The ArgusTourism signs cost council £2,772.68 each (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Tourism signs cost council £2,772.68 each

The Argus: Tourism signs cost council £2,772.68 each Tourism signs cost council £2,772.68 each

MORE than £108,000 was spent putting up new signs which are being slammed as “pointless”.

Brighton and Hove City Council put up 39 signs dotted around the city costing £2,772.68 each – racking up a £108,134.52 total bill.

Kemp Town resident Martin Wood was so enraged by the signs he said: “I have seen these signs popping up all over the place and they are pointless.

“Everyone I have spoken to has agreed they can’t understand what they are for.

“Some of them are in residential areas. I’m sure most residents don’t need telling where the North Laine is.

“There is one outside the Pavilion saying where the Pavilion is. The worst thing is they still have the old brown signs which are perfectly good enough.

“With all the council tax rises and budget cuts, to spend £108,000 on new signs is ridiculous.

“I would like to know who had the bright idea to spend so much of our money on these signs.

“They say they are there to help people in wheelchairs, but the maps are too high up for people in wheelchairs to see.

“To cover residential areas is just silly and people in wheelchairs won’t be able to see them.

“And they are already all covered in fly posters and graffiti.”

One sign in Southover Street had been covered with stickers yesterday. Mr Wood asked Brighton City Council under the Freedom of Information Act to reveal the cost of the signs.

In their response the council said: “As part of an agreed programme of investment in improvements to directional signing for residents and visitors travelling on foot or in a wheelchair/scooter, 39 additional new signs have been purchased and installed recently (during 2014). The total price of each sign was £2772.68, inclusive of installation.”

The visitor information centre next to the Pavilion was closed last September and replaced by eight “pop-up” points where tourists and day-trippers are able to pick up advice and support from a series of new points at businesses and buildings across the city centre.

The council’s website advises local businesses against using too many signs and says that there are “issues with having too many signs on the highway and also with advertising.”

The Argus asked the council to justify the expenditure on the signs. A spokeswoman said that the people responsible could not be contacted yesterday but said the signs were not paid for from council taxpayers’ money.

When the signs were introduced Councillor David Smith, cabinet member for culture and tourism, said: “The new signs will make it much easier for visitors to find the main attractions and discover some of the city’s hidden secrets without getting lost.

“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.”

 

Comments (43)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:05pm Wed 25 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.
What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is. stevo!!
  • Score: -7

12:09pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Fight_Back says...

"but said the signs were not paid for from council taxpayers’ money"

I smell lies ! If this statement were true then they could and should have refused to reveal the cost of the signs as it wasn't tax payers money. It also raises the question of "who did pay for them then ?".
"but said the signs were not paid for from council taxpayers’ money" I smell lies ! If this statement were true then they could and should have refused to reveal the cost of the signs as it wasn't tax payers money. It also raises the question of "who did pay for them then ?". Fight_Back
  • Score: 27

12:18pm Wed 25 Jun 14

NickBrt says...

The signs should show location of nearest park to put caravans in. That would be a great service.
The signs should show location of nearest park to put caravans in. That would be a great service. NickBrt
  • Score: 26

12:24pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Stoney33 says...

Maybe not for locals, but they have these in London and they are a great help for infrequent visitors like myself

Brighton is a tourist town, its not really hard to figure out why they are there
Maybe not for locals, but they have these in London and they are a great help for infrequent visitors like myself Brighton is a tourist town, its not really hard to figure out why they are there Stoney33
  • Score: 31

12:30pm Wed 25 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

NickBrt wrote:
The signs should show location of nearest park to put caravans in. That would be a great service.
The travellers appear to be able to find them already.
[quote][p][bold]NickBrt[/bold] wrote: The signs should show location of nearest park to put caravans in. That would be a great service.[/p][/quote]The travellers appear to be able to find them already. stevo!!
  • Score: 14

12:42pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Fozborn says...

Oh God - another example of the "don't worry it's not council tax payers money" attitude.

It's still our money you numpty!!

It's this attitude to public funds that has resulted in us having one of the biggest government budget deficits in the world. Our children's children's children will still be paying for this profligacy!
Oh God - another example of the "don't worry it's not council tax payers money" attitude. It's still our money you numpty!! It's this attitude to public funds that has resulted in us having one of the biggest government budget deficits in the world. Our children's children's children will still be paying for this profligacy! Fozborn
  • Score: 19

12:42pm Wed 25 Jun 14

NickBtn says...

