looks like an Automated Edit

It looks like you didn't survey the area and readded roads that no longer exist. While at the same time deleting the real roads

"validated google street view" You can not use any incompatible licenses (definitely not google street view or maps). as source or confirm data with them in the process of making edits on openstreetmap. I don't know what SUSBR is (quick search didn't turn up anything) but unless you know for a fact the license is compatible (likely isn't) you cannot use it as a source either.
If you drive or bike through the area and take some pictures. Those pictures or what you see while you are there are a valid source.

bike lanes are cycle lanes.
osm.wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane

This is a highway for car traffic that does not prohibit bicycle use. I would not say it is a particularly good highway to ride a bike down but that has no bearing on tagging. The majority of the road that you tagged doesn't have a marked shoulder or anything that vaguely resembles a bike lane. So the way it was tagged before is appropriate highway=tertiary and no special bike tag (bike-yes is assumed).

I don't think there are cycle lanes on this section of the road. Was this road recently widened?

Did you actually survey this? Please fix it based on reality. Not outdated sat.

What is your source?

It would be great if people checked out all the sat images. I don't know how many times I will have to redo this area

Kenmore Blvd Bike is not the actual name of the route (leave it with no name if there isn't one), the bike lanes are already part of the road's tags. Why is there a cycle path bridge osm.org/way/771406637

When I drove through in august of last year I didn't see any indication there was a east bound bike lane.

It looks like you added a lot of features to these golf courses but got off track somewhere. Roads, trees, most everything else you tagged are not water hazards. Please correct or remove these water hazards.
Example:
osm.org/edit?editor=id&way=19109129

Do you have a source for this? It appears to be fictitious.

Appears to be vandalism. A path going across rt 8 twice at low angles (instead of right angles) and a park labeled paintball course.

It looks like this and your other edits around the same time created several points with not data attached to them. What was the intent of these points?

Sidewalks are not service roads
osm.org/way/646230337

Way: Leisure Lane (636778235) was created as basically duplicate of Leisure Lane (478535042) the effective shape was the same but none of the point were shared. Then about a month later Changeset: 64892019 someone else from telenave added a name to that same way missing that there was already a road there with the same name. I deleted the duplicate way.

Are the relations you created (7811426 and 7811427) effectively duplicates of relation: Laurel Highlands Trail (7192246) ?

Could you provide a little more description about what you did in this (and all of your) changesets.

This change set added a node that doesn't appear to have a purpose osm.org/node/4835164146 . Could you updated with some info or delete if it was a mistake?

I think that they should be deleted/ this edit reverted (if the node has not been changed since) because they appear useless / part of an import and the user has not made any other edits or comments as far as I can see.

It looks like the Riesbecks (502540383, v1) building you added is the outline of the parking lot. Has the building been enlarged to that size?