End this High Street hazard (From Evesham Journal)
Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting EJ NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
End this High Street hazard
7:30am Tuesday 26th February 2013 in News By Tom Edwards
Buy this photo »
NUMEROUS: The county council says it has lost count of the A-boards. 0913254802
CALLS are being made for a crackdown on A-boards in Worcester – amid claims dozens of them are “cluttering” the High Street.
It is illegal to display the advertising boards in the High Street, and elsewhere permission should be sought from Worcestershire County Council. But the council has in recent years chosen to turn a blind eye to the boards and now admits it has no records on the number in the city. Councillor Lynn Denham, who represents the city centre, said she counted “at least 50” between Foregate Street and the cathedral.
“I was contacted by a resident and at first you may think it’s an exaggeration, so I started to count them for myself,” she said.
“There were at least 50. It’s quite a serious issue as these boards can be a hazard to pedestrians and the partially sighted, they are causing real clutter.”
Former Worcester mayor Councillor Allah Ditta, who also represents the area, said: “You walk around Worcester and the sheer clutter you see from these boards makes it so untidy.
“There doesn’t seem to be any regulation on it, no rules, and for disabled people or children it can be a real problem.
“It’s something we’ve got to look at again because they are all over the place.”
By law A-boards are illegal on public highways, including Worcester High Street, but County Hall does not actively enforce it as council bosses want businesses to flourish.
Back in 2007 it ordered them to be taken off the streets, but since then the council has allowed more and more to reappear in an attempt to help traders fight off the economic downturn.
Talks are now due to take place over how to satisfy businesses, shoppers coming into the city and critics alike.
Adrian Field, of Worcester’s Business Improvement District, the body representing traders, said: “We would welcome a meeting as we’d like to give a business perspective, and a perspective from people visiting the city.
“You get shops in areas such as Charles Street and Copenhagen Street chaining A-boards to bollards or any type of furniture in the High Street, which doesn’t go down well with businesses there.
“But it’s an emotive subject and one we wouldn’t feel comfortable policing.”
The county council says it judges each A-board request on a case-by-case basis.
Coun John Smith, cabinet member for highways and transportation, said: “The council is committed to helping local business but we would remind owners A-boards should be kept as close to their shop frontage as possible.
“They should not cause an obstruction to people, particularly those who are disabled or less able, especially in narrower sections of pavement.”
Comments(45)
RogerLFC
says...
10:01am Tue 26 Feb 13
sherlock39b
says...
10:20am Tue 26 Feb 13
all say worcester news todays headlines are.................
More Tea Vicar
says...
11:18am Tue 26 Feb 13
RogerLFC wrote:Good point, but the signs are a bit of a pain, especially for pram-pushers and wheel-chair users (or those walking behind them...).
How many pedestrians have ended up in hospital having collided with a stationary 'A' board? Probably zero.
The picture shows a good illustration of what could be done...there's a lamp-post style sign pointing up towards the Cathedral/Guildhall.
Few more of those, pointing towards various shops and streets, would be quite helpful.
Cheeky hops
says...
11:41am Tue 26 Feb 13
Cheeky hops
says...
11:44am Tue 26 Feb 13
Graham Price
says...
12:05pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Or will the defence be that businesses can stick two fingers up to the law but concerned citizens can take no direct action?
I think we should be told.
Hamilton60
says...
12:36pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Graham Price wrote:I agree but people could spend all day doing that as there are so many boards. I myself have tripped over a couple (probably my own fault!) but I was looking up to find a particular shop and expecting it to be a pedestrianised area, naturally didn't expect any hazards in the way. Luckily I didn't hurt myself badly on either occasion - just my pride - but anyone trying to negotiate these with pushchairs, mobility scooters or elderly people will find the High Street a challenge these days.
If the boards are indeed illegal, is it breaking the law for a group of concerned citizens to pick them up and return them to the shop from whence they came? In so doing they would be preventing a clear and present danger to people.
Or will the defence be that businesses can stick two fingers up to the law but concerned citizens can take no direct action?