How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved
How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved NickBtn
  • Score: 25

12:52pm Wed 25 Jun 14

TomPaine says...

These are really detailed street maps of the whole local area, not just road signs or directions to a single location. I think they're useful, and I've lived in Brighton for twelve years.

It would be interesting to know where the money did come from though. Might have been central govt or European funding, or perhaps contributions from local businesses or universities. I notice there are a few near the Brighton Uni site on Lewes Rd.
These are really detailed street maps of the whole local area, not just road signs or directions to a single location. I think they're useful, and I've lived in Brighton for twelve years. It would be interesting to know where the money did come from though. Might have been central govt or European funding, or perhaps contributions from local businesses or universities. I notice there are a few near the Brighton Uni site on Lewes Rd. TomPaine
  • Score: 17

12:53pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Quiterie says...

Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!?? Quiterie
  • Score: 23

12:56pm Wed 25 Jun 14

clare_giggles says...

Annoyingly too - the one in Seven Dials has been up for a few months and hasn't even been finished??!! The plastic wrapping is still around it now ... !!
Annoyingly too - the one in Seven Dials has been up for a few months and hasn't even been finished??!! The plastic wrapping is still around it now ... !! clare_giggles
  • Score: 15

1:02pm Wed 25 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

Quiterie wrote:
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
It's almost as if Argus is in cahoots with the Council.

*clasps hand to mouth in shock*

After all, we're not allowed to slam the Council over its conduct of traveller stories.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??[/p][/quote]It's almost as if Argus is in cahoots with the Council. *clasps hand to mouth in shock* After all, we're not allowed to slam the Council over its conduct of traveller stories. stevo!!
  • Score: 12

1:02pm Wed 25 Jun 14

We love Red Billy says...

They know they are not going to get re elected. Things like this are a two fingered salute on their way out. @gzunder.com
They know they are not going to get re elected. Things like this are a two fingered salute on their way out. @gzunder.com We love Red Billy
  • Score: 10

1:03pm Wed 25 Jun 14

notaconspiracy says...

Seems the enraged chap doesn't understand what maps are for. We shouldn't be mean about that, probably, but I bet his use of the FOA cost the council money, too.

Still, maybe he understands why tourist towns have maps now.
Seems the enraged chap doesn't understand what maps are for. We shouldn't be mean about that, probably, but I bet his use of the FOA cost the council money, too. Still, maybe he understands why tourist towns have maps now. notaconspiracy
  • Score: -12

1:06pm Wed 25 Jun 14

esh lad says...

Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.”

Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.
Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.” Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges. esh lad
  • Score: 27

1:12pm Wed 25 Jun 14

cynic_the says...

clare_giggles wrote:
Annoyingly too - the one in Seven Dials has been up for a few months and hasn't even been finished??!! The plastic wrapping is still around it now ... !!
I noticed that, but I think it's been removed now and the hole concreted in.

As with the 20 signs, these sort of things are designed to turn public money into private money at a very poor value to the taxpayer.

Someone will probably be on here soon to tell us that these were paid for by the Ringfenced-EU-Sustai
nable-Tourist-Signag
e-Fund and the money could never have been spent on anything else.
[quote][p][bold]clare_giggles[/bold] wrote: Annoyingly too - the one in Seven Dials has been up for a few months and hasn't even been finished??!! The plastic wrapping is still around it now ... !![/p][/quote]I noticed that, but I think it's been removed now and the hole concreted in. As with the 20 signs, these sort of things are designed to turn public money into private money at a very poor value to the taxpayer. Someone will probably be on here soon to tell us that these were paid for by the Ringfenced-EU-Sustai nable-Tourist-Signag e-Fund and the money could never have been spent on anything else. cynic_the
  • Score: 15

1:15pm Wed 25 Jun 14

DistinctLackOfGravitas says...

NickBtn wrote:
How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved
I imagine this cost combines the graphic design, purchase of the physical signs, and the work to install them.

