[Talk-GB] The Park, Nottingham

Stuart Reynolds stuart at travelinesoutheast.org.uk
Thu Jan 28 16:34:14 UTC 2016


Hi Jerry,

Many thanks for that view. I’m quite happy to add foot=permissive instead of doing my proposed changes - looking for better solutions was why I asked!

Regards,
Stuart

------------------------------------
Stuart Reynolds
for traveline south east & anglia



On 28 Jan 2016, at 16:00, SK53 <sk53.osm at gmail.com<mailto:sk53.osm at gmail.com>> wrote:

The access constraints on the park are quite complicated, although for vehicles they are clearly access=destination. The regulations of The Park are embodied in two private Acts of Parliament<http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/1990/14/pdfs/ukla_19900014_en.pdf>. It took a 5 day public enquiry<http://sk53-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/openstreetmap-at-public-inquiry.html> to establish <http://www.nottinghampost.com/Park-Estate-t-block-hoi-polloi-Lenton/story-20306183-detail/story.html> that one pedestrian route is actually a right of way. As far as I know there are two other routes which may be PRoWs but this has not been established. In practice the precise legal position for routes other than the Lenton Road public footpath<http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12360834> has not been established, and the tagging for this is correct designation=public_footpath which implies foot=yes. (This does need a tweak on the roundabout with the intersection with Cavendish Drive.

I would much prefer that you add foot=permissive rather than remove the generic tag: this is how most things have been tagged in the area. For instance, although I suspect folk cycle through The Park I have no idea if they have the right to do so, whether it is permitted or tolerated. It may well be that passing through the area as a pedestrian is technically not allowed: certainly the provisions in the private acts were perceived to be in conflict with relevant public Acts of Parliament (specifically CRoW 2000).

In practice for routing to destinations which aren't in the Park, the existing footpath is by far-and-away the likeliest route. Descending through Derby Road to Castle Boulevard may be used by some, the reverse isn't very attractive as a short cut. Similarly for Park Steps. I'm not certain of the current status of the tunnel, which would avoid hills. I suspect Strava <http://labs.strava.com/heatmap/#15/-1.16320/52.95091/blue/run> gives a misleading impression as the prominent route through The Park was the course for the 2015 Robin Hood Marathon.

Over the past 50 years The Park Estate has progressive increased how it enforces its powers with respect to traffic, from partial tolerance of rat runs, some closed entrances, through to entrances all having barriers: these should also affect vehicular routing. It is generally helpful for vehicle users that the roads in The Park Estate are rendered in such a way that they are obviously different from ordinary residential streets.

Paul Sladen is the person who is likeliest to know more as he played a much bigger role in the public enquiry. Robert Howard has also written extensively about some of the pedestrian issues<http://parkviews.blogspot.co.uk/p/park-footpath.html>.

Jerry

On 28 January 2016 at 13:34, Stuart Reynolds <stuart at travelinesoutheast.org.uk<mailto:stuart at travelinesoutheast.org.uk>> wrote:
Hi all, and especially Nottingham mappers.

There is an area of Nottingham called The Park that is a private estate. At present, all of the roads on the estate are tagged as access=destination. However, my client at Nottingham City Council informs me that “there is definitely pedestrian access through The Park” [my italics], while another colleague tells me that “having lived for many years on a gated private road, my interpretation of the signs [viewable on Streetview] is that the road and vehicular access is private, but there is an unimpeded pedestrian right of way in this example in Notts (as there was where I lived in the past)”.

Based on this, I propose to remove the access=destination tag from the roads on the estate, and replace it with a vehicle=destination tag. That should allow walking, while still having the desired effect of only allowing vehicular access if you are actually going there.

This corresponds to the guidance at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access where it says that destination means

Only when travelling to this element/area, i.e. local traffic only. NOTE: This restriction often only applies to certain modes of transportation (e.g. only to vehicles). Take care to use the right transport mode restriction, e.g. vehicle<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:vehicle>=destination<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:vehicle%3Ddestination> when only vehicle traffic is restricted.

Regards,
Stuart

------------------------------------
Stuart Reynolds
for traveline south east & anglia




_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org<mailto:Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20160128/49e7e00a/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list