What is local government ultimately about if it is not to do with delivering responsive, high quality services efficiently?

INCOME GENERATING "INVISIBLE"
PARKING SUSPENSION SIGNS?

H ere are some examples of "failed" Temporary Parking Suspension Signs in use in the London Borough of Camden. I have numerous similar photographs at other locations in the Borough. These signs have become "invisible" to unsuspecting motorists because of poorly designed "fixings" and can, therefore, unfairly, entrap them into being issued with Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs).
     Initial enquiries with the Council about these inadequately installed signs elicited a response on 31/05/2017 which included a phrase that says the signs "... are the DfT authorised sign type". Formal enquiries with the Department for Transport (DfT) are currently in progress. However, informal discussions with technical contacts who used to work in "signage" at the DfT reveal - quite correctly as it happens - that

the DfT's "approval" (case 2979 issued on 04/11/2011) only covers the "design" of the sign and NOT its fixings or installation.      The examples below clearly demonstrate that urgent "re-thinking" of the design of the fixings for these signs, which have been seriously at fault from the very beginning of their use, is now long overdue.
     Photo0285 (below) shows why the "fixings" for this sign fail so often - they are "inadequate" and not fit for purpose. Further consideration needs to be given to the height at which these signs are installed because it is not uncommon to see the signs in various stages of "collapse" from the eye/face-level of pedestrians to ground level creating potential obstructions/trips.  
10/08/2017 - DfT confirms that "approval" is NOT for fixings



Photo0131

Photo0161

Photo0181


Photo0198 (night)


Photo0199 (night)


Photo0275 (night)


Photo0278


Photo0287


Photo0401


Photo0386 (night)


Photo0410


Photo0413


Photo0401


Photo0285


Photo0403


Photo0438



IF THIS "BOLLARD/GUARD POST" IS ESSENTIAL FOR SAFETY WHY DOES IT TAKE SO LONG TO REPLACE?

T he two photographs below were taken on 26th July 2017. The situation at this location has re mained unchanged for several weeks. It may well be useful to examine what may have happened here.
     Clearly, the "knock down" may either have been reported to the Council by the public and/or it may also have been "picked up" during the "scouting regime".
     Obviously, this information must have been passed on to a Council contractor who responded to the "incident", cleared the site of debris and installed the"signage" shown in the photograph - and the situation has remained unchanged, as shown in the photographs below, for several weeks. Clearly, as no excavations or electrical connections seem to be required to replace the IGP why has it taken so long

(well over 6 weks)?
      There are many far more effective ways of dealing with such situations and amongst these is the initiative adopted by some Local Authorities by publishing contract specifications (excluding pricing and some "commercially sensitive" matters) on the Council's web site.
      Come on Camden - we are all in this together - so what is there to hide? Make contract specifications available to the public like some Authorities do. Ultimately, it is the public who pay for this service anyway so, what reasons are there for not making these specifications public? In fact, if you did, there would be many more eyes looking to improve the service and, possibly, reduce costs.   



Photo IGP-ChalkFarm-1

Photo IGP-ChalkFarm-2

 

Updated 7 August 2017

free web
                    stats
Pageloads