressway=yes + highway=primary for their connectivity importance. There are a few highway=secondary+expressway=yes roads in western NY:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1jGz
Examples include Mount Read Boulevard Rochester: https://zelonewolf.github.io/openstreetmap-americana/#12.17/43.17427/-77.64989
and NY-957B in Tonawanda:
https://zelonewolf.github.io/openstreetmap-americana/#13.24/42.98866/-78.94732
In both of these cases the roads serve as relatively local access to a number of neighborhoods rather than supplying significant cross-city connectivity, but are built with limited access and improved physical infrastructure, making them expressway construction rather than normal city streets.

Hi there and welcome to OSM!

I took a look at your changes and it looks like the opening_hours needs a fix to be correctly understood by tools that use OSM data.

I believe that the value you want is:
Mo-Fr 10:00-17:00; Sa 9:00-14:00

The opening_hours specification is a bit complicated (see osm.wiki/Key:opening%20hours ) but this evaluation tool can be helpful for validating the format:
https://openingh.openstreetmap.de/evaluation_tool/?EXP=Mo-Fr%2010%3A00-17%3A00%3B%20Sa%209%3A00-14%3A00

Reply if you have any questions.
Best,
Adam

Here's the link to the OSM-US Slack if you haven't joined: https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

Hi rickmastfan67, thanks for the feedback. I'm local to the Adirondacks and spend some time in the Rochester area, but haven't been to this area south of Buffalo. The NYS Streets is a very good indicator, but not perfect. See: osm.wiki/Proposal:_New_York/Highway_Classification for details. I'm totally open to the idea that NYS Streets has the priority of NY-5 and US-20 wrong and that NY-5 should be the primary for that segment.

Most of the conversation on highway classification in NY and nationally has been taking place in the OSM-US Slack's #local-newyorkstate and #highway-classification channels. It would be great to get more feedback from western NY mappers as we still need to figure out more of the lower-classes now that the motorway/trunk network is better sorted out.

Best,
Adam

Thanks for the documentation prompt. I've merged the text that was on osm.wiki/United_States_admin_level#Unincorporated_areas into osm.wiki/United_States/Tags#Places so that there is now a single US-specific definition of the place=* hierarchy instead of two inconsistent versions. I've also added the distinction between admin_level=* and place=* to the latter section.

Best,
Adam

Hi Fred, I bulk reverted the changesets that just had a comment "change a town to a village" or similar. I missed that the population was also changed in this changeset. It should be able to be updated independently without changing the classification of the place and is easier to identify what is valid than the judgement call that the place level demands.

Best,
Adam

Ah, yes, I see what you are looking for. It's not actually wrong to have different admin-levels and place=* values in the US.

The admin-level is specifically tied to the governmental organization of an area. Different parts of the country have different nested levels of administration. In contrast to adminstration, the place=* value has more to do with the size and regional importance of the community, regardless of administrative boundaries.

In my part of the New England region we have Town government (admin_level=8). The actual collections of development within these administrative areas may or may not be incorporated and may have population and amenities that make them place=hamlet, villages, OR town. If a sub-area of the Town *is* incorporated then it will have an additional admin_level=9 boundary, but this sub-area may have population and amenities that make them place=hamlet, villages, OR town. There really isn't any correspondence between admin_level and place here.

A potential point of confusion: The phrase "Rule of Thumb" (used in the wiki) is an idiom that means "imprecise or rough guideline" in English. Then inclusion of the word "rule" in the phrase could be a point of confusion for non-native speakers.

See note in osm.org/changeset/118614405 . This is properly a place=town regardless of the absolute population.

@Fred, I'm not local to West Virginia so I can't speak to these communities specifically, but I noticed you making similar changes all over the US. That wiki page you are referencing says that these are "some rough rules of thumb to have emerged in the US are". It is most definitely *not* a rule that all towns must have at least 10,000 population.

Please pause on these mass changes and discuss further in the [talk-us] mailing list or the OSM-US Slack https://slack.openstreetmap.us/ before blanket-changing the place levels just based on population.

While those population numbers are guidelines, they aren't rules. The presence of other amenities and community services is a better indicator of Town versus Village distinction than a raw population number. Municipalities with hospitals, several groceries stores, many shops and restaurants, car dealerships, movie theaters, and light or heavy industry are properly place=town even if their population is less than 10,000.

