Pedestrian access of shoulders and verges

TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited March 24 in April AMA - 2022

In many rural areas, there are no sidewalks or other marked pedestrian footpaths along the side of the road, but some roads have wide shoulders or verges, sometimes up to a full car lane in width, that are separate from the road and allow for enough space for a pedestrian to walk safely. Would these shoulders be acceptable as safe pedestrian areas and what limitations on width, grade, and [surface composition] should reviewers consider when assessing these areas?

Post edited by NianticTintino on
23
23 votes

New · Last Updated

Comments

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,110 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't think the Niantic legal team are going to allow that, they need something to point at (See, we said you need a proper pedestrian path up to the POI) to cover themselves when somebody sues them for getting run over while standing in the road.

  • CipherBlakk-PGOCipherBlakk-PGO Posts: 308 ✭✭✭✭

    In practice, the reviewers decide what counts for safe pedestrian access. But I absolutely agree that Niantic needs to make language more inclusive of rural areas. Whether that's listing wide, grassy or gravel areas as examples or clarifying that "pedestrian access" is a local interpretation, they should do more to assist playability in those areas.

  • RandomExploit-INGRandomExploit-ING Posts: 428 ✭✭✭✭

    In rural areas the roads are the road sometimes.

    I had a brewery/pub rejected for no pedestrian access despite the supporting photo showing people sitting down having a pint outside, so clearly pedestrian access. The face the road doubles for people and cars doesn't mean there is no pedestrian access.

    Another was a old red decommissioned phonebox on a verge. BT don't put phones in places that pedestrians can't reach to use because...it's pointless. So it obviously had access too.

    Both of these were in rural areas where the particular roads are lightly used by cars at slow speeds but often used by people walking in the middle of them.

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I now of some areas where the shoulder is much wider than your standard sidewalk, enough for a full size vehicle to pull off on and not be in the road itself. But reviewers are still likely the reject because there is no clear guidance on whether these areas a pedestrian accessible and would rather play it safe.

  • Traxi25-PGOTraxi25-PGO Posts: 57 Ambassador
    edited March 29

    Having lived in several, rural and remote communities, I know this to be true of these communities. Often people in rural and remote locations in Australia walk on this part of the footpath for exercise and it is common place. Councils don't put in footpaths as they have extremely low traffic in these areas and lots of space to walk.

  • DEMorDimitrii-PGODEMorDimitrii-PGO Posts: 2 ✭✭

    I have seen several bus stops, historical signs designed to be read by a pedestrian, and other objects obviously meant for people to interact with that have rejected with pedestrian access as the reason.

    The guidance should acknowledge that a paved path is not required for a POI.

  • VladDraco-PGOVladDraco-PGO Posts: 560 ✭✭✭✭

    @DEMorDimitrii-PGO if you want, you can share your rejected nomination on #NominationImprovement to see if we can help you. But not the bus stop, those are not eligible, as long as they are not painted or very special.

  • Dembonez19-PGODembonez19-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    Hmm. This is true. I have a nomination in a park that has a "road" directly in front of it...but it's really just a cycling/skateboarding road. Cars can and do drive on it, but it's a one-way for the rare person/group to exit the park from the pool.

    I should've thought about that when submitting because I'm sure people will see the road and think danger. It would be a fair assumption but still frustrating considering the rural situation. It's not budget-conscious for some towns to construct sidewalks where there is rarely any traffic, and it's a shame when rural towns already struggle with a lack of wayspots anyway.

    In some of these cases, would it be okay to resubmit (after a rejection) to edit or include information and supporting photos that may have been more helpful?

Sign In or Register to comment.