piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
anderfo (2024-05-06 11:47:25+00:00): Hi,
for way 126382750 (which you created in this changeset, about 8 years ago) and its nearby segments  which probably stem from the same original way, I struggle to understand what mtb:scale=1;2;3 and mtb:scale:uphill=1;2;5 means.

Can you clarify?

Normally the semicolon means that this tag could have both values, but for mtb:scale you need to select a single value...

Could it be that you merged trails with different values for these tags and that JOSM basically merged the tags for you? (this shouldn't be possible, but it may have happened long ago...)

Now I think it would be better to remove these tags and rather reintroduce them with suitable values for each part (possibly with the original values, if those can be recovered) since at the moment, they do not contain anything useful.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2024-05-06 17:54:39+00:00): hello, you are correct. this probably was the result of an incorrect join of lines. agree with the approach you suggest to fix the data.
GerdP (2015-12-12 08:08:51+00:00): Hi there!
I've changed highway="Station Roundabout"
to highway=mini_roundabout:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35904056
Is that OK? (I am not a local)
literan (2015-12-11 11:27:55+00:00): shop=organic это магазин органической еды, без пестицидов, без удобрений, без антибиотиков, без всего. Такая еда стоит в три-пять раз дороже обычной, и в России всего неск. магазинов с такой едой. Вкусвилл/Избенка это совсем не то, здесь просто молочка и иная продукция без консервантов и химии; молоко там используется с обычных ферм. Так что меняю на shop=convenience
DaveF (2020-04-27 23:57:17+00:00): Hi
Could you explain what the refs (BOK, SAR etc) you've added to railway tracks mean?
Ta.
shrddr (2015-12-11 06:45:13+00:00): подъезд к парковке это действительно просто highway=service, но зачем убирать service=parking_aisle с внутрипарковочных проездов?
Supaplex (2015-12-11 11:33:10+00:00): 运舅场是体育馆吗？如果是跑步的跑道标成体育馆怪怪的
dudka (2015-12-11 12:59:09+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/305589300
Jojo4u (2015-12-13 20:03:16+00:00): Hallo ziltoid,

könntest du bitte für jeden Changeset einen Kommentar hinterlassen? Es gehört zum guten Ton und es schauen hier in Stuttgart mehrere Leute auf Changesets anderer - es hat also auch seinen unmittelbaren Zweck.

LG Joachim
SomeoneElse (2015-12-14 21:25:24+00:00): Something's gone a bit wrong here.  You've added https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3887264860 , but it looks like a duplicate of the already-existing https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3883566264 .
BCNorwich (2015-12-15 07:01:02+00:00): Thank you for pointing this out.  
My mistake, it was a duplicate node, both were on the same spot by the same mapper. I separated them to make sure all tags were on the remaining node. Then inadvertently forgot to remove the duplicate which is now removed.
Georges62 (2016-02-23 14:42:01+00:00): en cours 23/02/2016
andygol (2016-01-29 19:42:49+00:00): Доброго дня, скажіть будь ласка, з якої причини ви створили дублікат цієї точки http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/775552828? І що значить "(експ.)"?
trigpoint (2015-12-11 13:08:07+00:00): No need to shout.

OSM tags are lowercase, hence your additions should be natural=heath.

Cheers Phil
MarkusHD (2015-12-12 14:10:57+00:00): Seit dieser Änderung wird der Wald nicht mehr gerendert.
malenki (2016-01-29 22:45:21+00:00): Hier fehlt die Straße zur Adresse: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/142098664

Dieses Gebäude ist nicht geschlossen: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385393616

(immerhin bin ich nicht allein beim Mappen von Hausnummern :) )
SomeoneElse (2015-12-14 19:18:39+00:00): (continuing the conversation from http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=52960 )

I think that something's gone a bit wrong with http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385248573 - if you click that link you can see that both the start and end of it are " (part of way Over Hill Road (385397014))", i.e. it's a duplicate of a bit of unclassified road.

