Amazing POI removed

Wayspot Appeals
1

Hello All & Scopley Team,

As an active Pokémon Go Community member, I know what community looks like, which is exactly why I also recognize when one is dismantled, and that’s what has happened here.

I’m writing to appeal the removal of the POI at 34.031763, -117.149700 “Tree City USA - Growth Award” which was removed recently in a suburban neighborhood of Redlands, California, a city that won the Arbor City growth award and has placed the unique award sign at locations that helped them win the award throughout the community to mark that year’s recognition.

It sat aside a designated dirt walking road, and from its creation it became a natural gathering point.

For a short stretch of time, this location hosted raids and gym takeovers on a near constant basis.
It wasn’t an incidental stop players passed through, it has been where a nieghborhood, many of whom live within walking distance, regularly came together to play. That kind of consistent, local, face to face activity is exactly what community ambassadors are asked to cultivate. This POI was doing that job on its own, day after day.

The area around it isn’t ideal. The only pedestrian access is a dirt walking path, not a proper sidewalk. But it’s the sole route on this street, and it’s what is there for pedestrians to continue to use. I’ve included photos to show this.

Losing this POI has left this community with real disappointment and the void of the connection it helped create. I’m asking that its removal be reviewed and reversed.

Coordinates of the POI:
34.031763, -117.149700

I’m glad to provide further documentation, player testimonials, or anything else needed to support this appeal.

Thank you.

image
image291×446 72.3 KB

image4 (1)
image4 (1)1920×2560 1.83 MB

image2 (1)
image2 (1)1920×2560 2.07 MB

2

Welcome to the forum :wink:

Although it isn’t visible on streetview, the fire hydrant (?) is, so the location looks correct. The most likely explanation is that it was reported for unsafe access. This verge is definitely not one that pedestrians are expected or able to walk along, so you would have to walk in the road.

Having to walk in the road to access a POI means it is not suitable to be a wayspot.

image
image1084×469 218 KB

3

I think you will need to provide evidence that the wayspot is really there now.because when people cant see it in street view, it make people question if its permanently placed there. Especially since street view is only 2 years old.

4

Hi to you too! :waving_hand:t3:
Thanks for the warm welcome.

Some good points here, I can try to talk through what I know and what I’ve observed.

First, regarding the side trail, I’ve walked my dog and my son in a stroller through here many times and it’s the width of a normal sidewalk. Just dirt is all. All sidewalks are near a road, kind of comes with the territory.

As far was why it’s not displayed on the Google Maps street view, that was weird. I spoke, (“texted”) some of the people I’ve met from playing here who have been residents for a long time and they said they recognized the sign. Apparently the 2 awards they had won used to be displayed in town but due to vandalism the city had moved them, seemingly here.

I hope the new pictures I included, near the Redlands bike path, as well as near the fire hydrant is enough evidence.

Thanks for the support all!

5

I’m happy to believe the POI exists, but there is clearly no safe access.

The verge is not walkable. For example, a little further along is this:

image
image572×312 61.3 KB

It doesn’t matter if people do walk along this road. What matters is that you are expected to walk along the road, and that means that wayfarer considers this to be strictly ineligible.

If the zero point of the POI requires you to stand in a road, and risk being hit by a car if you are staring at your phone, this is a problem.

6

(post deleted by author)

7

Not author, but I’m someone who knows @FriskyChicken and lives in the area.

Thank you for taking the time to respond on this matter, but I respectfully disagree with this assessment.

Under Wayfarer criteria, temporary lack of maintenance or seasonal foliage growth along an approach path does not negate safe pedestrian access for a location. The issue further down the road is a city maintenance matter, not a structural lack of pedestrian access to the POI itself.

To be sure, this morning I went to check, that foliage has since been cleared, and safe pedestrian access near and around the POI’s location is fully intact.

Thanks for helping us add context!

8

I entirely understand the disappointment as I have a POI near me that I walk past regularly, but cannot have as a wayspot due to it being against the roadside.

9

@ChicknBit
Yooooo, thanks for the support here.

