Hi marcmarti,
My name is Santosh, and I am a mapper on the OpenStreetMap team at Lyft.Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and we apologize for the oversight.
According to Lyft-owned aerial imagery source from May 2026(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ClJsT2J291eukRb0HO3uAJLcnxeF2zJu/view?usp=sharing), construction elements are visible in this area, and there is currently no traffic flow. Therefore, removing the TRs would be more appropriate,as the situation may change in the future(Changeset:changeset/185247056).Additionally, the exception was not clearly visible in our sources, which led to it being missed(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rhiz_6sZRgIBWs22heHdTRb9jDN4ek7d/view?usp=sharing).If you have any additional local knowledge of this location, please feel free to make further adjustments as needed to ensure the map reflects the current on-the-ground conditions. I apologize for any inconvenience my changes may have caused and will be more careful with future edits.
The images will be available for a month. Please let me know if you are unable to view them within this timeframe – I could generate them once again.

Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Santosh

Hi Maksim Sazanovich,
My name is Santosh, and I am a mapper on the OpenStreetMap team at Lyft.Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and we apologize for the oversight.
The issue was caused by duplicate ways in this area (way/1529676652)which were left incomplete, resulting in incorrect bridge mapping. In this changeset (changeset/184904988#map=13/35.69265/-120.69760&layers=P), the duplicate ways were removed, and the bridge was mapped only where it exists.We also reviewed the surrounding area to maintain the accuracy and consistency of the data. Please let me know if you identify any other issues or if any further changes are needed here.I apologize for any inconvenience my changes may have caused and will be more careful with future edits.

Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Santosh

Hi ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy ,
My name is Santosh & I am the mapper on the OSM team at Lyft.Apologies for the mistake, and thanks for pointing this out. I’ll review the wiki guidance on placement=transition and the correct usage of width:lanes:start/end to better understand the expected approach.I’ll also share this learning with the team to help ensure we follow the correct approach in similar cases going forward. Appreciate you reverting the change and providing the clarification.

Thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Regards,
Santosh

Hi ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy,
My name is Santosh, and I am a mapper on the OpenStreetMap team at Lyft.Thank you for bringing this to my attention and for taking the time to point out the mistake.
After reviewing the changes, I realized the issue was due to my oversight. I missed the placement=transition tag and updated the lane information instead. I'll make sure not to change the alignment or the number of lanes/transitions when adding turn lanes in the future. I am sorry for the mistake and any inconvenience it may have caused. I’ll also pay additional attention and train the team on such cases, so we do not edit such cases in the future
Thank you again and happy mapping!
Best regards,
Santosh

Hi Roydon Olive,
My name is Santosh, and I am a mapper on the OpenStreetMap team at Lyft.Thankyou for your insight.
Regarding my edits, there was insufficient evidence to determine a more specific classification for the way. As the surrounding residential development does not yet appear to be established and no clear indicators were available from the imagery, I classified the road as highway=service based on the information available at the time. If additional evidence becomes available in the future, the classification can be reviewed and updated accordingly.
If you have access to more recent imagery, local knowledge, or any on-the-ground information that may help clarify the road's function, I would appreciate your input. Please feel free to update the classification accordingly or share any supporting evidence so that we can ensure the mapping reflects the most accurate information available.
Thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Regards,
Santosh

Hi milliendollar,
My name is Santosh & I am the mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your notification regarding my edits in Winston-Salem Fairgrounds and for reverting them.
I sincerely apologize for the mistake and any inconvenience it may have caused. My decision to reclassify the highway as a “service” road was based on my interpretation of recent data sources, including Bing aerial imagery background data showed parked vehicles,which I mistakenly interpreted as indicating general access. I apologize for any inconvenience my changes may have caused and will be more careful with future edits. Thanks again for taking the time to fix this.

Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Santosh

Hi justinsenemy,
Thank you for your message and for bringing this to my attention again. I sincerely apologize for the recurrence of this issue. I fully understand that this was previously addressed, and I take full responsibility for ensuring it does not happen again. Additionally, I am reviewing my processes to prevent similar mistakes in the future, so that the integrity of the map data is maintained.
I appreciate your patience and your continued efforts in helping maintain data accuracy.

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi ion_chi,

We currently lack explicit evidence confirming the one-way designation from the Park Avenue on mid segment. If you’re familiar with the area, your edits to the intersection would be very helpful. Additionally, I have included a via member in this changeset (changeset/179236998) that was previously overlooked.

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi ion_chi,
My name is Santosh, and I am a mapper on the OpenStreetMap team at Lyft. Regarding my edits, the oneway tag was added based on Lyft-owned aerial imagery (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-JrDZ0PQ10-cnNHmO9_O6C_0YNwu7R9R/view?usp=sharing) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RlEy1GXoRpIyHanf-7j2otCAm-_K8GMb/view?usp=sharing) captured in January and February 2026. The imagery clearly shows oneway information visible from both sides of the road, which is why the update was made.
If you have any more up-to-date information or local knowledge regarding this, please feel free to update it accordingly.
The images will be available for a month. Please let me know if you are unable to view them within this timeframe – I could generate them once again.
Happy Mapping!

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi justinsenemy,
My name is Santosh & I am a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you so much for paying attention & correcting the mistake. I added some roads according to the old background & didn’t notice any closure & construction work there. Now, I agree with you that some kind of construction work is still ongoing.
Please accept my apologies for that & I’ll be more cautious in future.
Thank you for going forward and fixing my mistake.

Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Santosh

Hi ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy,

My name is Santosh & I am the mapper on the OSM team at Lyft.
Thank you very much for noticing the issue and correcting it. Regarding my edits: I removed the segment because there was no physical separation and converted it from dual to single carriageway, but I missed fixing the connection with restrictions. I completely agree with your correction. Please accept my apologies.
I apologize for any inconvenience my changes may have caused and will be more careful with future edits. Thanks again for taking the time to fix this.

Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Santosh

My name is Santosh and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. I apologize for not considering the placement tag in this revision. Thank you for your timely correction. I appreciate your commitment to ensuring the accuracy of the map, and understand the reasons behind reversing our changes.
We take the OSM rules very seriously and collaborate with data providers strictly under legal terms, ensuring that we have all necessary licenses. In this case Nearmap provides us a license for imagery usage for OSM mapping purposes. You can read more about Lyft-owned data here: https://github.com/Test-DCT/OSM-LYFT-DCT/blob/1beae15649f43e0bef043fc0ef3950d7cbfdc867/osmtrainingmaterialsfeatures/Lyft-owned%20sources%20(ex.%20proprietary%20sources).md

Best regards,
Santosh

My name is Santosh and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
Many thanks for letting me know about the issue on turn:lanes added.
According to our approach we refer to the green signboard closest to the junction. The green sign board is visible in below street-level imagery which is freshest: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XgpxsNTSnUf14Keejiium5ersr25xSAO/view. If there is a directional arrow indicating an exit, we use that to assign the turn as slight_right.
I will be grateful if you provide your thoughts on these edits.

Kindly let me know if you're unable to access the imagery link, and I will resend it.

Best regards,
Santosh

My name is Santosh, and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
Thank you for your message, and for catching this error! The lanes tags shouldn’t be modified here. I apologized for this mistake. I have reverted my edits in the changeset:changeset/172305783
I will exercise greater diligence when submitting changesets.

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi Buy_osmand!

My name is Santosh and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.

Thank you very much for bringing this to our attention. I apologize for the conflicting information. We will take measures to prevent such situations in the future

Best regards, Santosh

Hi,ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy

My name is Santosh and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.

Indeed, according to our data, this bypass is no longer in place. I apologize for overlooking the fact that this was a temporary bypass. We aim to implement long-term changes on the map (exceeding three months). However, it is not always possible to accurately determine the anticipated timeline for these changes. Thank you for promptly updating the transitions. We appreciate your contribution to OSM.

Best regards, Santosh

Hi mf8s003j,

My name is Santosh, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.
Sorry for such a delayed response, there was some issue with comment notice on our side.
My edit was based on street-level data from February 2025, which shows a left-turn restriction sign present before the median.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GU3Bp83pa1iTX2VOBmu15BETGYeUEtb2/view?usp=sharing
If you have any more up-to-date information regarding this restriction, please feel free to update it accordingly.

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi keithonearth,

My name is Santosh, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.
Sorry for such a delayed reaction, there was some issue with comment notice on our side.
We are grateful for the on ground confirmation of our edits. Happy mapping!

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi Baloo Uriza,

My name is Santosh, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.
Our edit was based on recent street-level data from August 2024, which shows a U-turn sign present before the intersection.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SuOdgRZVzlSZacVucwBkK4o7a-E4cYs1/view?usp=sharing
If you have any more up-to-date information regarding this restriction, please feel free to update it accordingly.

Best regards,
Santosh

Hi, Baloo Uriza,

My name is Santosh, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.
I'm not sure why you removed the edits of the lanes and turn lanes tags. This contradicts the rules outlined in the wiki regarding indication. According to the wiki (turn=*#:~:text=the%20first%20indication%20via%20road%20markings%2C%20signposts%20or%20similar%20indications), a split should occur where the lane count or turn:lanes conditions change. My edits were based on this approach, and the lanes and turn:lanes were edited appropriately.
Also, in navigation, turn:lanes guidance is used for particular destinations independently. If a driver from the main road wants to reach the parking through way/740160600, they receive lane guidance like - left|left|through|through|through|right, where the rightmost lane will be highlighted. Meantime if the driver decides to go to North Rockwell Avenue, they also receive the same guidance. So, in both cases, the driver receives correct lane guidance. However, according to your edits, the driver who wants to turn into the driveway sees incorrect lanes and turn lanes suggestions because the value 'left|none|none|none' is not relevant.

Could you please explain why you didn't follow the wiki guidelines and reverted the edits?

Best regards, Santosh