Letterkenny CCTV

Martyr

hey, anyone heard or know anything about this, is it still going ahead?
whats the budget for it, i'm just curious.

thanks!

Damien Blake

Average Joe wrote:

hey, anyone heard or know anything about this, is it still going ahead?
whats the budget for it, i'm just curious.

thanks!

Yep, it's still going ahead. I was discussing this in a meeting yesterday in Athlone.

The budget is approx E140k, contractors have been appointed and negotiations (I understand) concluded with building owners at seven sites around the town. The Council is giving E45,000, with approx E100,000 coming from the Government, through Pobal.

The contractors are now constructing the equipment and finalising details with the council (road openings etc). I would hope that the CCTV will be in place by the end of the Summer.

The system will see six cameras to start with, located around the Main Street/Town Centre area. I would hope we will be able to extend the system further into other areas as time goes on.

Wishbone Ash

As a matter of interest, will it be a 'live' feed and if so, who monitors it? Gardaí?

Martyr

Damien Blake wrote:

Yep, it's still going ahead. I was discussing this in a meeting yesterday in Athlone.

The budget is approx E140k, contractors have been appointed and negotiations (I understand) concluded with building owners at seven sites around the town. The Council is giving E45,000, with approx E100,000 coming from the Government, through Pobal.

The contractors are now constructing the equipment and finalising details with the council (road openings etc). I would hope that the CCTV will be in place by the end of the Summer.

The system will see six cameras to start with, located around the Main Street/Town Centre area. I would hope we will be able to extend the system further into other areas as time goes on.

hi Damien,
it says on your blog that the company Access Video Projects will be setting the system up, i'm just wondering why (if you know) was the contract not given to someone locally.

i understand this company is from northern ireland.. was the decision to grant AVP the job based on doing the job the cheapest? or because AVP are more qualified and experienced for this kind of work?

i also understand that this is a difficult job, and will not be without complications.

EDIT:
just wondering what examples of good work AVP have completed?

muffler

And can we see the juicy bits up on Utube

jimmycrackcorm

I'd love to see the cost break down.

At the moment I'm able to remotely connect in and remotely watch live footage from the streets of letterkenny.

Martyr

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

I'd love to see the cost break down.

At the moment I'm able to remotely connect in and remotely watch live footage from the streets of letterkenny.

hahaha
there are a few places in the town that already allow that
although the town-cctv isn't actually running yet, what do you mean?

donegalman1

I'm sure that price is just installation. CCTV is a very easy and cheap installation and there is some markup on that price. Obviously its another celtic tiger inflator or imcompetance on the part of central and local govt. (Most likely all three)

I wonder is that the same NI company involved in the speed casmeras for Ireland. Heard some interesting things about that.

Not withstanding that, good to see it. BUT will it stand up in court?

How's it complicated or specialised, bar the legal ramifications, its simple wiring, and networking.

Martyr

donegalman1 wrote:

I'm sure that price is just installation. CCTV is a very easy and cheap installation and there is some markup on that price. Obviously its another celtic tiger inflator or imcompetance on the part of central and local govt. (Most likely all three)

I wonder is that the same NI company involved in the speed casmeras for Ireland. Heard some interesting things about that.

Not withstanding that, good to see it. BUT will it stand up in court?

How's it complicated or specialised, bar the legal ramifications, its simple wiring, and networking.

i believe its a specialised job, and if its to be done properly, will be complicated, but i am waiting for Damien to re-assure its smooth operation before i comment any further.

i just have some doubts about how well it will operate, thats all, but i usually am quite negative on alot of issues, and perhaps it will run perfectly.

Damien Blake

Wishbone Ash wrote:

As a matter of interest, will it be a 'live' feed and if so, who monitors it? Gardaí?

The controls for the CCTV will be based in a secured room at the Public Services Centre at Neil T Blaney Road. There will be a connection from the Garda Station to this system, whereby they will be able to check in to any of the cameras as required. At this stage, it is not likely that the cameras will be monitored 24hrs.