Unfortunately, within the default editor that you're using I'm not sure how you're supposed to select either the track or the road to do something with them (such as deleting the overlapping bit of residential road).  I'll try and find out, but in the short term I can remove the overlapping bit in a different editor if you like.
One more question - is the name "Over Hill Road" or "Oven Hill Road"?  The bit just to the north has a name taken from OS OpenData as "Oven Hill Road", but it's fairly common for there to be misspellings in that, so if it's really "Over Hill Road" all the way to Birch Vale you can change the name to that (and it would also help to add a "not:name" tag of "Oven Hill Road" - there's an "all tags" option at the bottom left of the editor - you can add extra tags in there).
SomeoneElse (2015-12-14 19:37:40+00:00): (re the selecting multiple ways thing) - it turns out that I tried to find out how to do this a couple of years ago:

https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/23102/id-how-do-i-choose-which-of-two-contiguous-ways-to-edit 

https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/1239
Johnthemap (2015-12-16 15:45:31+00:00): Firstly about the name - it's a odd one - the name is Oven Hill Road at the Birch Vale end, and Over Hill road at the Chinley end. Where it changes from one name to the other is not clear - for example Moor Lodge, which is the farm next to the bit you've highlighted (I'll put a named point here) has used both names at its address (for example on different planning applications). The naming was done by previous mapper, and I didn't edit this (probably), so best to leave it changing at Moor Lodge.
Secondly, I made a bit of a bodge of the edit - in mitigation, one of my first ones. From a point immediately south of Moor lodge, south to the borough boundary, Over Hill Road is an earth track, designated as a restricted byway (New Mills restricted byway 163). North of Moor Lodge, Oven Hill road is a tarmac unclassified road. I've got the location of the south end of the byway correct, I think, but near Moor Lodge it's not right, and you say there's an overlap  on this small section you highlighted (I can't see the overlap on my screen, only  the road). The route also coincides with the National Park Boundary - I must have messed this up too, as someone else has had to edit this again - I did tag my edit as the NP boundary, but I might have missed something else (the 'outer' tag?). To edit this myself, the only way I think I could do it would be delete the small section entirely, then continue the road and the byway to the correct point where they meet, but without knowing how to reinstate the NPO boundary correctly I don't want to do this (maybe someone could point me to how to do this?). The correct way to show the route at this point is tarmac unclassified road (Oven Hill Road) to a point immediately to the South of Moor Lodge (where on the satellite view there is a short drive on the east side of the road, and south of this is the restricted byway called Over Hill Road. As I'm not sure how to do this properly (mainly the NP boundary relation) could someone (else?) do this for me?. I could put  a point on the map where the road status/name change occurs if required.
SomeoneElse (2015-12-16 18:20:06+00:00): Hi, I asked over at https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/1239 again to see if there was a way of dealing with coincident ways in iD yet, and it turns out there isn't. I've deleted a bit of overlapping road, and you can now get at the bit of track http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385248573 that you might want to delete or merge with the piece north or south.  The national park boundary http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2176657 was originally added as a fairly crude boundary - have a look over at e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/162867421#map=19/53.11121/-1.65726 to see the effect.  Originally the boundary relation was made up of separate "boundary=national_park" ways such as http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/162867421 ; the only bit that isn't is the corner near you.  However, it actually looks OK (in that it appears to be a complete ring) so I'd leave it as is for now.

You can check the status of the national park by looking at the "analyze" link from the wiki page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Peak_District , the URL for which in this case is http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=2176657 .
PlaneMad (2015-12-11 19:12:42+00:00): You need to be more careful with changeset comments.
Jothirnadh (2015-12-12 10:49:12+00:00): Okay... I will be careful with that next time. Thanks for reminding me Planemad.
Alecs01 (2015-12-11 18:00:07+00:00): Ciao, benvenuto/a su OpenStreetMap! per il garage, il tag corretto è building=garage (anzi, meglio building=garages se è per più posti auto), area=yes da solo non significa nulla. Ciao, buon mapping! Ale
Supaplex (2015-12-11 16:29:30+00:00): 您好：

歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
下面是台灣社群相關的網站，可以加入彼此切磋切磋！

台灣OpenStreetMap網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw

敬祝畫圖愉快！
naoliv (2016-09-15 20:20:14+00:00): Marcos, os trechos de rodovia que passam dentro da cidade geralmente devem continuar tendo a mesma classificação.
Por exemplo, o caminho da SE-175 que se interliga com a SE-240 devem possuir uma hierarquia sem "quebras" (mantendo-se como primárias, nesse caso)
Marcos Medeiros (2016-09-20 00:25:13+00:00): Obrigado pela instrução, me esforçarei para não cometer esse erro novamente.
naoliv (2016-09-20 00:28:29+00:00): Beleza
Abraço!
Marych_ (2015-12-11 12:36:59+00:00): Hi,
where did you get information about this new railway Angren - Pap?
filu (2015-12-11 13:17:58+00:00): World bank papers, pdf , last page

http://documents.banquemondiale.org/curated/fr/2015/01/23908378/uzbekistan-pap-angren-railway-project
Alecs01 (2015-12-11 18:23:33+00:00): Ciao, benvenuto/a su OpenStreetMap! A quello che vedo questo percorso: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385402797 non è un edificio in realtà, sarebbe da taggare come landuse=residential. "Il Borgo" è il nome del gruppo di palazzine? il commento del changeset non aiuta molto a caprilo :) Ciao buon mapping! Ale
PlaneMad (2015-12-11 16:30:43+00:00): The turn lanes on this way looks incorrect: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/66984273

