Hi,
Cannot add way/675779641 to relation/675779641 as that way shares segments with an existing member ways segment.

I have fixed this. Take care.

Make changeset comments!

This changesets undoes your previous road classification changes ..

Helps you track what you are doing.

And helps others who come across your changes.

A fixme, note, or a comment in descending order of 'importance'. Rather than just 'fork' .. for example, "another track takes off on the east" .. adds more information. I expect some of these will be dead ends.

Adding a tag of name=Fork says nothing about what is there. Fairly useless information.

Same with other name only tags.

Adding a node with only the tag name=Willoughby seafoods is not good. There has to be a physical tag ... shop=seafoods or amenity = restaurant.
Same with 'Baby Savings'.

Hi,
The towers throw errors in OSM inspector - no physical key. The problem is the relation ... thought a site relation would be better .. looked that up and that then suggested a simple way around the outside .. and the best thing for that I think is landuse=commercial .. with the name, website and address on it. Then the towers can have their names building etc on them.
So this what I have done, deleted the relation and made a Way: The Citadel Towers (675737940).

See how that works?

Hi,
Welcome to OSM!

This changeset has added no new roads.
It appears to have attempted to make a section of 'Research Park Drive' as being under construction?
I have removed that suggestion.
Comment?

I'd use what there is there as a basis for another go. Most of it is not rendered .. some of it has no tags. Certainly some of it will be useful.

I'm not local so cannot help. Good luck to who ever takes it on.

The LPI Base map shows a different alignment.

It is not possible to use a GPS for the underground track.

I suggest that the track be aligned to the LPI Base Map data.

Hi
You have the construction tags wrong. They were correct before you changed them.
See osm.wiki/Construction

E.g. Node: Cherrybrook (2699627446)
Tags:
"name"="Cherrybrook"
"station"="subway"
"construction"="yes"
"railway"="station"

Should be:
"name"="Cherrybrook"
"station"="subway"
"construction"="station"
"railway"="construction"

Hi,
Node: Wynstan (2422532836) has no physical tags ... delete?

Hi,
Is this cycleway construction open by now?
Way: 402570220

Really destroyed the path I survey there...
And combined it incorrectly with the suburban boundaries...

Hi,
Looks like the cycle trail joins the road to cross the bridge. If it does than then the cycleway tail ends on both sides of the bridge as a cycleway. The route should then include the road as part of the route.
If the cycleway is separate from the road then they presently overlap - using some of the same nodes. Those need to be separated out.

Let me know if you need help - you'll have to tell me what goes on there.

Hi,
These are better viewed with the NSW LPI Imagery.

Way: Marsden Oval (655863367) Not a park. Part of the school .. recreation ground.. probably.

Tree area .. the 'name' is a description - use description= tag for this.

Revert.

No changeset comment... again.

Tree cover is NOT repeat NOT a park and therefore has no name.
Reverted. and change sets 67786489 and 66042338.

Lambert park is NOT all trees.

The area of Lambert Park is best mapped using the LPI Base Map - not an area of trees and grass.

Reverted.

Arr .. it is only documented on the Australian tagging guide lines .. not paid attention to that bit as it is not something I have mapped.

Thanks.