Hi Baloo Uriza,

Our team’s objective is to maintain consistency with the documented OSM wiki guidelines and the consensus reached in previous community discussions.
As mentioned, we only apply specific turn values when we have verifiable evidence to support them, and we treat the placement tag as optional rather than mandatory, in line with current wiki standards. We will continue to follow these guidelines to ensure data integrity across our edits.

Best regards, Oscar Medinilla

Hi Baloo Uriza!

My name is Oscar Medinilla, and I'm a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. As we mentioned in the forum discussion, we don't tag any specific turn key value if we don't have corresponding evidence for it. We proceed to follow the wiki guidelines if another approach is not approved and documented. (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/consensus-regarding-lane-and-turn-lane-tagging-guidelines/133364)
Based on the wiki, the ‘placement’ tag is not mandatory when working with lanes and turn:lanes, so we don't add it as a new tag in our edits. However, we adjust the key if the geometry changes somehow influence the current key value.
Hope the comments above is clarifying my edits.

Best regards,
Oscar Medinilla

Unfortunately as for now these images that I shared are the only evidence that I have regarding possible construction, so I can hardly identify the geometry, extension and nature of it.

Best regards,
Oscar Medinilla

Following the OSM Wiki guidelines (highway=construction), we add any kind of construction tags only where we have confirmation from official sources that construction or repair works will be ongoing for more than 1 month. In this case, we didn't find any confirmation of that, so we will proceed with the edits mentioned in our previous response and add motor_vehicle=private to the missing segments based on the Lyft street level images. However, if you have any additional information about construction or believe that construction tags will be necessary in this case, you can add them on your own.

Best regards,
Oscar Medinilla

Hi, ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy!

My name is Oscar Medinilla, and I'm a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. I appreciate your message and bringing this to my attention.

I have used Lyft-owned street-level imagery highlighted below as evidence to add the motor_vehicle=private tag to road way/169851110:
- 45.453284113666186, -73.74502748250961 Date: 2026-01-16 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CqYGQTgN5C1I0lr3aJs0uvS19Ui-75T7/view?usp=sharing)
- 45.45365971570624, -73.74480921775103 Date: 2025-12-14 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XmQIeaCya3l1DzvoywdqcbmZpWrwSW0s/view?usp=sharing)

Additionally, I used Lyft-owned telemetry, which does not show active passes on this road during the last two weeks (green color indicates the southeast direction) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fyztoNzuPBVFO3cz2G_6u9ELCq5eyyAH/view?usp=sharing).

However, I've reviewed the street-level imagery again to build a logical sequence. While the original edit only covered part of the road, the signage at 45.45436, -73.7454 clearly impacts the merging link and the subsequent ways:
Date: 2026-01-25 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r3gN3cpNA381iTB3YY_GSCBqy5xIJb-6/view?usp=sharing)

Since imagery from late 2025 through January 2026 and telemetry activity confirm these signs are actual, I plan to add the restriction to the entire impacted area for map accuracy. If you have any concerns regarding this or more up-to-date evidence, please share it with me

Best regards,
Oscar Medinilla

Hi, atticquilt!
My name is Oscar Medinilla and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
You are right, I apologize for any inconvenience caused by my edits. I really appreciate your help by bringing this mistake to our attention. Thank you for correcting my mistake, and I will be more attentive in the future.

Best regards, Oscar Medinilla

Hi, user_5359!
My name is Oscar Medinilla and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft.
You are right, I apologize for any inconvenience caused by my edits. I really appreciate your help by bringing this mistake to our attention.
I removed the non exist pond in this changeset (changeset/174967691)

Best regards, Oscar Medinilla