Proposal:Wasteland
| Wasteland | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Abandoned (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | trs998 |
| Tagging: | landuse=wasteland |
| Applies to: | area |
| Definition: | land not used for anything - not maintained or with any planned use |
| Statistics: |
|
| Rendered as: | Brown. |
| Draft started: | |
| Proposed on: | 2008-08-05 |
Proposal
This is a proposal for the tag landuse=wasteland, which is an area of land with no current or planned future use, and is not maintained or with public access.
There are several areas around where I live which have no use (none in my memories of the area ~ 2 years), and no planned use I know of. There appears to be no way to tag these areas appropriately.
Alternative Methods
- landuse=brownfield is defined as land previous used for building, which has new buildings planned.
- landuse=grass usually isn't appropriate as wasteland seems to end up as brambles, nettle and trees.
- natural=scrub might cover areas ("bushes or stunted trees") - is this appropriate in cities?
Tagging
- key=landuse value=wasteland
rendering
A brown area.
Comments
Pro: Very usefull tag, can't be replaces by Tag:landuse=brownfield or Tag:landuse=greenfield. Quite common and applicable for rural as well as urban areas, like formerly industrial or agricultural areas, now covered by grass, herbs, shrubs and young pioneer tree species like birches. Should be used in spite of Tag:landuse=brownfield if future use is unknown. -- Turnvater Jahn 23:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- As far as I understand wasteland is not the same as brownfield (or industrial wasteland). With "brownland" I'd tag e.g. a decayed industrial areas like this. -- ::User:Malenki - 12:46, 19 April 2009
I think I'm in favour of this tag, and perhaps phasing out of "brownfield", because the word has some particular meanings which aren't that helpful. This tag could encompass all these muddy patches. See also Talk:Tag:landuse=brownfield -- Harry Wood 17:34, 9 August 2010 (BST)
- landuse=brownfield is intended for cleared industrial areas, (the definition literally says buildings have to be "demolished and cleared"). Dieterdreist 15:25, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm in favour of this tag if "no planned use" is removed, and "not maintained" is changed to "hardly maintained" or "without or with few maintenance", because in modern societies there will almost in every case be some planning even if not in site-scale, or with the plan that the land is kept clear, and for the maintenance: also building a fence around (or removing some litter) is some kind if maintenance, but IMHO these areas should not be excluded. Dieterdreist 15:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Seems like very useful tag. I agree, that it should be defined as "without of with few/intermittent maintenance". Wasteland could also have its origin in natural degradation of some abandoned area, previously used for some activity, but not properly cleared after that. I think, wastelands are very diverse and very similar objects in the same time, so it would be useful to define it as wide set of examples.--BushmanK (talk) 21:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)