Is all the pavement clutter necessary?
From Paul D
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
If I lived on Market Street and obstructed the street outside my house with a big board asking people to come in and buy some homemade jam, a board that only slightly inconvenienced most of the public walking past by narrowing the pavement by say 50%, but a board which nonetheless created an obstacle for the elderly, those with children or buggies, and posed a very real danger to the partially sighted or wheelchair user, then would I be seen as irresponsible local householder, or an entrepreneur?
It seems that we have allowed retailers to appropriate public space by default, Bridge Gate and the Square for example, both funded from the public purse, both in large part handed over to private enterprise to maximise their profits. Other retailers are turning a walk around town into an obstacle course, with an ever increasing number of garish advertising boards screaming for our attention. We seem to be slipping towards a sort of contempt for local pedestrians and their needs and some shopkeepers appear to have no social awareness whatsoever, there is even a board right next to a pedestrian crossing on Market Street, opposite a school.
If only we could attract a minibus full of those semi-professional personal injury claimants, who no doubt would trip over a few of these poorly situated boards and hit the owners with a very large bill for an imaginary sprained wrist or ankle. Some local retailers don't appear to care much about the needs of elderly local residents. The cluttering of our pavements tells us more than just what is for sale; it tells us that the elderly, the infirm, the wheelchair user, the partially sighted, or even the local mum struggling with a pram and a toddler don't really matter too much, but that money and its accumulation does.
From Andy M
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Where are we talking about Paul? Hebden Bridge? I really can't say I've noticed. And it's rather nice for people to be able to sit out in the square isn't it?
From Dave J
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Paul. If there are boards blocking the pavement (can't say I have noticed either) isn't it simpler to ask the advertisers to move them rather than cause a song and dance about it on here?
From Myra James
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
I think Paul makes it pretty clear that he's talking about Hebden Bridge, and particularly Market Street, although he also mentions St. George's Square and Bridgegate. Perhaps, Paul, you shouldn't have confused the argument by bringing in the matter of use of public space for private commerce; your point about the risks and inconvenience to many pedestrians from advertising boards placed on narrow pavements is strong enough in itself. People who don't have mobility problems or push a pram can very likely walk about unhindered but that leaves a pretty large constituency who probably cannot and whose needs should be recognised.
From Andrew B
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
"If only we could attract a minibus full of those semi-professional personal injury claimants, who no doubt would trip over a few of these poorly situated boards and hit the owners with a very large bill for an imaginary sprained wrist or ankle."
And what good would that do Paul? There is lots of talk about people claiming compensation in today's 'claim culture', however I'm sure you know as well as most other people that you could not walk into a sign and claim for it- otherwise people might just have been walking into lamp posts or traffic lights for years. This all seems a bit melodramatic because local businesses are trying to pull in as much trade as possible in difficult times!
From Joel B
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
We're living in the middle of a recession, local people are struggling to find work, most of us have money worries due to ever increasing bills.
Yet small business's run by local people have the cheek and to to advertise with a board to try and get more business through the door to pay their bills and feed their families. Shocking eh !! If there's a board in the road please feel free to walk round it, I don't mind coming down to Market Street and giving a demonstration if you're struggling with the concept. Think its called something like a side step ???
From Ian M
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Or perhaps do what I do.
If I find that my way is blocked by an inappropriately placed A board and I am faced with the prospect of having to walk into the road to get around it, knock it over into the road and continue on my way!
The pathway is for people to walk on, not for shops to use as free advertising space!
Consider this, if it was a car parked on the pavement would you be so quick to say "sidestep it"
From Anne H
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Joel, the point is that not everyone can just step around the boards. And Paul is quite right to say that they create an obstacle for the elderly, disabled and those wih buggies etc.
The pavements on Market Street are simply not wide enough to accommodate boards, signs, and pavement furniture - they are barely wide enough to pass someone in a wheelchair or pushing a buggy. And if you do have to step off the pavement to pass someone - or something - it is quite dangerous with the heavy lorries we get passing through. We can all understand the need for businesses to advertise and compete, but unfortunately advertising boards on the pavements is not a safe option in this part of town.
