Hi tcarlisle,
In the future, can you please write a more descriptive changeset comment? To keep data quality high, I and others review others' changesets. [0] Having a descriptive changeset with a summary, justification, or other info makes it much easier for the community to skim changes. There is a wiki article about good changeset comments. [1]
For example, for this changeset you might put something short like "Add fences, improve stream geometry, improve rail depot features".

[0] https://osmcha.org/?filters=%7B%22users%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22tcarlisle%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22tcarlisle%22%7D%5D%2C%22date__gte%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22%22%7D%5D%2C%22checked%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22Both%20Good%20or%20Bad%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22True%22%7D%5D%7D

[1] osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Honestly, I agree with you that east should be part of the housenumber, logically. But ultimately I think I agree with Martijn that house umber should be just that, a number. Anyway, Utah's grid system is really nice imo but it can really lead to some weird edge cases like this.

Thanks for looking out! Happy mapping!

Hi! Not because of doubt of your observation, but because I'm curious and want to find them myself, how did you identify this ALPR? In this case, does your specified source of local knowledge mean you noticed it visually on the pole?

Hi, thanks for going over these! Only potential issue I see is the addr:street tag - it's my understanding that they are generally understood to be concatenated with addr:housenumber, so having the directionals both on street ("East 1400 North") instead of just the second one makes sense.

Eg full address would be "555 East 1400 North" instead of "555 1400 North" if that makes sense.

Hi, have you seen the following wiki page? osm.wiki/Utah/Naming_Conventions
Roads in Cache Valley generally follow that schema.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, (and because I review most changesets in my area), I looked over your changes. There are a few issues, but looks great overall! Here are some tips:
- Especially since these features aren't visible on the commonly-used satellite imagery, you should specify a source for your edits. Survey (seeing it in person) or local knowledge (from memory) are excellent sources!
- You have changed a sidewalk to a residential road along Factory Street. In this case, the existing (footway) sidewalk seems like the correct classification.
- In OSM, we generally avoid using abbreviations. So, this new street should be named "North 900 West" instead of "N 900 W".

I went ahead and fixed those issues. Let me know if you have any questions. And thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OSM! Thanks for your many recent contributions. StreetComplete is a great way to add lots of detail when out walking around. Let me know if you have any questions, and happy mapping!

That trailhead never knew what hit it.

Roger. Updated tags.

Is it open as of now?

Howdy! I agree with the removal of lift_tickets as it is not used (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/lift_tickets#overview), but rental=no seems appropriate? Why move that to description?

Howdy! The aquatic center here already has an outer area with the name and other tags, so I moved the data you added from this concession / office building to the overall area feature. Let me know if you disagree with that!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for your contributions here - looks great.

Reverted! Thanks!

Howdy! Thanks so much for explaining that reasoning. My changes in this case were mostly done with enabling future edits in mind. Specifically, I find it easier to update tags and geometry when clicking on some feature selects one feature, if that makes sense. However I did notice that everything in this area was following the "overlapping ways" paradigm, so in retrospect I think I should have tried to contact the original mapper (you in this case, I guess) to come to an agreement first.

Anyway, sounds like a revert is in order? Thanks for caring about data quality and communicating with your fellow mappers! :)

Hi, and thanks for your contributions! In this changeset, what is your source for changes? Did you notice that the highway you added the name for already has a ref= tag? It's my understanding that unless signed as such, this type of attribute is best represented by osm.wiki/Tag:ref=.

Thanks for looking into this! I think I found a dataset from BLM that contains the relevant polygon: https://gbp-blm-egis.hub.arcgis.com/maps/df026e4da520481ea929cf4b400d8266/about

I'm happy to import it, but am a little unsure as to license compatibility. The "license" copy on that page is not very helpful...

Tcarlisle, thanks so much for your detailed response! And sorry it's taken me so long to respond. Your explanation makes sense to me!

Thanks for your contributions!! :)

node/83327020
Are you referring to this intersection? Everything there looks fine to me as well. What routing tool are you using?

Also, please submit your changes in one area before moving on to the next. That makes it a little easier for other contributors to review your work and answer questions.

Thanks for your contributions!