[Talk-GB] A431 toll road (going a bit OT)

[David Woolley]

On 11/08/14 10:33, Dave F. wrote:
> On 05/08/2014 15:00, Curon Davies wrote:
>> On 5 August 2014 14:25, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com
>> <mailto:davefox at madasafish.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> > One reason I haven't added it is because it's illegal (AFAIK. The
>> owners of the land & local councillor failed to reply to my tweets) &
>> definitely has no planning permission.
>>
>> The development isn't illegal, there is no criminal offence (AFAIK),
>> on the other hand it is unlawful.
>
> a) Semantics
> b) Isn't there a statute law which says 'you can't build or open a road
> without authorisation'?

It seems to me that this is being driven by one particular application 
of the map, motor vehicle routing.

The road exists.  It is possible to get permission to use it if you are 
under 3.5T.  Therefore I would say that something like this is valid: 
highway=unclassified; motor_vehicles=yes/permissive; hgv=no; fee=yes is 
necessary.

If that results in routing applications using it in a way that voids 
insurance, maybe add something like mib_approved=no.

Buildings certainly should still be mapped, even if they don't have 
planning permission (four years for construction and 10 for use are more 
permanent than most shop tenancies).

Settlements should be mapped, even if some other country disputes their 
legality.

More generally, though, it is dangerous for something like OSM to claim 
authority on the legal status of any object.  Locally, you put yourself 
at risk of being sued when you turn out to be wrong.  Internationally, 
it increases the pressure to ban it from countries involved with border 
disputes.