[OSM-talk] path or byway ?

matthew-osm at newtoncomputing.co.uk matthew-osm at newtoncomputing.co.uk
Tue Jul 22 22:11:37 BST 2008


On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 06:13:39PM +0100, David Earl wrote:
> They are universally rural. They are tracks, yes, but formally public 
> whereas a track will typically be associated with a farm ore similar. 

Mostly rural, but not all. There are two in Loughborough that I
am aware of - one "Cross Hill Lane":


The other unnamed, but just labelled as "byway open to all
traffic" - on the edge of town, and rather useless as after a
while it turns into a private road, no turning room.


Both are surfaced, and once would have been in the country, of
course (like most old roads!). There are many in Suffolk, some
tracks, others surfaced, such as


where Swilltub Lane (going North) is a restricted byway, but you
can only walk down it as it's all overgrown (in the last 30-40
years or so). Hundred Lane (going East from Swilltub Lane) is a
BOAT but indestinguishable from any unclassified road (which it
is to the West) apart from a sign saying byway.

Byways should be signed in theory, just like a footpath, but
might not be of course. Anything labelled "RUPP"[1] is now a
byway, since about 2006 (sadly, in my opinion - it's nice to have
some strange historic stuff around sometimes). There's an
(ex-)RUPP in grey here:


I usually label with something like "uk:row=B.O.A.T.", or
similar, at least before highway=byway (oxymoron=true? ;-) )
started to be used.



[1] Road used as a public path

More information about the talk mailing list