I think we should be told.
one94
says...
12:38pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Omicron
says...
1:11pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Such as the man who parks his motorbike on the pavement in Ombersley Road and then further restricts the pavement by setting up a tripod to mount a speed camera on it.
CJH
says...
1:50pm Tue 26 Feb 13
one94 wrote:Well, in historic Worcester there would probably have been a lot more of them! No 'elf and safety to worry about. But, yes, they should go. However, we apparently have to wait for the council to make a decision...no-one hold their breath.
They really don't have a place in "Historic Worcester" as far as I'm concerned. Clear them out.
CJH
says...
1:54pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Jim F
says...
4:43pm Tue 26 Feb 13
CJH
says...
4:54pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Jim F wrote:A WEEKLY collection?? Ooo those were the days...
Oh Worcester! nothing changes. A council wagon should go round weekly, pick them all up & scrap them.
Hwicce
says...
6:48pm Tue 26 Feb 13
grumpy woman
says...
8:09pm Tue 26 Feb 13
alfiepie
says...
9:56pm Tue 26 Feb 13
.
alfiepie
says...
10:01pm Tue 26 Feb 13
DarrenM
says...
10:25pm Tue 26 Feb 13
It was also an offence to have a shop awning lower than 6ft over the highway as well, but like everything else in Worcester these days it seems to be pick and choose what laws you would like enforced.
saucerer
says...
10:45pm Tue 26 Feb 13
DarrenM wrote:Well said. Only things that generate lots of revenue to top up council staff salaries are targeted.
Its an offence called obstructing the highway - funny how if you parked there an army of civil enforcement officers would descend but stick and advertising billboard there and you can do what you like.
It was also an offence to have a shop awning lower than 6ft over the highway as well, but like everything else in Worcester these days it seems to be pick and choose what laws you would like enforced.
TDH123
says...
11:06pm Tue 26 Feb 13
Hamilton60 wrote:I find myself having to negotiate the obstructive push-chairs, mobility scooters and the elderly rather than the "A" board signs!
Graham Price wrote:I agree but people could spend all day doing that as there are so many boards. I myself have tripped over a couple (probably my own fault!) but I was looking up to find a particular shop and expecting it to be a pedestrianised area, naturally didn't expect any hazards in the way. Luckily I didn't hurt myself badly on either occasion - just my pride - but anyone trying to negotiate these with pushchairs, mobility scooters or elderly people will find the High Street a challenge these days.
If the boards are indeed illegal, is it breaking the law for a group of concerned citizens to pick them up and return them to the shop from whence they came? In so doing they would be preventing a clear and present danger to people.
Or will the defence be that businesses can stick two fingers up to the law but concerned citizens can take no direct action?
I think we should be told.
Hwicce
says...
8:40am Wed 27 Feb 13
Guy66
says...
10:04am Wed 27 Feb 13
TDH123 wrote:Arrr Didums.........
Hamilton60 wrote:I find myself having to negotiate the obstructive push-chairs, mobility scooters and the elderly rather than the "A" board signs!
Graham Price wrote:I agree but people could spend all day doing that as there are so many boards. I myself have tripped over a couple (probably my own fault!) but I was looking up to find a particular shop and expecting it to be a pedestrianised area, naturally didn't expect any hazards in the way. Luckily I didn't hurt myself badly on either occasion - just my pride - but anyone trying to negotiate these with pushchairs, mobility scooters or elderly people will find the High Street a challenge these days.
If the boards are indeed illegal, is it breaking the law for a group of concerned citizens to pick them up and return them to the shop from whence they came? In so doing they would be preventing a clear and present danger to people.
Or will the defence be that businesses can stick two fingers up to the law but concerned citizens can take no direct action?
I think we should be told.
imustbeoldiwearacap
says...
10:39am Wed 27 Feb 13
More Tea Vicar
says...
12:02pm Wed 27 Feb 13
alfiepie wrote:Cumulatively, they can block whole paths, as far as users are concerned.
