Thank you for the explanation and for providing the link to the relevant discussion with context

Best regards,
Artem

Hello, my name is Artem, and I'm the QC Lead at OSM Lyft. Could you please explain the logic behind removing the separately mapped HOV road and share the source where the OSM community requested this change? The I-405 HOV road, along its entire length, has the HOV lane/lanes mostly mapped as separate roads where the solid lane is present to show entrance/exit restrictions, and your changes seem to contradict this logic.
Best regards,
Artem

Hello, my name is Artem, and I'm the QC Lead at OSM Lyft. Could you please explain the logic behind removing the separately mapped HOV road and share the source where the OSM community requested this change? The I-10 HOV road, along its entire length, has the HOV lane/lanes mostly mapped as separate roads where the solid lane is present to show entrance/exit restrictions, and your changes seem to contradict this logic.

Best regards,
Artem

Hello, my name is Artem, and I'm the QC Lead at OSM Lyft. Could you please explain the logic behind removing the separately mapped HOV road and share the source where the OSM community requested this change? The I-10 HOV road, along its entire length, has the HOV lane/lanes mostly mapped as separate roads where the solid lane is present to show entrance/exit restrictions, and your changes seem to contradict this logic.

Best regards, 
Artem

Hi Mateusz Konieczny,

I'm Artem, the OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. Sorry for the delayed response. Thank you for reaching out to us and highlighting this issue. Yes, there was a misspelling in the value, which I have fixed in this changeset (changeset/187099488). I also updated the corresponding way and added the same restriction as applied on the gate. Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions.

Best regards, Artem

Hi txemt,

I'm Artem, the OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. Thank you for reaching out to us. We'll let our team know that local mappers will maintain this area, so it would be better to avoid edits on our side. Thank you for keeping the map up to date and accurate on a regular basis.

Best regards, Artem

As I mentioned in my previous response, other navigation platforms work well and correctly interpret this maneuver (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-iBnNw5gWRmdSFnqfYyxxpHZOCyGngOf/view?usp=sharing) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Qc27yEIlPmA79fl9XpygT2f0nqiE2Ben/view?usp=sharing). So perhaps there are some problems with the Tesla route engine.
However, I updated the turn restriction to exclude extra 'via' elements (relation/20624492). I hope this will help to resolve the issue.

Best regards,
Arsiom

Hello icerooster,

I’m Artem, Lyft’s OSM Policy Lead. We appreciate you reaching out with your feedback. Regarding the left turn restriction added in this changeset, it is specifically limited to the maneuver from West Glebe Road (way/590831832) onto South Four Mile Run Drive (way/8796267). This particular restriction is substantiated by Lyft street-level imagery dated 2026-04-23 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CuNdadm1qaKjZKQKQkvxOl-idSS-xlDM/view?usp=sharing). Additionally, other navigation platforms—including GraphHopper, Valhalla, and OSRM—do not show restrictions for any other maneuvers at this intersection.
Please let us know if you possess more recent data or evidence regarding changes in this vicinity.

Best regards, Artsiom

Hi Ygramul,

I'm Artem, the OpenStreetMap Quality Control Team Lead at Lyft. Thanks for pointing this out. As far as I can see, the incorrect tennis courts have been deleted, so thank you for editing these elements. We will revisit our policy on deleting outdated areas that could be overlapped by newly added roads, to avoid issues in future.

Best regards,
Artem

Hi VigilantPenguin,

I'm Artem, the OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. Thanks for raising this issue. You are absolutely right. I have removed the toll conditions from all affected ways in this changeset (changeset/178069341). I apologize for any issues this may have caused
Best regards,
Artem

Hi Udarian,
My name is Artem, and I'm the OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. Thanks for bringing this up. It looks like something is broken in preview mode. Please try using this link with preview: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?panel=gallery&layers=eef6b33da60d47c0964387960c840eea
If that also doesn't work, please refer to the initial page where you can load the map by yourself: https://gis-mdc.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/MDC::address/about

Best regards,
Artem

Hi, wolfy1339
My name is Artem, and I'm OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. Thank you for the comment. According to our current policy, we only tag the segment closest to the exit. Our policy is based on widely accepted practices within OSM. As you know links can be very long, and it seems unnecessary to overload OSM with information without a clear need. At present, we adhere to this approach. However, we may be overlooking something. We would appreciate it if you could share your thoughts or provide links to OSM wiki/ OSM forum discussions explaining why you believe it is important to tag the entire ramp.
Best regards, Artem

Hi Baloo Uriza,

We’ve created a topic on OSM community forum to engage a wider discussion on this topic:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/consensus-regarding-lane-and-turn-lane-tagging-guidelines/133364#:~:text=on%20this%20recommendations-,However%2C%20some%20mappers%20believe,-that%20explicit%20turn

Best regards, Artem

Hi Baloo Uriza,

We’ve created a topic on OSM community forum to engage a wider discussion on this topic:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/consensus-regarding-lane-and-turn-lane-tagging-guidelines/133364#:~:text=Currently%2C%20the%20wiki%20states

Best regards, Artem

Hi Baloo Uriza,

We’ve created a topic on OSM community forum to engage a wider discussion on this topic:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/consensus-regarding-lane-and-turn-lane-tagging-guidelines/133364#:~:text=2.2.-,We%20also%20encountered,-inconsistencies%20in%20where

Best regards, Artem

Hi, Baloo Uriza,

My name is Artem, and I'm OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. As we mentioned in the comment to changeset/166200809 we informed our entire team about this case to prevent such mapping in the future. I apologize for any inconvenience caused by the edit.

Best regards, Artem

Hi Baloo Uriza,

My name is Artem, and I am OSM curation Policy Lead at Lyft. Thank you for your comment. We take into account the vision shared by you and will consider the opportunity to exclude from our workflow the tagging of lanes and turn lanes on slip roads and one-lane links altogether.

We are grateful for your contribution and wish you happy mapping!

Best regards, 
Artem

Hi, Udarian

Sorry, now shared as a public. Please, double-check

Hi, CurlingMan13
My name is Artem, and I'm OSM Policy Lead at Lyft. Thank you for bringing this to our attention and fixing my mistake. I apologize for any issues this may have caused

Best regards, Artem

Hi, Aduxas, sorry for the late response

My name is Artem, and I'm OSM Policy Lead at Lyft.
About the 'way' you mentioned in the comment. According to our street level from September 2024 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Dx7kWdayU9bx-Ki462ELRXOKB44tzkwd/view?usp=drive_link), the ramp changes level from the ground truth, so we decided to mark the bridge from the part where the level of the ramp is different from the base ground level.
If you have any concerns about this tagging, we might delete the bridge tag on this part and add the embankment tag (embankment=*)
But if you have another approach for this case, please share it with us. Thanks for your contribution!

Best regards, Artem