@salixsorbus
I just went to double check this too, yeah no more overgrowth.

Your second point,
having a POI on a walkway/sidewalk isn’t against guidelines.

10

There is a big difference between a sidewalk, which people are expected to walk along, and a narrow verge, which people are not expected to walk along.

In the UK, milestones are very good wayspots. Sometimes, they are on roads with a very narrow verge and poor access. If the verge looks like people do actually walk along it, it stands a chance.

11

A little different in California, but the point stands as while this isn’t paved it’s the cities designated pedestrian space that’s maintained by the city.

California’s Department of Housing and Community Development specifically recognizes the guideline for a pedestrian-access requirement on residential roads. This being as such.

12

There are multiple points on this stretch of road that points to the fact that this is not an “unpaved side walk” and that people are expected to walk in the road.

This may be seen as safe whilst you are paying attention for traffic but not whilst you are concentrating on the game.

We are not staff so can not return the wayspot but I would not hold my breath hoping staff will overturn the decision.

nsa01
nsa01690×298 107 KB

nsa02
nsa02445×267 36.8 KB

nsa03
nsa03350×216 25.8 KB

Sorry.

13

Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate it because I want to understand and have an opportunity to address any concerns.

Safe pedestrian access does not require paved concrete sidewalks; unpaved verges and wide shoulders are standard designated footpaths in many areas.

Maybe it’s just more common here, but this many of times is the best accommodations you get on some of our roads. If anything more generous in this specific case.

Wayfarer guidelines require that a location can be safely reached on foot, while player safety and situational awareness are the responsibility of the individual. This POI sits on a safely accessible public verge off the roadway where pedestrians regularly walk and can easily be approached to either take pictures with or just see up close.

14

I am in the UK and we have many country roads that will either have a wide verge to walk on which could be a possibility in wayfarer or you are expected to walk in the road which would be a definite reject.

You stated above about the “seasonal foliage growth” but this is just evidence that people are not using this as an Unpaved Side Walk.

You have not addressed the other solid items shown in the screen grabs that will force you to walk in the road such as the fire hydrant, the post just after and the hedge which even with a trim is not allowing space.

In the 2nd image it also looks like if you attempted to walk there you are at risk of sliding down a ditch.

15

The presence of utility infrastructure like hydrants and this sign posts actually helps confirms that this public verge is maintained and accessed on foot by utility workers and local pedestrians alike.

Regarding the verge terrain and ditch, maybe the photo is flattening the depth or make inclines look steeper than they are in reality.

Onsite, the verge is broad, flat, and stable enough to comfortably walk on either side of the hydrant without stepping onto the active roadway or slipping. I’ve also walked my boy in a stroller through here with no issues.

Wayfarer criteria do not require manicured, or paved sidewalks for a location to be pedestrian accessible a usable, public grass or dirt verge where pedestrians can safely stand off the road would meet the threshold.

16

This more or less sums up why I disagree with the removal reasoning.
On the hydrant and post, I’d actually flip that argument. Fixtures like those don’t exist in isolation, utility crews need to reach them on foot to service them @SlimboyFat71 so their placement is really a sign the verge gets walked regularly, not evidence against it.

I had hoped the pictures I provided would help show how wide it was.

17

Are you guys just not going to address the cacti? They are definitely blocking the path and make access difficult. And I say that as someone that probably applies the concept of “safe pedestrian access” more liberally than others here, having grown up in the countryside

18

Kinda of a long read now, but yes the cacti was addressed earlier on

19

I don’t agree, Maintenance workers will pull up in their van and use flashing lights to warn road users and keep themselves safe.

If this is the case then you need to take photos that show this because it doesn’t look like this with current evidence. Remember it is down to the submitter to show evidence that this has safe pedestrian access. Not that you can access it but that this is what is expected.

Overgrowth and the absence of any worn path just shows that even if “you could” walk on it, this is not what is intended or used for.

20

Surely, if this was regularly used as an “unpaved side walk” the cacti would not have had a chance to grow?