Thoughts about this as a potential Wayspot nomination?

So, rural areas have a special place in my Wayfarer heart and I regularly find myself stumbling upon potential candidates for first or second Wayspot in a larger area, looking at Google Maps or just passing by.
In my corner of the world the challenges are often lack of proper pedestrian access, or it’s semi private property.
I just found this place in a very small village. I can’t even find the population number in a search. There is one Wayspot in the village already, which is nice - but could we maybe make a couple more?
Amstrupgaard strikes me as somewhat ‘private residence’, but then there’s the very professional-looking website and the part about take-away and even wedding receptions. So this gives ‘community house’ vibes (unsure about the term in English, hope the meaning is clear).
What are your thoughts about this type of place?
I don’t want to submit something problematic, but I’m legit unsure about these sort of locations.
Thanks in advance for any constructive input. :slightly_smiling_face: :pray:

My Danish is not very good, but as you said this looks like a place that hosts weddings and receptions so that would both make it a great place to socialize and alleviate the access concerns somewhat. Is this a farm that is also a business?

On the website there are pictures of great-looking bread and food so that could also make it an interesting place to explore the local cuisine (or any kind of cuisine that is not common locally, that works too), which is a big part of the exploration criterion. That part is for you to research and expand on in your nomination, like what are they known for and what would you want to come explore and try there.

Therefore if on the premises there is a restaurant plus wedding/brunch place with some interesting food that promotes local produce sources and you can document all of that, I really don’t see any concerns with nominating it.

My positivity here is not financial advice purely theoretical. I have not researched it deeply and have not looked at the map at all but if you have concerns as to how it works (maybe the restaurant is somewhere else and this place is just for the produce, or maybe you see on-site that it is not organized quite like what I interpreted, or maybe you know upfront that the owners would hate it), outside of any hard rulings on SFPRP I would not nominate something that is very likely to disturb owners/inhabitants.

1 Like

In the UK we have a lot of huge old houses, mansions or stately homes, and if they are still people’s homes they are often also open to the public, hosting weddings or having restaurants or hotels based there

To me that isnt a single family private residence. If a single family still lives there, it will be in 1 part of the building, with some areas open to the public. It sounds like it may be a similar thing for your place. I would definitely say it could be a good nomination


Thank you for your feedback, and for taking the time to look at the website etc!
It seems it’s a business and the owners live in one of the buildings (from what I can tell). I don’t think it’s a farm now.

The part that confuses me about these sort of places is that as far as I can see, the couple who owns the restaurant/event hall also live in an adjacent building on the grounds.
But I do share your positivity about the location, from the first impressions that I get from this.
If I make a trip to nominate it, I think I will put in on Hold until I’m sure about the criteria here. I certainly don’t want to disturb the owners/inhabitants. But on the other hand, what if they’d really appreciate the mention? It may bring more people to visit the restaurant/event hall and thereby maybe even increase their sale? That’s not a Wayfarer criteria, I know. :sweat_smile: But it’s definitely a thing to consider here.

Generally we have a lot of ‘gårdbutikker’ in the rural parts of Denmark. They translate into ‘farm shops’ and they are more or less official shops that sell farm products and sometimes cheramics or wine or whatever also. I have been wanting an ‘official’ definition on these (eligible or ineligble) for years, but I haven’t figured out where to ask.

I skip the farm shops mostly when I review them, or reject them if they are really small and ‘unestablished’.

The Wayfarer AI accepted one of these I nominated a couple of days ago, but I’m kinda nervous about recent reports of random punishments from other Wayfinders here in the forum. I actually wanted to put in on Hold, but the bot got to it before I remembered it. :melting_face:

Thank you for your response! I think what bothers me is the criteria clarification about historical buildings, even though it’s not the same - but there are similiarities still. They are both interesting places Wayfarer-wise, but they are also private homes and that comes first. Hope you follow what I mean. :slightly_smiling_face:

There’s a farm shop about 30 mins away from me, it has a cafe as part of it. People travel there because the food is so fantastic. They have their own butchers and have the most fantastic sausages anyone’s ever tasted that are made on site. I would say that kind of place is ideal as “explore” since people travel there to visit it-bypassing some major supermarkets and other shops along the way. The cafe of course makes it more of an obvious submission, but I do think regardless, this kind of shop can be a special part of a rural community and could be eligible


I think if a home is open to the public ie hosting weddings, then it becomes more in line with how we view apartments for wayfarer purposes than how we view single family private residences. I would treat the business areas of the estate differently from where the family live


I think it’s a bit utopian to expect a specific clarification for everything, nor do I personally want it this way, and I doubt one on farm shops specifically is ever going to happen. There are many regional-specific wayspot types in the world for which people are asking to clarify but I would really prefer it to stay anchored in criteria rather than in categoric eligibility otherwise we will never, ever have something comprehensive and the world is very vast.

As @frealafgb has said in all appearances this business goes beyond the definition of the SFPRP (there is an R in SFPRP :slight_smile: ). The land for all businesses is owned by someone, technically. If it is really hard to distinguish where the owners live and where the events take place then I would indeed absolutely stay cautious, but I would imagine they don’t live in the middle of a restaurant space that is surely not disappearing outside of business hours. Again links to additional information and photos of the restaurant go a long way towards proving this is something standalone.

I have personally also nominated things at farm shops that are established markets that have a demonstratable dedicated location (i.e. not the living space), clear business hours and a local identity. I don’t see a particular issue with that as this is very different from nominating a business someone is running from their living room.

UY:BJ at all times but like, Buckingham palace is also SFPRP technically?


Yeah, plenty of people live where they work, but usually the living spaces are separate from the work spaces and they would expect members of the public to be in the public spaces. I think in those cases, its okay to have a waypoint at appropriate locations on that kind of house/farm/palace

Yes, which is exactly where I am going with this - it’s about a demonstratable separate location for the “business”/“public” part, I believe.

1 Like

I’m choking a bit on the Wayfarer (?) abbrevations, but I suppose SFPRP means single-family private residence…something?
UY:BJ? I got nothing. :sweat_smile: @Xenopus

Sorry, hard to guesstimate who among the forum regulars is familiar with what :slight_smile:

SFPRP is defined eg. here as single-family private residential property. This is what a hard exclusion factor and rejection criterion would be. Not just private property, not just residential, all of these elements combined.

UY:BJ is a tongue-in-cheek abbreviation for “use your best judgement” which is a catchphrase you will encounter many times throughout this forum and official sources and which I think should be done in your case to determine how much this would bother the inhabitants and how appropriate this is as a wayspot - this is not required to understand my post and is really more of a “Wayfarer ethos” meme.


The “private property” exclusion is based on U.S. law. Land can be zoned as a Single Family Residence. (I worked for a very very large company on insurance risk, and all our feeds from taxes, insurance companies, and realty companies, used the same code: SFR.)

A property zoned SFR can’t also be a customer-facing business. It would need to be rezoned to COM or something.

Niantic settled a lawsuit from U.S. homeowners by agreeing not to put more Wayspots on SFR.

THEN they tried to export the idea to the rest of the world.

Also… going about it logically… people in a house expect privacy out to their property line and even the street in front of their house. People in living quarters over a restaurant don’t expect people to stay so far away.


From what I have seen, SFPRP trumps any other eligibility criteria. So, in case of a SFPRP and a business in the same building, the business will become ineligible. This could be because of the reasons you mentioned. This is purely from what I have observed in the fora.

Not really, because single family private residential property means a self contained house that is only a home to 1 family with nothing else there

If there is a business there too then that would be a public part, and a private part, so the house isnt sfprp anymore.


Like I said that’s from what I have seen. They have removed residential properties like this in the past.

It’s the same as an apartment. You wouldn’t put a wayspot in the living quarters where the public isn’t allowed. But even on the exterior wall is okay because the owners of the building can arrange that however they want. Artwork outside the window, pavilion steps from the door - not ok for a Single Family Residence, but fine for an apartment. Even an apartment over a restaurant.


You have the sign leading up to the area. I think that could be a good location since it is more accessible. The farm itself does also have a large parking lot, but it does say that you should make an appointment to come there on their web page. I don’t think the owners would appreciate people coming up for no particular reason. :sweat_smile:

Okay, so this is embarrassing: Apparently I have been looking at a different Amstrupgaard than I meant to! :joy:
I legit thought this website was for another Amstrupgaard. The one I was looking at does not have a restaurant, it seems.
Why does everything have to be named the same here? It’s not like Denmark is a large country… :laughing:
Apologies for the silliness - however, the discussion is quite useful.
The Amstrupgaard we have been discussing would be less problematic as far as I can tell. That just seems to be a restaurant and not much else to it.
Just like ‘my’ Amstrupgaard seems to be a private farm/residence - and not much else to it. :skull:

Thanks for all the input.
These types of locations will pop up regularly and it’s great to have some reflections about them.


My general take on this is that it really depends on the location. Most of them will technically be on private property but they are also running a small business so they will want visitors. So I think it will mainly depend on how close the object you are nominating is to the main road and how far it is from somebodys house. These are often in rural areas and any traffic outside business hours is bound to draw attention.

1 Like