Is it a public footpath ?

[john ryan]

Walking around Mill Hill North London the other day and i saw some metal gates and padlock on the entrance from the road on what i remember as a public footpath.

Went to StreetMap site and could not see it listed as a footpath. It may well be that my memory is failing, but how could i check on whether it might be a public footpath?

Streetmap on what appear to be Ordnance Survey Maps does not mark footpaths in red dotted lines like the paper version OS maps used to. The seem to have green dotted lanes marked, but whether these are the traditional public footpaths, i just dont know; i suspect not.

I went to my local WH smiths and they had such a poor stock of paper OS maps and none that covered here locally. Also they are now soooo expensive.

Can anyone give advice on finding out where the local public right of way footpaths are, please? Thanks.

[Paul Herber]

It might have been a permissive path.

[Robin]

You might do better to start with

and then possibly their group |Greater+London&zoomLevel=4&If the path is in Barnet you could also ask the council to let you look at the definitive map for the Borough.

[David]

Can anyone give advice on finding out where the local public right of way footpaths are, please? Thanks.

Not sure but I think Bing maps have an OS option.

[Man at B&Q]

OS website "getamap".

MBQ

[Phil Cook]

In England and Wales public footpaths are marked on OS maps in red on

1:50k and green on 1:25k so it depends which scale you are looking at on Streetmap. Walls and fences are shown on 1:25k but not on 1:50k.

the definitive answer is to look them up on the definitive map held by the local authority.

[Mike Barnes]

Agreed.

Many councils have their maps available online, showing public rights of way. While these are not definitive, they're the next best thing, and often at a better scale than the maps you can buy in the shops.

Also a public footpath is identifiable by the prominent sign to that effect where it joins the public highway.

[Phil Cook]

/Should be./ I have seen instances where the sign has got lost.

[Robin]

Are such signs now always required please? (Section 27 of the Countryside Act 1968 provided a let-out if the Parish Council/parish meeting agreed with the highway authority that a sign was not necessary.)

[Chris J Dixon]

You can browse on-line, and get to an amazing level of detail by visiting

is more information there than I have ever had time to fathom.

Chris

[Huge]

[Mike Barnes]

Robin :

I believe that is still the case. I was intending to convey that if such sign existed or did exist, it's a strong indication of the existence of a PROW. I could have made that clearer. The absence of a sign conveys nothing. The act provided no timescale for compliance, so non-compliance is common even after all these years.

[Roger Chapman]

My access track is a PROW. Thankfully it doesn't (and as far as I know never has had) have a finger post. The top half (from where it leaves my drive) must get several traverses every year but most of the few that attempt it retreat when they get to the section where the walls have fallen in.

[Dave Liquorice]

Isn't the landowner responsible for maintaining a PROW? Though This section with fallen walls might not be on your land.

[Graham Seed]

Streemap plus other clues like signposts etc should be good enough to show if the route is/isn't a RoW. I suspect that it isn't if it's padlocked. Any chance of a Google link so we can have a look?

Graham

[Roger Chapman]

This particular footpath comes down my drive to the house (some 60 yards) and then turns though a right angle and goes down between my land and my neighbour's, with walls on both sides for most of its run. It is not on my deeds and my neighbour assures me it is not on his.

I felt compelled to rebuild part of my wall when the council cleared the previously impenetrable undergrowth some considerable time ago but that was because the wall looked a danger to any path users. The fallen walls are further down the hillside.

As a footpath it would not be particularly useful even if it was cleared. It runs straight down a steep hillside and is only marginally shorter than the road that links the two ends which itself is steep enough to discourage all but the most determined of cyclists.

[John Williamson]

Deposnding on whether there is a pavement on the road, it could be very useful, especially for children needing to take that route.

Normally, fences and walls bordering a public right of way are the responsibility of the land owner, and if a boundary feature has fallen down and is obstructing the right of way, the council can force the landowner to rectify the situation. Similarly, any gate across a public right of way must be left passable by authorised users, so a locked gate is breaking the law, unless there is a stile on a footpath, or some method of bypassing it for traffic entitled to be on the right of way.

[John Williamson]

The local council ( Probably Barnet, in your case) should have a definitive map of all rights of way. It is normally held and maintained by the highways department. There may be copies in local libraries.

There is an online map available here:-

it only works using Internet Explorer, and needs an ActiveX control installing. Don't you just *love* closed, proprietary solutions?

[tinnews]

Those maps are incredibly *un*detailed IMHO, unless I'm missing something very obvious. The open mapping initiative maps are far more useful.

[tinnews]

Isn't that illegal now? Certainly it contravenes government policy.