Weird that this happened twice in the same week but we had the same exact issue as note note/4632537 where a bus bottomed out here on a temporary detour due to the steep angle. No signage but marked as bus=no due to it being physically impassable for buses but I really really don't want to keep doing these because I think it sets a bad precedent.

In Feb 2025 a TriMet Bus on a temporary detour was heading NE on McKillican St to Willamette Drive. McKillican is so steep that at the intersection, the front of the bus got wedged onto Willamette and the bus became stuck. So, this intersection effectively is an unsafe no-go for any kind of low floor bus. There's no official signage here prohibiting bus access, so I debated whether or not to mark this as bus=no or something slightly more permissive so I posted in the OSM US #tagging Slack channel for guidance. The most popular and simple response was to mark this segment as bus=no but to write a note explaining it.

"I'm fine with using =no to indicate that something is physically inaccessible to that mode of transport, even if it isn't signed."

I don't like the potential to start an edit war and I don't like inadvertently setting a precedent where people can put bus=no on any road where they don't like to imagine buses, but... I think this one is worth a try.

Great place

there is no yield signs (or any signage) for east-west traffic, and no roundabout or oneway signages anywhere either. does this still fit the mini-roundabout tag requirements?

centre for health and healing

Are these highway= tagged correctly?

This is now a roundabout