Hi, this road was correctly labelled Banbury Circle Northeast.

The on the ground street sign reads Banbury Circle Northeast and the county GIS portal shows these houses addressed with Banbury Circle Northeast.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/98268971

The auditor's site still shows a road easement here. Are you sure it isn't a class B or C service road? In that case it should be marked highway=track.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/98041987

In this situation, the road osm.org/way/772941530 should be name="2nd Street". Name is supposed to refer to the commonly used name, typically found on the street signs.

So the name of the street is 2nd Street, but is also Highway 6. Notice the tag ref="US 6". The ref tag is used to denote highway networks which are posted with route shields. This tag is rendered in the standard Carto layer in addition to the name tag. The ref tag can be used for interstates as "I ##", US highways as "US ##", state highways as "IA ##", and county roads as "CR ##"

Heads up, when making names don't use abbreviations. So something like, "hwy 6", should be written in full as, "highway 6".

This allows the renderer to judge when the road name should be abbreviated or not. It also prevents confusion in abbreviations. For instance, consider osm.org/way/15933860. This street was abbreviated as "Heim Str" which someone assumed meant "Heim Street". In reality, "Str" was short for "Strasze"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97320169

Please use Mapbox Satellite imagery if you are going to trace buildings in the Quad Cities. It is the highest quality imagery available and is also aligned.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97225492

Mapbox Satellite is the highest resolution and best alignment for the Quad Cities
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/96879410

Also, per the wiki, the name tag should not be added on holes. The ref tag makes it redundant. osm.wiki/Tag:golf%3Dhole
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/96150568

You deleted a fairway I had already drawn completely accurate and replaced it with a lower quality version. Why?

If you are going to modify a feature that already exists, you should just move the nodes around. Deleting something removes the associated edit history.

* I was referencing the Cedar Creek Timber. Also you shouldn't include the Jefferson CCB in the name. That would be operator="..." You shouldn't use all capital letters unless the item is actually all capitalized. Names shouldn't be abbreviated, they should be written in full.

That should be tagged as leisure=nature_reserve or boundary=protected_area. Landuse=recreation_ground is incorrect tagging.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/96122238

Ok. Just a heads up that "Google" is a phrase that gets automatically flagged in QA applications. That is why I saw your changeset.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/96019688

You are not allowed to use any Google Imagery as reference when mapping on OSM. Google's data is copyrighted and the licensing is not compatible with OSM. Reference, osm.wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps.2Fwhoever_for_your_data.3F
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/96019688

I would recommend against using Bing Imagery in Cedar Rapids. Esri World Imagery is of higher quality, more recent, and more aligned then Bing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/95804432

Here is a list of changesets which are also essentially what you are reverting here. I believe they were all generated with Microsoft Building Footprints. It is evident the user did not manually adjust each building they imported, since many of the buildings do not match their actual footprints. Not sure if it is worth reverting them? Or if it is even possible because of conflicts?

78886283
78747505
78659575
78393716
78393700
77028399
71449909
71783556
79057338
77077142

The satellite imagery is up to date, you simply didn't make the effort of looking at other available imagery. You'll probably want to use Esri World Imagery. I also have to point out that what you marked as a highway=unclassified is actually highway=service. Also you attached a road to a boundary, you should only attach boundaries to boundaries.

Here is a map with bridge clearances across the state. Looks like driving through Davenport would be the hardest for a semi. https://iowadot.gov/mvd/motorcarriers/clearance.pdf

Any idea why they switched it to at-grade? Wouldn't that make the flow rate of traffic slower?

The way should be tagged as either a parking aisle or a service road. It is not a living street.

Some things that imply it is not a living street: it is not named, it is not a public road, it doesn't go anywhere. Living streets basically don't exist in the US.

Things that imply it is a parking aisle: it is on private property, there are parking spots on either side, the road doesn't lead anywhere only to more parking

Why would those road spurs deserve the tag highway=proposed? That particular road was built nearly 20 years ago. The highway=proposed k/v pair is supposed to be used for roads that have been platted, but where construction has yet to start.

OpenStreetMap doesn't sound like the right application for your use case. Maybe Leaflet? You should make a post here, https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=10 . Ensure that you thoroughly describe all of the details involved. I am sure someone can give you a recommendation of a good way to accomplish what you want to do.