The turn restriction isn't needed - the road's already oneway.

Note: this area is likely to change a lot in the near future: https://www.deeleyfreed.co.uk/cribbs-urban-village-bristol and http://www.studio-hive.co.uk/?projects=cribbs-urban-village

Nice :-)

No worries - I just wanted to make sure before I marked it as a building passage -- I couldn't be sure just looking at imagery.

Missed the landuse construction - and I use ESRI clarity. I've modified buildings and added service roads.

Because there is now an old footpath running through the buildings I have added a note to ask local mappers to survey on the ground. And it will remind me too when I'm in the neighbourhood.

Please add a changeset comment - it's difficult to click on a "."

I've removed the parking aisle going through the building.

way/672292392

Are you sure the parking aisle goes through the building? GPS track?

Maybe a difference between UK legal version of a private road, versus OSM access=private.

Surprised you don't mark them as access=delivery :-)

I think the outpatients at least is being demolished / reconstructed - maybe also the Cotswold ward too - I would maybe wait a while before editting there.

Thanks for the extra review.

As I said ask talk-GB -- but removing the signed (suspended) onewayness isn't a great idea. The road will likely just get joined back without adding the oneway back as the normal state is lost.

Maybe: use the temporary: prefix then -- temporary:oneway=no, temporary:access=destination

Or if the end date for construction is known make the oneway happen after that date.

As I said ask talk-GB -- but removing the signed (suspended) onewayness isn't a great idea. The road will likely just get joined back without adding the oneway back as the normal state is lost.

Maybe: use the temporary: prefix then -- temporary:oneway=no, temporary:access=destination

Or if the end date for construction is known make the oneway happen after that date.

Well I wasn't happy to see the one-way restriction removed.

Maybe talk-GB can suggest a better approach.

I've rejigged this and just marked roads affected by construction as "highway=construction" and moved the previous highway type to xxx "construction=xxx".

I just don't want to lose info like oneway, etc. when construction is over.

Not sure service roads should go through a building - I'll adjust

Obviously your QA process is for your internal decisions - however, please don't delete them if they get added back in the future.

As for "access=private" -- it seems that you are guessing somewhat -- if you aren't sure (can't find photographic evidence of roadside signage, or similar) then please don't mark highways as private -- an empty tag gives some indication of uncertainty -- a tag thats present should have a full degree of certainty, otherwise they will probably be reverted.

Why did you delete good tracks you added?

How did you determine that access is now private?

Pretty sure some of this area is being demolished and re-developed

Great - sounds like the cleanest way to map it.