T he answer to that question is
that the Council actually
urgently needed them at least 5+
Why? - if for no other reason - to
avoid the embarrassing poorly
designed "falling and/or invisible
parking suspension signs" that the
Authority does not seem to have
realised was/is a problem it has
had - and still plagues the public -
from the first time these poorly
designed signs began to be used
over 5 years ago.
A correspondent recently sent
me a photograph of a "similar", but
significantly better designed sign
that has, it seems, been used by the
Mteropolitan Police together with
one of its "partners" in some
locations (see Fig. 2).
The sign is streets ahead of the
"Camden design" and is far better
"fit for purpose" (there have been a
few reported "failures" but
significantly less frequently than
those in Camden).
The image clearly shows that the
Metropolitan Police have
very much better access to
technical engineering design for the
"type" of "sign" that has plagued
Camden for several years now.
The Metropolitan Police sign is not "perfect" (I
have photographs of "failures") but
it is far superior to the sign
that Camden has been using for
several years now.
Come on Camden, get your "act"
"Invisible" parking restriction signs.
A not uncommon poorly designed "Camden Sign" - numerous photographs are available.
A "Failed Camden Sign (very poorly designed: indeed "design" is not really fit for purpose).
A preview of Christmas Decorations 2017 from Camden?
A similar but significantly more stable sign of very much better design.
A similar but more stable sign as used by the Metropolitan Police.
Low sign invisible to motorists - entrapment procedure?