Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-25 Thread Paul Johnson 
On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 5:03 PM Peter Neale via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> > I'm just amused that staying in a trailer park is considered a high end
> > tourism/glamping experience in the UK instead of a cheap form of
> permanent
> > housing.  Granted, my exposure to this phenomenon is limited to this
> thread
> > and Damn Dog Games covering Furcation 2018 on YouTube.
>
> We have to remember that they were characterised as "Luxury" by the people
> trying to sell them at £190,000!  I was not proposing to tag them with
> "quality=luxury" Ha Ha!
>

I suppose if the alternative is, say, camping in my pickup truck, then
yeah, a mobile home is relatively high end luxury.  But, you know, I mean,
just a quick Google converts that to US$242,000.  For that kind of money, I
could get 2-4 single family homes that exceed local tornado building
codes.  I suppose I should be flattered that rich people consider American
poverty luxury or something, but, that's like, the weirdest possible flex
ever.  I mean, again, I was laughing a bit when Corey Coyote on Damn Dog
Games was saying they were going to a camping con, and it appears to be in
a "vacation resort" that, in America, would be probably most generously
called "a well-maintained blue-collar trailer park", and Corey's reaction
is that (at least from his UK exposure) it is.  Though I'm pretty sure my
MIL has the same floorplan, and well, it's probably generously a $20,000
trailer on a $400/mo space.  Sure, it had a community center and a pool,
but, hey, any relatively decent trailer park that isn't on a floodplain
does.


> I would like to tag them as some form of leisure facility, because they
> are supposed to be used intermittently for weekends / holidays.  However, I
> also understand the idea of "tag what you see".
>

I'd probably tag the site itself as a caravan site, especially if they let
you bring your own caravan.  The midwestern US seems to have a lot of
trailer parks that have a genuine mix of RVs (caravans) and mobile
homes/manufactured homes.  At least locally, both fall under the category
of vehicles (my MIL's place has a current license plate mounted on the back
as required by state law, even though it hasn't moved in 20 years and I'm
about 85% sure it doesn't have wheels and definitely wouldn't survive
making it to the street, much less down it)


> Out of interest, I looked up the planning permission granted for the site.
> It is for a number of "caravans", which can only be occupied for 11 months
> of the year.  Originally, this was 8 months, but it was later increased.
> One "caravan" (for the site manager) can be occupied all year, but the
> owner is now applying for permission for 9 of them to be occupied all year
> (with no real justification - IMHO)
>

Honestly if these "caravans" are mobile homes, there's no reason they can't
be occupied until they fall apart.


> It seems that the local community do not want a permanent development
> there, but the owner (selling them at £190,000 per plot, remember) wants to
> turn them from caravans into permanent bungalows.
>

I'd honestly want to see him pass a 15 panel drug test asking that much.
Especially if he's retaining rights to the land it's on (typical in the US,
you might own the mobile home but the land below it could be an entirely
different story).
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-25 Thread Peter Neale via Tagging 
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 20:42:24 -0500
From: Paul Johnson 
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
    
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"
Message-ID:
    
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 6:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

>> I personally would not tag a >20 foot wide manufactured home as a static
>> caravan

Agreed
> I'm just amused that staying in a trailer park is considered a high end
> tourism/glamping experience in the UK instead of a cheap form of permanent
> housing.  Granted, my exposure to this phenomenon is limited to this thread
> and Damn Dog Games covering Furcation 2018 on YouTube.

We have to remember that they were characterised as "Luxury" by the people 
trying to sell them at £190,000!  I was not proposing to tag them with 
"quality=luxury" Ha Ha!
>> I thought that building=static_caravan was meant for (single-wide)
>> trailers / “mobile homes” without permanent foundations, since these could
>> still be moved without demolishing a foundation or breaking the building
>> into pieces.
> I would tend to agree.  Or like the situation I was in for a few years in
> the middle of this decade where it's *literally* a caravan that is
> permanently parked.  I've not exactly considered them permanent enough to
> warrant tagging (even though the specific one I lived in for a few years is
> still parked in the exact same spot it was when I lived there, and I
> legitimately question whether or not the landing gear is actually capable
> of retracting or the brakes releasing if they even wanted to move it at
> this point, since I believe it's sat on the same spot all but the first two
> years after it was built).  I consider "mobile home" and "manufactured
> home" to be synonymous.

