piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Sébastien Pi (2025-09-14 16:21:51+00:00): Bonjour,

Je vous rassure, je l’avais bien lu.
Mais cette notion « définitive » n’a pas été reprise par la presse qui écrit.

https://www.lavoixdunord.fr/1616607/article/2025-08-19/la-piscine-neptunia-fermee-partir-du-1er-septembre-apres-la-decouverte-de-graves
« fermeture plusieurs années »

De plus sur le site officiel : https://www.piscine-neptunia.fr/silh/lactualite-du-centre-aquatique/2025-aout/2627-fermeture-de-la-piscine-a-compter-du-1er-septembre
> Nous vous informerons régulièrement sur l’avancée des travaux et la réhabilitation future de la piscine.

Semble indiquer qu’il y aura une « réhabilitation ».
C’est curieux que le site de la mairie et celui de la piscine reprenne le même mot dans deux directions différentes.

Mon opinion personnelle est :
* elle sera au moins fermée plusieurs années ;
* soit c’est « réparable » (et rentable) de réparer, elle le sera (mais ça semble peu probable vu les mots employés) ;
* soit ce n’est pas « réparable » et c’est une nouvelle piscine qui verra le jour (les mots employés par la piscine semblent indiquer qu’il y aura bien quelque chose).

Si c’est une nouvelle piscine, elle sera peut-être ailleurs. Elle aura peut-être le même nom, mais peut-être pas.
Vu le temps nécessaires pour les votes, appels d’offres et autres. Je pense que nous n’aurons pas d‘informations « définitives » de sitôt. D’autant qu’elle est intercommunale, il faut que Loos « valide » aussi.
À voir si j’en grapille au prochain conseil municipal, mais je doute qu’il y en ai en 2025.

Pour cela que je suis un peu plus conservateur que vous sur le nom et le fait que la piscine ne rouvrira pas.
Y a-t-il des choses que vous voudriez préciser dans ce qui a été modifié (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/63562601/history/10) ?
Tosenbo (2025-09-14 18:19:34+00:00): Si vous suivez l'actualité locale, je vous fais confiance, personellement j'ai suivi uniquement à partir des actualités.

Pour les tags, c'est vrai qu'"abandoned" convient probablement mieux,
j'avais mis was car je trouvais pas ça fou que le nom de la piscine s'affiche encore sur la carte, surtout qu'au minimum la piscine sera fermé pendant plusieurs années.

Et sinon je pense il pourrait être pertinent de mettre le parking vélo en access=no, car j'imagine que les grilles seront fermées jusqu'à réouverture ?
Sébastien Pi (2025-09-14 19:17:51+00:00): Ça marche.

À ma connaissance, il est convenu sur OSM de laisser les noms tant qu’ils sont visibles sur le bâtiment (car ça permet de se repérer éventuellement).
Mais je comprends votre confusion sur le fait de voir un nom apparaître. Normalement, ça ne doit plus être le cas en « abandonned ». Chez moi, il n’apparaît plus sur le carte normale.

Je ne sais pas. Le parc derrière est accessible de là et ses horaires dépendaient de la piscine (je ne sais pas si c’était le personnel qui ouvrait, mais les horaires étaient calqués).
Je n’ai pas l’impression que le bâtiment risque de s’effondrer à court terme (sinon il ne serait pas resté ouvert qq semaines en plus !) et comme il n’y aura sûrement pas de travaux avant des mois, je suppose que le parc va rester ouvert. Ce qui implique de passer par le chemin de la piscine.
Mais ça demande vérification. Il faudrait que je vérifie l’impact sur place, j’habite juste à côté. J’essaierais de jeter un œil demain.
Sébastien Pi (2025-09-15 10:40:07+00:00): Sur la grille de la piscine : « et envisager la réhabilitation rapide et sécurisée de l’établissement ».
À propos des villes qui gèrent le lieux. Donc, c’est à l’étude de « réparer » si possible. Mais sans garantie pour le moment.

