Safe Speed Forums

I live in a small village in North Yorkshire, and every morning and night i pass a school in the middle of the village, situated on the inside right of a T junction

There is a 20 limit outside the school with road humps, which is fair enough, even though at the times of day i drive past the school they are pointless as there is noone else up in the world!

The other day i was driving home in the dark and as i approached the school on the main carriageway (30mph) my headlights lit up the surrounding road signs. I could not believe my eyes!!

there were so many road signs on this one junction that i did not have time to count them all as i drove past. For the past 3 nights i have driven past i have tried counting them, and i count no less than 22 signs on this one junction!

22 signs! on one junction!!

Now, it took me 3 drives past to even count them all, never mind see what was on each sign. How is anyone supposed to be reading all of these signs, watching for children, and keeping an eye out for traffic emerging from the sign road??? it is utterly amazing.

A know someone who works with the highways department designing roads, and road signs, and he told me that a standard sign costs up to £500 to erect. That's £11,000 just on this one junction!!

To my knowledge there has never been any accidents on this stretch of road, however the council could see that as the road signs work.

I am thinking of writing a letter to my council asking them to explain why they feel 22 signs is appropriate for this junction, and maybe i'll ask them if they are planning on putting any more signs up. Are there any arguments that i should concentrate on, or points i should raise apart from this signage stupidity??

James

Why not send a photo to Look North? They've covered similar stories before and brought NYCC to account.

One can only laugh when we hear how essential they all are!

I can only agree that they do go over the top on signs. They seem to think slippery road signs are essential along many routes; why not fix the roads instead making sure they are safe to use?

Outside Scarborough Hospital there are signs obscured by other signs which are in turn hidden behind traffic lights! They just haven't got enough room to place them all. Again, far too many to count. I was thinking along the same lines as yourself in following this up.

Basically, because a road sign costs about £200 to put up and to even patch and surface dress 100m of carriageway can cost £5000. If the money was there local authorities would be out fixing every road we could but schools, hospitals, social work, and housing win more votes than roads, so they get the money!

Agreed, but the road in question here has been resurfaced just this year, so surely the slippery road signs ought to be no longer needed? They are adding to the visual clutter which distracts drivers from looking out for real hazards rather then the council's imaginary ones!

There have been accidents here and the local councillor has stated that drivers have been going to fast (without evidence to prove it) and are ignoring the slippery road signs! You couldn't make it up. Trouble is, if there is a real need for a slippery road sign somewhere its message will be lost when so many are placed as a matter of course. This is a main A road through the town's suburbs and nowhere near a farm crossing with the potential for mud on the road making it slippery. If road signs are overdone, don't their messages simply get lost?

Seem to be plenty of similar comments here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main ... dl2003.xml

The fact that a road has recently been resurfaced does not necessarily mean that it has a surface with good grip. Check out http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16265

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

The signs have been in situ for years, not just added after resurfacing.

you think maybe they do it just to spend their budget?

The reason i think this is because near my parents house about 15 miles away, 1/2 a mile down a 1 miles country B road, there is a sign on the verge that warns pedestrians that there is no footpath!

It is truly unbelieveable, because the pedestrians have to walk half a mile down the road without a footpath before being warned there isn't one!

Everyone in the village thinks it is stupid, and these are the people who it would affect. So much for democracy.

same with them introducing a 40 limit just outside the village too. Noone in the village thinsk there is a speed problem, there has never been a speed related incident, yet the council deem fit to introduce a 40 limit outside the village. but that's another story....

It's just typical backside covering, I wouldn't be surprised if someone tripped at the location of the sign and the council responded by putting the sign up. It sounds stupid, but that's the way that we're force to do things nowadays!

And certainly where I am we've never had to spend money at the end of the financial year to get funding next year, as we have a rolling budget programme, though I can't comment for other local authorities.

I think having too many signs is a major problem. Signs should exist to warn of dangers not immediately obvious (wildlife crossing the road, regular ice, landslides, hidden junctions, school crossings), and directions.

Have you noticed how many signs are erected these days with a reflective yellow border? These are obviously to make them stand out from the plethora of other signage which really isn't required.

We don't need signs warning of bends that are perfectly visible. We don't need signs telling us the road narrows. We don't need signs telling us traffic lights are around the corner. Just get rid of them, and tell us only about things we can't see even while driving safely.

I'm very tempted to go out one night with a spanner and screwdriver and remove a load of signs from my neighbourhood. The trouble is I know the council would just re-erect them and that would increase everyone's council tax bill.

I hear scrap aluminium fetches a good price these days...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

I've had more than one rant on this topic in the past.

I'm still convinced my local County Council has a "buy one, get shedloads free" deal with the company that makes the bloody things.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

There is no doubt that excessive use of roadsigns is a blight on the countryside. I also live in North Yorkshire and they have recently installed 30/40mph signs in villages near me. The 40 sign is at Ellerbeck. I have no quarrel with the speed limit, as there have been several accidents due to people going too fast round the bend into the village. However, the signs have been put up on new posts with garish yellow backgrounds and they are complemented by chevrons, repeaters in the grass verge, etc. (the chap who cuts the verges must love them!). The new 30 sign is outside a little, unspoiled village on a quiet country road. Again, the limit is no problem, but the signs on the four roads into the village are an eyesore.

If you drive through Northallerton, from one end to the other, there are now a staggering 64 road signs just on your side of the road. That's excluding the 7 roundabouts and 7 sets of pedestrian lights!

On the continent, for example in Denmark, speed limit signs are incorporated into the village or town name sign - much nicer and neater. Better still, a town sign (sillouette of rooftops and a steeple on a white backround) denotes a mandatory 50 kph speed limit, so you don't need a garish yellow sign at all.

Apart from the eyesore, I hate to think how much money it is costing us all!

In Test valley Bourough Council (Hampshire) every newhome has to contribute £5000 to non car transport AND Pay for chicaines or junction improvements. There is a plan for 3,100 new homes so that is a budget of over 15 million for signs and cycle paths... we are doomed
half of that to be spent within 2 miles of my home.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code