Right, this should have been `natural=grass`.

“Hawkins Road East” does not seem to have physical divider or barrier. Why did you split it in a dual carriageway?

It is not an attack but a mere observation and statement of fact, followed by a suggestion how you can stop bloating the database and harming others by breaking routing.

For example, you have added multiple, effectively identical and useless, turn restriction relations to many `NY 27` segments with just two members. Turn restriction relations require at least three members in the `from`, `via`, and `to` roles. A `via` member should be a (one) node but can also be mapped with multiple `via` member ways. `from` and `to` members must start or end at the `via` node. In other words, all members have to be connected. Additionally, you do not need to add `oneway=yes` ways to turn restrictions in the `to` role if traffic would flow in the `backward` direction of the way. Furthermore, do not add `restriction=only_*` restrictions unless absolutely necessary. Try to map with `restriction=no_*` restrictions first. And finally, even after you have managed to add three members to turn restriction relations you have fallen into the novice mapper pitfall: You created too many `restriction=no_u_turn` restrictions with identical ways in the `from` and `to` roles. These specific turn restriction relations do not add any value to the map nor to routing, nor do they represent in the OSM database what mappers think they are mapping. Most novice mappers start adding these when they feel or have the impression that their navigation app suggests a u-turn at the strangest places. Then they usually naively assume that there must be something wrong with the map, which in most cases is not. In these cases, usually the routing algorithm is broken. In short; routing algorithms should always calculate loops (or navigate to a `highway=turning_circle` or `highway=turning_loop`) instead of suggesting a u-turn whenever they *think* is necessary.

Long story short; please read about the basic concepts of relations first and then about more complex relation concepts, like turn restrictions on the OpenStreetMap Wiki before adding any new or modifying any existing turn restriction relations.

Please stop adding turn restrictions because apparently you do not understand how they work. You are adding garbage and thus burdening the OSM database and navigation apps unnecessarily.

It’s sad that you lack the resolve to sand up to your mistakes and apparently have no appreciation for other people’s work. If only you would put in the same amount of energy and effort to fix your mistakes that you have invested in obliviously damaging good work that has served many people well, the world would be a better place. From what I can see, your fixing efforts are rather halfhearted at best and you are breaking even more. Apparently, you do not fully understand how `destination:*` tags are supposed to be mapped. Let this be a life lesson to you: Just because you *can* do something it does not mean you *should*, especially when you are unaware of what you are doing. The next life lesson is: Stand up to your mistakes and try to fix them completely not just superficially. So, I would suggest that you better stop mapping `destination:*` tags for the sake of other OpenStreetMap users and contributors because you are doing more harm than good.

You also do not understand how turn restrictions actually work, in other words, what is their meaning to OpenStreetMap and what do they actually map because you have fallen into the same trap like many other new mappers before you. You have started to add `restriction=no_u_turn` relations with identical ways in the `from` and `to` roles. These turn restriction relations DO NOT add any value to the map. They do not fix navigation either. Turn restriction relations map the flow of traffic, not the legal situation on the road. What you are trying to map is the legal situation on the road. For this purpose you should map using the `traffic_sign` tag.

You also apparently do not know when or how to map roads with ways.
1. We do not map lanes with ways.
2. We only map separate ways when there is a physical barrier or divider between road surfaces.
3. We do not delete inaccessible roads, even if they are in decay. We tag them `access=no`.

Final life lesson for the day: Think twice, sometimes even three times before you act because what may seem simple to do can cause a lot of damage when done or done badly. You are still a new mapper. Start with the simple stuff like adding buildings and roads. Learn by observing what others have done, especially very experienced mappers before you touch anything more complex. And, read the OpenStreetMap Wiki before you start learning a new potentially more complex mapping scheme. There is always more than to it than you may think. Thus, you may also want to use a more sophisticated editor than iD before mapping anything more complex, like [JOSM](https://josm.openstreetmap.de "Java OpenStreetMap Editor").

Are you sure CR 111 does not exist?

Oh, I forgot to mention that whenever you add a street name it is probably best to check any existing `addr:street` tag values in the vicinity. For example, I have encountered tags like `addr:street=New York 25A`. Otherwise, address search will not update and will not work correctly.

Great! 👍 You can use the history function to see what the `destination:*` tags looked like before. Thank you!

I was just lacking any source data to support this because for many years peripheral roads did not get any street name signs. However, I have finally found some evidence like here: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=40.947302581768&lng=-72.90196952632&z=17&focus=photo&mapStyle=OpenStreetMap&pKey=984944912157613&x=0.7928552283790877&y=0.5328145091126502&zoom=2 or
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=40.943763987273&lng=-72.861849935993&z=17&focus=photo&mapStyle=OpenStreetMap&pKey=1685451221632248&x=0.7240181802281513&y=0.3927159762005113&zoom=1

Well, I guess than thank you for updating the names. Yet, one should be very careful when assuming and checking how far the naming goes.

We all make mistakes. However, because you have made so breaking many edits it would be too much of a burden to others to fix them. We usually expect these to be fixed by those responsible.

Also, regarding turn restrictions. I have seen that you have tried to add [relation 13683544](osm.org/relation/13683544/history) as a `no_u_turn` restriction at the Meadow Ponds gated community in order to prevent your app from routing a u-turn in a gated community. This goes back to mapping the situation on the ground, not what kind of behavior we want in any particular app. So, instead what you should have done was to map the ways in the gated community as `access=private` because this is the situation on the ground, not a u-turn restriction. Again, independent of the behavior of the app.

Please, DO NOT create loop ways in cul-de-sacs. Use `highway=turning_loop` instead if you want to be more specific about the type of the cul-de-sac.

You have also added `name` tags to ways that do not have a street name but only a route reference. See `name=Route 25`. Please revert these changes too.

Please revert your breaking `destination:*` tag changes of this changeset too.

In this changeset you have added `name` tags to roads that do not have a name (no street name sign) but only have a route reference, like the `NY 25A`. Again, there was nothing wrong with the OSM database. The issue you have is with your app. Contact your app’s developers and please revert your changes.

The same applies to this changeset. Please revert or fix according to guidelines your `destination` tag changes.

If the cul-de-sac has an “island” then please tag with `highway=turning_loop`.

The same applies here. Please revert you `destination` tag changes.

You have broken `destination:*` tag values. Please follow the guidelines laid out in the [OpenStreetMap Wiki](osm.wiki/Key:destination "Key:destination"). For example, you have garbled every type of destination information into one value. Furthermore, you have not payed attention to the syntax adopted by the community for specifying route references.
```
destination=CR-46;William Floyd Parkway SOUTH;To NY-25;I-495;NY-27;Brookhaven Lab;Shirley;Smith Point Park
```
Since you seem to have a problem with your navigation app, unfortunately you have taken the wrong course of action to mitigate your app’s problem.
Generally speaking, we do not map for a particular navigation app nor a particular map rendering of the OSM database. If you have an issue with your navigation app or a map rendering then please contact your app’s or map’s developers respectively. DO NOT *fix* the OSM database in order to get some desired behavior in your app or some desired map rendering. Thus, please revert your changes. Otherwise, I should be forced to refer this incident to the OSM database admins and ask them to revert your changesets.

Hamlets DO have admin centers in certain jurisdictions. DO NOT try to outsmart locals from your armchair. Be very careful when mapping admin structures in other countries, especially those you are not familiar with.