Niveau parc, pas de changement : officiellement la grille est censée être ouverture aux anciens horaires de la piscine (je suis passé avant, donc il faudra que je repasse pour vérifier).
Côté bâtiment sportif, la grille était bien ouverte par contre.
Possible que l’entrée du parc n’est possible que depuis la salle de sports. Je verrai si c’est pareil la prochaine fois.

Donc oui, il faudra peut-être modifier les accès sur cette partie. Bonne question que vous avez posé !
Sébastien Pi (2025-09-21 19:10:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4962926
Je vais fermer les accès au parking. Les deux fois que je suis passé, l’accès au parc était fermé de ce côté. Depuis la salle de sport, c’est étonnant car c’était fermé aujourd’hui. Je ferai un 3e passage pour voir s’il a lieu de le fermer aussi.
Sébastien Pi (2025-09-26 16:43:46+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172494675#map=15/50.61392/3.00852&layers=VN
Donc, il est tout à faire possible d’aller sur le parking de Neptunia. Seule le deux grilles depuis la rue Thirion sont fermées. Tout le reste est ouvert.
J’ai mis les deux voies de services liées aux grilles en no (bien que les grilles soit locked, je sais que cet attribut n’est pas utilisé par toutes les applications). Le reste a des accès normaux.
eggie (2025-09-05 06:52:25+00:00): Dag Waterleiding. Die oprit is er natuurlijk wel... dus waarom moet die weg?
 Je zou wel service=driveway kunnen toevoegen en evt een accesstag.

MVG
eggie
TrickyFoxy (2026-01-16 20:31:21+00:00): 👋 Note that you added an extra node to the relation https://osm.org/relation/19566254

You also incorrectly specified the restriction:conditional tag in https://osm.org/relation/19566253

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions
Im Fokus (2026-01-16 23:51:01+00:00): extra node - so what?
TrickyFoxy (2026-01-17 11:45:54+00:00): https://osm.org/node/13120296039 This node was added to a relation without a role. Now that I looked more closely, I realized it's a road sign, but it doesn't need to be added to a type=restriction relation.

https://osm.wiki/Relation:restriction#Members
Im Fokus (2026-01-17 19:42:45+00:00): No need, but not a mistake either. Then everything's fine.
Benoît C MdP (2025-11-10 17:16:51+00:00): Bonjour

Il s'agit pourtant d'une piste cyclable et certainement pas d'un "trottoir ouvert aux cyclistes".

Je corrige.

Bonne continuation

Benoît
rskedgell (2025-11-04 14:30:15+00:00): I've truncated the decorative sidewalk stubs from this and related changesets to the nearest junctions, as they are detrimental to pedestrian navigation.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174196909
rskedgell (2025-11-04 15:04:19+00:00): Ends of crossing ways connected to the kerb nodes, which were already mapped (in 2017) in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174198530

The segments of kerb which had been mapped included information about the kerb height and the presence of tactile paving. Mapping separate sidewalks, but ignoring accessibility information which has already been surveyed is very unhelpful to users with visual or mobility impairments.
VLD318 (2025-11-05 18:38:43+00:00): Hello rskedgell, 

I will keep this feedback in mind going forward. Thank you for the advice.

VLD318
marczoutendijk (2026-01-11 12:55:48+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1427223144#map=19/36.596161/136.738577

building:levels=9999

Is that a mistake?
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-05 04:52:08+00:00): These edits don't appear to be golf course changes, rather it looks like you mapped buildings and roads completely unrelated to the golf course. For the sake of making it easier for future editors to understand what was changed, please make sure your changeset comments accurately summarize what was changed.

Also, please don't draw buildings as simple squares. You should be outlining buildings as accurately as possible and, for buildings with right angles, squaring them so they don't look jagged.

