SK53 for the last 12 MonthsSK53 for the last 12 Months| Note | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Event | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 406074 | 1 | ~ 11 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | The name of the tertiary road through Eyam is very confusing. Clear signposts exist for "Church Street" just to N of junction with New Close and adjacent to The Square at the E end. Shops in Eyam Hall Craft Centre have a street address of "Main Road". This may be a description rather than a name, applying to the point where Town Head or Townhead starts.OS Locator and other OS tools are not that useful. |
| 2 | ~ 7 days ago | commented | ntzm ♦600 | Still no signs on the ground to help the situation :( | |
| 3 | ~ 7 days ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Might be able to do something with NSUL postcodes, but you still need an open source for some addresses. USRNs may also help identify the splits, try usrn.uk | |
| 4 | ~ 7 days ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Sorry, try https://uprn.uk/usrn-map?loc=17,53.286517,-1.6769788 | |
| 5 | ~ 7 days ago | closed | ntzm ♦600 | The old post office is tagged as addr:street=Main Road, so I've adjusted the extents according to the USRN data | |
| 5545828 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 13 days ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | LNew 5MVA substation has been built here. Current work is laying a cable along Hillside and S side of Derby Road towards Lenton Primary S/s |
| 2 | ~ 13 days ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Planning ref https://publicaccess.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=TCE3K1LYIAF00. Not permissible for mapping (OS copyright in the maps). | |
| 3599714 | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Now seems to sell electric scoooters. Have a photo so should be able to update |
| 2 | ~ 14 days ago | commented | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | Are you still able to? | |
| 3 | ~ 14 days ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Yes, but will take a while. | |
| 5499126 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Substantial parts (most) of this 'wood' is a needed. There's a small amount of Willow scrub near the railway. |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | Sorry, “needed” how? Do you mean needs deleting, because only a small amount of willow scrub remains (near the railway)? | |
| 3 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | Oh maybe typo for “isn’t needed”? | |
| 4 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Should be "reedbed". Typing notes on a phone whilst on a train slightly suboptimal. Suspect this might have been a pesky autocorrect. | |
| 1351866 | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | There's a newish PRoW on the Derby CC dataset from rowmaps continuing track & crossing river here. |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | commented | Dave Venables ♦1,257 | Seems unlikely as path would need to cross the river Derwent and the Midland Main Line. Save Penny Lane named as one could once use this path and then cross the river using a ford to avoid the toll bridge but the bridge owner destroyed the ford and deepened the river to stop this am not aware of any new bridges or fords. Cycled along Duffield Bank and did not notice any footpath signs to Duffield here. There is a parish boundary here that joins and crosses the river. | |
| 3 | ~ 8 years ago | commented | Dave Venables ♦1,257 | Had a look at the "byway open to all traffic" marked on rowmaps that does not cross the railway and terminates in the cricket club grounds after crossing the river. Route marked may be close to the original path and ford not used by the public for more than 100 years. Farmer has signs at the junction of Save Penny Lane and Duffield Bank saying no access to riverbank for anglers and suggesting a very long way round. No public footpaths signs. Not in use as a path other than by the farmer as far as I can tell. Am not aware of any river crossing where marked on rowmaps but an ancient historical right may exist as there was once a ford. | |
| 4 | ~ 7 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Had a long chat with a lady from the Millennium Meadow last Saturday (10th Nov). Apparently the ford at bottom of Save Penny Lane was one of three, and there is some talk of a bridge hereabouts too. | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | mappermonday | Old Penny Lane's still viable, resilient pedestrians might borrow the gas pipe walkway 200yds W, (Ladybower Reservoir, Milford Weir, etc., had previously disrupted the fords). | |
| 6 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | fredgolightly ♦144 | This should still be accessible, it's a byway to all traffic yet completely blocked at Save Penny lane entrance. Should this be mapped as a prow even if BOAT 53 & 148 are blocked by land owner? | |
| 7 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Broadly speaking no! It might just mislead someone to go there only to discovered it's blocked etc. I believe there's no trace of the ford as river flow has scoured it away. We actually have quite a good understanding of the status of this BOAT, perhaps a less good understanding as to how to tag it given all the practical aspects. | |
| 8 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | mappermonday | Dept of Agriculture vs ancient desire-path, go forth and legislate. Was an old, fairly busy village link until the main road moved West (pre-A6 days, hence Milford's bend). Also confirm its ford faded last Century, adding to beaches downstream. Used to be crayfish, still does kingfishers. | |
| 9 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | fredgolightly ♦144 | Interesting. I know we map the 'ground truth' but here https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/public-rights-of-way-tagging-when-there-is-no-navigable-path/137902/29 and the wiki imply that the definitive map is just that and legal access should be mapped, with physical access tagged to better describe it's ground truth. | |
| 10 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | mappermonday | Bah humbug, definitive's gone digital, transcription errors steadily embedded, e.g. my address recorded in five different ways. Had to get an OS job just to reduce it to two, am still pursued for phantom TV licences. Also, that younger A6 shifted a further 100yds West for the railways. And while Save Penny Lane stays occasionally used by discrete couples or late-night drunks, its upper access closed pre mid-50s. Tag reads: Git orf my land! | |
