Question, can you check your data and see if ways
way/1149564737
way/1149564718
way/1149564715
Along with all other ways tagged to be under construction linked to the above mentioned ways have also opened since this is one big construction site and I doubt that one would open but not the others since they all link to each other.

I agree with Joseph R P here, I went through that Reddit post, it has no links to official FDOT pages, news articles or anything, I google what I think is every possible combination of terms to find this from the post and found nothing, I spent hours on that. It could be possible I missed it, but I highly doubt that. Bvonter23 since you obviously want this project to happen, contact your local and state officials and ask them to make this happen, until construction actually starts on something highway=construction is not appropriate. As I said in the post above OSM is a map of the real world and what we want doesn’t really matter unless it is being built in the real world. Again highway=construction is only for features actually being built, so until something is actually being built it doesn’t belong on OSM.
Hope you have a good day.

Please respond
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145539922

What’s the source for this, I don’t see any signs prohibiting bikes in these ways. Also “ not specified” is a nonstandard tag, use something else.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146342554

What’s the source for this, I don’t see any signs prohibiting bikes in these ways.

This is all I’m going to post here on this matter, have a good day.

I’m sorry but I didn’t quite understand the above comment, did you put the change set on Reddit or a link to sources, because if it’s the scone option(link to sources for this commit) please physically link it in the comments here(the post).
I asked for sources because I didn’t see construction on areal imagery and couldn’t find and FDOT or any other official sources mentioning a project here being under way or even planned so I was suspicious that this was vandalism due to mapping of imaginary/wanted features. It didn’t help that you had in the past (at the time, you’ve continued this behavior since looking at your commits) tried to add fictitious bridges in Vietnam (along with other such features. So due to passed behavior and no sources to be found the edits in this commit were removed.

A point here, highway=construction is meant for features that are in the process of being built. That is why the ways added were removed, because it seems there aren’t any such ways being built (or even planned, which in that case would be miss tagging because there is specific tagging for planned features). highway=construction does not apply to features any one individual wants, OSM is a map of the real world as it exists, not what one may want it to be, if you want a change to the highway petition the Florida government to make that change, if that petition is accepted, planned, announced and work starts then it can be mapped as highway=construction on OSM because it would then be real.

Then wouldn’t something like toll:sunpass=yes or toll:sunpass=designated be more appropriate?

Also, shouldn’t the through lanes have hov=designated on them?

What is the source for the new name for “State Road 821 Access Road”?

Wrong comment, it was supposed to be:

Updated alignment of highway link such that the turn lane tagging is better represented as it is

Why did you delete that track, it seems to be there on the bing imagery
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145718769

Again I would really like to know when you made those tagging changes as per the above comment I left.

Question, why are there so many vertex deletions along the coast lines?

Can you please respond, I would really like if you could respond about the second point in the above comment.

Looking at the video linked in the change set comment it seams the from way way/87553350 to node node/11417293763 on way way/38840376 it is closed and under construction since that seems to correspond to the part of the highway shown in red in the video. So to me that implies it should be tagged as such.

A few notes here:
It seams you just removed all the bicycle=designated and bicycle=yes but left the segregated=no which together mean that the you can ride your bike down that sidewalk/footpath but there is no segregation between the normal pedestrian and bike traffic, segregated=no means nothing without bicycle=designated and bicycle=yes. As a note I see no reason to remove those tags in the first place, so the question becomes why did you do so, because from my understanding those tags should stay, so please add them back.

The second point is that in one of the residential areas you changed the access on a foot path from motor_vehicle=no to motor_vehicle=private which would imply that private vehicles are allowed on that pedestrian foot path, this seems illogical thus I assume this is a mistake, please fix this, also I assume in that same residential area horses are not allowed so horse=private should be brought back to horse=no .

In general please stop removing bicycle=yes from public sidewalks and other footpaths.

Wouldn’t that mean that ways such as way/992722249 would now need to be tagged using the construction tagging?

again busses are the only form of traffic allowed on these ways so this commit is incorrect

this is incorrect, busses are the only vehicles aloud on ways
way/807636696
way/807656900
way/807636695
so they are busways.