Proposal/Building units bedroom distribution
| Building flats bedroom distribution | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Proposed (under way) |
| Proposed by: | Simgaymer |
| Tagging: | building=apartments, building:flats=*
|
| Applies to: | |
| Definition: | Structured extension of building:flats=* to describe the number of dwelling units (flats) in an apartment building by bedroom count. |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2026-02-20 |
| RFC start: | 2026-02-20 |
Proposal
This proposal introduces structured keys to describe the distribution of dwelling units (flats) by bedroom count within apartment buildings.
The proposal extends the existing building:flats=* key by allowing mappers to record the number of flats with 0 bedrooms (studio), 1 bedroom, 2 bedrooms, etc.
Proposed keys:
building:flats:0_bedrooms=*building:flats:1_bedroom=*building:flats:2_bedrooms=*building:flats:n_bedrooms=*
These tags are intended for use on areas or ways tagged:
The values must be non-negative integers representing the count of flats of that bedroom type within the building.
Rationale
The existing building:flats=* tag provides only the total number of residential units in a building and does not describe their internal composition.
In many regions, official planning documents, development filings, and public records include breakdowns of units by bedroom count (e.g., studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom). This information reflects the structural configuration of a building and may support housing stock analysis and typology mapping.
The proposed tagging:
- Extends an established key using existing colon namespacing conventions.
- Avoids compound string values that require parsing.
- Uses numeric bedroom counts to ensure international neutrality.
- Remains optional and backward-compatible.
The proposal is intentionally limited in scope to avoid feature creep and minimise overlap with market or occupancy data.
Tagging
Base Tag (Required)
The building must already be tagged:
Bedroom Distribution Tags
| Tag | Description |
|---|---|
building:flats:0_bedrooms=* |
Number of studio (0-bedroom) flats |
building:flats:1_bedroom=* |
Number of 1-bedroom flats |
building:flats:2_bedrooms=* |
Number of 2-bedroom flats |
building:flats:n_bedrooms=* |
Number of n-bedroom flats |
Values must be non-negative integers.
Partial Information
If a complete breakdown is not known, only known values may be recorded. There is no requirement to map all bedroom categories.
When a complete breakdown is provided, the sum of all building:flats:*=* values (e.g., building:flats:0_bedrooms=*, building:flats:1_bedroom=*, etc.) should equal building:flats=*, if that tag is present. This consistency is recommended but not mandatory.
Not Intended For
- Individual apartment units mapped separately
- Single-family homes
- Rental prices, occupancy, tenure, or market data
- Internal floor area measurements
Examples
All Studio Building
building=apartments building:flats=49 building:flats:0_bedrooms=49
Mixed Building
building=apartments building:flats=25 building:flats:0_bedrooms=15 building:flats:1_bedroom=10
Larger Building
building=apartments building:flats=120 building:flats:0_bedrooms=30 building:flats:1_bedroom=60 building:flats:2_bedrooms=30
Rendering
No specific rendering is proposed. These tags are intended for data analysis and specialised use rather than cartographic display.
Features/Pages affected
If approved, the following pages may require updates:
building:flats=*=*- Any documentation referencing residential flat counts
External discussions
(To be filled in after RFC announcement on the community forum and tagging mailing list.)
Comments
There must be at least two weeks set aside for comment before proceeding to a vote.
Please comment on the discussion page.
Revisions made to proposal
- Keys changed from
building:units=*tobuilding:flats=*and all other associated keys in the proposal.
Rationale: To conform with the keys used internationally per peer review. - Tag naming convention changed from
building:flats:bedrooms:n=*tobuilding:flats:n_bedrooms=*orbuilding:flats:1_bedroom=*, the latter in keeping with proper grammar.
Rationale": To remove the inconsistency with common tagging patterns after peer review.