It seems like a good investment to me, considering the amount of tourism Brighton gets and the help these signs would be to direct tourists to all the great stuff around Brighton.
[quote][p][bold]NickBtn[/bold] wrote: How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved[/p][/quote]I imagine this cost combines the graphic design, purchase of the physical signs, and the work to install them. It seems like a good investment to me, considering the amount of tourism Brighton gets and the help these signs would be to direct tourists to all the great stuff around Brighton. DistinctLackOfGravitas
  • Score: -5

1:20pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Kate234 says...

Quiterie wrote:
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
The tourism board is funded by a very high fee to tourism related businesses. This is separate from business rates and is voluntary if they wish to be a member. It is very likely this was where the funding came from. This is where the funding for the visit brighton and the maps etc comes from. I think a more serious question is why when tourism is so essential to jobs and prosperity in the city is the council doing nothing but sticking a knife in it e.g. high parking charges, closing down the visitor centre etc. The maps may be an eyesore but if you do another freedom of information request to fund out how much hotels, guest houses, restaurants pay in fees and booking commissions to the council it will present a clearer picture.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??[/p][/quote]The tourism board is funded by a very high fee to tourism related businesses. This is separate from business rates and is voluntary if they wish to be a member. It is very likely this was where the funding came from. This is where the funding for the visit brighton and the maps etc comes from. I think a more serious question is why when tourism is so essential to jobs and prosperity in the city is the council doing nothing but sticking a knife in it e.g. high parking charges, closing down the visitor centre etc. The maps may be an eyesore but if you do another freedom of information request to fund out how much hotels, guest houses, restaurants pay in fees and booking commissions to the council it will present a clearer picture. Kate234
  • Score: 13

1:28pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Take it Personally says...

stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
It's almost as if Argus is in cahoots with the Council.

*clasps hand to mouth in shock*

After all, we're not allowed to slam the Council over its conduct of traveller stories.
of course they're in cahoots with the council, and local businesses eg why won't the argus report on Gresham Blake ripping off one of their suppliers? (single man protest outside shop in Bond Street) -when Gresham Blake claim all their expensive shirts and suits are made in England from British Mills. I didn't know Mumbai was in Britain!!!
(watch my post get taken down immediately)
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??[/p][/quote]It's almost as if Argus is in cahoots with the Council. *clasps hand to mouth in shock* After all, we're not allowed to slam the Council over its conduct of traveller stories.[/p][/quote]of course they're in cahoots with the council, and local businesses eg why won't the argus report on Gresham Blake ripping off one of their suppliers? (single man protest outside shop in Bond Street) -when Gresham Blake claim all their expensive shirts and suits are made in England from British Mills. I didn't know Mumbai was in Britain!!! (watch my post get taken down immediately) Take it Personally
  • Score: 13

1:45pm Wed 25 Jun 14

TonyTony says...

Take it Personally wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
It's almost as if Argus is in cahoots with the Council.

*clasps hand to mouth in shock*

After all, we're not allowed to slam the Council over its conduct of traveller stories.
of course they're in cahoots with the council, and local businesses eg why won't the argus report on Gresham Blake ripping off one of their suppliers? (single man protest outside shop in Bond Street) -when Gresham Blake claim all their expensive shirts and suits are made in England from British Mills. I didn't know Mumbai was in Britain!!!
(watch my post get taken down immediately)
1;45 Still here
[quote][p][bold]Take it Personally[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??[/p][/quote]It's almost as if Argus is in cahoots with the Council. *clasps hand to mouth in shock* After all, we're not allowed to slam the Council over its conduct of traveller stories.[/p][/quote]of course they're in cahoots with the council, and local businesses eg why won't the argus report on Gresham Blake ripping off one of their suppliers? (single man protest outside shop in Bond Street) -when Gresham Blake claim all their expensive shirts and suits are made in England from British Mills. I didn't know Mumbai was in Britain!!! (watch my post get taken down immediately)[/p][/quote]1;45 Still here TonyTony
  • Score: 10

1:50pm Wed 25 Jun 14

s&k says...

Paint over them in protest.
Paint over them in protest. s&k
  • Score: -8

2:01pm Wed 25 Jun 14

MCW1507 says...

stevo!! wrote:
What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.
If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.[/p][/quote]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better. MCW1507
  • Score: 9

2:03pm Wed 25 Jun 14

MCW1507 says...

stevo!! wrote:
What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.
If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.[/p][/quote]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better. MCW1507
  • Score: 2

2:12pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Andy R says...

Kate234 wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
The tourism board is funded by a very high fee to tourism related businesses. This is separate from business rates and is voluntary if they wish to be a member. It is very likely this was where the funding came from. This is where the funding for the visit brighton and the maps etc comes from. I think a more serious question is why when tourism is so essential to jobs and prosperity in the city is the council doing nothing but sticking a knife in it e.g. high parking charges, closing down the visitor centre etc. The maps may be an eyesore but if you do another freedom of information request to fund out how much hotels, guest houses, restaurants pay in fees and booking commissions to the council it will present a clearer picture.
Yeah....go down to the seafront at this time of year and it's....like....tumb
leweed. Where on earth did all the visitors go......?
[quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??[/p][/quote]The tourism board is funded by a very high fee to tourism related businesses. This is separate from business rates and is voluntary if they wish to be a member. It is very likely this was where the funding came from. This is where the funding for the visit brighton and the maps etc comes from. I think a more serious question is why when tourism is so essential to jobs and prosperity in the city is the council doing nothing but sticking a knife in it e.g. high parking charges, closing down the visitor centre etc. The maps may be an eyesore but if you do another freedom of information request to fund out how much hotels, guest houses, restaurants pay in fees and booking commissions to the council it will present a clearer picture.[/p][/quote]Yeah....go down to the seafront at this time of year and it's....like....tumb leweed. Where on earth did all the visitors go......? Andy R
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Wed 25 Jun 14

s_james says...

MCW1507 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.
If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.
I’m sure the businesses in Hanover would be very happy to take advantage of some of the tourist trade that usually sticks to the seafront and city centre. If these signs encourage tourists to venture a little further afield into areas like that with a little more confidence, then all the better.
[quote][p][bold]MCW1507[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.[/p][/quote]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.[/p][/quote]I’m sure the businesses in Hanover would be very happy to take advantage of some of the tourist trade that usually sticks to the seafront and city centre. If these signs encourage tourists to venture a little further afield into areas like that with a little more confidence, then all the better. s_james
  • Score: -3

2:34pm Wed 25 Jun 14

jimthedoorman says...

Andy R wrote:
Kate234 wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??
The tourism board is funded by a very high fee to tourism related businesses. This is separate from business rates and is voluntary if they wish to be a member. It is very likely this was where the funding came from. This is where the funding for the visit brighton and the maps etc comes from. I think a more serious question is why when tourism is so essential to jobs and prosperity in the city is the council doing nothing but sticking a knife in it e.g. high parking charges, closing down the visitor centre etc. The maps may be an eyesore but if you do another freedom of information request to fund out how much hotels, guest houses, restaurants pay in fees and booking commissions to the council it will present a clearer picture.
Yeah....go down to the seafront at this time of year and it's....like....tumb

leweed. Where on earth did all the visitors go......?
They got lost.
[quote][p][bold]Andy R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Do the Argus not feel it's appropriate to challenge such a ludicrous statement from the Council?!?!? If it's not Council taxpayers money paying for it, then who is it?!??[/p][/quote]The tourism board is funded by a very high fee to tourism related businesses. This is separate from business rates and is voluntary if they wish to be a member. It is very likely this was where the funding came from. This is where the funding for the visit brighton and the maps etc comes from. I think a more serious question is why when tourism is so essential to jobs and prosperity in the city is the council doing nothing but sticking a knife in it e.g. high parking charges, closing down the visitor centre etc. The maps may be an eyesore but if you do another freedom of information request to fund out how much hotels, guest houses, restaurants pay in fees and booking commissions to the council it will present a clearer picture.[/p][/quote]Yeah....go down to the seafront at this time of year and it's....like....tumb leweed. Where on earth did all the visitors go......?[/p][/quote]They got lost. jimthedoorman
  • Score: 11

2:39pm Wed 25 Jun 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

I agree with Stoney33 - in London the signs are well received, and quite useful. Of course, positioning (as Mr Wood said) sounds a bit hit and miss.

I am a lot happier seeing some signs that promote visitors finding their way around, rather than all the 20 signs chasing them away. Would be interested to see how much THOSE signs cost each, especially as they have been shoved in every cul-de-sac and minor road.