>> If a manufactured home is placed on a permanent foundation, on land that is
>> owned rather than rented, then it is just a different way of building a
>> house, no?
> I would classify a mobile/manufactured home as a permanent building,
> whether or not the owner took the wheels off and built a foundation.
> Entire multistorey buildings are only slightly less likely to ever move
> again than mobile homes, and about as likely to survive transport (based on
> Mercy Hospital Joplin being picked up and moved around 3 meters by a
> tornado a few years ago, and seeing old mobile homes being moved; in both
> cases the only real next stop is a garbage dump).

Agreed.  
>> Similarly, a fancy modern house or apartment building might be built out of
>> prefab modules or modified shipping containers.
>
>> I’d say the defining difference is whether or not there is a permanent
>> foundation
> I think that's not a bad starting place, though I'd be willing to call any
> mobile home not rigged up for immediate tow to be a permanent structure.
> See also: Portable classrooms.  The leaky, 20 year old one I went to 6th
> grade in (along with it's sister unit that was planted immediately
> adjacent, scheduled to be removed "any year now" back in the 90s) is now
> about 45 years old, basically a black mold lawsuit waiting to happen and
> still in daily use back in Portland.

I would like to tag them as some form of leisure facility, because they are 
supposed to be used intermittently for weekends / holidays.  However, I also 
understand the idea of "tag what you see".
Out of interest, I looked up the planning permission granted for the site. It 
is for a number of "caravans", which can only be occupied for 11 months of the 
year.  Originally, this was 8 months, but it was later increased.  One 
"caravan" (for the site manager) can be occupied all year, but the owner is now 
applying for permission for 9 of them to be occupied all year (with no real 
justification - IMHO) 

It seems that the local community do not want a permanent development there, 
but the owner (selling them at £190,000 per plot, remember) wants to turn them 
from caravans into permanent bungalows. 
Anyway, I have now tagged the individual structures as "bungalow"s and the site 
as "Residential".
Thanks to all who have  taken the time to contribute and assist.
Peter
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190524/59f3ab53/attachment.html>

  ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-24 Thread Paul Johnson 
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 6:24 PM Joseph Eisenberg 
wrote:

> I personally would not tag a >20 foot wide manufactured home as a static
> caravan
>

I'm just amused that staying in a trailer park is considered a high end
tourism/glamping experience in the UK instead of a cheap form of permanent
housing.  Granted, my exposure to this phenomenon is limited to this thread
and Damn Dog Games covering Furcation 2018 on YouTube.


> I thought that building=static_caravan was meant for (single-wide)
> trailers / “mobile homes” without permanent foundations, since these could
> still be moved without demolishing a foundation or breaking the building
> into pieces.
>

I would tend to agree.  Or like the situation I was in for a few years in
the middle of this decade where it's *literally* a caravan that is
permanently parked.  I've not exactly considered them permanent enough to
warrant tagging (even though the specific one I lived in for a few years is
still parked in the exact same spot it was when I lived there, and I
legitimately question whether or not the landing gear is actually capable
of retracting or the brakes releasing if they even wanted to move it at
this point, since I believe it's sat on the same spot all but the first two
years after it was built).  I consider "mobile home" and "manufactured
home" to be synonymous.

If a manufactured home is placed on a permanent foundation, on land that is
> owned rather than rented, then it is just a different way of building a
> house, no?
>

I would classify a mobile/manufactured home as a permanent building,
whether or not the owner took the wheels off and built a foundation.
Entire multistorey buildings are only slightly less likely to ever move
again than mobile homes, and about as likely to survive transport (based on
Mercy Hospital Joplin being picked up and moved around 3 meters by a
tornado a few years ago, and seeing old mobile homes being moved; in both
cases the only real next stop is a garbage dump).

