I find M's comments off the mark. And possibly uninformed about what is really happening. So - Firstly there is no validity in the remark that if you do not like it you can move to leafy suburbs. Good if you can take the Pavement Obstructions with you.
Secondly there are two sides to the claim that Pavement Obstructions - particulary A Boards- are needed for commercial success however good or bad the financial environment. The reality is that congested pavements deter trade for all the traders in that section when there are alternatives to shop at, which there are. Tesco outlets do well without A Boards. In particular the Grey and Disabled £ is simply frightened away - and that is big money in B&H. Many of the smaller A Boards, for which licences are generally not required, are not individually a serious problem if sensibly positioned next to the facade and well within the private forecourts of most shops (certainly those along Western Road south side in Brunswick Town), for which licences are generally not required. However for visually impaired people they remain a menace and cumulatively become a danger for all. They are often supplied free by the advertiser (such as The Argus, LinkCash etc). The really significant general obstructions associated with A Boards mostly arise from placing them in the exterior,Public Highway, part of the pavement if there is not some 2 metres clear space all around them (even then blind people are in danger). Slalom skiers would find it hard to negotiate some stretches. I have noticed, and had it tacitly confirmed by Highways Enforcement, that quite a number of these seem to be applied for due to 'turfwars' - for example the two Estate Agents Boards on the North and South sides of the W.Road just East of Brunswick Place.
Thirdly. The latest proposal (it would appear an intended fait accompli) does not meet the needs of the public,who have studiously not been consulted,and is not even a realistic expression of the grass roots traders requirements (many are disadvantaged by the Boards of more vociferous neighbours) and appears to have no sound basis in either Highways or Disabled Persons Law. It has been sharply rejected by the representatives of the Blind /partially sighted and other Disabled Groups - but trundles on with, as yet, no apparent democratic input or approval. Hence a necessary call is being made for the Full Council, and other appropriate governance bodies, to have the 'regime' reviewed by way of a Consultation and or Scrutiny. The strong impression is that officers trying to manage this growing problem would welcome better political (and legal ?) briefs and support based on real democratic processes. They are also due adequate resources to do a proper job, and more positive support from the legal department. This only relates to aspects of Boards. There are other aspects related to Licensing pavement Displays of Goods and street furniture where an Pavement Obstruction 'Scrutiny' should resolve a number of significant public issues.