Hello! My request to remove an invalid/non-existant wayspot was rejected and I would like to appeal.
The wayspot in question is a sign for the Hapgood Wright Town Forest in Concord, MA. The original sign was removed in 2025 and rebuilt in a completely different location approximately 20 yards from the original.
The main issue is that the new sign is in the same S2, L17 cell as the wayspot titled “Information Board at Hapgood Wright Town Forest” (42.448499, -71.342465). According to wayspot rules, there can only be one wayspot in an S2, L17 cell, so rather than request that the wayspot be modified with an updated photo and location, I requested that it be removed completely. My request was denied.
Here is photographic evidence of the removal and replacement of the wayspot in a new location:
Original Location - Google Streetview Nov 2017
NOTE: The sign shown in this Nov 2017 Google Streetview is already different than the one originally submitted in ~2014. It was rebuilt and slightly moved compared to the original, but is only 2-3 feet off the original location:
Current Location - Google Streetview July 2025
In the summer of 2025, the sign shown in the Nov 2017 photo was taken down and moved ~20 yards closer to the forest entrance/parking lot. The “Information Board at Hapgood Wright Town Forest” was also taken down and rebuilt (but in the same exact location as the old one). Other information signs were also added to the entrance area of the forest as shown in the next photo.
Better Photo of Current Site
Since the July 2025 Google Street View is a little dark, I have included a geo-tagged photo that I took of the new features, which shows the new sign is directly next to the Information Board. You obviously can’t tell from a photo, but I verified with GPS and an S2 cell app while standing on site that these two signs are in the same S17 cell. The red arrow shows where the original wayspot was located:
The algorithms around S2 cells are just community observation. The team may reinforce density and inclusion rules, but they don’t remove a Wayspot because it won’t be a Pokestop.
I am having trouble following the rest of your post, but wanted to address that.
I am not staff to decide this, so it doesn’t matter if I understand. The sign was there, then it was not, then it was put back up in a different place, but isn’t the same sign? I will leave this to them, but wanted to let you know that S2 cells have no bearing on what action they will take.
Also, regarding this point, I was more explaining why I requested removal rather than relocation.
I understand the other option is to request that the wayspot be moved to the correct new location with an updated photo, but I wasn’t sure if that would be more proper than simply requesting removal. (ETA: In fact, I originally requested relocation and then withdrew it). I requested removal based on the community’s understanding of how S2 cells are leveraged in the game and the fact that the original wayspot literally does not exist anymore.
Streetview is from July 2025 so shows the new location of the sign that this Gym represents. Since it looks almost identical to the wayspot photo, which was taken in snow, it is difficult to see this as any proof that it the original sign has been removed. In any case, relocation of the wayspot would be the normal thing to do here.
It’s hard to confirm that the current location of these wayspots is wrong, so it looks like you are stuck with two gyms here and probably won’t be able to remove a gym from this area. (Incidentally, it won’t appear anywhere else unless there is a seventh wayspot being added.)
The July 2025 sign lacks the tall uprights and hand scripted font of the original, which was 20 yards further back and on the slope, as indicated in the last photo of my submission. You can tell from the Nov 2017 Google street view that the sign had already been replaced at that time as it does not have the tall uprights of the original. The last photo of my submission also clearly shows the new sign does not have the tall uprights or hand scripted words. Here’s the original:
It’s arguable to say the sign has gone. The sign was replaced with an identical sign in purpose and style at a very similar location to the old sign.
There is no evidence that the location of the Gym is wrong.
Using the OSM map (I keep forgetting how many maps are available beyond google and google aerial), it looks like the Gym should be further to the SE, making it even more comfortable inside the cell it is currently in.
No worries at all. While I am new to this whole process, I tried to understand the rules before submitting anything and trying to improve our neighborhood. This is designed to be a community-policed process, so all concerns should rightfully be noted. Thanks again.
The last thing I will say on this, as I forgot to mention it before: the fact that this sign has been rebuilt in different locations at least two times in the past ~10 years suggests it is not “permanent,” which also weighs in favor of just retiring it.
I was using streetview, OSM and the path network to determine an approximate location. Your “new location” is clearly wrong, using the available data.
If you look at the google streetview from 2025, you can see the corner of the parking lot (the curbs) and that the new sign is right there, so we’ll have to agree to disagree. Thanks for your input.
