highway = tertiary_LINK?! *quadruple facepalm*

Hello, where did you get thoese refs from? They aren't prefixed with anything, nor are they in any road route relations. Thanks!

According to the OSM Wiki, it's best to map each individual unit of the terraced house, especially if each unit has its own address. See more info here: building=terrace and house=terraced

Okay, I'll be changing these back shortly. (I haven't been to Tucson, but since its state is near mine, I'd assume similar conditions, such as those for roads.)

You commented all those changesets with "Downgraded trunk stub[s] to primary." Well, I decided to restore them to trunk roads as long as they didn't form any "stubs" or anything. The way I re-upgraded them here ensures that there will be a cohesive network, from what was likely the intent of the original user(s) who upgraded them in the first place.

(Is this why [semi-]automated edits are discouraged? Plus, I wonder if no one at the Lyft team knew about the bridge being temporary...)

So, this bridge was temporary after all? Then what was the point of mapping it in the first place, as some semi-automated Lyft account has done?

Hello, why did you retag Mountain Run Drive as an under-construction road? Satellite imagery from Copernicus Browser shows that this portion has been paved over. Thanks!

Hello, what was your reasoning for upgrading the very western segment of Saint Rose Parkway—between the right-turn slip lane and Southern Highlands Parkway southbound—to primary? There's no other trunk or primary road that specific segment can access, as that's what the slip lane is for. Any information helps, as the potion of Southern Highlands Parkway between SR 146 and the median break is divided and technically does not have access to residential properties. Thanks!

Did I say re-align ROAD? I mean re-align landuses *triple facepalm*

For the hundredth time, there's a Wikipedia article on Future Interstate corridors, with 7/9 being one of them. If this isn't evidence for the existence of a future I-7/I-9, then I don't know what is (I don't live in California, but I've been there many times).

First of all, these highways are already tagged as fut_ref=I 7;I 9. Secondly, this isn't "roadgeek speculation" because it represents an actual plan by California to add an Interstate to State Route 99. In fact, that's why it's been upgraded to freeway standards and will soon be upgraded to Interstate standards.

What do you mean? What "budget documents"?

Hello, where did you get the name of "Donovan Way Connector"? I couldn't find it any source for its name. Thanks.

I made a typo in both the comment and the source. The correct URL is changeset/176165267.

Alright, will do!

Oh, okay. Should I delete this polygon, too?

Oh, okay. In that case, should I just delete these "new" freeways since, according to you, they're just temporary?

Alright, I guess that makes sense. But here's the thing: I'm not actually sure if any of the new roads I just mapped are temporary or not (with respect to the construction timeline). The random track road I created linking Summerlin Parkway westbound to the freeway link is temporary for sure, but I'm not 100% sure if the "new" one-lane freeways that parallel the 215 are just temporary road construction bypasses or are indicative of a new project, such as "local" and "express" lanes, similar to what California does with its Interstates.

Oh, alright then. I guess I'll just have to wait then.