Everyone seems to have a view on the Nottingham ‘A’ Board controversy (they were going to call it A-gate but that’s a microcrystalline variety of quartz and could get confusing…) with even Gail’s Man at Nottingham Daily Photo recording the recent protest by city centre businesses in his inimitable style. So I thought I’d get in on the act by taking a walk around the city centre and sizing up the problem.
There are a lot of ‘A’ boards as it happens… but there’s also loads of other stuff that could cause problems for disabled people, especially those with a visual impairment. This appears to be an intrinsic part of any modern city centre. As the photos below show, there are litter bins, benches, phone boxes, permanent advertising hoardings and a whole host of other ‘obstructions’ on the city’s pavements. Amongst these the ‘A’ boards seem to be a small problem.
I suppose the City Council would say that all the street furniture shown in my photos is necessary in the city centre but ‘A’ boards aren’t. They may have a point here but I’m sure there is some compromise that could be reached to help soften the blow for city-centre businesses.
How about some sort of licensing system rather than a blanket ban? Businesses could apply for permission to have a board outside their premises and the City Council could send someone (after a suitable three-month training coarse, with necessary health and safety qualifications and personal protective equipment…) to see if the sign was necessary and whether or not it represented a real danger to passers-by. If it was needed and wasn’t likely to cause an injury, it could be approved.
Seems reasonable to me. But then I suspect that the ‘A’ board campaign is much more about the City Council making the city centre look clean and tidy than it is about the genuine needs of disabled people. Like the removal of ‘aggressive’ beggars some years ago, the motto for City Centre Management is ‘City first, citizens second’.
Clumber Street/Bridlesmith Gate
St Peter's Gate/Bridlesmith Gate
Low Pavement
2 Comments
In a dereliction of duty I’ve not done anything on this one myself yet. Had a bit of a look into it after reading this and it seems that they’re relying on highways law ie obstruction to remove the signs which I think is pushing it a bit. Might have more of a look into it when I’m feeling more energetic.
As you’ve seen they’ve pulled the idea now.
Did have a look into the legalities, reckon they’d have had to get a magistrates court order for each sign. So it could have been goodwill or it could have been the realisation that it would have been a bureaucratic nightmare with no guarantee of success.