It would seem that a measure of effectiveness of this council is how little of the city is seen, due to it being plastered with signs every 3 yards....
I agree with Stoney33 - in London the signs are well received, and quite useful. Of course, positioning (as Mr Wood said) sounds a bit hit and miss. I am a lot happier seeing some signs that promote visitors finding their way around, rather than all the 20 signs chasing them away. Would be interested to see how much THOSE signs cost each, especially as they have been shoved in every cul-de-sac and minor road. It would seem that a measure of effectiveness of this council is how little of the city is seen, due to it being plastered with signs every 3 yards.... PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 4

2:42pm Wed 25 Jun 14

itmeansnothingtome says...

Fight_Back wrote:
"but said the signs were not paid for from council taxpayers’ money"

I smell lies ! If this statement were true then they could and should have refused to reveal the cost of the signs as it wasn't tax payers money. It also raises the question of "who did pay for them then ?".
Councils can often bid for funding from central government or the EU (still tax, but not Council Tax), as well as other tourism bodies.

Incidentally, councils still need to respond to Freedom of information requests regardless of where money comes from.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: "but said the signs were not paid for from council taxpayers’ money" I smell lies ! If this statement were true then they could and should have refused to reveal the cost of the signs as it wasn't tax payers money. It also raises the question of "who did pay for them then ?".[/p][/quote]Councils can often bid for funding from central government or the EU (still tax, but not Council Tax), as well as other tourism bodies. Incidentally, councils still need to respond to Freedom of information requests regardless of where money comes from. itmeansnothingtome
  • Score: 5

2:45pm Wed 25 Jun 14

itmeansnothingtome says...

NickBtn wrote:
How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved
It doesn't seem that bad to me. of course it depends on whether that cost includes installation (including all the work digging in to the path) and designing each map.

I've never ordered anything like this, but have ordered noticed boards and similar to be supplied and installed.

£2000 for a large fairly bespoke metal item like this, plus labour, doesn't seem bad.
[quote][p][bold]NickBtn[/bold] wrote: How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved[/p][/quote]It doesn't seem that bad to me. of course it depends on whether that cost includes installation (including all the work digging in to the path) and designing each map. I've never ordered anything like this, but have ordered noticed boards and similar to be supplied and installed. £2000 for a large fairly bespoke metal item like this, plus labour, doesn't seem bad. itmeansnothingtome
  • Score: 8

3:19pm Wed 25 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

MCW1507 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.
If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.
"]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said."

Really?

My version of the report quotes Mr Wood stating:

"I’m sure most residents don’t need telling where the North Laine is. "


Feel free to quote what YOUR version of the report states as to what Mr Wood said (if anything) about North Laine....
[quote][p][bold]MCW1507[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.[/p][/quote]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.[/p][/quote]"]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said." Really? My version of the report quotes Mr Wood stating: "I’m sure most residents don’t need telling where the North Laine is. " Feel free to quote what YOUR version of the report states as to what Mr Wood said (if anything) about North Laine.... stevo!!
  • Score: -7

3:46pm Wed 25 Jun 14

stumpyshimmans says...

esh lad wrote:
Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.”

Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.
David Smith needs to toe the Party Line & support the Unfair Parking Charges & Permits! Tell him Geoffrey!
[quote][p][bold]esh lad[/bold] wrote: Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.” Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.[/p][/quote]David Smith needs to toe the Party Line & support the Unfair Parking Charges & Permits! Tell him Geoffrey! stumpyshimmans
  • Score: 3

4:10pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Patsyr says...

s&k wrote:
Paint over them in protest.
4.18 and still there. Argus staff must be having a long lunch today !
[quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: Paint over them in protest.[/p][/quote]4.18 and still there. Argus staff must be having a long lunch today ! Patsyr
  • Score: 3

4:36pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Phani Tikkala says...

esh lad wrote:
Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.”

Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.
Hear ****ing hear!
[quote][p][bold]esh lad[/bold] wrote: Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.” Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.[/p][/quote]Hear ****ing hear! Phani Tikkala
  • Score: 0

4:56pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Phani Tikkala says...

If the wayfinding signs have been financed from the local transport plan (pedestrian signing, fingerposts and monoliths is specifically mentioned in it) then it does come from Council Tax…..
If the wayfinding signs have been financed from the local transport plan (pedestrian signing, fingerposts and monoliths is specifically mentioned in it) then it does come from Council Tax….. Phani Tikkala
  • Score: 3

6:29pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Hove Actually says...

