<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Rob Nickerson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK4yQTmZnhqAXbSshg0-kuqQ8-t7h1N9-YKu3Fik=cNDbJ=jOA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
The reason designation=unclassified_county_road is described as
obsolete on Robert's page is that there is legally no such thing
(unlike public footpaths, etc.. which are included in the
legislation - CROW Act 2000).<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
It's a designation still in use by some councils on the markers in
the ground, so where it is, it still makes sense to me to use it.
Inferring access rights from that designation is a different issue,
though (although in Lincolnshire - the nearest highway authority
that marks UCRs to me - I've never seen a UCR that has motor vehicle
access prohibited or that doesn't get a reasonable amount of vehicle
use).<br>
<br>
Whether, at some time before the <a
href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/37/section/56?view=plain">cut-off
date</a>, councils will get their act together and ensure that
everything on the list of streets is classified as _something_ on
the definitive map (or <a
href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/37/section/53?view=plain">deleted</a>)
is another matter.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK4yQTmZnhqAXbSshg0-kuqQ8-t7h1N9-YKu3Fik=cNDbJ=jOA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<br>
... (perhaps as they are not official maybe a note rather than a
designation?).<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
In addition to the above, "note" is already used on some of the ways
in question for e.g. "Unsuitable for motor vehicles", so it wouldn't
to my eyes be a good idea to overload it with UCR-ness as well.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>