There is a difference between a freeway permitting bikes in the shoulder and a roadway having dedicated, marked bike lanes. Freeways do not have bike lanes, nor sidewalks for the same reason. This doesn't address the fact that this roadway provides direct access to properties, something that is explicitly prohibited in a US freeway design. This is a nearly textbook expressway.

Freeways *do not* have RIRO access to adjacent properties; neither do they have bike lanes. The complete lack of access to adjacent properties is, in fact, a defining feature of a freeway. This is not "obviously and undoubtedly" a freeway, especially in a country with a national standard for a freeway (interstate), which this roadway does not meet. Please stop tagging every roadway with two grade-separated interchanges in a row as 'motorway'.

Once again, this is not up to 'motorway' standards for the US. This road has multiple single-carriageway sections, bike lanes, and sidewalks, which preclude it from being a freeway.

How are these Ventura Ave NB & CA 33 SB links 'motorway_link's if they don't connect to a motorway? Northbound link points you straight into a two-lane road, and the southbound link comes straight from a two-lane road.

Hello,
I noticed this changeset removed nearly all of the 'natural' mapping done in this area. I have reverted it, since there are in fact trees where the 'natural' mapping had suggested. Please do not remove these ways/tags where they are not directly erroneous.

Hello,
Please stop bumping Luther Pass Road (CA 89) up to 'primary'. I have lived in this greater area for over a decade and have driven this road many times - this piece of highway does not serve major regional traffic or any cross-country route, and best fits the definition presented here: highway=secondary.

Why have all these single interchanges been bumped up from 'trunk' to 'motorway'? This is against tagging guidelines as specified under the Motorway section here: osm.wiki/United_States/Road_classification

Why are so many urban roads in this area (as well as Los Angeles) being bumped up to primary? Per osm.wiki/United_States_roads_tagging#Primary_tag_2: "A few major urban arterials also may merit highway=primary if and only if they provide a clearly better routing (higher speeds and fewer delays arising from traffic signals, stop signs, or other obstructions) than available urban arterials bearing highway=secondary." NHS does not necessarily correspond to a road being 'primary' in OSM, especially not MAP-21 NHS roads (usually secondary).

I have driven this road a couple times and an unaware of any "Begin/End Freeway" signage existing south of the first at-grade past Santa Cruz Ave. Can you provide any evidence for this signage existing as claimed? Trunks are allowed to have grade-separated interchanges without forcing adjacent highway to 'motorway', and starting and stopping 'trunk' at arbitrary points is bad practice (should be signed at bare minimum to tag like this).

From osm.wiki/Highway_link: links should only be used for slip roads "physically separated by an obstruction or painted island", which this is not.

The intersection of 16th Avenue with CA 198 (east of Lemoore) does not have ramps or any physical separation between traffic turning right off of CA 198 and traffic turning right onto CA 198; why were 'motorway_link's added here?

Hello,
Why is CA 149 'trunk' east of the Shippee Rd. at-grade intersection, but 'motorway' west? The road class switch just after Wicks Corner seems arbitrary to me. If the at-grade is between fully grade-separated interchanges on either end, shouldn't it retain the same class on either side of the intersection simply by symmetry?

Hello,
Just a heads up that I will be reverting this change - these sections of US 101 have numerous at-grade road crossings and provide direct access to properties, both of which are prohibited for a motorway (freeway). Please see: highway=motorway

The majority of this user's edits are in Mexico, and I'm not really in a position to comment on those. Aside from this changeset, the small handful of changesets in the US appear to be valid and worth keeping (77343540, 77343026, 76467611)

Hello again,
I noticed you have bumped many roads up to primary in CA based on them being in the NHS. NHS status does not necessarily correspond with the OSM definition for primary, especially MAP-21 roads which are generally secondary. See: osm.wiki/United_States_roads_tagging, specifically:
"A few major urban arterials also may merit highway=primary if and only if they provide a clearly better routing"

Why was this added? This project was abandoned last year: https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/11/28/710-freeway-extension-alhambra-south-pasadena/

Exit signage doesn't make a road a freeway. I'm just skeptical that a road with bike lanes, sidewalks, a relatively low speed limit, and multiple at-grade RIROs (not to be pedantic, but there are three) is properly classified as a motorway, and judging by the way history I'm not the only one either.

Do the multiple RIRO intersections along this highway not preclude it from being a motorway? Motorways should be fully access controlled and grade separated by my understanding. Wikipedia also lists this road as being a RIRO expressway, not a freeway.

Hello SikeMo,

Please leave the 'access=private' tag on these trails - per Sierra Pacific Industries access policy (https://www.spi-ind.com/OurForests/RecreationAccess), "vehicular use (including mountain bikes) is limited to existing roads" and "We do not allow target shooting, trail building, off-road vehicle use, overnight camping or any fires on our property."

Thanks, Bradley

Hi NorCalRoads,
Many of these roads bumped up to 'tertiary' in this changeset should be tagged as 'unclassified' - please see highway=unclassified. In general, in the US, rural 'tertiary' roads should connect smaller, distinct settlements and are nearly always paved (an exception might by FH 7 through Mendocino NF, currently incorrectly tagged as secondary). While I understand many of these roads are the through roads in these rural areas, these *are* extremely rural areas, and many of these roads serve a very small number of people (single to double digits) in the greater context of the US road network and don't connect distinct settlements; thus 'unclassified' is sufficiently high to describe them. If you are trying to "see" them better on the rendered map, please osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer, and consider that many of the ways in these regions have never been touched since the intial TIGER import and are usually classified incorrectly as 'residential' roads rather than 'track's. The hard work of cleaning up nearby TIGER roads and adding landuse makes these minor roads show up more distinctly.