| 11 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | See my personal views based on trying to follow rights of way in Carmarthenshire back in 2011: http://sk53-osm.blogspot.com/2011/07/footpaths-in-carmarthenshire-whats-point.html Personally I add a designation tag, but no highway or access tags. One I reported to the Leicestershire RoW officer has a stile buried deep in a fence & several farm buildings obstructing the line. From their viewpoint this was a WON'T FIX. I don't think its helpful to mislead people that something is viable rather than viability being a legal fiction. | |
| 12 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | mappermonday | Quite agree, fun's risky fictions, some boundaries argued, others explored. Ol' Save Penny's a rare ramble only for those up for it, many paths more travelled come freely available and popularly accessible. Though, on a bad day, the one along Spurn leads into the sea, ill-advised after dark on an unlit bicycle. | |
| 5482714 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | This entrance does not allow exit. The exit is on then other side of the foyer to the W. |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | silversurfer83 ♦549 | you sure you got the right one? | |
| 3 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | Martinligabue ♦1,877 | Entrance east, exit west | |
| 4 | ~ 1 month ago | closed | Martinligabue ♦1,877 | fixed | |
| 5 | ~ 1 month ago | reopened | Mateusz Konieczny ♦41,469 | ||
| 6 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | Mateusz Konieczny ♦41,469 | tried to edit it and fix it | |
| 7 | ~ 1 month ago | closed | Mateusz Konieczny ♦41,469 | ||
| 2368326 | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Aura Power have apparent planning consent for a large battery-based energy storage facility hereabouts. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | closed | GeorgeShipman1 | ||
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | reopened | GeorgeShipman1 | ||
| 4 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | dstansby ♦516 | Any idea if this ever happened? Doesn't looks like anything on the imagery yet | |
| 5 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Yes the bit right next to the solar farm is new BUT these look more like gas generators (3 marked as buildings, but 3 more to the north as well) | |
| 6 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | There's 50MW somewhere https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/battery-storage/sms-energises-its-first-50mw-battery-energy-storage-site-in-620mw-pipeline | |
| 2345108 | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Steps ? (Bing Imagery) |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | FooBar99 ♦117 | Path could do with re-aligning too. Needs a #surveyme | |
| 3 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | You might be able to use the UK Cadastral parcels overlay because the path will be passed outside property boundaries. | |
| 4 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | FooBar99 ♦117 | Ah yeah looks like it's aligned with the Cadastrals and public rights of way so it's probably aligned correctly. | |
| 2572455 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | This is the "Working Library". There used to be stacks towards the NE end and 3-4 supervision rooms above. |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | closed | dstansby ♦516 | I'm not sure what the action to take here is, so I'll close | |
| 3 | ~ 1 month ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 4 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | The actual library (mainly very old books) is in the college building front St Andrew's St (requires librarian to supervise access, mainly for scholarly - non-undergraduate - purposes). There also used to be a Law Library on the ground floor (with fairly extended opening hours for undergrads). The building currently marked as the library is mainly a work area for undergraduates with a fairly limited set of books). Might all be moot because there's a planning application to replace this early '70s building). Main point is the location of library icon is incorrect/misleading) | |
| 5 | ~ 1 month ago | commented | dstansby ♦516 | Could you move the icon to where the main library is on Saint Andrew's Street? And possibly add other points for the other libaries? | |
| 289807 | 1 | ~ 11 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | The Nottingham Trent University Brackenhurst Campus is much larger than current mapping suggests (including working farmland). I suspect all roads in the campus should be treated as permissive service roads rather than unclassified. There is an extensive signed network of permissive paths through the campus too. |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | confusedbuffalo ♦18,197 | Is it better now? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11197024 | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Doesn't include university farmland, but am also uncertain whether it should. This situation applies to pretty much all agriculture schools (and agriculture research institutes). So places like Sutton Bonington; Aber (Bangor); RAC, Cirencester, Rothampstead; Allerton Project, Loddington, Leicestershire etc. Income the past these might have been mappable as a farm with the name "University Farm" but many now have quite extensive academic buildings (e.g., Aber). Cambridge, of course, have scrapped their farm and built Edfington on it. The signed permissive path network extends across the farmed areas. I haven't checked if named fields have an operator tag. | |
| 1003992 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Seems a bit odd to have 2 bridleways leaving the road so close together. Suspect these might be duplicates. No obvious line on aerial imagery for one to E (most recently added): is this a difference between actual route & RoW mapping? |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | Only the easter one is on rowmaps / Andy's Townsend's Useful Map | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | I see you tagged the wester one source:designation=survey (signs at crossing of tertiary road) I assume that means the jcn S of Wright's Lodge Fm? If so, is it possible the wester track is an error and the easter one is correct? Both added about the same time, but I can't easily see in iD which came first. | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | No, because source: applies only to the designation, not to the route. | |
| 5 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Yes, I only added the designation, so point on A606 could be wrong. The W path was added well before the E one. Stan_W was the rights of way officer for Leicestershire Ramblers, so pretty knowledgeable. There's a photo on Geograph showing a gate accessing the bridleway in 2011, but I can't find it with Bing Streetside (no Mapillary data). Strata heatmap may help. | |
| 6 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | I think the meeting point at the A606 is where I've set a gate. You can just make out a beaten path / statutory clearance in the two Esri images. I've put the gate there as I can't see that it would be anywhere other than the end of the flattened path. That's also consistent with the camera angle in the photo: we see mostly the western face of the western range of the horseshoe farm buildings, but also a bit of the eaves end of both ranges; and the wester range does not entirely obscure the easter one, maybe 10-15% of which projects into view. There appears to be no break in the hedge where the easter route is currently shown as joining the road, so the curve southwards would seem to be incorrect. Which is all great fun, but I'm not sure it answers the question of whether the wester route is there at all. Strava is not much help: there is activity along the wester route where it runs near enough exactly E-W, S of Wright's Lodge Fm and W of the join with the easter route, but the traces seem to bend NW from there, tracking the edge of the field, then disappear (possibly a horse rider based at the farm with "hide my home" set on Strava.) | |
| 1492792 | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Another country store hereabouts |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Mole Country Store | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | their website has 1 Snow Hill LE13 1PD. Is it where Halfords is currently tagged, w73464798 ? x-ref https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4429162 | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | No Mole is opposite side of SnowHill ftom store marked as Halfords. Both present in Bing Streetside 2019. You can also check building postcodes with one of the UPRN sites. | |
| 5 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | TheUKHighStreet ♦8,680 | It is tagged here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/14073308839 | |
| 6 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | Yeah that was me :) Evidently I didn't manage to update this note as planned - I said I thought good to leave open as a prompt to check postcodes against UPRNs. | |
| 7 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | TheUKHighStreet ♦8,680 | Ah - sorry, didn't notice it had just been updated! | |
| 8 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Here's the link to rjw62's site: https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/uprn/#19/52.7671/-0.8830 You can also search directly for a postcode on uprn.uk. Anyway checks out for LE11 1PD. Perhaps better to handle whether Halhords is still there separately. | |
| 9 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Oh, Halford has certainly gone too: https://www.meltontimes.co.uk/lifestyle/shopping/meltons-halfords-store-set-to-close-3727914. So closing this. | |
| 859054 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | These buildings N of Welby Lane are marked as Kennels on OSSV. They may therefore be part of the Defence Animal Centre to the S of the road. |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | commented | Scary gav | DAC Kennel compound for Dogs and Traing School | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | now in map but with non-standard name. Is it really Defence Animal *Service*? The DA *Centre* to the south is named as such in MOD websites. More generally / formally we might expect Defence Animal Training Regiment | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | DAC ended in 2018. Website has "Remount Barracks". Co-located with RAVC too. | |
| 852214 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | According to Leics online PRoW data (via rowmaps) this is a PRoW, but not signed on the ground. |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | eteb3 ♦1,596 | It's marked on Andy Townsend's PRoW map, too: does that mean it can be included in OSM now? | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | I think you can, but it's not much use as it doesn't connect with anything (probably why Leics CC didn't put a sign up). I've tidied up the path to the S because Bing Streetside shoes the gap in the hedge. The layer on Andy's map is actually rowmap's data, filtered by ODbL compatible licenses. Layer was built by Richard Fairhurst and is the same one included by editors (and data source used by Robert Whittaker's mathmos site). This location was the furthest I reached when 4 of us spent a day surveying footpaths around Scalford. I did some back to fill in gaps towards Waltham. | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | eteb3 ♦1,596 | Thanks. I've added it to satisfy my inner completion heuristic. If you think it's better de-prioritised, feel free to remove the highway tag, so just the designation remains. Thanks also for explanation of the source. I've credited "rowmaps via [andy's url]. If that seems wrong, perhaps you could lmk. | |
| 4093638 | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Not sure this connection exists anymore. There's an escalator which leads out to Middle Hill (except when it's locked as I discovered) |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | commented | kevjs1982 ♦907 | Does exists, walked thru it a few months ago. Have confirmed from Sussex street today it's still open - automatic doors at the edge of the "bridge" that consists of Middle Hill. | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | commented | kevjs1982 ♦907 | Closed yesterday with a sign at the Sussex street end reading "Sussex street entrance is closed today", but looking like it may have been out of use for a while | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | Same sign is still present. There's grafitti which could indicate long-term disuse. | |
| 5 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Didn't chance it last week used the doors in SE corner of bus station & then forgot to check as I walked through. | |
| 6 | ~ 1 day ago | closed | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | Entrance and associated footpath now tagged with access=no. | |
| 4054744 | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | opened | KoiAndBlueBird ♦218 | Is the name of this really "Plantation"? The CS says "local names", but OS doesn't list it. If this is slang, maybe another tag (local_name?) would fit better? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | closed | paceban353 | Why is Kosovo | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | reopened | KoiAndBlueBird ♦218 | ||
| 4 | ~ 6 months ago | closed | Qinyao Huang | ||
| 5 | ~ 6 months ago | reopened | Qinyao Huang | ||
| 6 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | No, clearly the typenof woodland, not the name. Probably copied from text on an old map. | |
| 7 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | christophersanders | I am being SILENCED by Israel! Listen closely: There is a nuclear power plant being built in Alford | |
| 8 | ~ 2 months ago | reopened | Fizzie-DWG ♦7,739 | Reopened by DWG | |
| 9 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | Thingummy ♦191 | Its a birders place i think, Rare brown things get blown tere as its the only cover for miles. | |
| 10 | ~ 2 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 11 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | I wouldn't use viewpoint (even if misspelt!) for places where birders assemble looking for rare birds. Places like Blakeney (whole North Norfolk coast really & Spurn further North) are most popular during Autumn migration & especially if weather conditions are right for a "fall" (rare migrants diverted across North Sea and arrive exhausted). I don't know how busy it is at other times. Clearly these are local names used by those in the know (birders) and not general names. For instance they aren't on OS maps. I think loc_name is more appropriate and have commented on the original changeset as well. | |
| 12 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | Thingummy ♦191 | You are probably right about using viewpoint=, but I was following the Wiki, although Taginfo shows no use in GB. As for names, there are no official or local names in the area as the rate of change of the topography and colonisation means there is very little fixed to name. So if someone wants to find a location, any identifiable feature, including this first colonisation by trees it is useful. None of the near by names are on any maps new or old. It has a wikimedia page, a Geograph page, and is on Cleybirdclub.org.uk 's sketch map. I gave up counting when i got to 20 distinct websites mentioning it from a google search. | |
| 13 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Oh yes birders locations will crop up on a lot of websites (especially if used for reporting sightings). However they tend to be names used by those 'in the know', rather than general ones. It can be very confusing trying to match birders reports in an unfamiliar location (although this may have lot easier over the past 20 years). So I'm in favour of having the names, but not sure if the name tag is best. On the other point I suspect the wiki is plain wrong. Bird hides and other birding locations are not in general viewpoints in the accepted tourism sense. A few locations (notably narrow straights & mountain passes) are called "raptor niewpoints". | |
| 14 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Oh yes birders locations will crop up on a lot of websites (especially if used for reporting sightings). However they tend to be names used by those 'in the know', rather than general ones. It can be very confusing trying to match birders reports in an unfamiliar location (although this may have lot easier over the past 20 years). So I'm in favour of having the names, but not sure if the name tag is best. On the other point I suspect the wiki is plain wrong. Bird hides and other birding locations are not in general viewpoints in the accepted tourism sense. A few locations (notably narrow straights & mountain passes) are called "raptor niewpoints". | |
| 15 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | In fact the wiki says "tourism=viewpoint is extremely unlikely to be a valid combination, such objects are likely man_made=tower + tower:type=observation". One the bird hide page. | |
| 1706070 | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Check if these houses have PV or hot water solar. Based on size I suspect latter. |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | I've had glances at these panels and I can confirm with confidence these could be for hot water. | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Hot water always has quite a big pipe coming out. Often visible on aerial imagery. Very obvious if ground surveying. | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Less useful hint if integrated into the roof. But have looked at Bing Streetside and am very sure now. | |
| 5 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | Thanks for adding these, I think this note can be resolved now. | |
| 2421299 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | According to the Evening Post this is now slated to be housing. Will add link later. |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | Seems to be mapped sufficiently now, resolving. | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Not sure the development name "Willoughby Gardens" still applies, unless there's some explicit signage remaining (as on Martin's Reach). | |
| 2454993 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | --- | Callaway Gardens has not been plotted in the correct location as the aerial footage on Bing Maps is from when it was a hospital 10 years ago. The road from the entrance off Hospital Road goes up to roughly level with 12 Leighton Gardens, then bends round to roughly by the marker, then straightens out to roughly parallel with the Butts and heading for the garage between 82 and 97 Studland Park. The ultimate layout of the estate is roughly as drawn, except it needs to be further to the east - the eastern part is much closer to Studland Park (the whole site includes the paler land in a line from the existing grey area to roughly level with the edge of 93 Studland Park). The garden area in the middle is also not a 'communal park', its really not that big! Sorry, but I do not have the skills or technology to edit this myself, but if you take a look at the OS map or the planning application map you can see what I mean. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Excellent report. I rather suspected it's not a park (looks suspiciously like one created by a Pokemon enthusiast). OS OpenRoads or OS OpenLocal should show enough detail to amend the ways. | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Sadly it has little data https://os.openstreetmap.org/#zoom=18&lat=51.255721&lon=-2.183013 | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | AlanandKate | Hi - I added the original comment... the April 20 update to the OS layer linked to in the last comment above includes blocks for the properties that run along the part of the road that is roughly parallel to The Butts towards the garage between 82 and 97 Studland Park. The property numbers (from the first block) are 15, 17, 19, 21, then 23, 25 and 27, then 29, 31 and 33, and finally 35 and 37 (the block nearest Studland Park). The front gardens are very short, only one car length to the road. So if the road could just be moved to the right and down as per my initial comment, that would be great. The 90-degree angle where the road changes to a NE direction is in front of number 35 which is the left-hand portion of the final property block on the OS April 20 addition. A friend did take an aerial shot from a hang glider, that shows the layout, but I have no way to submit that. Hope this additional comment helps. | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Thanks for the additional information. I'd forgotten another recent source of open data (UPRNs: unique property numbers) which are often assigned before houses are built. The location of those together with your description should reasonably locate 15-35. Working on a theory of mine I've also added 37-61, but am aware some of these may not yet be built (or at least occupied). I've also added additional uprns (presumably for even-numbered houses). Let me know of any corrections needed. (You may need to refresh your browser to see the most up-to-date info) Jerry | |
| 6 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | AlanandKate | Hello. Please can I ask someone with the skills to update Callaway Gardens (don't know if you are still around Jerry - apologies for delay in coming back to this!)? The layout at the entrance is still wrong, as per my comments from December 2020. You can actually see the correct layout now in the layer OS OpenMap Local - October 2022. Note - Google has the road wrong as it adds an extra offshoot at the entrance, and also shows the road continuing past numbers 35/37 (which it doesn't). Also please can the reference to water drainage and park be removed - they are erroneous and are just very poor landscaping (the plans etc bear no resemblance to what is actually constructed here), no difference to any other new build estate! Much better to leave as the background pale grey colour. The properties are all built and occupied (have been for over a year now). They can all be seen on the Google Maps aerial photo (sorry if that's not allowed). As an aside - the properties 39 to 45 are the same size as each other. Properties 47 to 61 are all detached. There is a gap between properties 34-38 and the next terrace 40-44. I'm happy to submit a personal aerial photos, if there is a way for me to do so. | |
| 7 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | AlanandKate | Also do you show all roadways, or only adopted roads? if the latter, then you should remove the section of road between numbers 33 and 35, and in front of numbers 63 to 69 (in the south west corner) | |
| 8 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Sure I'll take a look. There should be aerial imagery now, as I was really creating the stuff from your description and various odd (and I mean odd) bits of data. In general we show both adopted roads and service roads. In the context of a new build estate usually only shared driveways where how to get to a house would be non-obvious, and they are mapped with a tag which indicates they aren't public roads. | |
| 9 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | Car Tographer ♦840 | Aerial imagery is now available showing the estate in iD - seems like everything matches up with that now. Should we close this note now? | |
| 10 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | The link detached houses are still incorrectly mapped. They are not terraces. I've tweaked the road & amended house types ; all the terraced houses were .apoed as terraces. | |
| 11 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | AlanandKate | Hi, as per my note 3744840, the terrace block containing properties 6, 8, 10, 12, should be exactly the same size and shape as the terrace block containing properties 14, 16, 18, 20. Other than that, the estate is now looking a lot better, and very close to what is actually on the ground. | |
| 12 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | Car Tographer ♦840 | @SK54 I think JOSM must have automatically tagged the buildings as terraced when I split them; sorry about that. @AlanandKate when viewing 6-12 in the editor they seem to have the same proportions as 14-20, but are taking a while to update on the map - if you press Edit at the top left your screen next to the open street map logo you should be able to see a more up to date view. | |
| 13 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | AlanandKate | Hi @Car Tographer You mis-tagged Jerry @SK53... All looks good to me now, so I'm happy for this to be closed now. | |
| 14 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | AlanandKate | @Car%20Tographer (hopefully this tag formats correctly now) | |
| 15 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | Car Tographer ♦840 | Yeah, you’re right. If you are happy for this to be closed, I’ll close it now. | |
| 2490350 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | --- | The number 12 bus no longer runs |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Thanks, it was on the bus stops about 2 years ago | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | ceirios ♦3,915 | 12 was removed? | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | reopened | ceirios ♦3,915 | ||
| 5 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | ceirios ♦3,915 | ignore last sorry, i had the wrong layer open, it's still mapped | |
| 6 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | I also think the Indigo might run there now either. Indeed it doesn't https://bustimes.org/services/igo-indigo-nottingham-queens-medical-centre-beesto#map | |
| 7 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | I've set the 12 and the Indigo relations to disused. Also removed the 2 Indigo relations from the route master. The relations can be deleted once it's clear nothing else affected. Also checked my15 & Skylink buses on this road | |
| 5400682 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | path very overgrown at this point |
| 7645 | 1 | ~ 13 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Would be nice to establish true course of Day Brook in this culvert |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | JayTurnr ♦1,089 | I agree, but I wouldn't know the way to do that without walking it, is it even big enough to do so? | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Don't know, but someone did make a YouTube video of kayaking down the Leen! What might be possible is to see if there are any signs in Heathfield Park at the back of the houses fronting Valley Road. | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | JayTurnr ♦1,089 | Hahah that sounds fun! | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Not quite the same, but a good video nonetheless https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKNAUZjGaww | |
| 6 | ~ 2 years ago | commented | JayTurnr ♦1,089 | So when are you kayaking it and can I watch? With popcorn and maybe a rope to pull you out if you get stuck, ofc 😅 | |
| 7 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | ceirios ♦3,915 | has this been updated since this note was made? | |
| 8 | ~ 2 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | No | |
| 9 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | LordGarySugar ♦2,221 | Based on OS 25 inch showing the original course of the stream, and OS 1:1250 showing the stream turning before it is culverted, I have realigned the culvert beneath Valley Road and not under any houses. | |
| 476495 | 1 | ~ 10 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Missing townland MacCrackens (43 acres) |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | commented | LateNightTone ♦671 | I've drawn in the extra line to create MacCrackens townland (relation r21043539), traced from British War Office map. NB: Sources differ as to capitalisation (placenames NI says Maccrackens). There's no wikidata entry for this townland at present, so I have omitted this field. Take a look a nd see whether this resolves the note please :-) | |
| 3 | ~ 3 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Yes that looks fine. I think the alignment of the old railway line is significantly wrong. There are several places where roads obviously were designed to bridgenthe line & it doesn't go there. More research needed (probably should open a separate note). | |
| 4 | ~ 3 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Have also created wikidata entry & added it to the relation. | |
| 5 | ~ 3 months ago | closed | LateNightTone ♦671 | Great stuff, thanks! Yes I'd say a new note is best for the former railway. Should be relatively easy to do using a historical map layer. | |
| 913524 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Union Shop seems to have gone to be replaced by larger cafe area. There is another cafe for staff rather than students probably on D floor. |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | closed | OSMuser77 ♦48 | ||
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 4 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | You don't seem to have resolved the point of this note. I still see the Union Shop mapped. The note suggests it has gone. The note might be old, but that doesn't mean it is incorrect or outdated. A proper survey is still required. | |
| 5 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | OSMuser77 ♦48 | My apologies, I am still very new to this site. Yes I can confirm there is no union shop. The cafe is located on A floor to the right of the entrance as you walk in and it is directly opposite Greenfield Library. I have visited this place just recently. | |
| 6 | ~ 3 months ago | closed | OSMuser77 ♦48 | This is now up to date. | |
| 3021671 | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Almost certainly a slurry pit |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | LYNX4546 ♦57 | You seem to be correct, do you know what it should be designated as on here? | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Ohh, will take me some time to remember what the received position on tagging these might be. I do remember thinking it was slightly silly. Will look it up a bit later. | |
| 5324805 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Die Trauernden Eltern, Kollwitz. Pair of sculptures |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | closed | Raymond ♦1,021 | See https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3325427221 | |
| 239382 | 1 | ~ 12 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Bestwood area 20 mph scheme came into effect 26th April 2014. http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/article/26332/Nottinghams-2020-vision |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | ceirios ♦3,915 | roads still missing maxspeed tags, is this scheme still in place? | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Definitely, all residential roads in the city have been 20mph for at least a decade. The problematic bits might be Beckhampton Road, although as it pages a school 20 photovoltaic seems likely. | |
| 766105 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️⚧️ ♦1,137 | Is this Coleraine area really a barony? It looks very small... |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | It's certainly not shown on the Memorial County Atlas http://maps.openstreetmap.ie/oocmaps.html. Everything on the right bank of the Bann should be in NE Liberties of Coleraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_East_Liberties_of_Coleraine)/. | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Looks as though this has been corrected https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6393813. Can you review again? | |
| 4 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | LateNightTone ♦671 | No response from the OP. Suggest ok to close? | |
| 5 | ~ 4 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Last edited by Bogged(e)y, a very active member of the townlands project, so yes. | |
| 1666862 | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | There's a patch of Common Reed Phragmites australis here, but aerial photos are too coarse to pick it out. |
| 2 | ~ 11 months ago | closed | dannmer ♦23,455 | added | |
| 3 | ~ 11 months ago | reopened | dannmer ♦23,455 | ||
| 4 | ~ 10 months ago | commented | therealzakie ♦81 | Why is this reactivated? Did you push the wrong button on accident or something? | |
| 5 | ~ 10 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Probably because it was deleted in a subsequent changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174511318. The note is consequently still valid. | |
| 6 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | LateNightTone ♦671 | I've mapped what can be seen from aerial imagery, and updated the walkway which appears to be a pier over the wetland. Does this work for you @SK53 ? | |
| 7 | ~ 4 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Seems reasonable, certainly you've put the boardwalk on the right side | |
| 2175517 | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Quite a lot of houses in this area have something which could be a small solar panel or (more likely) a solar hot water panel on their roofs |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | ceirios ♦3,915 | Agree, i see something that looks like a solar panel on 36, 51 and 57 | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Quite a lot more now added. 36, Green Lane shows two pale spots adjacent to the top & bottom of the panel which is a good sign of solar hot water (water pipes in and out). Unfortunately the houses are not that well aligned with the land registry parcels over most of the area. It's a big job to tidy them up. | |
| 1115848 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Chip Shop possibly closed. Not on FHRS Aug 2017 |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | closed | Essex Trophy | ||
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Hi, I'm not sure why you resolved this note. The chippy is still present on the map, and I think it has closed since I mapped it. If the actual map is updated then it is appropriate to close the note. I'm guessing from your user name that you might live nearby and know the current situation. You can either update the map yourself, or just let me know here & I'll do it. Thanks, Jerry aka SK53 | |
| 5 | ~ 4 months ago | commented | TheUKHighStreet ♦8,680 | I think this node could just be removed? It hasn't had a name for a long time and no hygiene rating. | |
| 6 | ~ 4 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Just had it confirmed that it closed "years ago". The building to the N is a vets on Bing Streetside in 2020. | |
| 1201086 | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Entrance to mosque about here, actual PoW is on 1st floor. |
| 2 | ~ 6 months ago | closed | maxwellward ♦2,985 | Added, thanks | |
| 3 | ~ 6 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Unfortunately, as the note was made in 2018, the mosque has moved since then. prior to the move it had been mapped as you can see from the current node: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5455339632. Please be more cautious adding things from old notes. I don't necessarily trust my own after 6 months or so because things change so much. I've deleted the nodes you've added. | |
| 4 | ~ 6 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Closed because mosque has moved. | |
| 2603346 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | There's some sort of utility compound shown about here on Bing & ESRI Clarity but not on other imagery. No UPRN either, but clear land parcels from INSPIRE. |
| 2 | ~ 6 months ago | commented | ceirios ♦3,915 | is this still here? i think we've had newer Bing and Esri since this note was made | |
| 3 | ~ 6 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Just wonder if the note is misplaced and means the wastewater plant nearby (just added). Agree nothing business here now. The idea of spotting construction compounds is that they may hint at undergroundpipes or cables. | |
| 4 | ~ 22 days ago | closed | ceirios ♦3,915 | I think it's likely the note was misplaced, thanks for adding the wastewater plant. | |
| 1050108 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | NCC Streetlights has this as 205a (& there is a Companies House entry for that address too). Related to other notes further along Brownlow Drive. So this house, No. 13 and the building currently between 140 and 142 need on-the-ground checks. |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | closed | Sleath | ||
| 3 | ~ 8 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 2385329 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | --- | Path linking Oldmoor Wood track and Shortwood bridle path, in regular use by local walkers over decades. |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Yep, I've just never got round to surveying it! | |
| 3 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | See older note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1059162 | |
| 4 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | From memory this as mapped is on wrong side of hedge | |
| 5 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | Mapref | The path most commonly used moved east of the hedgeline when the margin on the west side was ploughed up to the hedge 3 or 4 years back. Other occasional attempts to restrict the route have been rendered futile this far by sheer persistence and numbers of users it seems (mainly dog walkers, ramblers and occasional cyclists and horse riders) | |
| 6 | ~ 5 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Reminder to myself. This is an excellent example of an informal path. | |
| 7 | ~ 8 months ago | commented | fredgolightly ♦144 | Bottom of Robinettes is a formal Deposit which is this https://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/media/w4kdnmnh/s61.pdf essentially stating no public paths anyway on their land. Loath to close as if used for 20yes application can be made for row | |
| 8 | ~ 8 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Might be worth finding out if Notts Footpath Preservation are on it. I certainly used it around 2006/7 when it was very well marked. Probably have photographs from that date too. | |
| 9 | ~ 8 months ago | commented | fredgolightly ♦144 | It seems they're more a walking club than anything else now. Email on website is just a empty mailto: link. The application process to have it recognises seems a little overwhelming. Shame as it's a great little fp which makes a great loop from Strelley I've seen 1000s of people do over the years. | |
| 10 | ~ 8 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | I've had mixed results with them. A few years ago (pre-Covid) they were quite active with making claims. But 15 years ago they were completely dismissive of OSM (and clearly, at the time, all retired). The Ramblers are the other group likely to be able to so something. Not sure how active they are locally. | |
| 5149100 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 8 months ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | La Maison des Ailes a vendu cet immeuble en Novembre '25 " exigences fiscaux". Voir https://www.mda-hdv.be/fr/ |
| 2 | ~ 8 months ago | commented | bxl-forever ♦6,041 | I get your point, but I happened to be there some time ago and I confirm that the place itself is still labelled as the same name and there are still events here, even if the association sold the property itself. I suggest we keep it unchanged for the time being. | |
| 3 | ~ 8 months ago | closed | bxl-forever ♦6,041 | Confirmed, no change in current branding. Let’s close this note now. | |
| 1036711 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | club nit open |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | not open; continue to check status | |
| 3 | ~ 9 months ago | closed | RTFurlong | ||
| 4 | ~ 9 months ago | reopened | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | ||
| 5 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | RTFurlong, please only set notes to resolved once the issue stated is fixed. | |
| 6 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Ah last passed near in June, just may be around next week, but may be too much of a diversion to check. Did a lot of these when we met at a pub on Mansfield Road, which we haven't done for 6 years. | |
| 1657199 | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Gating orders apply to paths of Brewsters Road from 2010 https://www.nottinghaminsight.org.uk/Document-Library/Document-Library/aAXOSpQ |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | closed | RTFurlong | ||
| 3 | ~ 9 months ago | reopened | RTFurlong | ||
| 4 | ~ 9 months ago | closed | RTFurlong | ||
| 5 | ~ 9 months ago | reopened | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | ||
| 6 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | Aethonatic ♦1,711 | Unclear if actually resolved. SK53, could you check? | |
| 7 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Unfortunately wrong side of city for me, and we dont currently have a mapper in that area. Most gating orders are permanent in my experience, but do need an on-the-geound check. | |
| 1905912 | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Buildings partially replaced |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | closed | RTFurlong | ||
| 3 | ~ 9 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Bit at a loss as to why this has been closed. Buildings as mapped do not correspond to current aerial imagery. Also looks like the Mechanics Arms has gone. | |
| 1029246 | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | Most buildings have been demolished |
| 2 | ~ 6 years ago | commented | kevjs1982 ♦907 | Looks like some housing has been built near to Laburnum Grove. | |
| 3 | ~ 6 years ago | commented | will_p ♦316 | I have updated this. The residential part of the development ("Beeston Quarter") is still at an early stage. The industrial/commercial units ("Trent Gateway") look closer to completion. | |
| 4 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | Dave Venables ♦1,257 | The residential roads were added in July 2022 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123856839 and the alignment was improved today from Esri World Imagery https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176085797 but the map could be improved further | |
| 5 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Cadastral parcels can be used as well. Transmission Avenue can certainly be improved with these (iD doesn't allow me to move it on the phone) | |
| 2660459 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | --- | 11A |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | added but next door | |
| 3 | ~ 9 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 2078421 | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | path access to terraces here needs checking, was untouched from my edits in 2009. Have used street light data to hopefully make a bit more accurate |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Have now added more, even the back alleys to provide access to back gardens (and rubbish bins.) are lit. | |
| 3 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | See a note on a similar issue nearby: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2078421#map=15/52.89450/-1.19206&layers=N Ideally these things need a ground survey BUT given they are often effectively private access to people's back gardens it's rarely a good idea. | |
| 5019263 Category: Unknown | 1 | ~ 11 months ago | opened | Mex ♦8,461 | where does this path go? |
| 2 | ~ 9 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | I would assume it provides access to the rear gardens of the houses (often for household bins). There's no sign of it emerging onto the main road : what I'd expect given the latter has no pavement on the S side. IIRC this estate was built around the 1980s. It has an intricate, and often non-intuitive network of footpaths. Probably similar to The Meadows and St Ann's. | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | closed | CiaránMooney ♦249 | Surveyed this path. It goes left for a few meters then stops at a back gate. Updated the map. | |
| 1692447 | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | 5 steps to entrance in side |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | closed | hephu ♦2 | ||
| 3 | ~ 10 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 4 | ~ 10 months ago | commented | SK53 ♦3,862 | Why have you resolved this note? You do not seem to have added the missing feature. | |
| 2422775 | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | opened | TomJeffs ♦243 | Location of this bridge and the connected routes is approximate and is taken from the map in this tweet thread - https://twitter.com/StockportMBC/status/1327205873287131136 |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Bridge aligns with awrials | |
| 4768860 Category: unknown | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | opened | --- | there's a path here between pedley street and mill street |
| 2 | ~ 10 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Was added by quantumjinnx (sp?) a while back. | |
| 4828678 Category: unknown | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | There's a Rogue Tattoo on St Leonard's Road. I suspect they've moved from here as the latter address is on their website. |
| 2 | ~ 11 months ago | closed | Sébastien Pi ♦3,227 | itsu is still here | |
| 3 | ~ 11 months ago | reopened | SK53 ♦3,862 | ||
| 4 | ~ 11 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 | Probably wasn't when I made the note, as I was looking for tattoo parlours in Windsor and found two Rogue Tattoos but not Black Heron (separate note if you're out & about). | |
| 2298278 | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | opened | SK53 ♦3,862 | outbuilding demolished? |
| 2 | ~ 11 months ago | commented | Dave Venables ♦1,257 | Removed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220364348 Nothing obvious on bing maps aerial or esri world imagery | |
| 3 | ~ 11 months ago | closed | SK53 ♦3,862 |