Can you check?
PlaneMad (2015-12-11 16:30:57+00:00): Also check the other roads around this intersection.
PlaneMad (2015-12-11 19:10:02+00:00): Also your changeset comments don't match the edits.
saikabhi (2015-12-14 07:02:43+00:00): Thank you for the feedback. Have made the required changes.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35938814
SomeoneElse (2015-12-14 21:47:51+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

It looks like you're trying to map a bus route here, but the way to do this isn't to create duplicate streets of existing ones.  I've removed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385405076 and trimmed Alexandra Road back to its former size https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/56457959 .
To add a bus route, you'll want to create an OSM "relation", consisting of constituent ways.  Here's one locally that you might be able to use as an example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1178471 .  If you'd like any help doing it, you could ask over at the help site https://help.openstreetmap.org/ or on the #osm channel on IRC http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IRC - there will be lots of people there able to help.
Best Regards,
Andy (SomeoneElse)
GOwin (2015-12-14 13:28:42+00:00): Asdfghjk
SomeoneElse (2015-12-11 12:53:50+00:00): What does "write error correction" mean?
Alecs01 (2015-12-11 18:28:38+00:00): Ciao, benvenuto/a su OpenStreetMap! Ricorda che la "lingua" dei tag è l'inglese, per cui shop=ice_cream è giusto, come surface=asphalt ;) il nome "Pallacanestro" peraltro non è correttamente un nome, in realtà basta il tag sport=*, vedo però che non lo avevi inserito tu. Ma c'era una specie di mapping party a Brugherio oggi? Ciao buon mapping! Ale
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:14:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
sabas88 (2015-12-11 13:39:13+00:00): Contatta l'utente ed aiutalo ad inserire l'attività commerciale magari :-)
corfede (2015-12-11 13:57:35+00:00): Stefano non sai quanta assistenza faccio per aiutare i nuovi mappatori, anche mediante screensharing hangout e skype. Ma se devo mettermi a messaggiare oltre al tempo che devo impiegare per correggere un errore macroscopico che mi cancella un intero isolato, davvero non vale la pena di coltivare questa passione. Detto questo conosco personalmente l'utente in questione, quindi in questo caso il problema non si pone.
sabas88 (2015-12-11 13:58:42+00:00): Ok :)
malenki (2016-02-08 10:07:17+00:00): Well – when checking housenumbers you should /really/ check them.
At least one of these has an additional error you failed to realise / flag. :)
b-holdet (2015-12-13 20:57:06+00:00): Hej Rillemus,

Jeg kan se at du har udlagt et stort område som en stor bygning, Møllebro.

Hvad er din kilde til denne bygning?
Er det et storcenter eller noget lignende?

I så fald skal det tagges anderledes.
Se gerne i wiki.openstreetmap.org for mere info

/Flemming
literan (2015-12-12 12:26:37+00:00): Приветствую! для POI адреса прописывать не нужно: программы берут их из контуров зданий. Лишняя, немного, работа.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:14:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:14:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
user_5359 (2015-12-11 19:35:51+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Du hat am Namen einer Straße eine Nummer eingetragen (und aus dem Changieset Kommentar entnehme ich, dass dies eine Hausnummer sein soll. Jetzt hat der ein Haus eine Hausnummer und nicht die Straße. Wo befindet sich denn jetzt die Hausnummer 2, die man übrigens minimlaistisch mit addr:housenumber=2 bezeichnet?
Luzandro (2018-05-03 16:50:05+00:00): Hallo Andresek,

