When submitting a Wayspot Appeal, make sure to include as much of the following information as possible:
* Wayspot Title: Cottesloe School Cage
* Location *(lat/lon): -31.989610, 115.764436
* City: Cottesloe
* Country: Australia
* Screenshot of the Rejection Email *(do not include your personal information)*:
* Additional Information *(if any)*:
This “cage” is actually a sculpture, Kinetic Interference by Manuel Badia, that was donated to the North Cottesloe Primary School. It has been installed on the grounds / boundary line of this primary school.
This location is confirmed to an extent by the school being mentioned in the actual wayspot title. In addition, the school is clearly visible in the background when looking at this sculpture on Google Maps.
Hi,
Having the word school in the title isn’t helpful, although I’m sure it helps people to locate it.
Have you some evidence that this corner plot belongs to the school?
The public pavement for walking along this road goes between the school and this area - the parking also is on that side. That path continues along beyond the school There is a clear fence marking the restricted school area.
To me this gives the impression that this placed on public land.
That may be sufficient evidence. I noticed that the sculpture /looks/ like it is on public land, but also that the parking is a school car park. The legal status of that corner plot is key.
Whilst the property is zoned as a primary school there still a nature strip (or road verge) around it. This is the public land area between the property boundary and the road curb (generally containing utilities and footpaths). This sculpture is not located on the nature strip.
Other than it clearly being misplaced based on the satellite view, that is.
You claim it’s on school property because of some incredibly undetailed zoning map. But it’s literally separated from the school by a public footpath that runs the entire length of the block, well past the school. In addition, the plot of land that it’s on is surrounded by the same wooden poles that are around other nature strips in the area. And there’s a clearly visible fence around the school on StreetView, which this art piece is outside of. Typically, fences are used to demarcate where the property line actually is. And even if you consider the parking lot as school property, then the art piece is still not located on school property. The wooden poles pretty clearly show where the parking lot ends.
I also doubt your claim that it was “donated to the school”. I can’t find anything about the school supposedly owning this art piece. Seems to me that the city owns it and they just installed it on a city-owned plot of land that happens to be next to the school. Cottesloe Collection: - Sculpture by the Sea
And your argument that “it’s obviously school property because it says so in the wayspot title” holds no meaning. Just because that’s what whoever submitted this thing in the past called it doesn’t make it true. You’ve said the name of this art piece yourself, so that’s obviously what this wayspot should be called. There should be zero relation to the school in this wayspot title.
All this wayspot needs is a title change and a minor location edit, not a removal.
The zoning map has been prepared and issued by a government department and is detailed to the extent of what the actual planned property zoning is. You will note that the statue is located within the primary school zone shown on this map.
I would argue that the wooden bollards are there as a protective feature rather than forming the basis of a boundary line.
In the event that this appeal is rejected, I will definitely submit the appropriate edits to update this wayspot.
I’m still not seeing anything that proves that this art piece was donated to the school, as you claimed, and not the city. It’s part of the Public Sculpture Trail, so it seems to me it’s on public property. https://share.google/t5I3j1cxBTCrcA7mc
So is the footpath that runs along the entire block school property too then? Or could it be that the zoning map is more of a “broad strokes” sort of approach that isn’t all that detailed?
And there is a difference between planned zoning and actual zoning. If the area is actually supposed to be part of the school property, then why didn’t the school include it in its fenced-off area?
They are a protective feature for sure, but they also clearly demarcate where the boundaries of the parking lot are. Probably not a coincidence.
And I’m still not getting why this needs to go so badly. It’s not an unsightly object, it can be accessed safely, and the only way anyone would even think this is school property is if they look at that zoning map of dubious detail. Why do you want it gone so badly?
@GeneralSecura I don’t want this wayspot to be gone “so badly”. I just responded to your earlier feedback to try and address some of the issues that you raised.
All I am doing is reporting an existing pokestop that is located on school grounds (we can agree to disagree on that point). This is why I submitted the initial report and then the subsequent appeal. If Niantic then disagree with this appeal, then I respect that decision and move on.
I do disagree with your assertion that the zoning map is of dubious intent. This zoning map has been prepared by the state government and shows the actual approved planning use for each property. It is definitely not a surveyor’s map that would show (amongst other things) the nature strip.
I have never said that the statue is not publicly accessible. Like the rest of the school grounds, it is readily accessible to the public.
Thanks for the appeal, @TheGallopingCat We took another look at the Wayspot in question and decided that it does not meet our criteria for removal at this time.