Average Joe wrote:

hi Damien,
it says on your blog that the company Access Video Projects will be setting the system up, i'm just wondering why (if you know) was the contract not given to someone locally.

i understand this company is from northern ireland.. was the decision to grant AVP the job based on doing the job the cheapest? or because AVP are more qualified and experienced for this kind of work?

i also understand that this is a difficult job, and will not be without complications.

EDIT:
just wondering what examples of good work AVP have completed?

There was a fairly detailed tender process. To my recollection, 7 companies applied. Tenders were then independently adjudicated, by an external group organised through the Chamber of Commerce. A number of local companies applied, but AVP were the best candidate by some distance. All tenders were marked on a 200 point scale, and there was huge variety in the results.

AVP have engaged in a number of similar jobs, both North and South. I met with them on their last visit, and am very confident in them completing the job succesfully.

Muffler wrote:

And can we see the juicy bits up on Utube

Sorry Muffler, you're going to have to rely on Camera Phones for that kind of stuff

Jimmycrackcorn wrote:

I'd love to see the cost break down.

At the moment I'm able to remotely connect in and remotely watch live footage from the streets of letterkenny.

The tenders have been organised, and the process managed, by the Chamber of Commerce, who are not under the Freedom of Information Act. However, the funding is coming from the Town Council and The Department of Justice so they would be. The Breakdown should be able somewhere once complete.

I would be aware that most CCTV systems can now be monitored remotely. I hope none of the local businesses are allowing theres to be viewed at random!

Donegalman1 wrote:

I'm sure that price is just installation. CCTV is a very easy and cheap installation and there is some markup on that price. Obviously its another celtic tiger inflator or imcompetance on the part of central and local govt. (Most likely all three)

I wonder is that the same NI company involved in the speed casmeras for Ireland. Heard some interesting things about that.

Not withstanding that, good to see it. BUT will it stand up in court?

How's it complicated or specialised, bar the legal ramifications, its simple wiring, and networking.

The 140,000 will cover the capital costs - construction and purchase of equipment, installation on buildings and poles, connection to the MAN (Fibre Optic Broadband Network), civil works for road openings, installation and securing of operations equipment at PSC.

The cameras are very specialised pieces of kit; they have to operate with little-to-no maintenance, in all weathers, and be resilient enough to withstand vandalism (although all will be out of reach). They are connected by a series of wired and wireless data connections, through a secured link to the PSC and Garda station. Roads have to be opened, connections made then roads reinstated. The project is being handled on a very tight budget; none of the 140,000 has gone towards the expenses incurred by the Council, Chamber of Commerce or Gardai for their work on the project. Some of this money is being paid to eNet for access to the MAN Broadband Network.

As for it standing up in court, the Gardai have been extremely helpful and directly involved at all stages of the project. They are confident that a properly-managed system will be applicable in Court. The most common issues with CCTV are 1)quality of images and 2)accuracy of timestamp. Under the regulations, every camera has to be checked every day by the council to ensure the images remain clear and the system is fully operational (including time clock).

Average Joe wrote:

i believe its a specialised job, and if its to be done properly, will be complicated, but i am waiting for Damien to re-assure its smooth operation before i comment any further.

i just have some doubts about how well it will operate, thats all, but i usually am quite negative on alot of issues, and perhaps it will run perfectly.

We've been working on the operational matters of this for about 18 months. Joanne Sweeney (formerly) at the Chamber of Commerce put in great work on the application. Indeed, the Department have highlighted how good the application was. The Town Clerk, Town Engineer and Town Foreman at the Council have all helped greatly, with financial and technical matters. And the Gardai have been involved throughout; Paul Wallace has been active throughout, and Gardai at every level up to Superintendant have helped when needed.

I am very confident this system will run smoothly. It's not a silver bullet, but it will be a benefit to the Gardai in their work.

Civilian_Target

Yet another intrusion on our privacy. Lets hope it doesn't reduce the number of Gardai walking the streets of the town...

smashey

Damien Blake wrote:

Under the regulations, every camera has to be checked every day by the council to ensure the images remain clear and the system is fully operational (including time clock).

