Reverted

osm.org/changeset/167339109

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/167339056

Although it is true that many tourists visit Laguna Beach, given its population is only ~20K it wasn't considered a population center of inter-regional importance (although it looks like it was listed as a potential borderline case). osm.wiki/California/2022_Highway_Classification_Guidelines

The US community has also been trying to form a more coherent network of motorways and trunk roads in recent years, and avoiding spurs and islands of these classifications as mentioned here:
osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#Classification

Because of this, I think it's best to leave Laguna Canyon as primary before further discussion with the community.

Given that this stretch mainly consists of RIRO junctions, this would be considered a borderline case as outlined in this wiki article: osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#Exceptions_and_Borderline_Cases

Because of this, this stretch of Central shouldn't be changed from its current classification without consultation with the local community. I ask that you please revert these changes until consensus is reached with the community.

I noticed that you accidentally glued a powerline to a sidewalk in this changeset. I understand that it can be easy to unintentionally glue things to each other in iD, this issue can be prevented in the future by opening the Map Data panel in the editor (keyboard shortcut 'U') and unchecking 'Power Features' under 'Map Features'.

Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Thank you for fixing this street name. Please note, however, that we don't abbreviate street names in OSM (see osm.wiki/abbreviations for more info). In this case, 'S McKern Ct' should be expanded to 'South McKern Court'

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/163228139

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/163228139

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/163228139

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/163228139

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/163228139

Reverted

osm.org/changeset/163228139

Is there a reason why service=* tags were removed in this changeset? They seem to have been correct.

Is there a reason why surface, maxspeed, and access tags were removed from these service roads? They seem to have been correct?

Please be more careful in the future, it appears that this changeset broke this no right turn restriction relation: osm.org/relation/16204805

It appears that you accidentally glued a power line to a road. I recommend unchecking 'Power Features' under 'Map Features' in the Map Data panel to prevent this from happening in the future.

This changeset seems to change the neighborhood boundary for North Image into a road. I understand that it might be confusing for everything, including administrative boundaries, to all be in the same layer. This issue can be prevented in the future by opening the Map Data panel in the editor (keyboard shortcut 'U') and unchecking 'Boundaries' under 'Map Features'.

It looks like this changeset turned the neighborhood boundary for North Image / Burnt Bridge Creek into a road and broke the boundary relations for the aforementioned neighborhoods

Hi,
I noticed that this changeset separates the pedestrian walkway on Back Bay from the road itself.

In general, paths like this should only be mapped separately if there's a physical barrier, whether it be a curb, island, etc. Since the pedestrian walkway on Back Bay is only separated by paint, the consensus is to instead use tags on the road itself.

Thanks for the clarification! I'm of the opinion that stretches roughly longer than a Portland block (200 ft) shouldn't be left as a dual carriageway, however you do make a good point about the increased difficulty of maintaining relations and lane tagging as more medians get installed. I know that this can be pretty subjective, so I might start a thread on Slack to give others a chance to chime in.