[Talk-GB] Proper Rights of Way coverage

Richard Bullock rb357 at cantab.net
Sun Oct 25 12:37:59 GMT 2009


> Hello Andy,
>
>>Couple of comments on that. Quite a lot of PROW within the urban sprawl.
>>These being ways that have had to be adjusted and realigned when housing
>>development extended, but at least were maintained as a route.
>
> True, though perhaps these aren't so important to show as most people
> interested in using rights of ways are going to be using them in the
> countryside.
>

Whilst that's probably right, I notice that the boundaries of these urban 
areas are drawn very loosely and don't just exclude heavily urbanised areas, 
e.g. you have excluded quite a large proportion of what is essentially rural 
Cheshire due to its proximity to Manchester - but in reality much of it is 
very rural including some long-distance footpaths etc. All of the land 
between Liverpool and Manchester is missing, and only shows countour lines 
at closer zoom levels, not just the cities themselves.

There's also a large void from Bridgnorth in Shropshire all the way to the 
North Sea near Lowestoft which cuts off a lot of rural areas.

There is a large void in the North of England - which includes part of the 
Northumberland National Park.

Are these voids intentional, or are they areas that haven't been rendered 
for whatever reason? 





More information about the Talk-GB mailing list