Based on the address changes, I'm thoroughly convinced that actual parking that needed to be updated was this one: way/45068139
I reverted this edit, and applied all the same changes to that parking

Hey, two things:
You forgot to delete planned bus stops near the mazdārziņi (fixed)
Generally, it's advisable not to delete and re-add nodes (or other objects), but to edit existing ones, to preserve history. So here, ideally those planned stops wouldn't be deleted, but converted into non-planned ones. Specifically in this case it's not *that* important, but since you requested review ... =)

Additional thing: ideally, those stops should be included into bus route relations once the changes to route take effect. Current routes are relation/11261550 and relation/11261551 , we'll need to duplicate those and add stops to copies, but it will be clear only after RS adds these stops to routes on their site.

What about this path: way/298255368 ?
Is it closed off too?

Also, you missed this tiny connection path from your edit: way/1177100641

way/1493430543
seems to be partially duplicating way/1493402051 from earlier edit

I don't get what happened with bus stop.
Why did you append "Bus Station" to its name? I'm doubtful sign was changed to append English phrase here.
Meta comments should not be included into names: it's already tagged as bus stop, so adding words into name are not needed (unless it's indeed called that, for example on the sign)

Second, is way/1493184059 really a building=garage? Latest aerial photos (which are outdated) show amenity=parking there. Were garages build there instead? Seems to close to primary school. Also, are they really called otopark?

Fair point. I didn't know how/where to connect east path, and thought that it's probably only intended as a path to this house. But I see how in total it looks strange.
I disconnected it from entrance, and connected to west path directly.

access=no is definitely wrong here, changed to access=private.
Also name in russian seems unlikely. Plus is sounds more like a description. Unless it's commonly referred by locals with this name, name tag should be removed.

Looks good
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180230965

Two notes about address tags:
1. As far as I understand, introduced addr:* tags will be striped by latvia-bot on next run, since ref:LV:addr=* is not present.
2. Is house number correct? Previously same place had house number 51 (which again was stripped by bot). It seems like 51 was assigned to structure that was where node/9834190253 now, so I wouldn't say that it is an immediately obvious correct number either.

Reverted and retagged as disused at changeset/179954275

It didn't look just like a vacant shop. It seemed to me that the same premises were used for storage or some business without sign: windows are lined with translucent film, entrance looked a bit refreshed, but no sign of construction work, so I wouldn't expect it to open as a new shop or something.
Would this still be correct to use disused:*=* in this case?

You changed area around from construction, but didn't retag building - it was building=construction. I fixed that.
But I'm not sure about road on the south - is it still under construction?

I would be very surprised if only one was changed. Will remove notes from the stops now.

Hi rusjanis,
I noticed that you've be splitting this street in smaller segments for the purpose of adding turn restrictions in multiple places.
It seems like while doing so new segments are not included in bike paths (EV10 in this case). I don't know what could cause this, maybe large size of the relation?
Anyway, I re-added all missing segments, so nothing from your side, just an FYI)

Both stops have notes on them saying `Rigassatiksme's site says that this stop is called "Anniņmuižas Jaunā pamatskola", but sigh still says "Anniņmuižas vidusskola"`

Was the name changed on the bus stop signs?
If so, notes should have been removed. If not - renaming shouldn't have been happened.

Also, as an aside, just putting a word "исправление" into comment is not particularly useful to anyone, and effectively is same as an empty message

Looks good.
Also updated building outline, since it was rebuilt. But service/living roads behind it need survey.

Thank you!

You are completely right.
I always forget about landuse other than construction. Can you revert this changeset, please?

Seems like this changeset duplicated a bunker in Grīziņkalns: note/5188493

After discussion in OSM's chat, and since your approach seems to be the best what is currently possible with existing tooling, I would like to retract my request of you stopping: please proceed with creation of route=road at will.

Link to the discussion for reference: https://osmlatvija.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/358602-general/topic/Road.20routes/