Is there anything the greens cannot frack up?

Even some, what could be useful signs are totally mis-placed and overpriced
and then lied about to cover up the unbelievable incompetence of this utterly useless bunch of wasters who seem to lurch from one stupid idea to another without a backwards glance.

Please STOP, PLAN, THINK AGAIN .
Is there anything the greens cannot frack up? Even some, what could be useful signs are totally mis-placed and overpriced and then lied about to cover up the unbelievable incompetence of this utterly useless bunch of wasters who seem to lurch from one stupid idea to another without a backwards glance. Please STOP, PLAN, THINK AGAIN . Hove Actually
  • Score: 1

9:14pm Wed 25 Jun 14

cynic_the says...

itmeansnothingtome wrote:
NickBtn wrote:
How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved
It doesn't seem that bad to me. of course it depends on whether that cost includes installation (including all the work digging in to the path) and designing each map.

I've never ordered anything like this, but have ordered noticed boards and similar to be supplied and installed.

£2000 for a large fairly bespoke metal item like this, plus labour, doesn't seem bad.
Eugenius is that you?
[quote][p][bold]itmeansnothingtome[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickBtn[/bold] wrote: How can each sign cost over £2000? This is similar to the bus stop solar light fiasco costing around £1500 - when domestic versions cost around £20.... How does the council manage to spend this much? If we could cut this wastage and buy items sensibly then council tax could surely fall and key services be preserved/improved[/p][/quote]It doesn't seem that bad to me. of course it depends on whether that cost includes installation (including all the work digging in to the path) and designing each map. I've never ordered anything like this, but have ordered noticed boards and similar to be supplied and installed. £2000 for a large fairly bespoke metal item like this, plus labour, doesn't seem bad.[/p][/quote]Eugenius is that you? cynic_the
  • Score: 5

9:42pm Wed 25 Jun 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Fozborn wrote:
Oh God - another example of the "don't worry it's not council tax payers money" attitude.

It's still our money you numpty!!

It's this attitude to public funds that has resulted in us having one of the biggest government budget deficits in the world. Our children's children's children will still be paying for this profligacy!
Yes, it's a great example of the loony left's total inability to understand, despite what they may think, that money actually doesn't grow on trees. With attitudes like this we will never ever pay our way as a country.
[quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh God - another example of the "don't worry it's not council tax payers money" attitude. It's still our money you numpty!! It's this attitude to public funds that has resulted in us having one of the biggest government budget deficits in the world. Our children's children's children will still be paying for this profligacy![/p][/quote]Yes, it's a great example of the loony left's total inability to understand, despite what they may think, that money actually doesn't grow on trees. With attitudes like this we will never ever pay our way as a country. Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 1

9:24am Thu 26 Jun 14

Pebbles says...

Do these boards carry advertising for local companies/businesses
?
Do these boards carry advertising for local companies/businesses ? Pebbles
  • Score: 1

9:32am Thu 26 Jun 14

Fercri Sakes says...

Idontbelieveit1948 wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Oh God - another example of the "don't worry it's not council tax payers money" attitude.

It's still our money you numpty!!

It's this attitude to public funds that has resulted in us having one of the biggest government budget deficits in the world. Our children's children's children will still be paying for this profligacy!
Yes, it's a great example of the loony left's total inability to understand, despite what they may think, that money actually doesn't grow on trees. With attitudes like this we will never ever pay our way as a country.
What about the right wing's inability to notice that Corporations now pay a tiny percentage of the tax that they used to due to tax havens and offshore accounting? Moaning about a perceived profligacy of government spending on local amenities just shows a lack of awareness of the bigger picture and a sycophantic attitude towards tax dodging companies.

