[Tagging] Landuse=farmyard vs residential

[Paul Allen]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 03:04, John Willis via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2019, at 4:22 PM, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Conversion of farm buildings to residential buildings is not only
> possible, it's frequent in
> > some parts of the world.
>
> Very true, but even a house or cottage inside a working farmyard would
> still be on a landuse mapped as a farmyard.


That's how I've handled it.

The building may no longer be =shed or farm_auxiliary,


I think you will find there is some dispute over that.  Some people would
insist that the building is
still a farm_auxiliary or cowshed or stable because building=* is meant to
describe physical
characteristics not usage.  I'm not a purist on the matter, but when I read
that a holiday cottage
is a converted stable, building=stable seems natural.


> but unless the activity of the farm ceases (and becomes merely a
> residential living area or a commercial resort), I think it would still be
> on a landuse=farmyard.
>

I'd generally agree.  If you can have tractors and muck-spreaders going
past your window all
day long, it's still a farmyard.  One exception I made is where part of the
farmyard has been
sold off with walls/fencing erected to separate it and each chunk of land
having its own
driveway.  In that particular case the split-off land has two holiday
cottages run by different
individuals than the farmer who has his own holiday cottage in a converted
building in the
farmyard.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190614/d6ece013/attachment-0001.html>