Safe Speed Forums

Danger! Rural blight ahead

How the forest of signs on this page can be found disfiguring a single mile of country road

By Ray Massey, Transport Editor, Daily Mail, Tuesday 12 September 2006, Page 23

THEY must be enough to distract and confuse the most careful of motorists.

These 48 signs (shown around the border of the page) pepper a one-mile stretch of road in an area of outstanding natural beauty.

Campaigners found an astonishing 335 signs lining the green verges of a seven mile stretch of the 83006, which passes through the South Downs National Park, in Hampshire.

This includes 207 safety signs, such as `bend ahead', 44 direction signs, 11 brown tourist signs, 18 blue cycle signs, 18 for hotels or attractions, and 30 roadside reflector poles.

The Campaign for the Protection of Rural England is demanding a reduction in the number of signs, painted warnings, chicanes and bumps that are blighting the landscape.

The call is being backed by the RAC Foundation, which fears the sheer number of signs is causing accidents by distracting drivers from the road.

The two groups want councils to carry out `clutter audits' of road signs and remove those which are unnecessary, dangerous or simply an eyesore.

The campaign picks out the worst eyesores as Clanfield Road, at Bampton in Oxfordshire, and a T -junction on the A2 near Canterbury where signs spoil the view.

CPRE chief executive Shaun Spiers said: `People simply aren't prepared to put up with our countryside being blighted for no good reason.

`Local authorities should think again about putting up unnecessary road signs and keep our countryside from becoming a nightmare of garish signs.' Edmund King, RAC Foundation executive director, will highlight the problem at a conference at Loughborough University today, hosted by the Institution of Highway Incorporated Engineers.

Mr King said: `We are ruining many of our pretty rural areas by putting in far too many signs and lines. We need clutter reviews to remove the unnecessary ones.

`Signs that are clear, concise, relevant, reliable and timely can improve safety and reduce the number of drivers who get lost each day_ But a clutter of contradictory signs not only detract from the beauty of the countryside, they lead to confusion that can result in collisions.

`Visual clutter makes it harder for drivers to perceive traffic lights and other safety signs.

If there is too much information for the driver to take in the driver becomes stressed. `Much distraction is unconscious but reaction times are slower even if the driver does not know he/she is being distracted.

`In rural areas, groups of signs should be combined into a single placard if the messages are necessary. Some signs should be smaller and shorter.'

Mr King also attacked `appalling and dangerous' traffic calming schemes, from built-out pinch-points to chicanes, and said traditional cattle grids should be used in rural areas instead.

`This would be an effective way of slowing down traffic without ruining the visual environment of small villages.'

Mr King also suggested using more traditional `finger-posts' in rural areas so signs were more in keeping with their surroundings.

The campaign urges the Government to follow the lead of the Scottish Executive, which produces guidelines on signs and road-bumps in rural areas.

Drivers are already struggling with the clutter of road signs in urban areas. At the busy junction of the A3 in New Malden, South-West London, drivers have to contend with 19 signs giving ten different-instructions.

Studies in the U.S. suggest that up to 30 per cent of accidents have `driver distraction' as a factor - and that in a third of these cases, distractions are outside the car.

Research shows that since the current system of signage was introduced in 1968, the number of signs in the Highway Code has increased by 44 per cent.

Not far from us there is a NSL single carriageway "B" road (no markings). Part of it has a long downhill stretch with a sharp bend at the bottom and then the road immediately narrows to go over a little stone bridge. It is also wooded at the bottom and in a hollow.

A couple of years ago, there was just a bend sign on either side of it and a "road narrows" sign. Unfortunately a young lad and a girl were heading down the hill (locals) one night and he lost control and hit a tree. She died. There are still flowers left there at the same time each year.

There was much speculation at the time of the crash but massively excessive speed for the conditions was a factor and there were rumours in the press that he was drunk and she wasn't wearing a seat belt.

Nevertheless, there are now (IN ADDITION to the old signs):

Four black and white "bend" chevrons on long poles;
A "Bend in 300 yds" sign;
"Bend in 200 yards" sign;
"Bend in 100 yards" sign;
A "Warning, oncomming vehicles in middle of road" sign;

(and maybe a few more I've forgotten)

ON EACH SIDE OF THE BEND (despite the fact that on the other side, there is no big hill!)

Coming down the hill at night these days - especially on main beam, one is just dazzled by a bewildering array of reflective yellow, blue and white signs to such an extent that it's actually quite hard to see down into the hollow!!!!!!!

I think it has done NOTHING to enhance safety and it certainly spoils the look of the landscape!

This is one of my hobby horses.

Near where I live the A358 Minehead-Taunton road is littered with useless and confusing signs. I once counted (as a passenger, of course!) no fewer than 48 in a 1 mile stretch, not to mention hundreds of little "dalek" bollards at every side road (which nicely obstruct your view unless you happen to be driving a bus, a 4x4 or a tractor). This plethora of "signage" would look out of place in the suburbs of Birmingham, never mind the Somerset countryside.

Two new - and particularly fatuous - signs have recently appeared: "no footway for 1¼ miles". Great - but there hasn't been a pavement for the last 12 miles, so why should one be surprised that there isn't one on passing Bishops Lydeard?

The County Council has a reputation for being anti-motorist, and this sort of thing confirms my opinion that they are a bunch of suburban control-freaks. What worries me, though, is that one can easily miss important information whilst trying to decipher the junk.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

Surely the point of that sign is to warn you that the inhabitants of Bishops Lydeard may well be walking in the road as there is no pavement ?

You won't often get people walking miles down country lanes as its not really that safe to do so with cars hurtling round narrow bends, but in a village - they have to get round somehow ?

..

_________________
Q. Are you a stupid fascist with limited reading skills or are you just a retard?

Indeed not; as FJSRiDER knows, the road by-passes the village. After that there are fewer than half a dozen scattered houses until you get to the Royal Marine barracks at Norton Manor Camp (which is where the 1¼ miles ends, and where there is a similar sign on the Minehead-bound side). Bonkers.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

I've been doing so for 50 years, and I'm still above ground (crosses self, touches wood, etc).



If you "hurtle" round the narrow bends down here, your hurtling days will soon be over.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

Oh Somerset are wonderful at ruining the countryside with their proliferation of signs. I drove from Bridgwater down to Langport (and beyond when I eventually discovered the directional sign I hadn't been able to find on going through 3 times!) on the A372 in the summer. It was an absolute nightmare because of all the signs, particularly the speed camera ones. It takes a lot to really wind me up, but I was on the point of wanting to rip a few down, so I had to stop the car and have a walk. It was only then that I found the sign I had been looking for. It was only a little one, dwarfed by all the others and all but hidden.

I must have driven past hundreds of signs by the time I got to Langport and they have certainly grown vastly in number since I was last there. They really do spoil what was a beautiful landscape and one which was once a pleasure to drive through.

You can console yourselves with the thought that the 80% of your council tax which pays for the salaries of council staff, is helping employ more morons who cycle around the roads (in sandals) while dreaming-up yet more stupid things to do with the roads....except repair them...and stop utilities digging them up as soon as they've BEEN repaired.

Looks like the aproach to the hairpin at Donnington.....

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Well said! More signs = information overload = unsafe roads. The County Council are so keen on this proliferation of unnecessary signs that I can only think of two reasons for it:
1. They are a bunch of control freaks.
2. They have some sort of "buy one get one free" agreement with the company which makes the signs.
Or perhaps it's both. Either way, they are a bloody nuisance (both the signs and the council!).

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian