Hi Baloo Uriza,

My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you so much for your insight! It was not a misspelling.
There are different approaches on the OSM for adding turn:lanes. Our general approach is to add lanes & turn:lanes tag only when there are visible turn markings on the roads or signs showing possible turns.
In this changeset: I only saw a marking for a left turn maneuver, so I added it as left|none|none. Your approach also makes sense that from the rightmost lane vehicles can go straight & right as well. Since I don’t have any signs/markings,I didn't capture it as through;right.
I hope this clarifies my edits.

Thank you for your comment & your contribution to the OSM!

Best Regards,
Tanya

Hi Mashin,
My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. About my edits, the existing building boundary was demolished based on Lyft-owned aerial imagery (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VrBP-KPLgteZMn-fA_lAHmpgQ5nXDPd5/view?usp=sharing) from September 2025 and aligned with information from the OSM wiki. The imagery clearly indicates that the structure of the buildings no longer exists.
Regarding the addition of a new building boundary, I understand the importance of mapping the gas station or new boundaries. However, our efforts are mainly focused on drivable areas, reopening roads, redesigning networks, or updating road types post-construction (OSM/wiki/Lyft). Mapping new buildings is currently outside the defined scope.

I have made adjustments in this area. Please feel free to amend our changes if necessary:
Changeset (changeset/173000735)
Please let me know if you have any further questions. The screenshots 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,
Tanya

Hi Baloo Uriza!
My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. In this changeset, only lane tags were applied according to the signs and markings based on the June Lyft-owned street view imagery: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PU-ucRHe2_rQTOCcQWbwU3PyRnIrSLQP/view?usp=sharing. We did not modify “maxheight” tag here. It was added in 2021 (changeset/113626353#map=15/35.30896/-97.48360&layers=N) and remained after my split, just like all other tags on the new way. This can be observed in Osmcha (https://osmcha.org/changesets/171342837). We are aware of your perspective on how lane tags should be mapped and would greatly appreciate your understanding of our approach. In turn, we do not remove turn lane values if they are added without signage or markings, provided they align with potential maneuvers from the lane.

The screenshots 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.

Best regards,
Tanya

Hi Roydon Olive,
My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment. Based on the recent Lyft-owned street view imagery from May 2025 (49.88782, -97.33026): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vlK2Mwuq4dgvN5g0hrs19trbSWq2t1F6/view?usp=drive_link, it looks more like a huge parking area so that’s why I have added service roads.
It appears this area may occasionally be used as a parking lot. Thank you very much for clarifying the intended purpose of this area. We apologize for any inconvenience caused.

The screenshots 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.

Best regards,
Tanya

Hi Baloo Uriza,

I’ve mentioned in my comment that there are two contradictory approaches. Since you applied the edits using one of them, I shouldn’t change it to the other approach. So I highlighted that in the initial response. And as I mentioned before – I’ll be more attentive in the future on this matter. Thank you once again for pointing that out!

Best regards,
Tanya

Hi Baloo Uriza,

My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.

As we mentioned in comments on other changesets: "Based on the wiki, we don't include bike lanes in the lane count because the highway=* key is mainly used for motorized traffic. (osm.wiki/Lanes#Crossing_with_a_designated_lane_for_bicycles)
However, according to another article, your enhanced approach to tagging lanes is also applicable. (lanes=*#:~:text=lane%20for%20those.-,NOTE,-%3A%20Not%20settled%3B%20orthogonal)
Given our understanding, both approaches can be used, but we shouldn't change one approach to another"

I appreciate you pointing out my mistake regarding the inaccurate edits of already existing tags. I will be more attentive in the future.

Best regards, Tanya

Hi Udarian,

My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment.
Based on the recent aerial imagery from May 2025, it looks more like a huge parking area.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rm3grhCMP7M6hXJeF3LNM4vmUU7qK3OL/view?usp=sharing

However, if you have any additional on-ground details about this place, please update the road classification accordingly.

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

Best regards,
Tanya

Sorry, I posted my response to the wrong changeset. The correct one is below.

Hi Stretch Longfellow,

My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your comment. I appreciate you pointing out my mistake regarding the inaccurate deletion of the construction tags. I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience my edits may have caused, and I will be more attentive in the future.
Regarding the aerial imagery, Lyft has an agreement with the provider to use this imagery for edits in OSM. We can share it as evidence with other mappers if they request it.

Best regards,
Tanya

Hi, Cubbe8!
My name is Tanya and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
Thank you for your comment. I just would like to highlight that, unfortunately, it is not feasible for us to personally verify every change on-site. And it's not necessary for mapping in OSM. In our practice, we use both OSM and Lyft-owned evidence. However, our data is often quite up-to-date. You can read more about it here: https://github.com/Test-DCT/OSM-LYFT-DCT/blob/1beae15649f43e0bef043fc0ef3950d7cbfdc867/osmtrainingmaterialsfeatures/Lyft-owned%20sources%20(ex.%20proprietary%20sources).md. In this case, I removed the access tag based on active telemetry. Please take a look at the attached file with telemetry from the past week: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DZUTsCuDKglhXLlxs6CmpWVTzL9pEJLr/view?usp=sharing. Nevertheless, it confirms the oneway direction you corrected. Thank you for pointing out my erroneous directionality change. Moreover, instead of removing the access=no tag, it is better to replace it with a private tag as you did in your changeset. I am grateful that you promptly corrected my mistake and I sincerely apologize for it. I will be more attentive in the future.

Best regards, Tanya

Hi, Cubbe8!
My name is Tanya and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
Thank you for your comment. I just would like to highlight that, unfortunately, it is not feasible for us to personally verify every change on-site. And it's not necessary for mapping in OSM. In our practice, we use both OSM and Lyft-owned evidence. However, our data is often quite up-to-date. You can read more about it here: https://github.com/Test-DCT/OSM-LYFT-DCT/blob/1beae15649f43e0bef043fc0ef3950d7cbfdc867/osmtrainingmaterialsfeatures/Lyft-owned%20sources%20(ex.%20proprietary%20sources).md. In this case, I removed the access tag based on active telemetry. Please take a look at the attached file with telemetry from the past week: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DZUTsCuDKglhXLlxs6CmpWVTzL9pEJLr/view?usp=sharing. Nevertheless, it confirms the oneway direction you corrected. Thank you for pointing out my erroneous directionality change. Moreover, instead of removing the access=no tag, it is better to replace it with a private tag as you did in your changeset. I am grateful that you promptly corrected my mistake and I sincerely apologize for it. I will be more attentive in the future.

Best regards, Tanya