edodd at billiau.net
Tue Aug 31 08:58:49 BST 2010
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> yes, you can see that arthur st/wastell ct. in the east has an
> informal footway (the one of the link I modified from yours), in the
> west it hasn't. You can also see it on the nearmap aerial (even though
> it is a bit hard to see it because it "hides" in the shaddow).
but the presence or absence of the informal footway depends on the gardening
skills of the adjoining householders, and is not related to the quantity of
sorry about this, but this is a cultural thing.
More information about the Tagging