We've got no money.... Blame the poor.... Blame the left.... Blame nurses, doctors and teachers.... But leave those lovely, sweet natured corporations out of it.
[quote][p][bold]Idontbelieveit1948[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh God - another example of the "don't worry it's not council tax payers money" attitude. It's still our money you numpty!! It's this attitude to public funds that has resulted in us having one of the biggest government budget deficits in the world. Our children's children's children will still be paying for this profligacy![/p][/quote]Yes, it's a great example of the loony left's total inability to understand, despite what they may think, that money actually doesn't grow on trees. With attitudes like this we will never ever pay our way as a country.[/p][/quote]What about the right wing's inability to notice that Corporations now pay a tiny percentage of the tax that they used to due to tax havens and offshore accounting? Moaning about a perceived profligacy of government spending on local amenities just shows a lack of awareness of the bigger picture and a sycophantic attitude towards tax dodging companies. We've got no money.... Blame the poor.... Blame the left.... Blame nurses, doctors and teachers.... But leave those lovely, sweet natured corporations out of it. Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 3

11:47am Thu 26 Jun 14

Andy R says...

stumpyshimmans wrote:
esh lad wrote:
Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.”

Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.
David Smith needs to toe the Party Line & support the Unfair Parking Charges & Permits! Tell him Geoffrey!
Er....David Smith is a Tory, so why would he want to tow Geoffrey Bowden's "party line"?
[quote][p][bold]stumpyshimmans[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]esh lad[/bold] wrote: Councillor David Smith said..“Research has shown that people are more likely to return to a city if they have found it easy to get around.” Might I suggest that people are more likely to return if they didn't feel ripped off with parking charges.[/p][/quote]David Smith needs to toe the Party Line & support the Unfair Parking Charges & Permits! Tell him Geoffrey![/p][/quote]Er....David Smith is a Tory, so why would he want to tow Geoffrey Bowden's "party line"? Andy R
  • Score: 1

1:02pm Thu 26 Jun 14

Max Ripple says...

MCW1507 wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.
If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.
Yes. I'm sure the one out at Moulsecombe is essential for residents out there. The one at the bottom of Southover Street blocks a good proportion of the pavement. A wheelchair user would have trouble getting round it let alone reading it. If a business put an A Board there they would be prosecuted.
Complete waste of money!
[quote][p][bold]MCW1507[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: What a shame that Mr. Wood needs to be told that not every visitor to Brighton knows where North Laine is.[/p][/quote]If you read the article properly, that is not what is said. The point is that signs in Hanover which are a residential area are clearly not aimed at visitors. Yes if you go to the Kemptown area of the city which is very visitor focused with lots of hotels and B&B's there are none. So the point isn't that signs are bad, but the locations and amounts should have been thought through a little better.[/p][/quote]Yes. I'm sure the one out at Moulsecombe is essential for residents out there. The one at the bottom of Southover Street blocks a good proportion of the pavement. A wheelchair user would have trouble getting round it let alone reading it. If a business put an A Board there they would be prosecuted. Complete waste of money! Max Ripple
  • Score: -1

1:50pm Thu 26 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

Andy R wrote:

"Yeah....go down to the seafront at this time of year and it's....like....tumb

leweed. Where on earth did all the visitors go......?"

His sarcasm is ignoring the facts, as usual.

Tourists can generally find the seafront at Brighton. These signs are for those who want to experience a little more than a strip of beach and the pier.

How many of those tourists would have found their visit frustrating if not for those signs?
Andy R wrote: "Yeah....go down to the seafront at this time of year and it's....like....tumb leweed. Where on earth did all the visitors go......?" His sarcasm is ignoring the facts, as usual. Tourists can generally find the seafront at Brighton. These signs are for those who want to experience a little more than a strip of beach and the pier. How many of those tourists would have found their visit frustrating if not for those signs? stevo!!
  • Score: 0

11:11pm Thu 26 Jun 14

Seagull John says...

This story reminds me of the cycle counters around town at a cost of £20k each even though they are never switched on. No money wasted there then!
This story reminds me of the cycle counters around town at a cost of £20k each even though they are never switched on. No money wasted there then! Seagull John
  • Score: 0

8:28pm Fri 27 Jun 14

Roy Pennington says...

and Bond Street Laine is incorrectly named as "Bond Street Lane" even though the magistrates court decision in July 26th 2012 stated that the street must NOT be renamed as "Bond Street Lane". And the Council knew that when the new signage was commissioned and deliberately chose to ignore a court decision.....
and Bond Street Laine is incorrectly named as "Bond Street Lane" even though the magistrates court decision in July 26th 2012 stated that the street must NOT be renamed as "Bond Street Lane". And the Council knew that when the new signage was commissioned and deliberately chose to ignore a court decision..... Roy Pennington
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree