Hi,

"The Crossining" is a name that is sometimes used to describe this bridge. I live in the area, but had not heard this name before seeing it on the map, and looking it up. Though it isn't a ubiquitous name, it is used.

"Croton River Bridge", on the other hand, is both ambiguous (see Quaker Bridge just up the river), and not used among locals.

Personally, I would advocate for there to be no `name=` tag on this bridge at all, since there is no common name for it that is used in common speech.

There are at-grade intersections on this part of the Taconic, so it should be trunk, not motorway.

Hi,

It looks like you accidentally changed the maxspeed of osm.org/way/220441219 to 80 mph. Would you mind fixing that, and seeing if you did the same to any other roads?

This changeset (and surely many of your others titled "ggg") is almost entirely obvious vandalism, particularly in absurdly high values for maxspeed. Many of the vandalized ways still have the bad maxspeed tag (see the edited part of FDR Drive, which still has a maxspeed of 120 mph). I will be reverting as much of this as I can, over the next day.

Unfortunately, it looks like you haven't been editing recently, but I just wanted to let you know that you mistagged several apartment buildings in this changeset. It looks like you usually use building=apartments (correct), but you used landuse=residential with residential=apartments a fair bit in this changeset. I went ahead and fixed them, but just make sure you stick to the building=apartments tag in the future.

Congrats on your 1000th changeset!

From the wiki page for type=site:
"The features should have a close geographic relationship, usually within the same town. For example, do not use this relation to group all restaurants of a fast-food chain. Use a combination of name=*/operator=*/network=*/brand=* to group loosely-coupled and/or widely-distributed features - relations are not categories!"

As Croton Dam Road (leading to the dam) provides no outlet, it should not be tagged as highway=unclassified.

It looks like you've added a name to the wrong node. Perhaps you meant to add it to the amenity=toilets node slightly to the northeast? For now, I'll revert this.

Also, looks like there were actually two nodes on top of each other. Fixing that too.

That thought crossed my mind, though those two roads are the ones that continue to meet properties, similar to the rest of the road. It still may be the best approach though.

Fixed in osm.org/changeset/101888914

Outside of this bypass, I think most of the road should be highway=primary, since it carries quite a bit of traffic, but also has many properties along it. It has a similar feel to many US highways, which are usually tagged as primary roads.

That's a fair point. Perhaps the difference in quality between the bypass and the intersecting part could be made with the `expressway=yes` tag? That is, the bypass could be marked with that tag, which I believe is appropriate.

My main rationale was that the highway=primary went up to meet Tuckahoe Road, while the route under serves as somewhat of a bypass. There are no properties that can be accessed from this bypass, and it feels like a more significant, limited-access road. I thought those differences would be good to show, which is why I made the bypass highway=trunk. But again, if we think it's too insignificant of a segment, we can switch it back.

If you think that stretch is too short to warrant a change in classification, I would be fine with reverting it back to primary. I just felt that the higher classification is noticable as you drive down that road.

Of course there was a typo in my first changeset...

It seems as though you've marked both Ossining High School and its soccer field as "Ossining High School". I have not yet fixed this, so you can try to correct it if you wish.

There was already a point for Anthony's Nose. It has more detail, and is closer to the actual peak. I already fixed this, but going forward, please double check to see if something like this is already mapped.

These two points should not be placed. The unnamed "park" point is already mapped as an area. As for "Secret Beach", this is not the actual name of the place. The place does not seem to really exist. If you're referring to the beach that spans Croton Point, that should be mapped as an area if anything, not a point.

I already reverted these edits, but please be hesitant before adding points like this. As for the unnamed park point, check to see if something is already there.

If you ever have a question about whether something should be mapped (or how it should be mapped), feel free to send me a message.

Hi,

There are a few issues with this changeset.

First of all, you're not using the right tags for a driveway. in the iD editor, you would want to select the "Driveway" preset. In addition, since these are private driveways, you may also want to specify that. You can use the tag access=private, or by marking the respective field in iD.

I see that to signify that these were driveways, you named it "Driveway". This is not necessary (and should not be done!) if you simply use the correct tags/presets.

It also appears as though you are using Bing Imagery. In this area, Bing Imagery has very poor quality, and is essentially unusable. I have been using NYS Orthos Online, which provides a very high resolution image. In addition, the imagery was taken during the Winter, so you can see through trees.

I actually already submitted a changeset to correct these issues, so you can take a look to see what I mean. If you have any questions, I would be happy to help!