[Tagging] how to map soft story/soft storey buildings properly?
smaffulli at gmail.com
Tue Dec 18 16:59:27 UTC 2018
On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:19 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> It is at least debatable, I know there are some people who love long
> structured tags, although this idea is in a minority in Osm tagging, most
> people do not use tags like this. It doesn’t seem necessary in this case to
> use a structured name, I would not expect other “soft_storey”s in different
Ah! that makes sense. soft_storey=yes/no as its own key would be used also
to keep track of the status of reinforcement. (more about this below)
> The bigger problem could be verifiability. OSM is about crowd sourced
> geodata while this property seems to require expert capabilities and
> additional information you cannot get non-destructively on the ground?
A soft story building can be identified visually by the trained eye and
such buildings are inherently weaker than others in earthquakes, even if
they've been reinforced. That said, even among soft story buildings there
are degrees of weakness and higher rigidity is better. To address this,
there are laws and building regulations. In California, the location of
soft story buildings is shared publicly including their reinforcement
status. A soft_storey key could have value "yes" or "reinforce complete"
according to local law?
I got interested in this tag because I'm working with San Francisco NERT
volunteers to add the official SF soft story database from
https://sfdbi.org/soft-story-properties-list to OSM. Eventually, we'd like
to do a mass import but before even going close to it, I thought that first
we should reach an agreement on which key/value to use.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging