A while ago I subbed the following:
Dornal Avenue Playground: 55.89364337412506, -4.374848188384446
I was super clear that while adjacent, the playground is not part of the school to the west or the nursery to the east. Got what I think was an AI rejection, so I appealed.
This is a typical UK set up where the council own the whole plot and the playground is on council property and not part of a school. If you go back to 2008 you can see how more apart it is from the schools. It has stayed the same as the schools have been rebuilt around it. So it should have passed in 2024, and it was poor reviewing in first place by the community.
But there is not an appeal the appeal system. By raising examples here soon after the event, if something seems to have gone wrong with how the appeal was handled they can see if their processes are working correctly at that time. I think that the time gap is too far.
Next time you are over that way it should be an easy submit with an up to date photo.
Interesting, the setup in the Netherlands is similar, schools are by definition almost always on public property, the schools may use the playgrounds, but also everyone else.
The playgrounds are often partially located at the kadastral map of the school, but very often also partially at another plot of the kadastral map.
I would not feel comfortable accepting these playgrounds. I do feel this particular one is different as it looks also physically separated from the school.
It certainly was ages ago, but I’m not sure what you mean by “there is not an appeal the appeal system”? Is that not what we sometimes use this forum for?
Last time I passed by (a couple of months ago now), it looked pretty much identical and reminded me to make this post. Of course I was then distracted and it stayed in draft until yesterday! Given the fact that the site hasn’t really changed, I would be submitting a virtually identical picture and a completely identical name and description which seems a bit daft?
Hoping staff would be willing (if able) to just correct the bad appeal decision and save me the fuel
Yeah, there’s a solid wall / fence segregating them, and the playground has the small yellow gate giving its only access directly from the street. It’s certainly not on the school property.
I would just retry with the original photos, title and description.
Add a note saying that the only access to the playground is from the street, meaning this is publicly accessible and does not form part of the school or kindergarten next to it. Hopefully this would wake up reviewers who see a school nearby and insta-reject.
If you are within 10km, just try again with the existing photos.
If more than 10km away, you can still create a draft from anywhere and then finish it once you get within 10km, either with the same photos (if you won’t get to the actual location) or with new photos (if you will).
I would need to resave the photos from Wayfarer… Should be okay though, right? They’ve not been posted anywhere other than here, there and on the Wayfarer Discord…