I hope they are better at that than they are at fixing the roads.

I feel a new thread coming on.

nanook

and i think i know who the author is going to be

smashey

Civilian_Target wrote:

Yet another intrusion on our privacy. Lets hope it doesn't reduce the number of Gardai walking the streets of the town...

I don't agree with the "intrusion on our privacy" bit. If you aren't doing anything illegal or unsociable, what's the problem? The cameras will only pick up on those people doing what they shouldn't. Letterkenny really needs this, especially at the weekends.

@nanook: New thread coming when I get some photos of the subject matter.

ctc_celtic

Civilian_Target wrote:

Lets hope it doesn't reduce the number of Gardai walking the streets of the town...

hopefully not, but these systems have proved very useful in other cities and towns at manpower (garda) management.

I'd like to see the Garda have dedicated people to monitor the cctv, probably just a peak times at first.

Martyr

i spoke with a company who applied for the contract, and they told me that they would have provided the best equipment in the world for a little extra cash..they also had some concerns about AVP and their track record.

personally, i don't know how much more/less or not AVPs choice of equipment will be compared to this unnamed companys.. until AVP has finished the job, and we can see the results, of course.

jimmycrackcorm

As far as I can see this project is another example of a wasteful spend of public money. Had the budget been used for live monitoring then I'd say yes it is value for money, but to spend 140k on effectively a fancy 6 camera VCR is outrageous.

You see I've worked on integrated Digital video systems and I am aware of the capabilities and costs involved. In fact there have been successful prosecutions from systems I've been involved in. I know exactly how these systems work down to the level of relativities of waveform compression and object tracking.

I'd ask for example why it is necessary to dig up roads and connect to the MAN? Given that the chamber of horrors were driving the project, why didn't they ask if they could install DVR systems and cameras in local businesses and provide remote access over their broadband connections? Whatever happened to the community taking ownership of the problem?

The reason for using the MAN is simply to justify the exense of having it in the first place. It is comparable to flying a Boeing 747 from Derry airport to Carrickfin. The equivalent arguement is "look at how the savings in travel time". Then there is is the expense and incovenience of digging up the roads just to connect these cameras into a room where nobody is monitoring.

A Carlow company, Netwatch, has been very successful in this area with private business. Their system, for example, automatically picks up intruders and they monitor them immediately and can issue warnings or call in the Gardai. A former employer of mine cut his crime level to zero with this and his monthly manual security cost from 17k per month to a fraction of that. That was a saving in excess of 140k per year for a single site alone.

It's all very well for Damien to expound the virtues of the tendering process, but, given his own IT background I'd ask if he would spend 140k of his own money on an unmonitored 6 camera system or be able to come up with a more effective spend?

This is simply another example of how inefficient public spending programmes are. Hey, we have a budget, lets get something to fit it.

jimmycrackcorm

Average Joe wrote:

i spoke with a company who applied for the contract, and they told me that they would have provided the best equipment in the world for a little extra cash..they also had some concerns about AVP and their track record.

Every loser has concerns about the winner, and having the best equipment in the world is of no use if it is not used effectively.

Civilian_Target

I believe CCTV is, in a way, an excuse for laziness. It focuses on providing evidence after the event rather than crime prevention. How could we provide crime prevention? Replace the CCTV with a Garda at the peak hours. Given the costings Damien's just provided with, we could probably have 4-5 hours Garda coverage on each of these points for a year for the price of CCTV, much better value given that it sounds like no-one will even be watching the CCTV live feed.

smashey wrote:

I don't agree with the "intrusion on our privacy" bit. If you aren't doing anything illegal or unsociable, what's the problem? The cameras will only pick up on those people doing what they shouldn't. Letterkenny really needs this, especially at the weekends.

