OpenStreetMap
rskedgell's Notes
Notes submitted or commented on by rskedgell
| Id | Creator | Description | Created at | Last changed | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3301880 | rskedgell | Unable to answer "What kind of memorial is this?" for osm.org/node/4908592617 via StreetComplete 45.2: War memorial WWI? Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 4202485 | rskedgell | There seems to be rather a lot of cycle parking for somewhere cycling is supposedly prohibited. via StreetComplete_ee 57.0 Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 4202476 | rskedgell | Cycle stands via StreetComplete_ee 57.0 Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 4202473 | rskedgell | If cycling is prohibited here, it seems odd that there is no signage to confirm this and that cycle stands have been provided. via StreetComplete_ee 57.0 Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 4202463 | rskedgell | Crossing is a toucan nor pelican. This is because it is part of a shared foot and cucle route, not foot only. A pedestrian fingerpost does not imply a prohibition of cycling. via StreetComplete_ee 57.0 Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 4202439 | rskedgell | A faded or vandalised TSRGD diagram 956 sign does not revoke the explicit authorisation of cycling. The fact that the route is explicitly signed with a fingerpost also serves to confirm this. It is not a sidewalk/pavement, so Highway Code Rule 64 does not apply. Even if it were, the explicit signage would override the general prohibition. via StreetComplete_ee 57.0 Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 3798838 | rskedgell | Newly surfaced segregated cycle track (imcomplete at A13 end). via StreetComplete_ee 53.32 Attached photo(s):
|
|||
| 4281035 | rskedgell | Footway connection, paving stones via StreetComplete_ee 57.4 |
|||
| 4280999 | rskedgell | Footway, lit, paving stones via StreetComplete_ee 57.4 GPS Trace: osm.org/user/rskedgell/traces/11369878 |
|||
| 4287394 | rskedgell | Path via StreetComplete_ee 57.4 Attached photo(s):
|
