In my survey notes, I described it as "a bridge or tunnel" in the area of a golf course. Judging from the aerial imagery, it's a culvert-style tunnel containing either a service road or a golf cart path connecting two halves of a golf course.

In the western United States, a common way of grade-separating a major highway and a minor road is to run the road through a large-diameter culvert. It's faster, cheaper, and easier to maintain than either a concrete tunnel or a bridge.

Is there a reason why you deleted the road?

Could you please use more descriptive changeset comments? It makes it easier to figure out what you're trying to do.

Is there a reason you deleted a bunch of sidewalks and the Kalispell Police Department?

Is Meridian Road really one-way over its full length? The road markings don't look correct for that.

Official maintenance isn't the only reason to call something "not a track". If it can be easily driven by an ordinary car, rather than requiring something high-clearance, I'd call it "minor/unclassified" at least to the turnoff of the Rocky Lake boat launch.

Rocky Lake Road looks like a fairly substantial road in the aerial imagery. Are you sure it's a track and not a regular road?

Could you please pay more attention to what the AI is telling you to do? By my count, this changeset mapped: 1) A building that was actually three buildings, 2) A building overlapping a parking lot, 3) A building that was demolished about five years ago, 4) A building that was actually two buildings, and 5) Two buildings that only vaguely resembled the actual structures.

Please be more careful when you're adding buildings. In particular, this building (way/860887050) was already on the map as "recently demolished".

Are you sure about the routing of Bacon Loop Trail? When I hiked it about a decade and a half ago, it had just (as in, earlier that week) been re-routed away from Bean Creek, and no longer followed the lines on the topo map.

When you're moving business information to building outlines like you did here, could you please make sure you don't delete address information in the process?

Generally the only reason to map individual units as separate outlines is if they're physically independent -- you could knock one down and the others would stay standing. That's usually quite obvious from looking at the roof, and the roof of this building is just as clearly a single piece. Addressing of individual units within a building can be handled just fine with address nodes.

A good example of the "physically independent" situation would be this section of Sprague: osm.org/#map=19/47.65705/-117.38177

Thanks for your contributions!

The best available imagery for rural Spokane County is generally "Esri World Imagery". It's not quite as new as the default Bing imagery, but it's far sharper. You can access it through the 'background settings' panel (the button that looks sort of like three stacked sheets of paper).

In the southwest corner of this group of buildings, you've drawn what looks like a single large building in six separate parts. Is there a reason for this?

Is Whipsaw Lane really a zero-lane road?

Are you sure all those buildings survived the fire? The latest Copernicus imagery shows that as one of the more heavily-burned parts of town.

Are you sure that 1) the buildings you're adding survived the fire, and 2) that they're buildings? way/85031847 in particular, to the best of my knowledge, is a parked semitrailer.

You appear to have deleted a couple of fairly significant Forest Service roads here (NFD 550 and NFD 570). Is there a reason for that?

Mapping a road as divided should generally only be done when it's physically divided. There are some exceptions (for example, if the road is *legally* divided by having four yellow stripes down the middle, and is an extension of a physically-divided road, such as with Sunset Highway approaching Airway Heights).

The Argonne interchange is very much not one of those exceptions: not only is it not physically divided, mapping it as divided prevents mapping useful information such as turn lanes.

Running the boundary up to the pipeline is fine, but you should only attach things to each other if they're actually attached. For example, landuse to landuse is fine, as is connecting two buildings that share a common wall. Connecting unrelated things such as a building and a neighboring forest can make it harder to update the map when things change. Connecting objects that aren't physically adjacent, such as an industrial area and a pipeline running under it, can cause confusion -- software analyzing the map data might conclude that the industrial area is related to the pipeline.

A useful technique when mapping objects that are close together is to hold down the "Alt" (Windows and Linux) or "Option" (Mac) key. This keeps the editor from connecting things to each other when you don't want it to.