Hi, this is not a residential road, from aerial imagery it appears to be private farm track.

*sorry, wrong account

Hi, when were these traffic lights installed? do you have a photo or did you find this information on the internet?

okay cool, I see you added the node a while ago (node/10221002603), and in this changeset I added the building (way/1163572116)

Hi, thanks for fixing these issues, but please don't delete features just because they're private. the best solution is to split the road at the point where it becomes private, and change the private section to a "driveway" or "service road" or "farm track".

This will stop software from routing people down these private paths, but still keeps them on the map for software that intentionally make use of private driveways (e.g. courier services and some navigational apps)

I've added a private driveway at this location as an example, let me know if you've got questions

yeah, there's a tool which works quite well: https://revert.monicz.dev unfortunately it's tricky to tell which aerial imagery is the latest, and it's especially weird when something like a wharf gets demolished

hey, the aerial imagery you used is about 10 years old. these wharves were demolished in 2018 (see https://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=106175 ) due to earthquake damage, along with all many other nearby buildings. I think Bing or LINZ is the most up-to-date source of aerial imagery in wellington

hey, if construction hasn't started then the roads can be changed from `highway=construction` to `highway=proposed`, like other parts of milldale. I changed them to construction based on the massive earthworks I saw about 6 months ago, which is now visible in the editor (you need to choose "Bing Aerial Imagery")

regarding the laneways within each residential block, you can see them faintly on the PDF, similar to the existing back-alleys in Milldale which are tagged as `highway=living_street` or `highway=service` + `service=driveway` (e.g. way/725720791)

sorry, what I meant is, it's helpful to keep tags like route=bicycle on the individual relations too, which I see you've just added back, thanks

regarding how you would see the whole network - for most networks it's unfeasible to create a super-relation (E.g. all ATMs in NZ or all state highways), so the usual approach is a query like
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1uq5 or
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1uq7

in small cases like this, there's probably no harm in keeping your superrelation, as long as the individual relations still have the correct tags

hey, you requested a review on a few of your recent edits - they all look good, thanks for making these improvements :)

hey, i didn't hear back from you so I've added these roads back. all the names are still there, thanks for adding those the other day

hey, i think if you create a super route, you're still meant to keep all the tags on the original routes. otherwise it breaks lots of apps that don't understand superroutes.

Since this is more of a network than a mega-route, I think the usual approach is to use a tag like cycle_network=* (see http://taginfo.geofabrik.de/australia-oceania/new-zealand/keys/cycle_network#values for some examples)

what do you think?

hi, did you mean to delete all these roads? they are visible in both sources you linked to

sure, the first step would be to query all the features you want to update - for example this query https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1tZI finds all ways (lines & areas) with "name"="North Island Main Trunk" but no "railway:ctc" tag

it's generally a good idea to do small sections at a time - you can limit your query to an area with the 🖼️ button on the map.

then you can click "export" to load the data into JOSM or the Level0 editor. I personally don't use JOSM but assume it has a method to select all features in a layer

Hey, my changes were based on info from a friend that this part of the road is open for locals & contractors going to Warkworth Ridge

the rest of the details are from https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid025VpYe5aVcroEwKgA3uKbFKtmNy8dQYR9JywvYBrQuxn6dfANtSEJk3MFZUq2oS2wl&id=100063684983759&mibextid=Nif5oz and https://youtu.be/ncGdXfe-9ZM?t=2 - you can see a glimpse of the shared path in the first few seconds

thanks :)

hey, it might be faster to do a bulk update for this tag if you're interested - my understanding is that the entire line between node/10536363520 and palmerston north should have `railway:ctc=yes`?

Hi, why did you remove this tag? the boat ramp has a capacity of 40-70 parallel trailers depending on their size and the event. The iD editor suggests tagging the capacity of slipways using the `lanes` tag instead of `capacity`, is this not correct?

thanks :)

hey, not sure what you meant by this comment, should I add the tag back with proper capitalization? thanks