From Paul D
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
I wasn't aware that issues that may only be of concern to a minority were off limits for discussion on Hebweb, nor that direct action to resolve an issue was a prerequisite to posting something about it. So far from causing a 'song and dance' about something I'm just drawing attention to it. Perhaps I should have started with a disclaimer: that ambulent males, those who drive everywhere in a t-shirt, those who walk around town with a very limited degree of social awareness, or those who lack the psychological mobility required to see something from the exact point in time and space that they occupy right now - may not find this interesting or relevant.
I do agree that it's nice to sit outside, which is why we should be concerned to ensure that the opportunity to do so is not contingent on purchasing something to eat or drink. Not only that, but those who enjoy just sitting outside, happy in the simplicity of social interaction, as opposed to resting most of their social interaction on consuming something, should be provided with facilities that promote this. Arranging a family or social group around a tree where they can all sit facing in another direction like berries on a holly wreath, or all sit facing the tree with nowhere to put their legs, isn't exactly the sort of street architecture that facilitates this simple social interaction, but given the limited imagination of those responsible for refurbishing the town centre perhaps it will have to do.
My point (not very well made) was that in my view the pavement clutter interferes, or potentially interferes with individual's movement along pavements and poses a potential hazard to some, obviously not to the super fit, but more probably those older people who also live in the town (or visit it) and possibly those with mobility problems or visual impairment. Of course shopkeepers do this to increase the likelihood that they might sell something, which is their primary concern (increasing business and profit) and like Joel I can understand why they might do this even more in a recession, it's also clear the recession is now taking hold, but we've become dependent on tourism and disposable income, it was predictable that we'd be hit hard, it's called putting all your eggs in one basket. I just don't think that our old and infirm shouldn't have to run the risk of walking into somebody else's advertising hoarding as each shop competes with the other to attract the diminishing tourist spend. There's a reason why pub signs and barber's poles were hung above head height, we seem to have forgotten this.
From Lizzie D
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
I'm with Paul on this one. Having to negotiate an obstacle cluttered pavement with either a buggy, a wheelchair, or visual impairment is a pain and potentially dangerous. Would JoelB be happy to see someone with a buggy do the sidestep shuffle and be forced to push a) the pram or b) themself into traffic? Which you have to agree is a real risk given that Market Street is never clear of traffic, so to be fair you are not exactly going to be side stepping into a country lane on there are you Joel?
For people who cannot see very well, these signs are a huge hazard, imagine walking towards one with blurred vision, you hit it smack on before you have time to side step or indeed 'kick it over' as another contributor suggests.
Far from Paul's post simply being a criticism of traders trying to make a living, i also think that he has highlighted something that is illegal and dangerous. I suggest one of our councillor contributors clarify this for us if they would? I also think that pavement cafes do have to pay to have their tables outside. Again maybe a cafe owner could confrim this. So that would be a different argument, which I don't think Paul is making? And I do like the outdoor cafe culture we have in Hebden myself.
Alas, we often in this forum, respond before we are aware of the facts - I am guilty of that myself, but in my view, Paul makes very valid comments that deserve to be discussed not shouted down. But maybe the negativity of this compensation culture approach just doesnt care that a blind old lady may well have a valid claim because she fell over a sign that should not be there (unlike a lampost or bin), or a baby/pram/parent is hit by a car because they couldnt side step sufficiently on the narrow bit left over once the sign is in place. By all means advertise, free if possible but do it safely please.
From Michelle J
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
I can partly appreciate these boards being an hazard during the Summer months, when the town is full of tourists. But in the quiet Winter months, when the town turns into a Dormitory, I just can't understand there being a problem.
I find it a great deal more difficult to push my Grandchildren round in a double-buggy, when the streets are busy with tourists and more often than not I find myself having to push the pram into the road to get round them.
And "Yes" Joel we are in a recession and most of us who work in these local businesse
s have had our hours cut and have not received our usual annual pay-rise. So inexpensive advertising and displaying goods outside the shop, just might be helping to keep myself and others in a job and putting food on our tables.
From David Telford
Friday, 4 November 2011
Retailers have it tough right now and need to take any advantage they can.
It should also be remembered that retailers are fleeced by business rates and get very, very little for their money and should demand a lot more than a 60cm sq bit of pavement in return.
I think it shold be fairly self-policing, one A board per retailer of a reasonable size should not upset anyone.
From David Mack
Friday, 4 November 2011
Is all the pavement clutter necessary?
Message Body: Anybody placing anything on the footway - cafe tables and chairs, advertising boards, rubbish skips, scaffolding etc - needs permission from Calderdale.
If something is causing an obstruction it can be reoported to the Council who will investigate.
From Jonathan Timbers
Saturday, 5 November 2011
I'm afraid it isn't just shopkeepers who make it difficult for those of us with mobility impairments and buggies. Many residents park their cars over the footpath, blocking it. I've tried Calderdale, I've even tried the police, but nothing gets done because, I suspect, of the uproar enforcing the law would cause amongst car drivers.
Cars are not just a nuisance, they are a major cause of injury and death in this country, particularly of children.
Every time I cross Heptonstall Road by the Fox and Goose with the buggy, I fear for my child. Some car drivers don't even bother to indicate even though there is no provision for stopping the traffic to allow pedestrians to cross. Traffic is the biggest threat to the safety of my child in this town.
As for the traders on Market Street, they need to think a lot more about all the pointless steps into their shops. We could and should do much more to ensure that the shops and facilities of this town are accessible to disabled people.
From Bill Greenwood
Saturday, 5 November 2011
If what you say is true, and you do fear for the safety of your child every time you cross, then you need to cross somewhere else.
From David Telford
Saturday, 5 November 2011
Most cars parked on Heptonstall road are residents whose homes were never built with cars in mind. At least one of the pavements is clear and as for crossing the road being difficult, it's a one way street, itsnot that hard.
Now I don't think the traders on Market Street added "all the pointless steps into their shops" for fun. They are there because property was designed to withstand rain etc and built higher than pavement level. To lower their floors to pavement level would cost too much money for most independant traders who are struggling to make a living right now.
From Paul D
Saturday, 5 November 2011
A simple solution to Heptonstall Road would be to take the stop line 30 yards further up the hill, make the road between the stop line and the junction a single carriageway with a layout that prevented access uphill or downhill at any great speed.
This requires money and people who are able to begin to think about the needs of pedestrians, specifically those with limited mobility. In terms of access to many (but not all) shops, perhaps the ownners don't want anyone with mobility problems inside? This is my point about some people in this town being almost invisible. The powers that be don't care if you get run over on your way to the shops, have to walk in the road to get round a car parked on the pavement, trip over a hoarding outside one, or simply can't get in.
This is becoming a quite nasty place to live if you don't fit a certain profile.
From David Telford
Sunday, 6 November 2011
I don't know a retailer who would ever turn away a customer or profile. I'm sure in an ideal world all the shops would we wheelchair friendly but that would mean raising the place to the ground and constructing a metro-centre type place in the middle of the town. The existing shops were built for their time and an independent retailer will not be able to afford to adapt their shop (even if planning were granted) to be at pavement level. There seems to be a resentment to business, entrepreneurs and go-getters, the place would be very dull if all we had were council clerks.
From Andy M
Sunday, 6 November 2011
Nasty place to live? Once again: are you sure we're talking about Hebden Bridge?
Obviously pavements have to be clear for people of all abilities to negotiate. If some signage gets in the way (I failed to spot any today) then surely a polite word with the shopkeeper is the most civilized solution rather than wholesale complaining?
And the Heptonstall Road problem - and it is one - is surely a separate issue?
From Rev Tony Buglass
Sunday, 6 November 2011
David Telford - you think Heptonstall Rd is a one way street? Where, exactly? Are we talking about the same street? If so, no it isn't. It's steep and narrow, which means drivers and pedestrians really ought to show both caution and courtesy. The biggest hazard is people (drivers or pedestrians) trying to beat the traffic lights at the foot of the hill - if people used them properly, there'd be no problem: they stop the traffic long enough to let any pedestrians get across, it seems to me.
As in an earlier discussion on this forum about traffic, the real answer is for people to drive co-operatively rather than competitively. That goes for all road users, however many wheel or legs are involved.
From Graham Barker
Sunday, 6 November 2011
Jonathan is right to regard the Fox & Goose junction as a hazard. I often see vehicles turn up Heptonstall Road at speed without indicating. The latest horror was a few days ago, when I witnessed a guy come out of the Fox, step into the road because it seemed clear, and have to step straight back to avoid being hit by a driver who hadn't indicated or slowed down. And judging by the stupid look on the driver's face, only the pedestrian's quick reaction could possibly have saved him. A child might not have stood a chance.
In general, I find that drivers turning without indicating is a growing problem around Hebden Bridge. It's not helped by the fact that even police cars do it.