Similarly, a fancy modern house or apartment building might be built out of
> prefab modules or modified shipping containers.
>
> I’d say the defining difference is whether or not there is a permanent
> foundation
>

I think that's not a bad starting place, though I'd be willing to call any
mobile home not rigged up for immediate tow to be a permanent structure.
See also: Portable classrooms.  The leaky, 20 year old one I went to 6th
grade in (along with it's sister unit that was planted immediately
adjacent, scheduled to be removed "any year now" back in the 90s) is now
about 45 years old, basically a black mold lawsuit waiting to happen and
still in daily use back in Portland.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-24 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer 
I would also not classify them mainly according to the way they are
constructed. There are all ranges of quality with buildings that are
manufactored, from really cheap to really expensive.

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-23 Thread Joseph Eisenberg 
I personally would not tag a >20 foot wide manufactured home as a static
caravan

I thought that building=static_caravan was meant for (single-wide) trailers
/ “mobile homes” without permanent foundations, since these could still be
moved without demolishing a foundation or breaking the building into pieces.

If a manufactured home is placed on a permanent foundation, on land that is
owned rather than rented, then it is just a different way of building a
house, no?

Similarly, a fancy modern house or apartment building might be built out of
prefab modules or modified shipping containers.

I’d say the defining difference is whether or not there is a permanent
foundation

But I confess this is not my area of expertise

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 12:09 AM Clifford Snow 
wrote:

> I the US we call them manufactured homes. They are trucked to the site,
> often split lengthwise into two pieces. Once on site, they place them on a
> foundation then remove the wheels from underneath. Most are relatively
> inexpensive to purchase. The real money make is the owner of the land that
> rents out the tiny lot.
>
> These communities can be a mix of mobile home, aka caravans, and
> manufactured homes. From aerial imagery the individual units the only real
> difference is usually the roof. Manufactured home may have a peaked roof
> where the mobile homes are usually flat.
>
> I've tagged both a building=static_caravan
>
> Best,
> Clifford
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 2:56 AM Paul Allen  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 06:41, Martin Koppenhoefer 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> While they might be called „house“, why not „building=lodge“? The fact
>>> they are poorly insulated, prefabricated wooden single floor structures is
>>> better reflected by that word.
>>>
>>
>> building=luxury_shanty
>>
>> --
>> Paul
>>
>> ___
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>
>
> --
> @osm_washington
> www.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-23 Thread Clifford Snow 
I the US we call them manufactured homes. They are trucked to the site,
often split lengthwise into two pieces. Once on site, they place them on a
foundation then remove the wheels from underneath. Most are relatively
inexpensive to purchase. The real money make is the owner of the land that
rents out the tiny lot.

These communities can be a mix of mobile home, aka caravans, and
manufactured homes. From aerial imagery the individual units the only real
difference is usually the roof. Manufactured home may have a peaked roof
where the mobile homes are usually flat.

I've tagged both a building=static_caravan

Best,
Clifford

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 2:56 AM Paul Allen  wrote:

> On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 06:41, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> While they might be called „house“, why not „building=lodge“? The fact
>> they are poorly insulated, prefabricated wooden single floor structures is
>> better reflected by that word.
>>
>
> building=luxury_shanty
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
@osm_washington
www.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-23 Thread Paul Allen 
On Thu, 23 May 2019 at 06:41, Martin Koppenhoefer 
wrote:

>
> While they might be called „house“, why not „building=lodge“? The fact
> they are poorly insulated, prefabricated wooden single floor structures is
> better reflected by that word.
>

building=luxury_shanty

-- 
Paul
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-22 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer 


sent from a phone

> On 23. May 2019, at 00:27, Joseph Eisenberg  
> wrote:
> 
> It’s advertised just like a normal residential area, and claims to have won a 
> “Warick village of the year” award. So I would use landuse=residential for 
> the area, and building=house for each structure.


the village of the year price was won by the poor village where this holiday 
site landed, who knows if they would still have won with the lodge park already 
in place ;-)

While they might be called „house“, why not „building=lodge“? The fact they are 
poorly insulated, prefabricated wooden single floor structures is better 
reflected by that word.

Cheers, Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-22 Thread Joseph Eisenberg 
Looking at the website, it appears that you buy a plot of land from the
developer and then pick out a “manufactured home”, a house built in a Works
(factory) and then delivered to the site in 2 pieces. The “luxury” part is
very debatable, but I agree that these are a step up from a static_caravan:
they are more than twice as wide as a trailer and look to have a permanent
foundation, no wheels.

