This page shows a map and table of the Public Rights of Way (Public Footpaths, Bridleways, Restricted Byways, and Byways Open to All Traffic) in the parish/area of Bressingham, in the district of South Norfolk, in the county of Norfolk. Data from the Surveying Authority (Norfolk County Council) is compared with the data in OpenStreetMap. (more information)
OSM Map | Definitive Statement | PRoW GIS Data (GeoJSON) | OSM Highways (GeoJSON)
| No. | Type | DS | LGIS | LOSM | ΔL/L | MS | LE | AE | Z | OT | DM | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FP | ✓ | 1342 | 1353 | +0.8% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 2 | RB | ✓ | 684 | 702 | +2.6% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 3 | FP | ✓ | 462 | 471 | +1.9% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 4 | FP | ✓ | 518 | 98 | −81.1% | 2 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 5 | FP | ✓ | 618 | 626 | +1.3% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 6 | FP | ✓ | 161 | 163 | +1.2% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 7 | FP | ✓ | 1603 | 1593 | −0.6% | 4 | 6y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | O Significant obstructions on this route, including fence around new property at TM09058204, and a wide unbridged ditch at TM09038227. See: FMS:750032 FMS:750015 | |
| 8 | FP | ✓ | 218 | 217 | −0.5% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 9 | FP | ✓ | 1656 | 1721 | +3.9% | 3 | 6y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | O Mapped section near east end not quite on definitive line. Need to check how field boundaries are crossed. Route blocked by bushes and ditch at east end. See FMS:854506 | |
| 10 | FP | ✓ | 127 | 130 | +2.4% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 11 | FP | ✓ | 602 | 614 | +2.0% | 4 | 6y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 12 | FP | ✓ | 247 | 251 | +1.6% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 13 | FP | ✓ | 627 | 633 | +1.0% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 14 | FP | ✓ | 1128 | 1157 | +2.6% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 15 | FP | ✓ | 1535 | 1537 | +0.1% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 17 | FP | ✓ | 953 | 1043 | +9.4% | 4 | 10y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | N GIS data is missing N-S section along parish boundary at W end to connect with North Lopham FP 1. Statement seems not to describe this section either, but surely the two paths must join up. | |
| 18 | FP | ✓ | 313 | 316 | +1.0% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | D First grid reference wrong. Should be TM07208240. | |
| 19 | FP | ✓ | 965 | 979 | +1.5% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 20 | BR | ✓ | 1045 | 1058 | +1.2% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 21 | FP | ✓ | 435 | 434 | −0.2% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 23 | FP | ✓ | 859 | 867 | +0.9% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 24 | FP | ✓ | 212 | 260 | +22.6% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | D N O Route signed on ground does not match Definitive Statement and GIS data. Apparently a Diversion Order for new route was prepared and passed, but due to an administrative oversight the legal process never finally completed. This also applies to South Lopham FP 17. There's a 30m gap between the east end of Bressingham FP 24 and the U76221 Fen Street, which isn't recorded as a Highway or Public Right of Way. The Definitive Statement is unclear where FP 24 ends, but surely any link should at least have pedestrian rights on it. | |
| 26 | FP | ✓ | 181 | 190 | +5.0% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 27 | FP | ✓ | 685 | 696 | +1.6% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 28 | FP | ✓ | 335 | 338 | +0.9% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 29 | FP | ✓ | 597 | 601 | +0.7% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 30 | FP | ✓ | 704 | 714 | +1.4% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | N Statement says route starts from the north end of Chequers Lane, which is at TM07618096 in the GIS data. But Chequers Lane is not recorded as a Pubic Highway or Right of Way, leaving a gap in the network between TM07588082 and TM07618096. | |
| 31 | RB | ✓ | 755 | 772 | +2.3% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 32 | FP | ✓ | 777 | 801 | +3.1% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 33 | FP | ✓ | 338 | 345 | +2.1% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 34 | FP | ✓ | 755 | 756 | +0.1% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | N O As of 2016-07, the route is blocked at TM08558171 (FMS:855303). Why doesn't this route continue east to meet common road? The linking track is actually signed at both ends as a Public Footpath. | |
| 35 | FP | ✓ | 159 | 167 | +5.0% | 4 | 7y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | O Definitive line is mapped in OSM, but the route is obstructed / non-existent on the ground. | |
| 37 | FP | ✓ | 492 | 495 | +0.6% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 38 | FP | ✓ | 537 | 514 | −4.3% | 4 | 5y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 39 | FP | ✓ | 96 | 90 | −6.2% | 4 | 2y | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| 40 | FP | ✓ | 644 | 651 | +1.1% | 4 | 22m | MZ | OT | TM08SE | ||
| Totals | 23365 | 23353 | 99.9% | |||||||||
Table Details: To be counted in the table above, OSM ways need to be tagged with an appropriate designation=* tag (one of public_footpath, public_bridleway, restricted_byway, byway_open_to_all_traffic) and the relevant prow_ref=* tag (in the form 'Bressingham XX 12a', where XX is one of FP, BR, RB, BY; and 12 is the route number, and a is an optional suffix letter). The Mapping Status values in the table are: −1 Route should not exist; 0 Unverified; 1 Un-mapped; 2 Partially mapped; 3 Complete, but with significant deviation from definitive line; 4 Complete; 5 Complete, with adjacent field boundaries and stiles, gates etc. These values are manually maintained, so my not be up to date.
Map Details: On the map, the Yellow (FP), Blue (BR), Magenta (RB) and Red (BY) lines are Rights of Way from official Council data from 2022‑12‑13, licensed under the Open Government Licence (v3) (full copyright details). Rights of Way with mapping status 4 and 5 are shown with thin lines, others are show with thick lines. The Green lines are different Highways from OSM: Dark Green for unclassified Highways, Blue-Green for Public Cycleways, and Yellow-Green for Adopted Footways. Click on any of these lines for more information. The black lines are approximate modern parish boundaries, constructed by simplifying the polygons in OS Boundary Line. The underlying mapping is OSM Carto (key). Click inside another parish for a link to switch to that parish.
Use of data in OSM: The Rights of Way GIS data shown on the map above is suitably licenced to be used in OpenStreetMap. If doing so, please use the source tag norfolk_county_council_prow_gis_data. But please do not map Rights of Way just from this data; it is important that OSM reflects what is on the ground as well. Official Rights of Way are not always usable on the ground, and the paths on the ground do not always follow the Definitive Line. The PRoW GIS data (and Definitive Statements, where available and suitably licenced) should be used primarily to add appropriate PRoW tags to ways that have already been mapped from other sources such as aerial imagery (where paths and tracks can clearly been seen) or ground surveys.
OSM ways found in or near the parish with incomplete or contradictory designation=* or prow_ref=* tags. Further details.
| Way ID | Issue | prow_ref | designation | LOSM | OSM Note Tag | OSM Fixme Tag | JRC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 884157722 | Missing prow_ref | public_footpath | 157 m | Designation by virtue of Official Norfolk County Council finger post at junction with Fersfield Road. Fingerpost perhaps installed at wrong position? | J+ |
OSM ways with missing or inconsistent modal access tags are listed below. The classes of Public Rights of Way and Highways included on the map are checked, but Rights of Way with other tagging issues already listed above are excluded. Further details.