I have started a conversation on the forums to see what the Florida community would prefer to standardize on when it comes to SR vs FL. If you want to comment there feel free, the link is https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/unifying-florida-ref-and-other-related-tagging-sr-vs-fl/141158 .

as for the stuff about the expressway segment, it is only "divided" between the ramps for the highway so I wouldn't really call that short segment a "expressway". From my understanding this is way to small to be an expressway. Also, if this is an expressway, allot of roads in Miami Dade could have "expressway" segments at highway entrance/exit ramps between the ramps.

I don't know how accurate the light poles around the Golden Glades Interchange are due to the fact that there is allot of construction in the area (it is not on bing aerial or esri), for more info see https://go-ggi.com/
as a note for you going forward there is also allot of construction around the intersection of Dolphine expressway, I 95 and and I 395, for more info on that see https://i395-miami.com/
If you have any further questions feel free to respond here or send me a private message through OSM, I am also on the OSMUS slack. you also don't have to delete everything as there is newer imagery from the county that shows some of the progress (its from early January of 2025 and there has been quite some progress on the construction since, with some recent changes from the Lyft team using their newer imagery). I can tell what that imagery is if you want (you can use it as a custom imagery layer in iD).

Happy mapping,
Udar.

What is you source for this building existing, I can confirm that it seems to be under construction on the latest imagery available from the county, but that is not listed in you sources or imagery used, so I am wondering what you used.

Happy mapping,
Udar.

Thank you so much for the change, this has been really helpful.

Happy mapping,
Udar.

South Dixie Highway is a long road, saying that it is an expressway is incorrect. I may understand if US 1 was dual carriageway for the area around the ramps for HEFT, but it isn't, it is dual carriageway for basically all of South Dixie Highway, so saying that this small segment is an expressway because of a feature that is present across its whole run seems incorrect.
There has to be a reason why South Dixie Highway was tagged with SR 5 so I would much prefer that a discussion would be had with the larger US OSM community on what the best way forward would be because, for consistency, if this segment gets changed to FL 5 then all roads tagged with SR 5 (or at least all of South DIxie Highway) should be converted to FL 5.

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

why did you change HEFT from SR 821 to FL 821, what was the reasoning behind this change?

Happy mapping,
Udar.

a few questions, first along its run South Dixie Highway is tagged unsigned_ref=SR 5 so I think changing that would would require larger conversations, at minimum in the local-florida channel on the OSMUS slack but ideally with the larger US community as there is likely a good reason for the existing tagging. Second, from my understanding South Dixie Highway is not an expressway so tagging as one is incorrect. Third, why did you remove parts of HEFT where it meets with South Dixie Highway from the HEFT relation?

Happy mapping,
Udar

When you can see both the base and the roof of a building in the aerial imagery it should be aligned to the base of the building, thus several of the changes in this changeset are seemingly incorrect. See the following wiki pages for more details:
osm.wiki/Roof_modelling and osm.wiki/Buildings

Happy mapping,
Udar.

have you checked if the address 5700 Biscayne Boulevard no longer exists because if it still does it should have been removed from the building and placed into a node before the tags were removed from the building to turn it into the inner of the multipolygon.

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

what did you use to check if the addresses you deleted no longer exist because according to official Miami Dade County sources 227 Southwest 6th Street and others still exist

(Sorry for the comment above this one, I accidentally hit comment before I had fully written the comment)

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

what did you use to check if the addresses you delted no longer exist because acording to oficial Miami Dade County sources

the ALPR added in this changeset is inside of a parking space when looking at it with the aerial imagery (I have checked with multiple aerial imagery in iD), please double check its position and fix it.

Happy mapping,
Udar.

again, please be more careful next time, these service roads no longer exist.

happy mapping,
Udar.

please stop doing this, there are literal highway=construction ways under the service roads you added within a construction area, there is active construction in the area, this is something that I can attest to as I drive by often. Please be more careful next time you add service roads.

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

the service roads you added at Southland Mall do not exist any longer due to construction in the area.

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

next time please add a better changeset comment, for this changeset a comment of "added an electronics repair shop" would be sufficient, for more info see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

quick question, can you please look again and see if as part of this construction sidewalks have been added along Northwest 107th Avenue on the side of the street of this construction site based on the imagery you used for this changeset?

Happy Mapping,
Udar.

due to this changeset the geometry of the buildings is now broken, why have you done this?

Happy mapping,
Udar.

please respond to the above

This is incorrect, this section is under heavy construction for the go-ggi project (https://go-ggi.com/) from the FDOT, this project is doing massive amounts of construction around this highway interchange. The Bing aerial imagery is from January of 2024, the project had barely started at that point, there is newer imagery from 2025 that shows these roads as not existing any longer, they where mapped in the way they were for a reason. The new 2025 imagery can be used in iD as "Custom" imagery using the following URL template:

https://imageserverintra.miamidade.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Woolpert2025/ImageServer/exportImage?f=image&bbox={bbox}&bboxSR={wkid}&imageSR={wkid}&size={width},{height}+

please double check before doing something like this next time, things like this missing usually have a reason for being that way that is documented in the history of the object and the changeset comments of the changesets that made the changes, for example the changeset where I deleted the sections that now do not exist due to the construction and updated these ways as being under consturction since they do not form a valid network is 172670355 where I clearly put in the changeset comment that the changeset is done based on newer imagery to update what I could of the area due to construction in the area. The relevent part of the changeset comment is "various alignment and tagging fixes based on newer imagery at the GGI".

Happy Mapping,
Udar.