Help with finding online footpath closure notice for Suffolk Uk

Help and support
,
1

Hi,

Yesterday I saw another footpath closure notice but I’m unable to find a copy of it online.

1690653417222-175f137d-d79c-4117-966d-7c5e63a96996
1690653417222-175f137d-d79c-4117-966d-7c5e63a969961920×1440 248 KB

I have attached a copy of the notice, but I’m unable to find a copy of this online. Is there suppose to be a copy of this online. If so could someone point me in the right direction as I couldn’t see anything on the council website.

The only a text notice here, but it didn’t include much info. Temporary traffic regulation orders - Suffolk County Council

I have added a map note #3806693 but wanted to link to the online document.

This is my first time reporting a map issue here so any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks
Jack

2 Likes
2

Looks like this one Way: 104532037 | OpenStreetMap

1 Like
3

That’s the one.

4

Temporary closures are not mapped in OpenStreetMap but if you want to do that better use a conditional closure like:

acccess:conditional = no @ (2023/01/23 - 2023/07/12)

Given that it is already past 12/07/2023 I wonder if the closure is still effectieve.

2 Likes
5

Thanks. The closure is still in place with no sign of works taking place. It’s likely to be extended further.

2 Likes
6

Where the closure is essentially open-ended, I’d personally avoid access:conditional.

A couple of examples local to me are https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/601820045 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/129726923.

Obviously if/when the closure is reversed it can be undone.

1 Like
7

Looks like it’s now scheduled to be closed until 12 Jan 2024.

Route affected Details of restrictions Dates
FP41 and FP52 and part of FP38 Holbrook. From 616930 235720 to 617390 234980 and 617430 234940. In the interests of public safety the footpath’s are closed due to a damaged boardwalk. 13 January 2023 to 12 January 2024

But agree with @SomeoneElse - this isn’t a short closure and if work hasn’t actually started, it’s quite possible the closure will be extended again. So access=no and (optionally) disused:highway=footway with a note=* explaining the closure.

2 Likes
8

Also worth noting that it appears the public footpath “FP 38 Holbrook” ends prematurely in OSM and actually continues north (along a farm track?) to meet “FP 52 Holbrook”.

That missing section is also part of this closure notice, so not a huge issue right now but would be worth surveying and mapping.

9

Like I wrote above I think access:conditional is a much better choice:

  • Openstreetmap is not meant for mapping temporary things, if you still want to do it :conditional is I think the way to go
  • Too often it is forgotten to remove the access=no after the works after finished, which access:conditional there is no such problem.
10

Where a closure is actually temporary for a particular period of time only it might make sense, but this case doesn’t sound like one of those. Looking at one of my examples again, the closure notice does have an end date on it, but that only describes the length of the notice, not the length of the closure. The length of the closure is indefinite until (in this case) some fairly major riverbank renovation work is done**. Likely the date will just get nudged on a year and I’ll update the note in OSM accordingly

What I tend to do personally is to check every now and again what the state on the ground is (see here for another example). If there’s an advertised end date I tend to add myself a reminder outside of OSM to check periodically.

** The Environment Agency are quite busy upstream, and the local drainage board have been active on several sections downstream but there’s been no activity that could resolve the closure before the currently advertised “closed until” date.

11

I must admit I haven’t seen, or ever used, conditional tagging this way. As far as I can see, this isn’t a documented usage. Instead the documentation focuses on “permanent” restrictions rather than temporary.

They do still suffer from an update problem though. As shown in this very example, the conditional tags would have needed to have been updated otherwise the path would have re-opened in OSM whilst still being closed in reality.

Perhaps it’s better to default to open but I could see this leading to greater frustration, i.e. if being routed there and finding the path is closed rather than simply not being provided a route at all.

1 Like