OpenStreetMap
jpennycook's Notes
Notes submitted or commented on by jpennycook
| Id | Creator | Description | Created at | Last changed | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1908357 | jpennycook | New housing estate west/south of here. Fords no longer present and byway is now a public highway roughly west of here. |
|||
| 2171967 | This footway seems to overlap with existing roads and paths: way/795980318 |
||||
| 1441988 | Cycle path extends to about here via an island crossing to the south of the roundabout |
||||
| 2184744 | Signposted as "This is a permissive footpath NOT a bridleway" |
||||
| 1462499 | jpennycook | bridge has sign saying that it is unsafe and out of use |
|||
| 2191751 | jpennycook | This footway is part of the NCN256 relation (relation/2820475) but no "bicycle" access has been added to the footway. If cycling is allowed here, please add "bicycle=yes/permissive/designated" as appropriate (access=*#List_of_possible_values) |
|||
| 1583959 | jpennycook | Cycling is allowed on the SANG tracks. I asked the developer:-
Thank you for your email. I am pleased to confirm that cycling is permitted throughout the SANG.
Enjoy your weekend rides!" |
|||
| 707294 | This is no longer a church, but now a private dwelling (has been for over 20 years!) |
||||
| 2173904 | jpennycook | This is a track, not a cycleway (not overlapping ways) |
|||
| 2173890 | The newly-added cycleway way/797050251#map=16/51.2272/-0.8118&layers=C overlaps with existing tracks which are marked as designation=public_bridleway and bicycle=yes. It looks like someone was trying to record their bike ride or maybe work round a problem with their journey planner. |