Recently there have been discussions on Reddit and there doesn’t seem to be a consensus on this. I reached out to Niantic Support for a determination and they would not weigh in except to say “discuss it in the community”. So I am starting a discussion. This may have been covered before but I couldn’t find anything when searching with keywords, so if anyone know a previous discussion I can refer to that.
In many places, there is land between a sidewalk and the road (hell strip) or when no sidewalk is present, a certain amount of land that was part of private property but is technically owned by a village/town/city. Can POI located on this type of land (technically publicly owned but maintained by a private land owner) be approved for a waypoint such as a little free library or art on utility poles/boxes?
The land would need to be proven to not be part of the private property, such as with a boundary map, many of which can be found online. Otherwise, if a submitter cannot prove that the land is not part of the SFPRP, then we as reviewers are to assume that it’s on SFPRP.
There is a mention of this in the Little Free Library Clarification which I will link below:
There is nuance to this discussion since laws vary around the world about where Single Family Private Residential Property (SFPRP) ends (the property line). Niantic/Scopely are sensitive to things being on SFPRP. So unless it is very clear that it is village/city property I’d avoid nominating there. And/or provide supporting information to make it clear.
Actually @DTrain2002 grabbed the one I meant to grab. But both Clarifications are good to read.
I’ll just give you an example: I found a LFL that appeared to be on SFPRP. However, the owner placed it on the easement between the street and the sidewalk, and that is owned by the city per the boundary map, even though the owner is the one that maintains the area. Because of this, the LFL wasn’t removed. If it had been on the other side of the sidewalk, that would have been on SFPRP, and the LFL could have been removed.
I’ve seen sidewalks in the suburbs of a midwest city which had green grass to either side, so between the road and the sidewalk, and between the sidewalk and the visual property boundary.
Yet these particular sidewalks were fake. They didn’t go from anywhere to anywhere, they just ended at that property’s boundary and didn’t continue in-front of the adjacent property. They weren’t for use, just for show.
Those were on private property. It happens not to have been SFPRP in that case, but it does show that in the USA, a sidewalk does NOT automatically equate to public space, and the grass between the sidewalk and the road has the same issue.
In the UK, it does (or, as a minimum, pseudo-public private space, but definitely not SFPRP).
Just a reminder that this is about property lines in the USA. Each country has a different approaches and in large parts of the world there is a clearer boundary between private property and public land. As it’s a global forum it’s important to recognise that and give context to discussions.
I have also read I think ? that within the USA there may be slight differences in some states?
In the US the grass strip is usually owned by the homeowner. The town of municipality always holds a right of way or easement to that strip for utilities etc. In some places they may own the strip but in my experience that it rare. The laws not only vary by state but by municipality as well. For example, I have no sidewalks in my town but there is still a right of way. When they wanted to lay fiber along my road, they simply dug a trench in the grass along the road and laid the fiber. No permission needed. However if there is a hazard on the grass along the road, it’s my responsibility to remove or repair it since I own it.