Yes let's also move all the lamposts, benches, bins, trees, etc etc etc....they are A boards not landmines !!! - if they block the whole path then yes - if there are 2 or 3 across a 10 metre high street then if you fall over them then you shouldn't be allowed out unaccompanied.......
.
They are a major inconvenience, especially to the more vulnerable. If you just left a lorry there, you'd get a fine.
More Tea Vicar
says...
12:15pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Hwicce wrote:Yes, taxis are a huge issue, often discussed on here, and the Council's handling of it is distinctly questionable.
There were seven taxis parked on the pavement outside the Whitehouse hotel last night (approx 7:30pm). They are a lot bigger that A boards but the council don't do anything about those so don't expect anything to be done about signs.
The fact that Allah Ditta is mentioning the a-boards is of course questionable - might just be trying to take attention away from the controversies surrounding himself and 'his' community and taxi drivers, for example.
But that doesn't mean a-signs aren't a legitimate cause for concern.
Let's compromise - get rid of the boards, replace them with better, less obtrusive, signing, and get rid of half the taxis! Win win.
Bexsunshine
says...
12:25pm Wed 27 Feb 13
There are far more important issues within the city - personally we should get rid of the pigeons that leave their mess everywhere rather than an advertising board!
Anyone that can collide with one of these on foot needs to swing by specsavers
Hwicce
says...
1:38pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Just look at the adverts in the picture with this story. Would you go into any of those shops with their trashy appeals for customers?
alfiepie
says...
4:12pm Wed 27 Feb 13
imustbeoldiwearacap wrote:pedestrians that change direction without signalling........?? what the hell are you on about....?
It's not the A boards that are the problem, it's inconsiderate pedestrians who stop suddenly without warning, change direction without signalling and stop and talk in groups outside shop entrances! And don't start me on about mothers and buggies, mobility scooters and cyclists! Yes, the A boards might be a problem for the less able, but so are the benches, trees etc. Best solution, the businesses should pay a fee for placing the A boards.
imustbeoldiwearacap
says...
9:43pm Wed 27 Feb 13
alfiepie wrote:"and some fell on stoney ground"
imustbeoldiwearacap wrote:pedestrians that change direction without signalling........?? what the hell are you on about....?
It's not the A boards that are the problem, it's inconsiderate pedestrians who stop suddenly without warning, change direction without signalling and stop and talk in groups outside shop entrances! And don't start me on about mothers and buggies, mobility scooters and cyclists! Yes, the A boards might be a problem for the less able, but so are the benches, trees etc. Best solution, the businesses should pay a fee for placing the A boards.
imustbeoldiwearacap
says...
9:43pm Wed 27 Feb 13
alfiepie wrote:"and some fell on stoney ground"
imustbeoldiwearacap wrote:pedestrians that change direction without signalling........?? what the hell are you on about....?
It's not the A boards that are the problem, it's inconsiderate pedestrians who stop suddenly without warning, change direction without signalling and stop and talk in groups outside shop entrances! And don't start me on about mothers and buggies, mobility scooters and cyclists! Yes, the A boards might be a problem for the less able, but so are the benches, trees etc. Best solution, the businesses should pay a fee for placing the A boards.
RobertR
says...
9:37am Thu 28 Feb 13
Omicron wrote:Omicron: He's probably the Police!.
And what about the hazards put onto pavements in other parts of Worcester.
Such as the man who parks his motorbike on the pavement in Ombersley Road and then further restricts the pavement by setting up a tripod to mount a speed camera on it.
timevans
says...
9:54am Thu 28 Feb 13
More Tea Vicar
says...
12:43pm Thu 28 Feb 13
timevans wrote:What could you possibly mean....?
Could some financial arrangement be made with Mr Ditta regarding these boards?
I suppose they could be mounted on taxis, perhaps. It's not as though they carry passengers, and they are normally parked around town, in the way and highly visible.
Vox populi
says...