But the only thing luxury about these is the price. 190,000 pounds for 1000
square feet?!

It’s advertised just like a normal residential area, and claims to have won
a “Warick village of the year” award. So I would use landuse=residential
for the area, and building=house for each structure.

Joseph

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 12:07 AM Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> 22 May 2019, 16:45 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:
>
> I hesitate to raise my simple question in such an expert forum, but I want
> to tag correctly and cannot find the guidance I need in the Wiki.
>
> Feel free to ask any questions how things should be tagged!
>
> How should I tag Willow Park in Salford Priors, near Evesham (UK)?
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135928544
>
> Their website http://willowparkluxurylodges.co.uk/ talks of luxury lodges
> in the countryside.  You cannot live there permanently, because the site
> is only open for 11 months of the year.  Instead, you buy a “lodge” on
> the site and use it for holidays and weekends away (from the dirty, noisy
> city, where you live, I assume).
>
> Is it actually similar to buying a house? In that case it sounds to me
> like a residential area,
> used as a secondary vacation home, not some hotel/caravan site and I would
> use landuse=residential.
>
> Or is this "buying" a legal loophole and you may arrive, "buy" lodge, use
> it for two weeks and "sell" it,
> with all this "buying" and "selling" being a legal fiction?
>
> In that case it would be probably an expensive hotel.
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-22 Thread Mateusz Konieczny 
22 May 2019, 16:45 by tagging@openstreetmap.org:

>
> I hesitate to raise my simple question in such an expertforum, but I want to 
> tag correctly and cannot find the guidance I need in the Wiki.
>
>
Feel free to ask any questions how things should be tagged!

>
> How should I tag Willow Park in Salford Priors, near Evesham(UK)?>   > 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135928544 
> 
>
>
> Their website > http://willowparkluxurylodges.co.uk/ 
> >  talks of luxury lodges in the 
> countryside.>   > You cannot live there permanently, because the site is only 
> open for 11months of the year.>   > Instead, you buy a “lodge”on the site and 
> use it for holidays and weekends away (from the dirty, noisy city, where you 
> live, I assume).
>
>
Is it actually similar to buying a house? In that case it sounds to me like a 
residential area,
used as a secondary vacation home, not some hotel/caravan site and I would use 
landuse=residential.

Or is this "buying" a legal loophole and you may arrive, "buy" lodge, use it 
for two weeks and "sell" it,
with all this "buying" and "selling" being a legal fiction?

In that case it would be probably an expensive hotel.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Tagging a site with "Luxury Lodges"

2019-05-22 Thread Peter Neale via Tagging 

I hesitate to raise my simple question in such an expertforum, but I want to 
tag correctly and cannot find the guidance I need in the Wiki.

How should I tag Willow Park in Salford Priors, near Evesham(UK)?  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135928544

Their website http://willowparkluxurylodges.co.uk/talks of luxury lodges in the 
countryside. You cannot live there permanently, because the site is only open 
for 11months of the year.  Instead, you buy a “lodge”on the site and use it for 
holidays and weekends away (from the dirty, noisy city, where you live, I 
assume).

Individual Structures. 

The “lodges” are not “building=static_caravan”, as there isno pretence that 
they can be moved (See their website for pictures).  Theyare not really 
“building=cabin”, as they are not “…a small, roughly built houseusually with a 
wood exterior “.   I suppose they are “building=bungalow”,although (to me, at 
least) that would be more appropriate for a permanentdwelling that is single 
storey.   

The Entire Site.  

The site is currently tagged as “tourism=caravan_site”, but it is notfor 
tourists (“A person who is travelling or visiting a place for pleasure”. - 
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/tourist) and is not a caravan site 
(or RV Park, as the iD Editor calls it), becauseyou cannot arrive and park your 
Caravan, Tent, or RV there.

My inclination would be to tag is as some sort of leisuresite, but what sort???

It does not fit the Wiki definition of a “Leisure=Park” -  “Open, green area 
for recreation, usuallymunicipal”. 

Any advice, please?
 Peter 

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging