Hey Molandfreak, I am under the impression that these accessible paths were added recently and are still there. Are you sure these have been removed?

Hi Doug!

Looks like this changeset resulted in a lot of multi-use paths being named "East 42nd Street," having a strange access tag, and being designated for horse travel. Can you verify that these changes are accurate or fix them? Thanks!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160923187

This changeset edited numerous bikeways and marked them as sidewalks. This is inaccurate and needs to be corrected. 10-foot asphalt paths in Minnesota are cycle and footways.

This looks like an undiscussed import. Please refrain from importing data into OSM without a discussion on the wiki or other platforms beforehand. Much of this may have to be undone or removed as there are tags here with no meaning to OSM.

Hey Molandfreak. This locality was imported as a point some years ago and was at one point in history an actual hamlet. For example, it appears in this USGS quad (https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=022f49fd7acca39a5785aa05955480ae) from 1951 as a hamlet. Obviously this is no longer a populated place, but I think it would be appropriate to keep this labelled as a place=locality, as is custom in the US for these cases.

Hi MissieJ,

The Minnesota Highway Reclassification Project, initiated to bring MN in line with new American trunk highway standards, found that US 12 from the Twin Cities to I 29 in SD is highway=trunk. I'll refer you to the guidance here: osm.wiki/Minnesota/Minnesota_highway_classification

Please undo this change by reelevating US 12 to trunk status through western MN and refrain from further changes to the trunk network without consulting the wiki first.

MidwestMapGeek, thanks for reaching out.

I have driven this segment of road before, though admittedly few times. I downgraded the road as I am a member of the context-over-charictaristics school of highway classifications.

When I downgraded it, the only section of US 8 that was classified as a trunk was the short section in St. Croix Falls that you are interested in repromoting. In my opinion, a short "island" of physical improvements should not be classified as a trunk if the larger roadway is not a trunk road.

If you think the entire segment of US 8 from I-35 to Rice Lake is a trunk road, then I would support reupgrading. If not, I will still defer to your judgement as it is not my region of expertise nor do I feel strongly about this segment in particular.

In any event, US 8 is worth discussing as part of the Minnesota Highway Classifaction Project -- luckily, you've already joined that chat.

Thanks again for reaching out.

@iandees

The book "The street where you live : a guide to the place names of St. Paul." An archive copy can be found here: https://archive.org/details/streetwhereyouli0000emps/

I've been adding these to support the OpenEtymologyMap project at this address: https://www.dsantini.it/etymology/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112917360

@neuhausr. My bad. I should've included a note about that in the changeset notes.

The Bottineau LRT is no longer planned for that route. The alignment in the BNSF railroad corridor and along Olson Mem Hwy has been abandoned. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/03/11/planners-rethink-bottineau-light-rail-line-in-wake-of-rail-dispute

Hey RocketTuna, I accepted your friend request a minute ago! I'm excited to work with you on this undermapped and underappreciated side of the Cities!

I see here that you an an administrative boundary for the Battle Creek neighborhood, but I can't find it defined as such anywhere. Per OSM documentation on administrative boundaries (here: osm.wiki/Tag%3aboundary=administrative), an admin boundary should be defined by a government. All the resources I've found here https://stpaul.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MinimalGallery/index.html?appid=8163a199754d4367b85ee928026b58a1#viewer=8d3e5bc01c624dcbb4542fc4db9d920c indicate that Battle Creek is actually part of a larger district and not its own neighborhood.

If you have resources that would indicate otherwise, would you share them with me?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111251576

See discussion at https://osmcha.org/changesets/108002745/. I have readded some since deleting the originals. I will no longer delete originals since that seems to have drummed up discontent.

See discussion at https://osmcha.org/changesets/108002745/. I have readded some since deleting the originals. I will no longer delete originals since that seems to have drummed up discontent.

Strange... Anything I can do to fix that?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108002745

I am drawing them by hand from the Bing Aerial imagery. If my spacing is particularly consistent, I suppose I would take that as a compliment (unless it's not correct for some reason.)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108002745

@iandees, my intention is to add back driveways as I fill out southern maplewood. The old ones were (in my opinion) low quality and occasionally inaccurate.

As for the geometries, I imagine you're referring to the land cover or trails, which I am filling in based on aerial imagery and my experience exploring the area.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108002745