Ich habe die Adresse der Raabmühle von addr:street auf addr:place geändert. Den Namen der Zufahrt würde ich jetzt auch noch löschen, da ich davon ausgehe, dass dieser Feldweg nicht tatsächlich "Raabmühle" heißt?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:13:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:14:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-30 03:14:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44771579 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some google.cn derived objects in China
pkoby (2015-12-11 19:31:05+00:00): I saw that you changed back from vinyl_siding to wood, reasoning that there is no tag. But OSM isn't always about fitting into the values that exist. If you look here: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=vinyl#values , you will find that there is someone out there who has used it. Wood is certainly inaccurate, and it would be better to leave it blank than mistaken. I would say keep it vinyl_siding, or perhaps plastic, and hope that it catches on.
acubens71 (2015-12-11 15:28:08+00:00): Bonjour,
Attention aux tags que tu ajoutes : tu as ajouté "access=no" sur de nombreux chemins. Or, cela signifie que le chemin est complètement inaccessible, y compris pour les piétons ou les cyclistes, ce qui n'est bien sûr pas le cas dans le parc de la Combe à la Serpent...
AJA21 (2015-12-11 16:08:31+00:00): Bonjour,
Correction Effectué, merci pour votre commentaire
acubens71 (2015-12-11 16:37:58+00:00): Parfait :)
StaClan (2020-01-05 16:29:34+00:00): Correction to changeset - known in folklore and to date just one documented mention of Ballycashin in Mullinahone, Co Tipperary in the Dúchas Schools' Collection
School: Poll an Chapaill, Mullinahone (roll number 14181)
https://www.duchas.ie/en/cbes/4922234/4862934/5019539
wild (2015-12-17 09:52:34+00:00): Ciao Flavio ,
ho visto che hai modificato dei nomi di alcune strade nella riserva dell'Adelasia CAMCELLANDOLi e inserendo al loro posto i nomi dei percorsi...
Ora ti spiego che i nomi che c'erano prima erano quelli delle mappe catastali e che ritengo non fosse il caso cancellarli ma semmai aggiungere un nuovo tag con quello dei percorsi...
stefanct (2020-09-03 18:25:04+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385427349 surface=gras, obwohls durch mehr oder weniger wald geht? vl. komm ich morgen eh vorbei, falls du's nicht mehr weißt.
erebos1 (2020-09-05 16:04:47+00:00): also Surface=gras hab ich nicht hinzugefügt soweit ich mich erinnere. Den Weg kenne ich gut da passt des meiner Meinung nach ned so richtig
stefanct (2020-09-05 18:50:11+00:00): Lt. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/385427349/history hast du ihn mit dem Key vor 8 Monaten angelegt AFAICT. Wir haben's gestern nicht mehr hin geschafft und sind schon am Weg nach Hause... bitte selbst korrigieren oder mir sagen, was passend ist. Thx
erebos1 (2020-09-07 16:04:20+00:00): also vor 8 Monaten hab ich den ned bearbeitet das war Pitartal.
Surface gras hab ich sicher auch ned hinzugefügt "incline up" mach ich sowieso nie! Ich vermute ich hab den Weg vielleicht geteilt und die Merkmale sind übergeblieben und ich als neuer Erstersteller hervorgegangen, vermutlich hätt ich das Tag löschen sollen...
Hole dass jetzt nach.
stefanct (2020-09-07 17:05:32+00:00): Ja, bei den 8 Monaten hab ich mich verkuckt, hätte vor 4 Jahren sein sollen. Das mit dem Teilen erklärt das... passt, danke!
Geaquinto (2015-12-12 00:05:53+00:00): Perfeito, Thundercel. Vou fechar a nota. ;)
WiktorN (2015-12-12 22:11:31+00:00): Zwracam uwagę na notatkę:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/482262#map=19/52.15911/21.13152

Zgadzam się, że w tej chwili to powinno być:
 highway=proposed
A może nawet - highway=construction skoro już są podpisane umowy na realizację.
Kiekin (2018-07-24 13:28:05+00:00): Kann es sein , dass Bungalowsiedlung I und II vertauscht sind und somit auch alle Adressen? Siehe Geoportal.MV
Geofreund1 (2018-07-24 16:10:59+00:00): Hm, vergleiche mit:

https://www.orka-mv.de/app/#/map=6/359870.81173/5962743.72575/EPSG:25833/S
Danach hatte ich wohl seinerzeit die Adressen eingetragen.
Da bleibt wohl nur eine Recherche vor Ort?
Supaplex (2015-12-11 16:25:36+00:00): 什麼，建宏跟書鄉林都關囉?
bananatw (2015-12-12 08:21:58+00:00): 書鄉林已經在11月底結束營業了。另外建弘書局是二店，總店是建宏書局。
SK53 (2016-08-14 16:10:47+00:00): Was completely mystified as to why the path to S of Rainbow didnt match my recollection, so v. glad about your changeset comment. 