The cameras will pick up on everything. There have been numerous examples of abuse of CCTV footage, videos of a man who later that day committed suicide were aired on British TV without him ever commiting a crime. You see CCTV footage of Britanny's latest hairdo in magazines all the time because of the angles it provides. Also, we all break the little laws, all the time. Who here has never recorded something onto video and kept a copy? Who here has copied an MP3 onto a portable player without deleting the original? Who says you won't commit a minor offense on CCTV, later become Taoiseach, and have the media smash'n'grab the footage and use it against you later?

nanook

Quote:
Originally Posted by Average Joe
i spoke with a company who applied for the contract, and they told me that they would have provided the best equipment in the world for a little extra cash..they also had some concerns about AVP and their track record.

Every loser has concerns about the winner, and having the best equipment in the world is of no use if it is not used effectively.
___________

The truest words over said....

Damien Blake

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

As far as I can see this project is another example of a wasteful spend of public money. Had the budget been used for live monitoring then I'd say yes it is value for money, but to spend 140k on effectively a fancy 6 camera VCR is outrageous.

You see I've worked on integrated Digital video systems and I am aware of the capabilities and costs involved. In fact there have been successful prosecutions from systems I've been involved in. I know exactly how these systems work down to the level of relativities of waveform compression and object tracking.

I'd ask for example why it is necessary to dig up roads and connect to the MAN? Given that the chamber of horrors were driving the project, why didn't they ask if they could install DVR systems and cameras in local businesses and provide remote access over their broadband connections? Whatever happened to the community taking ownership of the problem?

1) How else would you propose connecting to the MAN? It is a series of cables, in the ground. The cameras will be connecting directly, so any road openings will be kept to a minimum, but I can't think of any other way that we can get a connection from a camera to a cable buried under a road without opening the road.

2) The funding was made available under very strict regulations. From a privacy/data security point of view, we need to have full proper control over every element of the system. Even if we where able to remotely access the system, the Data Monitor (in this case, the Town Council) is responsible for the operational integrity of the system. We need to check every camera, and every piece of computer equipment, every single day. This would not be possible if we were accessing third party systems. I also can't imagine many businesses wanting an external body, such as the Gardai, Chamber or Town Council, having unrestricted access to their CCTV systems.

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

The reason for using the MAN is simply to justify the exense of having it in the first place. It is comparable to flying a Boeing 747 from Derry airport to Carrickfin. The equivalent arguement is "look at how the savings in travel time". Then there is is the expense and incovenience of digging up the roads just to connect these cameras into a room where nobody is monitoring.

1) Using the MAN greatly reduces the expenses involved here. The cameras have to be connected in some way. Cameras with line-of-sight for radio links are sharing MAN connections (eg camera at Lr Main Street and Market Square will be connected wireslessly to eachother, with one of them then connected to the MAN). If we didn't use the MAN, we'd have to physically lay cables between the cameras, the Garda station and the control centre. That would clearly be more expensive than accessing the existing infrastructure.

2) The Gardai will have access to the same as and when they need it. Once the Cameras are connected and operational, they can be monitored as required (eg Rally Weekend).

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

A Carlow company, Netwatch, has been very successful in this area with private business. Their system, for example, automatically picks up intruders and they monitor them immediately and can issue warnings or call in the Gardai. A former employer of mine cut his crime level to zero with this and his monthly manual security cost from 17k per month to a fraction of that. That was a saving in excess of 140k per year for a single site alone.

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

It's all very well for Damien to expound the virtues of the tendering process, but, given his own IT background I'd ask if he would spend 140k of his own money on an unmonitored 6 camera system or be able to come up with a more effective spend?

I've been involved with this project from the start, and have seen all the work that has gone into it. For a major capital project, 140k is quite a small budget. As far as I know, Naas in Kildare spent over 300k on their town centre system. I haven't seen any money mis-spent, and don't see where we could have saved any money and had a working system in place.

There was massive variety in the quality of the tenders. I don't think I can reveal too many details on the unsuccessful bids, but I will say that the top tender scored more than 150 points more than the least, on a scale of 200 points.

