Apologies for the large changeset here. There are likely a few unclassified roads here that may be better off as residential, but I feel that most of the changes are accurate. Note that unclassified does not mean "the classification is unclear"; it's just the next level below tertiary. Feel free to comment if you think I got something wrong.

I forgot to include it in the source field, but I also used Bing Streetside here in a few places.

Sorry about the bbox on this one; I got a bit carried away. I may have been slightly heavy handed with tertiary here, but I wasn't just marking any road with a yellow line as such either. If local opinion disagrees with any of these changes, please let me know and I'll happily readjust the classification.

Hi,

I know this is late, but you may be interested in the "Gridify" plugin in JOSM. It makes mapping parking spaces much, much easier.

Hi there,

I've moved "Saw Mill River Parkway Lands" to the note tag, since this isn't really a common name for these woods. Since there isn't really a commonly used name for them, I've gone ahead and added noname=yes as well.

Best,
John

Ah, I see now that I looked at OSMCha. Sorry to bother you.

Hi there,

It looks like you named several woods "Saw Mill River Parkway Lands". Is this name sourced from anywhere, or did you create it yourself? If it's the latter, I believe it would be better to provide no name value at all, following the "on the ground" rule.

Hi,

As a local, I disagree with this change. The path gets about 50/50 foot/bicycle traffic, so I feel that the old tagging is more appropriate. highway=cycleway, in my opinion, is better suited for cases where the path is primarily used by bicycles. bicycle=designated already results in Carto rendering it in blue, even if it's a highway=path.

I see now that you also added the name "Long Beach Station Entrance" to the main entrance, which is definitely not signed there. As such, I've assumed that the other name values are not signed either, so I'm removing them. Please let me know if this is not the case, and I would be happy to revert that.

Additionally, consider using the (admittedly less used) railway=train_station_entrance tag instead of railway=subway_entrance for full railway systems (i.e. not subways/metros/etc.).

Hello,

Thanks for contributing this, it looks like a good changeset overall. I have one question though: is the name "Long Beach Parking Entrance" something that you actually saw written on a sign, or did you come up with the name by describing what the entrance is? In the latter case, it is better to add no name value at all, and just let the data speak for itself. In any case though, thanks for contributing.

Best,
John

After taking a closer look, this road was already accurate before this changeset, since it was tagged with change:forward=no or change:lanes:forward=yes|not_right|no. As such, I've had to revert this changeset. I retained your classification change (motorway_link -> motorway) since that looks reasonable.

Hi,

Generally speaking, paint alone doesn't warrant the use of a second way. Usually a physical barrier is required for this. If there's only paint but there is a turn restriction, this should most likely be mapped as a single way with a turn restriction relation.

Hi,

It looks like you deleted three good tags from this relation. Can you elaborate about why you did this?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153226512

If you disagree with this, please comment here before resorting to reverting. Though I have driven the road before, I am not a local, so I am happy to listen to local input here.

Hi,

Looks like you added water=stream to the southernmost bit of the Croton River. waterway=stream is defined as "a naturally-formed waterway which is narrow enough that an active, able-bodied adult can jump across it", which is definitely not the case for the Croton River. Thus, I'll change the tag to the more appropriate water=river.

Hi,

Thanks for contributing. Unfortunately I've had to revert this classification change, as NY-201 doesn't quite meet the standard for "motorway" under the current NYS classification guidelines. You can read more about them here: osm.wiki/TMP-Proposal:_New_York/Highway_Classification

In short, motorway is used for not only the highest performance roads, but for roads that are both controlled-access and the highest level of importance. Route 17 is a good example here; NY-201 might be controlled-access, but it's definitely not as important as Route 17. To tag a road that is limited or controlled access, but isn't important enough to be a motorway, you can use highway=primary+expressway=yes.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Best,
John

Thanks for responding so quickly. When you say "the designated name from the county", where exactly are you getting this data from? I checked on Bing Streetside for part of this road (from the state line to Great Bend), and I couldn't see any street signs for the road. By the "on the ground" rule, I would say there should be no `name` tag at all for this section.

Hi,

I know this is late, but you added `name=State Route 11` to US-11, which is a US route, not a state route. It could be argued that it shouldn't have a `name` tag at all, since the route number is already in `ref`, but it definitely shouldn't be named "State Route" anything. I see you also did the same for "State Route 6&11". Please let me know if you want to fix them, otherwise I'll do it.

Hi,

I know I'm noticing this very late, but it looks like you changed the westbound Tappan Zee from toll=no to toll=yes. For all the Hudson River crossings (at least in the NYC metro area), you only pay when crossing in the eastbound direction.

I neglected to also include Bing Aerial in the source. NYS Orthos usually is taken when there's no leaves on the trees, while Bing is the reverse. Thus, it's useful to use both at once for this sort of thing.