[Imports] Import cellular towers for Spartanburg County, SC, USA

Mike N niceman at att.net
Wed Sep 19 02:43:42 UTC 2018


Forward - On Sep 18, 2018, 10:27 AM, < Robertaustinbell at protonmail.com> 
wrote:


     Hello my name is Austin and I am also in the local community doing 
the import.
     I work on cell towers and can answer a few of these questions.

     1. Yes they do have a regular street address just like a house.

     2. We have looked at satellite imagery for a few and we will looks 
at them all during the import as part of the QA process.

     3. Yes it is intentional that there is no stated purpose. Tower 
companies build tower with things in mind but it's really just vertical 
real estate that they will rent for anything. I've seen space rented for 
amateur radio. Also things change on the towers as leases run out, for 
instance T-MOBILE starts using a new frequently and now they need less 
towers in a area and decommission one where they were the only cell 
carrier on the tower but there is still FM on the tower. So listing a 
purpose for the towers even if we could would not be a good idea since 
we could not update them. There are some projects out there to track and 
monitor who is on a tower but that is outside of the scope of this import.

     4. Mike might want to add to this one but, That will be made on a 
case by case basis, and I don't think it will be much of a issue as 
Very! few towers in our area are mapped to begin with, I'm sure less 
than 1%.




  -- Back to Mike---


To expand on what Austin mentioned -

   3 - I did overlook the tower:type tag, and have added that tag to the 
data now.
   4.  The existing data has one tag conflict, but I believe the new tag 
conforms to OSM standards (tower:type=pole instead of the more common 
tower:type=freestanding).

   Regards,

   Mike

On 9/18/2018 3:42 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Thanks for good import documentation!
> 
> 1. Are you sure that these towers have addr:housenumber?
> 2. Have you checked at least some masts/water towers
>       to confirm that official data is correct?
> 3. Is it deliberate that tower purpose is not mentioned in the imported 
> data?
> 4. Is it a good idea to overwrite data on existing objects by new data 
> in cases
>       where tags conflict (point 6 of workflow will lead to that)?
> 
> 
> 16. Sep 2018 19:26 by niceman at att.net <mailto:niceman at att.net>:
> 
> 
>     Proposing an import for 122 Cellular Towers (and merge tags with 7
>     existing towers in OSM). Plan is at
> 
>     https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spartanburg_County_Cell_Tower_Import
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Imports mailing list
>     Imports at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Imports at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Imports mailing list
> Imports at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> 




More information about the Imports mailing list