Invalid Wayspot Appeal
TheGateKeepr-ING
Posts: 33 ✭✭
Title of the Wayspot: Brookdale Reformed Church
Location: 40.837396,-74.187342
City: Bloomfield
Country: USA
Screenshot of the Rejection Email:
Photos to support your claim:
Additional information:
Appealing rejected invalid wayspot report for Brookdale Reformed Church. As per last photo (taken from njparcels), Brookdale Reformed Church and Looking Glass Children's Center (daycare) are on the same property thus validating the report that the church location is "K-12 and under".
Tagged:
Comments
Appeal Denied - Thanks for the appeal, Agent. We took another look at the Portal in question and decided that it does not meet our criteria for removal at this time.
@NianticGiffard could you elaborate? The church and daycare are the same building.
Both of them have separate entrances.
@NianticGiffard just to confirm, is this a new criteria? Because all I'm seeing under current rejection criteria is:
Location is a private residential property (even if historical), farmland, a K12 and under school (preschool, primary/elementary, secondary/high school), child care/daycare center, rehabilitation center, safety shelter
I'm not seeing anything about it being eligible as long as they don't share the same entrance. My house also has multiple entrances but it's still my property and the rooms within are all accessible from either entrances. Just trying to understand so I can adjust future reports if need be. I've seen other reports that don't seem to apply this "separate entrances" criteria.
@NianticGiffard just out of curiosity, based off of this new guideline, (I'm guessing it's new) if a daycare or pre-k has a snack bar business for parents and kids in the back of the building... let's call it "The Snack Shack"... then it's okay to make The Snack Shack a portal because technically it's another entrance even though it's part of the daycare? Essentially we can make a daycare a portal then if we use a loophole. If a mural is by entrance A, the kids can exit the building using entrance B, allowing the mural to exist. Like @TheGateKeepr-ING I'm also just looking for clarification.
Bump.
This separate entrance "criteria" needs to be addressed directly. This property is shared by church and day care and even in one building. Who is to say which door is being used for which entity? Not to sound condescending but which door did you conclusively find is for day care only? Was it the floating door in the front lacking stairs leading up to it,
the "main" entrance to the church, or the door on the side that is also labeled for church?
Separate entrances is not an indicator of whether a property is "K-12 and under". The rejection criteria mentions nothing of separate entrances but does mention property which can be proven as opposed to which entrance is being use for whom.
There is also inconsistency in the 'ruling' of appeals leading to confusion on what the actual guidelines are. This appeal was denied for having "separate entrances" but another appeal to request the return of a removed wayspot was denied even though the submitter gave photo evidence that the entrances are, in fact, separate.
I've also had countless appeals that have been approved for K-12 and under without ever mention of separate entrances from NIA.
We are all just looking for actual guidance when it comes to what makes something valid vs invalid for the sake of consistency and transparency. Clarification would serve everyone well; it's very much welcome and appreciated.
@NianticAaron @NianticAtlas @NianticGiffard @NianticEG
In addition, this thread was archived in guideline clarifications alluding to submissions/wayspots falling on property where "schools and other forms of childcare" exist. These comments were marked as an "Accepted Answer":
Personally, I think we should be applying that logic to nominations that are on schools/other K12 premises. Allowing them just encourages people that have no association with the K12 premises to be hanging outside them. Truthfully, it's a bit creepy that some adults are the ones making nominations that fall on school/K12 premises, let alone thinking that hanging outside because there's a wayspot there is a good idea.
If it is on the security fence/wall of a school or in the school's driveway, it is still on school property. This same rule applies to private residential property. Just because someone can "touch" it from a public sidewalk doesn't change the fact that it is on school property.
Bump @NianticGiffard
Hey there! Sadly we do not have more information to share in this regard. I would suggest you reach out to our dedicated team through in-app support so you may get more insights on the decision.
I wonder if it's a case of "church on the grounds of a kindergarten or school" versus "day care on the grounds of a church." I thought as I watched.
It is my understanding that temporary care for children is classified as a day care, just as the Free Little Library is one of the libraries.
In such a case, if there is a "temporary care for children in a shopping mall", is it reasonable to consider the whole shopping mall as K-12? If you ask me, I would say that it is not K-12.
I think this is the official decision that day care should not be considered the same as kindergarten. Is that correct?
Thanks for your input @SAThomason-PGO ; discussion's appreciated. It's possible that that's what it might have been, though more clarity would certainly help as I'm still left wondering myself and unsure of how to make adjustments and improvements moving forward.
You make a great point though that's worth looking into more. However, this specific daycare is not temporary and the property/building is not large like a mall which has multiple businesses inside. With safety in mind, it is just one building that is used as church and daycare where the whole property is shared regardless of the "separate entrances" Niantic undoubtedly found (which I'm also still confused about especially after taking a second look at the property and clarifying the entrances that might have been incorrectly thought of to be daycare-only).
I've also seen other appeals without mention of this separate entrance "criteria" which adds further confusion.