Is the diversion permanent?
user_5359 (2015-12-11 19:42:45+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Entschuldige die Frage sind die von Dir eingetragene Bibliothek und die Bibliothek, die mit dem Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/113476138 eingezeichnet wurden, nicht die selbe Bibliothek? Ein Eintrag sollte doch reichen oder?
rickmastfan67 (2015-12-12 01:35:29+00:00): I'm sorry, but this statement isn't always true.  Case in point, you edited I-79 at both of it's intersections with I-70 changing the ways from 'motorway_link' to 'motorway'.  I've traveled them 100+ times each way during my life.  The way they are built is clearly as '_link'.  Especially Way 15020549 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/15020549).  Only the brand new 2-lane 'mainline' NB ramp at the 'Southern' interchange movement of I-79 NB -> I-70 WB can be classified as a 'motorway'.  It used to be a tight 270 degree loop to do that movement which was tagged as a _link.  Then in the last few years, it was 'finally' replaced by the new alignment (trust me, the old ramp was a killer).
rickmastfan67 (2015-12-12 01:40:37+00:00): Also, when doing this, it can break the 'ref' tag for exits in routing.  With that same way as an example, routers can now be confused as to which way the 'ref' for the 'motorway_junction' needs to be applied since I don't think any use the 'ref:right' or 'ref:left' tags yet for exit numbers.  There are several things you have to take into account before just blindly changing the highway type, especially if you haven't traveled on said highway before.
user_599436 (2015-12-12 01:48:43+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I've reverted the changeset. I noticed most of the changes were originally made by NE2, and that account that is not active.

Do you know of a good way to tell when there is a fork rather than an exit? Perhaps the absence of a motorway_junction ref?
rickmastfan67 (2015-12-12 02:09:47+00:00): Well, a good indicator I use most of the time is the # of lanes in absence of a 'motorway_junction' node if I haven't visited the place before to see the signage or travel the 'ramps'.  Usually if there is just 1 lane, it's a '_link'.  Of course, there are sometimes examples that buck that like this one on PA-28 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/54581955).  Another example would be the I-279/I-376 interchange here in Downtown Pittsburgh.  I-279 use to be the through route up until 2009 when I-376 took over I-279 route between I-79 and Downtown along the Parkway West.  However, we kept I-279 still as a motorway in that interchange, even though PennDOT goofed (in my opinion) and gave some of the ramps there I-376 exit numbers when they should have been '1x' numbers based on I-279 mileage, especially '70B' which really should have been 1A to match the number going SB on I-279, and 70C shouldn't have existed ever here since that's mainline I-279 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/683700293).
rickmastfan67 (2015-12-12 02:18:59+00:00): Some other examples where the 'motorway' tag is legit would be the Northern ends of both I-279 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28410636) and I-579 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/54329607).  Both of them are tagged as 'motorway' because they maintain the same speed limit of the highways they leave, they are both partial interchanges, and the 'ramps' aren't loops.  Most of the time, if you come across a 'loop' ramp for the highway 'mainline' to continue on, hands down that needs to be tagged as a 'motorway_link', especially if it's just 1 lane.
user_599436 (2015-12-12 02:42:27+00:00): Great info, thanks again! It may be useful to include on the Interstate Highways wiki page.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Interstate_Highways

This guideline might need to be clarified "Apply the following tags to every way making up the interstate ... highway=motorway"

I'm reviewing my edits and will exercise additional caution in the future. It's always my intention to make the map more useful by making improvements that apply community standards.
rickmastfan67 (2015-12-12 03:09:33+00:00): I've tweaked that section on that Wiki page some.  Hopefully, it's now a little clearer on this subject. :) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Interstate_Highways&diff=1250540&oldid=1250539
rickmastfan67 (2015-12-12 03:23:58+00:00): Also, if you want another opinion on an interchange, don't hesitate to ask me.  I'd be more than happy to talk a quick look and give an opinion. :)
user_599436 (2015-12-12 03:58:09+00:00): I'll be sure to!
ToeBee (2015-12-13 17:50:47+00:00): What was this changeset doing? Please use changeset comments. I'm trying to investigate an error in a county boundary relation that you touched in this changeset. I don't THINK you caused the error but it would be helpful to know what your changesets were doing. Thanks.
dgitto (2015-12-12 08:25:16+00:00): Ciao. attenzione che c'è sia via Verdi che via Giuseppe Verdi. E sono contigue.
iWowik (2016-01-19 17:08:47+00:00): А чего вдруг Дербенёвская улица, 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/151045137
а не Дербеневская улица?
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0