I had an appeal come back just now that states this PoI was a duplicate. However, there is no other PoI at the location that I can see.
Its a park entrance leading from Whitehills Way, which is a residential road. There is another entrance nearby, but that leads in from a walking trail made out of an old road. They are distinct entrances, albeit not far apart, but they would be useful for people who are accessing the park from different directions.
Please can you take another look?
I know you’re asking for a staff response, but I think the Duplicate rejection is correct.
This is the view from the existing wayspot: South Loirston Road entrance to Cove Community Orchard. You can throw a tennis ball from here to your rejected wayspot. It just feels far too close to deserve a second wayspot for the same community orchard, as it is the community orchard that is the POI.
I was about to make an almost identical post so this made me do a double take. Good luck with this, the false duplicates are the worst because the picture gets attached to the wrong stop and it makes it harder to untangle everything. I don’t expect appeals reviewers to get things right too often but the least they could do is not actively make things more difficult!
Not distinct would be a better decision in my opinion if it is that logic. It is not a duplicate -the road name, direction and image are all different. Duplicates are for when the exact item is already present, and there are no proximity rules in Wayfarer
Duplicates are for when the same POI is being represented by an existing wayspot, which is not the same as “when the exact item is already present”.
The classic example is playgrounds. If a slide is already a wayspot, a submission of the roundabout should be marked as a duplicate of the slide, even though it is not the same exact item.
Both these are representing the playground, regardless of the title and description.
Similarly churches and their signs (a lot of the time).
For me, this entrance represents the community orchard, so the other entrance is a duplicate by definition.
Was this a community rejection….if so what reason?
From what I can see from the evidence the appeals reviewer had declining the appeal seems reasonable.
I think if I had had this in review I would probably marked it as a duplicate as neither entry point has a sign and they are very close together, a house length.
It was an ML rejection so an appeal was the only way to get anyone to see it.
I posted because this is not a duplicate, and saying there is already a PoI for Whitehills Way entrance is incorrect. If it’s not considered distinct, or it’s too close to another entrance, that is what it should say. Don’t say its a duplicate when it is not.
