Proposed features/Sanitary Dump Station

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Dumping-RV-Waste-Tanks.jpg
Sanitary Dump Station
Status: Approved (active)
Proposed by: brycenesbitt
Tagging: amenity=sanitary_dump_station
Applies to: node
Definition: A facility for people to empty (and clean) cassette and other portable toilet holding tanks
Rendered as: Dumpicon.jpg
Drafted on: 2015-02-18
RFC start: 2015-02-20
Vote start: 2015-03-10
Vote end: 2015-04-01


This proposal covers places to deposit human waste collected in portable toilet holding tanks. This is a commonly needed amenity for boaters and recreational vehicle users. These sites have various names including dump station, dump point, caravan dump station, sanitary station, Elsan disposal point (UK), pumpout, and chemical disposal point (CDP). It seems universal that people use euphemisms for human waste: there are a lot of names.

The tag is proposed at the same level of prominence as tags for toilets, showers and other similar amenities. This feature is commonly found on park and campground maps, worldwide.

This proposal is an alternative to relying on amenity=waste_disposal,waste=chemical_toilet or waste=excrement.

Rationale

This renewed proposal arose from a discussion on the tagging list. Facilities of this type are quite common on at least three continents but very limited numbers exist in the OSM db, and prior efforts to craft a tag have foundered. Having this data appear on maps is of value to travelers, holiday makers and grey nomads. These people are heavy users of maps, often driving larger and unwieldy vehicles.

A small group (on the tagging list) was looking at improving docs for camp_site, the amenity=waste_disposal;waste=chemical_toilet was considered poor syntax and evidently unpopular. A new high level key, waste_collection was considered as was better tags for waste=. However, it became evident that as people wish to avoid directly referring to human waste, a successful tag needs to describe the facility rather than the waste. This meant it was more appropriate to make an amenity= tag. Further, it was apparent that the common name for the facility varied widely across the globe and it would be impossible to pick a name that was ideal everywhere. For this reason, the name used represents a compromise, believed to be sufficiently recognizable to most.

Tagging for Nodes or Areas

  • fee=* - tag yes if there is a direct (or indirect) charge to use this facility. Some mappers also tag a currency amount instead of yes.
  • access=* - tag network for regional networks where a key or code can be obtained in advance. Tag destination if the site is restricted to registered guests of a facility only. Please do not tag private dump stations at all: tag only stations a member of the public can use. Tag public to confirm that anyone with a need can enter the station area and use the facility.
  • network=* - Name the network, if needed.
  • opening_hours=* - if different from the enclosing way
  • composting=* - if the waste disposed of is composted on site.
  • description=* - specific notes the end user may need to be aware of, but not suited to an established tag.

Tagging as an Attribute of a Place

Examples

For a standalone boating facility:

  • amenity=sanitary_dump_station
  • sanitary_dump_station:suction=yes
  • sanitary_dump_station:gravity=no
  • fee=network
  • operator=Canal & River Trust
  • network=Canal & River Trust
  • description=Vacuum pumpout station with a 30 foot dock. Use the standard C&R key to access.
  • website=http://cr.example.org/pumpout/42

As an attribute of a campsite, where only guests may use the dump station:

  • tourism=caravan_site
  • internet_access=wlan
  • shower=yes
  • sanitary_dump_station=yes
  • sanitary_dump_station:access=destination
  • sanitary_dump_station:gravity=yes
  • capacity=10
  • website=http://rv_spot.example.com/

And for simple tagging in a national park:

  • amenity=sanitary_dump_station
  • fee=no
  • access=public
  • opening_hours=24/7

Retagging

There are tiny number of existing dump stations mapped, which would be semi-mechanically retagged.

Not to be used for

This tag is specific to the proper disposal of human waste, and should not be used to tag sinks, recycling bins, regular toilets, rivers, graywater facilities, or any improper location for emptying contents of a toilet holding tank. Not to be used for individual hookups at a given camp spot (see discussion).

Comments

I see a need for (perhaps) description=* to indicate restrictions that may apply. For example, some facilities are not suited for larger vehicles (yeah, I know!). They might be specificity used for cassette type systems. Others may be marine or water way use only. I suspect these cases may be sufficiently small that specific tags are unnecessary. So, should we promote description=* ? --Davo (talk) 22:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to mention the brand of a facility (see Tagging above) ? I am assuming that no facility requires users to also be using that specific brand ? If not, brand does not seem very useful data. --Davo (talk) 22:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The key "type" has many uses already ranging from type of tree to type of relation (>2,000,000) , etc. I suppose it can take on this additional role but thought this point was worth mentioning. AlaskaDave (talk) 23:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Cassette style portable toilets are designed to be dumped into a regular toilet. Yet not all places permit this use of their toilets. What to do? Brycenesbitt (talk) 08:18, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

See Also

Voting

Please use {{vote|yes}} {{vote|no}} or {{vote|abstain}} and optionally give your reasoning for the vote. Use ~~~~ to sign with your user name & date. Feel free to reply to votes below, if you feel it's helpful, by preceding your comment with ::*.

See also the related proposal at Proposed_features/waste_collection.

  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Yes please, one can't completely map a typical campground without this type of tag. Multiple past failures to settle on a tag attest to the need for a solution. This might not be perfect, but it seems workable. Brycenesbitt (talk) 16:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Very well documented and thought through; useful extension. One question: I wonder if shower=* is an approved camp_site attribute; so far I created separate nodes for showers. --Jan van Bekkum (talk) 06:13, 12 March 2015 (UTC).
  • Should have been "shower" not "showers". Fixed. Brycenesbitt (talk) 18:04, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. This is a significently needed tag. Davo (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Agreed: One can't completely map a typical campground without this tag. AlaskaDave (talk) 23:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Well documented, good work. --Imagic (talk) 08:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Dieterdreist (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. This will be handy for me in a few years. Ibennett (talk) 08:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --hike39 (talk) 08:59, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Bigfatfrog67 (talk) 09:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Glassman (talk) 16:18, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Tyr (talk) 19:03, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. but think the symbol should be a toilet being emptied, not a caravan. pmailkeey (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2015 (GMT)
  • Each rendering map makes the final decision on symbol. In addition it's likely that pumpouts want a different symbol. Please feel free to find acceptable open source images and upload them here! Brycenesbitt (talk) 01:26, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. TheDutchMan13 (talk) 20:24, March 12 2015
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I visit a lot of campgrounds and will appreciate this tag.User:Alan Bragg
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Gisbert (Gmbo) (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Finally a proposal for this! JB (talk) 12:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. The description of the key fee was change after start of the voting --Mike-001 (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Fee is an existing tag, referenced here as a combination, no change in usage is proposed here Brycenesbitt (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --WalterSchloegl (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Escada (talk) 05:43, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Ngt (talk) 20:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)