logo for rowmaps web site rowmaps

these web pages
are being produced by
Barry Cornelius

rowmaps@gmail.com
Follow me at http://twitter.com/rowmaps

home

maps
preferences

datasets
KMLs
GeoJSONs

problems
links
posters

tweets
blog
contact

2017-11-09-1450

Problem with CC/334/FP43X or Neston FP43

A map is shown below. The underlying map is an Ordnance Survey 1:25000 map that has been produced by Bing. On the underlying map, public rights of way (PROW) are indicated by dashed green lines. Solid lines have been superimposed on top of the underlying map (and will usually hide these dashed green lines). A solid red line signifies a footpath, a solid magenta line signfies a bridleway, a solid green line signifies a restricted byway and a solid blue line signifies a byway open to all traffic (BOAT). These solid lines have been produced from data obtained from the Council of Cheshire West and Chester (CC) and from the Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (WR). You can click on a solid line to get more details about that PROW. You can click on the + and - buttons to zoom in/out.

There is a bridleway (WR/50) on the right-hand side of the map that goes SW-wards and ends at Roselea. At its end, a footpath heads NW-wards. It starts off as CC/334/FP43X/5 and after a few turns at a field boundary it becomes CC/334/FP43X/4. The red line ends at SJ311785 (53.29977,-3.03419) just before the 55m contour. There is then a gap. Another red line starts at SJ310787 (53.30083,-3.03640) This is footpath CC/334/FP43X/3 which later becomes CC/334/FP43X/2 and CC/334/FP43X/1 before ending at a T-junction (with WR/41 and CC/334/FP59/1).

So there is a gap. And again, from the lack of data from CC, I'm guessing that this is because CC think the gap is in WR.

  1. is there a need for WR to include the footpath in their PROW data?
  2. have WR instead included this path in their list of streets?
  3. do CC and WR disagree on the line of the boundary between CC and WR?


show map