I requested the below walking trail sign as new spot half a year ago. Yesterday finally got through the voting phase. However, the spot got declined because “the location is not accessible”. It’s just on the side of the road (see second screenshot). Perfectly accessible. It’s even a street with a dead end for cars, so perfect for pedestrians. Further down that street there are already 2 spots accepted for the same walking trail.
Appealed. And now got the response it’s rejected as it’s a “mass produced sign” and “a general business”.
I don’t get that. It’s a walking trail, so mass produced is in this case the amount of turns you have to make? And why is it labeled as a business?
Wayspot requested: Heuvelpad Rechtestraat
Description: richtingsbord voor de heuvelpad wandeling (translated: direction sign for “heuvelpad” trail)
I feel like the appeals reviewers must have copy and paste answers they can use, and can’t really go off script. I don’t know that, but it feels like that.
To me, this looks like a sign for traffic along a roadway, not a trail marker for a dedicated bike/pedestrian trail. Have a look at this clarification:
From what I can see on Google Maps, it does appear that both rejections are correct. There does not appear to be a safe place to stand along this roadway, and the sign just appears to be a generic sign for traffic.
Traffic sign… for a path (Heuvelpad = hill path)… Half a meter high (let’s say 2 feet)… Good luck in using that as a road sign.
And the logic on unsafe… I disagree. The road is the safe way to walk. It’s only used by pedestrians, and twice a year by a farmer to get to his field. I hope the context of a place is taken into account (that’s why there’s a description, no), and not just assumptions based on one picture. Don’t take it personally, I’m blaming the system
a marker for a bike route along a roadway for vehicles was specifically pointed out in the past as “not good”
NianticGiffard: Please check our stance on the below scenarios:
a) A marker with the trail name on the trail ← Excellent
b) A marker with the trail name on a street ← Good
c) A marker with no trail name on the trail ← Good
d) A marker with no trail name on an open green space area ← Good enough
e) A marker with no trail name on the street ← Not Good
A lot of reviewers still believe the Giffard scale is a good metric, even though it was posted on the old forum.
Are there readable words on that sign? If you do resubmit, do link the route name and prove that the sign has safe pedestrian access to those who are not familiar with the area.I would not.
My original intent in responding was to comment on your original topic that there was a different rejection on the appeal.
