I have submitted several submissions for the various Little Free Mini-Golf stations in my neighborhood. Two have been rejected because they’re on private property.
I’m not looking for specific feedback on this particular wayfaring spot as much as I’m curious how people decide when a Little Free Library, which is located right next to the sidewalk but is technically on private property and which neighbors are invited to use is an OK wayspot and when it isn’t? I would think that whatever reasoning goes into making that decision would be the same as goes into a decision for something like these Little Free Mini-Golf Stations which are right next to the sidewalk (so you don’t have to actually enter private property to reach the wayspot. You just have to stand on the sidewalk that runs through the property.) and which are signed in such a way that it is clear that the public is invited to use these stations just like they’re invited to use the Little Free Libraries.
In other words, when is something that is right next to the sidewalk and open to the public to use OK as a wayspot and when is it not?
LFLs on private property are not allowed, and if you do come across one, you should request removal. I have had to have several LFLs on PRP removed, as most are actually on the front lawn permanently, or in a large planter, if it’s not allowed to dig a hole in the area.
Now, it does depend on the country, but at least in the US, most sidewalks are part of the property, if maintained by the local government. The property typically ends at the street berm, not the sidewalk. This mini golf course actually looks to be on the private property, not the sidewalk; it’s right off of the sidewalk, but it’s location still makes it ineligible.
We also have more info on PRP, our shorthand for private property, here:
Yeah, I’m in America and here the government owns the sidewalk and the right-of-way from the sidewalk to the street (even if there’s grass and trees there). Despite the fact that the City owns the right-of-way to them, property owners adjacent to them are expected to maintain them (just like they’re expected to clear snow off the sidewalk, even though it’s the City’s sidewalk).
Many Little Free Libraries are in that are between the sidewalk and the street. Most of the Little Free Mini-Golf stations are also in that City-right-of-way zone. This one is an exception.
So, do you request removal for Little Free Libraries in the strip of land between sidewalk and street as well as those on the house-side of the sidewalk?
This also makes me wonder about wayspots that are of artwork that’s located inside of a business. Seems like we should be requesting removal of those as well, right?
Businesses are not ineligible locations, unless they are a daycare or child care center, for example. I’ve nominated artwork in businesses that are not ineligible locations, and have gotten them approved.
Being that here in the US most boundaries for PRP do start at the street berm, even if there are parts that might not be fully maintained by the homeowner, would be considered on that property.
Like with reviewing Wayspots, you have to make the best judgment when it comes to requesting removal. Many homeowners may not like it if there’s a gym in PoGo at their LFL and wondering why so many people show up there during Raid hours od Raid days. The homeowner could see this as trespassing, and that could end up being a tricky situation that might get police involved.
We have had so many disagreements here over those between the sidewalk and the road ones. That clarification even states:
I feel like you do, that if the property owner would in all likelihood consider that their lawn, then the LFL, etc. should be rejected. We cannot know the property laws in all states. The submitter can possibly submit evidence to convince that this is a public area and that it has permission to be there, but they rarely do.
I don’t think I have ever seen a removal report for an LFL in this strip accepted. I hope someone will post here if they have had one removed.