Future editors have to redraw buildings like this, and current users/editors will have a hard time discerning which building they are looking at on the ground.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171473977
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-09-05 13:58:01+00:00): Thanks! Be careful to reconnect entrances to the home buildings though. I fix these.
jcnl44 (2025-09-05 00:22:58+00:00): Hello, 
Merci pour votre contribution :)

Petite amélioration pour la mise-à-jour des commerces: il est préférable aussi de supprimer les attributs opening_hours, phone, website, ref:FR:SIRET, et tous les autres attributs se référant à l'ancien commerce (autre que ceux passés en was:* ou disused:*) pour éviter de garder des tags obsolète lors de l'ajout du prochain commerce. Vu la dernière photo Panoramax en date où on ne voit plus l'enseigne du tout, j'ajouterais aussi un shop=vacant et modifier le name en was:name.
❤️‍🔥 (2025-09-05 11:33:20+00:00): Hi, what's your source for this edit? this seems like someone's personal house, not a business. The address is also not on their website. Therefore, you're possibly leaking private information onto the internet. 

please also see https://osm.org/changeset/171389921
Nellhunter (2025-11-09 07:48:26+00:00): They gave me permission to add it onto the map. She works from her house.
❤️‍🔥 (2025-11-11 08:41:15+00:00): thanks for the response. there are still several problems:

1. openstreetmap does not map business's in people's private homes, only brick-and-mortar offices/shops. this means there needs to be some sort of signage on the ground for visitors. 

2. the business's website deliberately does not list the address, presumably to respect the privacy of the owner. We should only add this if the business chooses to publish their address, which they have not done. Their facebook page and website are both deliberately vague regarding their address. 

see https://osm.wiki/Mapping_private_information for more info
Erick Araujo (2026-01-16 13:50:22+00:00): Estou revertendo essa modificação em função das edições não refletirem a realidade, Luciano, por favor, atente-se a próxima, modificações como essas não agregam para a comunidade do OSM e também para as outras plataformas que utilizam o OSM como base da mapa, abraços.
Glassman (2025-09-05 23:41:28+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171476046
Ruslan Fatih (2025-09-05 05:08:49+00:00): Не удаляйте названия на русском, переводите их на name:ru
Udarian (2025-09-05 05:19:18+00:00): why did you add this as a circle when it obviously is not on the imagery. This also messed up the g4eoemtry of the existing building and added a unnecessary area=yes.
S-zation (2025-09-06 01:35:52+00:00): Hi, I think some of these are dome cameras that the DOT uses to look at traffic conditions, not ALPRs. You can find a lot of them here: 
https://ctroads.org/cctv?start=0&length=10&filters%5B0%5D%5Bi%5D=2&filters%5B0%5D%5Bs%5D=Guilford&filters%5B1%5D%5Bi%5D=3&filters%5B1%5D%5Bs%5D=I-95&order%5Bi%5D=1&order%5Bdir%5D=asc 

If they are domes, the tags to use are:
surveillance:type=camera
camera:type=dome
operator=Connecticut Department of Transportation
ConradWard (2025-09-06 03:06:06+00:00): Thanks for the heads up! I'm glad to hear this. It might be a few days before I'm able to fix this, but I'll make sure it happens.
AgusQui (2025-10-04 04:36:35+00:00): no agregar foot=no en calles con veredas dibujadas a ambos lados, alcanza con sidewalk=both, técnicamente no está prohibido caminar por las calles
SevierLake (2025-10-07 17:11:21+00:00): Hola AgusQui,
Gracias por contactarme. Voy a quitar las etiquetas foot=no y lo tendré en cuenta la próxima vez.
Udarian (2025-09-05 05:23:52+00:00): both these toilets seem to be duplicates
jake-low (2025-09-05 17:48:53+00:00): I've edited the area to fix this error; thanks for catching it!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171476770
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-08 02:00:17+00:00): Removed SEO spam tagging of landuse area and move them to actual POI (outside of it), and cleaned up tags for POI in changeset 183805222

https://osm.org/changeset/183805222
dcskobuffs (2025-09-10 17:58:29+00:00): Hello CharliePlett,

I noticed that you have added some new ref tags on some the major highways in Belize such as on the Coastal Plain Highway (primary route https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/676790300) which received a ref value of 'D200' before changing to ‘A5’ ; the Thomas Vincent Ramos Highway (primary route https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/953504437) with a ref value of ‘AR4’; and the George Price Highway (trunk route https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29418155) with a ref value of ‘AR4’. Other lower classed highways such as San Estevan - Progresso Road (secondary road https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/308129760) have a ref value of D482. Could you help me understand the significance of the A; AR; & D prefixes used here generally?