No problem, thanks for taking a look!

Yeah, the ACC made the process SO much simpler in NY than other states. Unfortunately ACC=4 and below are much more hit-and-miss in terms of network connectivity.

There's still an open question in the community if ACC can be trusted around NYC. I personally think we can still trust the ACC, but some folks feel that some urban expressways should remain trunk. I'm not local to NYC, so don't really have as much understanding of its road network compared to upstate. Much of the discussion is happening in the #highway-classification, #local-nyc, and #local-newyorkstate channels of the OSM-US Slack: https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

Here's more info on the overall US Highway Classification project if you haven't stumbled onto it yet:
osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance

Lastly, if you haven't see the new [work-in-progress] Americana style, check out the expressway rendering around Albany: https://zelonewolf.github.io/openstreetmap-americana/#10.64/42.7219/-73.9146 The data is a couple of months stale at this point so the Binghamton changes won't be reflected yet, but this new style is now rendering trunk, primary, secondary, and tertiary expressways distinct from non-expressways.

Don't hesitate to reach out either on Slack or through my profile if questions come up about the Highway Classification project in general or specific. No one has picked up the banner for NJ (or PA) yet and collaborators are certainly needed. :-)

Is this the page in the wiki? osm.wiki/National_Register_of_Historic_Places
or maybe this one?
osm.wiki/Key:heritage#United_States

From my reading of those the boundary=protected_area only gets applied if it is a larger site and not a single building. It might be worth updating your hotkeys to have a different one for buildings and sign-posts from historic districts/etc. :-)

I missed your note about the Brandywine Highway, I'm seeing that listed as an ACC=3 as well. Here's a zoomed-out screen-shot of NYS Streets around Binghamton:
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/25242/158396311-0aff7486-641d-49d5-9d0b-6f7f7b1dd545.png

Thanks for the note, ScantLeopard336! An ACC=2 *would* make the road trunk according to the current guidelines.

I downloaded NYS Streets last week from
http://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/inventories/details.cfm?DSID=932
and it is showing NY 201 with an ACC=3 though, which corresponds to primary. I wonder if this might have been changed one direction or another recently? It looks like the publish date on the file I have is January 5, 2022.

Here's a screen-shot of what I'm seeing:
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/25242/158387559-175e5f0a-dcee-481a-a338-a5f5c7de5a2c.png
-- as rendered in QGIS using a rendering style I set up for NY highway classification: https://github.com/adamfranco/NYS-Streets-QGIS-view

Given that the southern end of NY-201 only connects to other ACC=3/primary roads for local connections (rather than inter-city connections), ACC=3/primary seems consistent to me, but I'd be happy to see it updated if there is new data.

It turns out that it wasn't too hard to manually revert the classification while leaving the rest of your changes in place, so no need for further action. Please do reach out if you have any questions about highway classification as this is an ongoing project around the country.

I see you're doing a lot of editing around upstate NY. Lots of other mappers in the area are collaborating on highway classification and other mapping topics in the OSM-US Slack at https://slack.openstreetmap.us/ . Join us in the #local-newyorkstate and #highway-classification channels if you're interested.

Best,
Adam

See comments on osm.org/changeset/117064005

With the new 2021 US Highway classification project highway=trunk is no longer used to indicate "expressway" construction. Use expressway=yes for this.

Please revert this segment back to highway=primary.

osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance

Hi barndny, what is your reasoning for upgrading the LOSP to motorway? As described in
osm.wiki/New_York/Highway_Classification/2021_Classification_Project
the LOSP has been designated with an Arterial Classification Code (ACC) of 3 which maps it to `highway=primary`.

NY's Arterial Classification Code (ACC) is a connectivity-based code that is being used to categorize highways in NY.

Could you please reclassify back to highway=primary + expressway=yes? I'd rather not do a full revert and lose all of your bridge changes.

Hi Korgi1, this changeset add boundary=protected_area to a building. While the other tags seem normal, adding boundary=protected_area to buildings isn't something I've encountered before. Can you provide a reference as to why you are adding that boundary tag? osm.wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area doesn't mention any use on buildings or other objects. A built itself isn't really a boundary, though I appreciate that the building itself is protected.

Hi Himké, let us us know if you have any questions on the 2021 US Highway Classification project. The OSM-US Slack is where most of the discussion is happening, but many of us also subscribe to the [talk-us] mailing list. :-)