[Tagging] Power Tower Landuse = ?

[Mark Wagner]

On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 09:49:07 -0400
"Mark Bradley" <ethnicfoodisgreat at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Message: 1
> > Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:14:11 +0100
> > From: Philip Barnes <phil at trigpoint.me.uk>
> > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> > 	<tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Power Tower Landuse = ?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 4 July 2017 11:07:04 BST, Martin Koppenhoefer
> > <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:  
> > >2017-07-04 1:56 GMT+02:00 John Willis <johnw at mac.com>:
> > >  
> > >> it seems like other long-term infrastructure (power towers,  
> > >communication  
> > >> towers) are suggested to be landuse=industrial.
> > >>
> > >> I really think there should be some kind of subtag then, because
> > >> not  
> > >only  
> > >> can you define what and why you are tagging, but it allows
> > >> presets to  
> > >be  
> > >> easily created in iD and searched by new taggers.
> > >>
> > >> industrial=power, industrial=communication, etc.
> > >>  
> > >
> > >
> > >I agree that a formalization of industrial subtags would be really
> > >desirable. There are many different kind of things that get this
> > >same landuse property, e.g. warehouses, production facilities,
> > >logistical infrastructure (ports, distribution centres, ...).
> > >
> > >For the German context (but likely also for other places), there
> > >should be also a distinction for "light industry" (Gewerbe).
> > >
> > >Then it seems strange we don't have yet a standardized list of
> > >typical top level categories (e.g. automotive, textile,
> > >semiconductors, electronics, energy, machinery, mining, ...)
> > >  
> > The correct English term is pylon.
> > 
> > Although I am a little confused by the purpose of this thread, the
> > presence of pylons does not in my experience change the landuse, if
> > they cross farmland the land beneath them is still farmland or in
> > the case of this photo natural=wood.
> > 
> > https://flic.kr/p/V8pLyS
> > 
> > Phil (trigpoint)  
> 
> 
> 
> In American English most people would call the structure a tower, but
> according to the convention of OSM using British English, I would
> defer to the word "pylon."
> 
> I agree with you Phil; I don't think the small area under a pylon
> should have its own landuse.  I don't think most people think in
> terms of such a small area when they hear the term "landuse."  I
> think that giving a pylon area a separate landuse is overkill and
> misleading.

Just wondering: how would you tag something like this?
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9591891,-118.9945941,334m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e4

It's a paved and fenced area measuring about 30 meters by 250 meters,
containing two heavily-braced pylons where a major powerline goes over
the crest of a hill.

Or this one, four tightly-spaced pylons carrying lines from Bonneville
Dam to the substation across the river:
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6430068,-121.9514778,174m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e4

Some of these "small areas" are fairly substantial.  Yes, *most* pylons
don't need a separate landuse mapping, but some do.

-- 
Mark