I have not been able to find any ground signage that has route ref numbers on them in existing Mapillary images. I am curious if you know of any government documentation that details the full route system in Belize? Also do you know if these routes are new and will come with ground signage at any point in the future?

Thank you for helping me better understand the route ref in Belize and looking forward to hearing from you,
Dcksobuffs
CharliePlett (2025-09-11 02:46:11+00:00): These numbers are only used internally. There is no ground signage. I debated if I actually wanted to add them, but the folks on the AARoadsWiki Discord encouraged me to add them. You can find the ones I added in this document.

https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication/pda-2000-belize-annex.pdf
dcskobuffs (2025-09-15 15:51:39+00:00): Thank you for the information!
dcskobuffs (2025-09-19 17:55:30+00:00): Hello again,

Upon reviewing the ref network against the UN document you provided (thank you for that), I was wondering if the Coastal Plain Highway’s ref of A5 is actually AR5 since AR1 and AR2 are major highways and A5 seems to fall into this category too.

I also wanted to inquire on the refs that begin with D+###, along with the bypass trunk of Orange Walk Bypass / AR2-B ends in ‘-B'; can you confirm the ref schema on those highways is correct as the document you provided does not have anything mentioning those ref subtypes. Also, if there is any other government resource that documents the full range of refs in Belize, I would very much like to note that for future use.

Thanks again for your time.
CharliePlett (2025-09-25 14:41:07+00:00): You can find the references here

https://wiki.aaroads.com/wiki/Roads_in_Belize#cite_note-7
dcskobuffs (2025-09-26 13:30:50+00:00): Thanks again for the information. Upon reading, I am still not sure about the Coastal Plain Highway as ref A5 since its ref value is not documented on https://wiki.aaroads.com/wiki/Roads_in_Belize#cite_note-7 / 2023 Annual Technical Report of the Ministry of Infrastructure Development and Housing pdf). On theaaroad’s wiki, it’s on the ‘Secondary Highways / D Routes’ table and was previously ref=D200. I noticed that the A## system could be a remnant of the Forest Department Road System from reading other instances like “road between Punta Gorda and San Antonio... is Forest Department road A7, while the road that passed through Chiquibul is Forest Department road A10” . The Coastal Plain Highway seems like a national prominent road. Can you confirm A5 is the correct ref for it?

Thanks for all your help in getting a good baseline for refs of Belize in OSM!
CharliePlett (2025-09-29 22:12:28+00:00): I reviewed the historical A numbers, and I see it's supposed to be A3 for the Coastal Plain Highway. But as these are outdated numbers, maybe I shouldn't have them on the map at all. 

I've updated this page with my latest research. https://wiki.aaroads.com/wiki/Roads_in_Belize
CharliePlett (2025-09-29 22:14:20+00:00): And therefore I can't find any evidence of the current correct number for the Coastal Plain Highway. Though I would assume it should be AR5.
dcskobuffs (2025-09-30 21:51:57+00:00): Thanks again for taking a look!
huntertur (2025-09-05 17:24:44+00:00): Thank you for mapping this ^^ Is there parking next to the posts? If there is, I think mapping as protected fits, based on the precedent of other PBLs in the area (parts of Walnut, Pleasant, Kilbourn, Lapham, etc.) and the guidance for "track" in the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway#Cycle_lanes
Kovoschiz (2025-09-05 07:36:21+00:00): As eg bottlers (Swire) not Coca-Cola operates in each country, `brand=` should be used for `=vending_machine` , not `operator=`  which is not very useful for shops. Hanamusubi is not the company either, but Hyakunousha.
Skylark_H_C (2025-09-05 09:02:08+00:00): So what I need to do is to change all operator=* to brand=*? I’m not familiar with the relationship between Hanamusubi and Hyakunousha. What should I put?
Kovoschiz (2025-09-06 05:41:42+00:00): 1. Yes
2. You can ignore it first
eggie (2025-09-05 06:48:57+00:00): Dag Diner   Klopt dit nog wel brand:wikipedia	nl:Boni (supermarkt)?

MVG
eggie
NM$L (2025-09-07 04:23:33+00:00): Hi, it seemed you also deleted some paths here to change the boundary in Yadong but some of them can still be seen on the satellite images. Could you please provide the evidence of the removal or the change should be partially reverted.
NM$L (2025-09-11 15:13:50+00:00): Reverted in 171789157 since no response.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-05 05:30:48+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/240937706
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1427247328

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
真中あお (2025-12-26 19:41:19+00:00): 感谢您对OSM做出贡献~
我看到您删掉了诗词碑的name:zh标签，但是在OSM其实就算name标签里填的是中文，name:zh标签里再写一遍也是有意义的，因为某些中文地图在没有读取到name:zh后会优先显示name:en的内容，而不是name的内容。因此我把name:zh标签加回去了。
DanhengOSM (2025-12-27 07:36:40+00:00): 谢谢，感谢纠正
totera (2025-09-05 10:20:20+00:00): Ciao niubii,
1) la telecamera non è più lì, è stata spostata a marzo 2023
2) non è un autovelox, è un tutor
3) il limite di velocità è 70 km/h e non 50
4) il tutto era già correttamente mappato: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15620243
5) avevi già fatto una modifica di questo genere a dicembre 2023 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145349708), te l'avevo commentata e revertata.
Ora ho fatto il revert anche di questa ma come è possibile che affermi di mappare per conoscenza diretta e due volte sbagli allo stesso modo?
b-jazz (2025-09-06 15:30:14+00:00): RE: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/984095380

My opinion on mapping out roughs is that they are often so nebulous that it leads to messy course maps and is better to just leave them out. Most golfers understand that if it isn't within the fairway, it is rough. No need to really draw it out. There are some exceptions that I've seen where the boundaries are very clear and could be easily mapped. But those are few and far between.
eggie (2025-09-05 06:46:08+00:00): Welcome to OSM. I merged your info with the BAG addressnode.
Greetz,
eggie
custodiankeyy (2025-09-05 21:36:42+00:00): Park hava görüntüsünde hala gözüküyor. Orada bulunmadığından emin misiniz?

Silinen park:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1139208986
MaciekMma (2025-09-06 07:27:13+00:00): hej, ciekawe znalezisko z tym CPR po drugiej stronie Alei Tysiaclecia. Wedle google streetmap zaczyna sie ona od ul. Sredniej, a konczy sie w polowie ROD Stokrotka, gdzie laczy sie z istniejaca juz CPR prowadzaca na mostek na Krznie.
MaciekMma (2025-09-10 07:02:09+00:00): poprawilem, zamienilem chodnik z rowerem na CPR
Gregory Peony (2025-10-12 22:07:33+00:00): Please read about how to use the layer tag here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer#Guidelines
rajdhani (2025-09-05 07:21:24+00:00): Hello ,

way 1427255929,way 1427255930,way 1427255925,way 1427255931,way 1427255932,way 1427255927,way 20024379,way 1427255926,way 1427255924,way 1427255921,way 1427255922,way 20407669 on these ways added access=no tag as per TomTom proprietary GPS traces due to construction of roundabout. We will remove same once construction completed.

Thank you.
eggie (2025-09-05 07:30:17+00:00): Hi Is the bakery still present here?

They share the same housenumber.
Gr eggie
eggie (2025-09-05 07:34:28+00:00): Removed bakery
Ruslan Fatih (2025-09-05 07:23:39+00:00): Пожалуйста. Не удаляйте названия на русском. А меняйте на name:ru
Negreheb (2025-09-05 09:16:22+00:00): Servus, warum hast du denn das angepasst? Warst du da vor Ort, oder hast du das wegen der anonymen Note angepasst?
Negreheb (2025-09-05 09:27:18+00:00): Ich würde das reverten, weil jetzt die Haltestelle in der Relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1975676 komplett fehlt. Da ist die Haltestelle meiner Meinung nach lieber 10 Meter falsch, als gar nicht vorhanden.
Thsmap (2025-09-05 10:38:14+00:00): Ich habe selbst gesehen, dass der Bus dort nicht hält. Ich glaube dass der Haltestelle ca. 150 meter nach der Moosstrasse verschoben wurde. Ich bin leider nicht sicher, weil ich die neue Haltestelle nicht gesehen habe.
Negreheb (2025-09-05 12:37:51+00:00): Ja, hab im Fahrplan nachgesehen, die dürfte wirklich verschoben sein. Aber wenns für dich passt, würd ich das wirklich revertieren und die Note einfach offen lassen, bis ich sonst mal vorbei komme und dann die ganzen Haltestellen da überarbeiten kann.
Thsmap (2025-09-05 16:03:36+00:00): Ja, das ist gut. Danke für deine Sichtweise. Vielleicht kannst du den Tag highway=bus_stop (node) revertieren und den Tag highway=platform entfernen.
NeisBot (2025-09-05 07:39:46+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
pitscheplatsch (2025-09-12 18:01:16+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/171576455
whb (2025-09-05 22:22:50+00:00): Guten Tag,

sind aktuelle Ortskenntnisse vorhanden?
Denn zumindest vor wenigen Tagen gab es diese Straße noch:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1396053526/history

Viele Grüße
whb
whb (2025-09-09 20:50:59+00:00): Guten Tag,

die Straße existiert weiterhin. Offenbar waren keine aktuellen Ortskenntnisse vorhanden.
Straße soeben wiederhergestellt.

Viele Grüße
whb
SG86 (2025-09-09 23:05:39+00:00): Guten Tag,
leider bin ich erst jetzt dazu gekommen zu antworten. 
Die Straße nördlich der halle02 hatte offiziell bisher keinen Namen. 
Der Eintrag in OSM ist falsch.
Die Straße Zollhofgarten verläuft nur südlich von der Halle02.
Der Gemeinderat hat im Juli entschieden die bisher unbenannte Straße nördlich der halle02 "Odessastraße" zu benennen:
https://www.heidelberg.de/Bahnstadt/25_07_2025+odessastrasse.html
whb (2025-09-10 08:38:02+00:00): Guten Tag,

deine Antwort bezieht sich auf eine Frage, die ich nicht gestellt habe. Es ging nicht um den Zollhofgarten oder die Odessastraße, sondern um diese etwa 300 Meter entfernte Straße (siehe oben), welche du gelöscht hattest, aber vor Ort weiterhin existiert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1396053526/history

Zu den von dir angesprochenen Straßen Zollhofgarten/Odessastraße:

> Die Straße nördlich der halle02 hatte offiziell bisher keinen Namen.
> Der Eintrag in OSM ist falsch.
> Die Straße Zollhofgarten verläuft nur südlich von der Halle02.

Das kann ich nicht bestätigen, denn seit Jahren hängt hier an dieser Straßenlaternen ein Straßenschild "Zollhofgarten" in Richtung Südosten, damit ist eindeutig die Straße nördlich der Halle02 gemeint:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13132750103

Vom Straßennamen "Odessastraße" ist vor Ort bis jetzt noch nichts zu sehen.
Deshalb habe ich auch den Hinweis erstellt und den Namen nicht gleich eingetragen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4906249
Denn wenn vor Ort weiterhin "Zollhofgarten" statt "Odessastraße" steht, dann ist es eben "on-the-ground" weiterhin der "Zollhofgarten".

Viele Grüße
whb