There was much less variation in the pricing of the tenders. I don't have the exact details to hand, but there was much less variation in the pricing quoted than in the other requirements of the tenders.

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

This is simply another example of how inefficient public spending programmes are. Hey, we have a budget, lets get something to fit it.

The only problem I have with this process is that it has been much longer than I would have hoped. This system should have been in place last year. As with any programme spending Govt money, there is a lot of forms to be filled and regulations to be watched.

Yes, this programme has been done to fit a budget. Of course it is; it would be irresponsible to ignore the budget. If there was money to spare, it would have been spent on more cameras in more locations. Every effort was made to squeeze as much as possible out of the available budget.

Damien Blake

Average Joe wrote:

i spoke with a company who applied for the contract, and they told me that they would have provided the best equipment in the world for a little extra cash..they also had some concerns about AVP and their track record.

personally, i don't know how much more/less or not AVPs choice of equipment will be compared to this unnamed companys.. until AVP has finished the job, and we can see the results, of course.

As I mentioned in the previous response, there were massive variations in the quality of the tenders received. Every business that expressed an interest was sent tender documents which specified exactly, line-by-line, the requirements. The tenders needed details on everything; system design, equipment to be use, means of connectivity, lead times for ordering equipment, installation times, previous system references and more.

These requirements were outlined clearly. All tenders were then independently audited and scored on scale of 200 points. While some tenders at the top were close, there was a difference of over 150 points between the top and bottom tenders. I don't know which company you're talking about, so I can't know where they came in the process.

On another note, you mention they would have provided the best equipment in the world for a little extra cash; well, there is no extra cash, this is the budget we have and even this money was hard enough to get.

Martyr

jimmycrackcorm wrote:

Every loser has concerns about the winner, and having the best equipment in the world is of no use if it is not used effectively.

well, they weren't THAT concerned, i quote one "nothing but a headache"
anyway..they claimed, the camera system they proposed has been used successfully in major cities throughout europe and america.

Damien Blake wrote:

1) How else would you propose connecting to the MAN? It is a series of cables, in the ground. The cameras will be connecting directly, so any road openings will be kept to a minimum, but I can't think of any other way that we can get a connection from a camera to a cable buried under a road without opening the road.

existing broadband connections unreliable? i think what jimmy mentioned is good idea.don't know how well it would work though.

Damien Blake wrote:

2) The funding was made available under very strict regulations. From a privacy/data security point of view, we need to have full proper control over every element of the system. Even if we where able to remotely access the system, the Data Monitor (in this case, the Town Council) is responsible for the operational integrity of the system. We need to check every camera, and every piece of computer equipment, every single day. This would not be possible if we were accessing third party systems. I also can't imagine many businesses wanting an external body, such as the Gardai, Chamber or Town Council, having unrestricted access to their CCTV systems.

just out of curiosity, did the town council approach and ask any local businesses for co-operation?? seeing as it was mainly local businesses who demanded the system in the first place,maybe they would be willing to help in its successful operation.

Damien Blake wrote:

1) Using the MAN greatly reduces the expenses involved here. The cameras have to be connected in some way. Cameras with line-of-sight for radio links are sharing MAN connections (eg camera at Lr Main Street and Market Square will be connected wireslessly to eachother, with one of them then connected to the MAN). If we didn't use the MAN, we'd have to physically lay cables between the cameras, the Garda station and the control centre. That would clearly be more expensive than accessing the existing infrastructure.

this wireless connection, will it be encrypted? or can anyone "hook" into it and watch?

Damien Blake

Average Joe wrote:

existing broadband connections unreliable? i think what jimmy mentioned is good idea.don't know how well it would work though.

I wouldn't say they are unreliable, but they wouldn't be as reliable as the MAN fibre that would be in use. Connectivity is only one concern in this scenario.

Average Joe wrote:

just out of curiosity, did the town council approach and ask any local businesses for co-operation?? seeing as it was mainly local businesses who demanded the system in the first place,maybe they would be willing to help in its successful operation.