1:56pm Thu 28 Feb 13
alfiepie wrote:There is a glaring omission from this rant.
imustbeoldiwearacap wrote: It's not the A boards that are the problem, it's inconsiderate pedestrians who stop suddenly without warning, change direction without signalling and stop and talk in groups outside shop entrances! And don't start me on about mothers and buggies, mobility scooters and cyclists! Yes, the A boards might be a problem for the less able, but so are the benches, trees etc. Best solution, the businesses should pay a fee for placing the A boards.pedestrians that change direction without signalling........?? what the hell are you on about....?
Phone walkers! Those who amble aimlessly looking at their screen or walk into you whilst updating their facebook statuses....
More Tea Vicar
says...
3:12pm Thu 28 Feb 13
Vox populi wrote:Absolutely with you there. They're a danger to themselves and everyone around them.
alfiepie wrote:There is a glaring omission from this rant.
imustbeoldiwearacap wrote: It's not the A boards that are the problem, it's inconsiderate pedestrians who stop suddenly without warning, change direction without signalling and stop and talk in groups outside shop entrances! And don't start me on about mothers and buggies, mobility scooters and cyclists! Yes, the A boards might be a problem for the less able, but so are the benches, trees etc. Best solution, the businesses should pay a fee for placing the A boards.pedestrians that change direction without signalling........?? what the hell are you on about....?
Phone walkers! Those who amble aimlessly looking at their screen or walk into you whilst updating their facebook statuses....
I nearly knocked a youth over the other day; dozy b-gger was texting away, earplugs in, just walks across the road, barely aware that he wasn't on the path any more.
And it's the same around town, they just seem to float along, barely aware that other people are there.
A Different View
says...
7:03pm Thu 28 Feb 13
And while we are on the subject of what else to remove, I would suggest the elder generation who walk four abreast blocking entire pathways whilst going at snails pace, and small groups of women (normally) that have a good old chat in shops whilst blocking off an entire isle or even worse the entrance.
Yes I might be the slightly impatient sort! :)
mauro balbino
says...
1:02pm Fri 1 Mar 13
BrownSauce
says...
6:06pm Fri 1 Mar 13
So, why should shops in the city who pay heavy business taxes to trade there, not be allowed similar marketing?
Seems like some people need to get a life.
Cheeky hops
says...
10:41pm Fri 1 Mar 13
Cheeky hops
says...
10:41pm Fri 1 Mar 13
The Doosra
says...
9:40pm Sat 2 Mar 13
Here's a tip - see an A Board and walk round it. It might be hard the first time, but you'll soon get the hang of it.
WooWoo123
says...
10:49pm Sat 2 Mar 13
Personally, they don't bother me. This photo, with the article, is the first time I've really read any of them, so they're not really serving a purpose either. Well not to me!
It's the subway/mcdonalds/dom
inos ones that catch my eye. Is it in the job description for the person to hold them to be miserable and constantly looking at their phone!?
Keith B
says...
9:51pm Sun 3 Mar 13
saucerer wrote:I'm not Council Staff but Council Staff salaries have not risen in four years and staff have been cut so those left are doing far more work for much less pay, when cost of living increases are taken into consideration.
DarrenM wrote:Well said. Only things that generate lots of revenue to top up council staff salaries are targeted.
Its an offence called obstructing the highway - funny how if you parked there an army of civil enforcement officers would descend but stick and advertising billboard there and you can do what you like.
It was also an offence to have a shop awning lower than 6ft over the highway as well, but like everything else in Worcester these days it seems to be pick and choose what laws you would like enforced.
I'm getting old - I want Council staff there to administer my support in old age, I want schools to be kept open, I want roads repaired and public health inspectors out there to make sure the horse I'm eating isn't in fact substituted by rat or cat.
We NEED our Council staff and civil servants funded and in place.
This constant carping is unfair and stupid.
Respectable
says...
11:03am Mon 4 Mar 13
More Tea Vicar says...
8:35am Tue 26 Feb 13
They'd be visible, above head height, and safe. It's the kind of thing you see a lot in, say, France.
I can understand the Council's reasoning on this, but the concerns are valid, too.
The authorities were trying to help businesses, at a time when they need it, but the signs clearly are a hazard.