My appeal was rejected for being on a private property, but after reading some post and precision about “prp”, this criteria should only apply for single family residence, which is not the case here.
On google map it’s even more obvious (four letter boxes) :
On a side note, this last image was automatically rejected and I’m not sure why.
Sorry for the probably bad english and thanks for helping !
Welcome to the forums )
It may be obvious to you and it could certainly be multi-family residential, but this photo doesn’t prove it as it isn’t clear and obvious that those are letterboxes for different residences.
The appeal rejection for private property is indeed wrong if this is multi-family.
What is the wayspot proposal? It’s possible that reviewers correctly rejected, but chose the wrong rejection reason (this does happen) and that the appeal reviewer couldn’t overturn the rejection (because it was correct) so had to stick with the initial rejection reason.
Thank you for the help. My proposal was : “vitrail de fleur d’iris art nouveau” or in english “iris flower in art nouveau stained glass”
But with your precision, would it help if I added this picture of the street with the seven doorbells ?
Or is it realy outside of wayspot criteria ? (I think it’s unique and old and it’s part of small architectural details that justify walking to see a building or a place).
The doorbells work better for showing that this is a multi-family residence - instantly recognisable.
I think the problem is what this actually is - I would choose to reject it and can see why people ended up choosing private property. I don’t think it is that distinct/unique/noteworthy. It could only be eligible under Exploration criteria, but it isn’t something I would go there to see.
The key for Exploration is: would people go there to look at the object, or admire it as they went past and want to show it to others? Even if someone doesn’t actually go round telling people about everything worth exploring, the principle still works.
You can use wayfarer page so that you can submit up to 5 supporting photo. Put all those evidence there and resubmit. If it still getting rejection because its not distinct, then perhaps its not interesting enough to your local reviewer.
As I am UK based if this came up I would reject (IMO reason should be Not Distinct). If you had evidence that the building was a couple of hundred years old and the door was original than there would be a “chance”. At the moment I would just class it as a slightly ornate door.
You can buy new doors with similar designs easily.