I spoke, as did the Chamber, to a number of local businesses, who were all supportive to differing degrees. However, the funding available was only there for schemes like the one we are putting in place.

Average Joe wrote:

this wireless connection, will it be encrypted? or can anyone "hook" into it and watch?

To my knowledge, firstly it is encrypted (as are data feeds going through the MAN) but secondly the radio links aren't standard 802.22/b/g/n - meaning the won't simply appear as a wireless network on standard equipment. The connection to the Control Centre at the PSC and the Garda Station are being done through the MAN; they aren't being relayed through a Broadband link so the system will not have any parts connected to the external Internet.

Martyr

although they are not standard Wifi as you say, possibly someone with radio / electronics experience could program a device to pick up the transmission and decode it?

i'm thinking of the Ettus USRP which is being used in development of an affordable GSM scanner.

it would probably be capable in a scenario of intercepting the traffic, and in some cases interfering with it..highly unlikely though, i know!!!

Paddy20

This is just my tuppence worth, but I was involved in CCTV in the 1970's in London, it was corrupt and overpriced then, and leasing the equipment was the way to sell it.

You would give your customer the weekly or monthly leasig cost, instead of the full capital cost, the customer would sign a leasing agreement spread over 3-5 years, and no one would question this.

My advice to anyone considering purchasing a CCTV system would be to first of all check out the Manufacturer of the equipment. As I only installed equipment, camera's etc from one company who only manufacted CCTV equipment and nothing else.

The whole area was open to exploitation, and rip off's by supplier's and installer's and I imagine it still is, even though a quality CCTV system properly installed by qualified accredited installer's using professional equipment is worth it's weight in gold.

It is still an area where massive overcharging and technical gobbledegook will catch and con the unwary business or public body.

P.:cool:

jimmycrackcorm

Damien Blake wrote:

1) How else would you propose connecting to the MAN? It is a series of cables, in the ground. The cameras will be connecting directly, so any road openings will be kept to a minimum, but I can't think of any other way that we can get a connection from a camera to a cable buried under a road without opening the road.

Makes me wonder how every corner shop has an ATM installed now if they aren't directly by cable to the bank or the MAN.

My point is, bureaucracy aside, a co-operative business community effort could have produced a better result. The presence of in-shop ATM's is a good example of a successful and comparable model to what I'm talking about.

What is being done is the equivalent of the banks buying little plots of land and building little ATM houses and then digging up the roads to connect them to the MAN. I guess though that given the superprofits of the banks that they have a greater understanding of value for money.

.

Biglad

Hi there,

I dont know if somebody is still reading this but i would like to state that local knowledge was definately overlooked within Letterkenny. There are several very experienced Installers in the area.

I myself work for Ireland's largest DVR manufacturer and we supply several local installers with the latest state of the art DVR's in 4,8,16,32 and 64 channels. During the tendering process i spoke to several members of this so called committee that had to decide on where and how the money was going to be spend. Unfortunately, between all of them, they had no clue as to what was available on the market and there was not one person on this committee that had any relevant CCTV experience.

There was also little love lost between the gards and the chaimber of commerce. There are a lot of our DVR's installed throughout the town and surrounding villages and the gards are always impressed with the footage they produce and how easy they are to use. Our machines have produced a lot of very usefull footage which got criminals convicted as it should do.

The back-up we provide as an Irish manufacturer is second to none as we are always local and back-up is what they are going to need.

I'm sorry but I always laugh when I see a 140K budget given to who comes up with the best sales pitch. Our equipment is used from the smallest corner shop to Croker in Dublin, Dunnes Stores, Roches Stores, Bord Gas etc, but they ignored us altogether. Most of our machines are being networked for remote viewing via broadband and that works perfectly OK.

We also have IP solutions and Hy-brid solutions which can handle both conventional CCTV camera's as well as IP based camera's. I dont know what they expect to see in the town with a few PTZ cameras on a tour and not using it for live monitoring. It is an absolute waste of money and the gards will still have to rely on footage recorded on DVR's installed on business premises.