Botched Roadsigns

[Dougman]

I've noticed that the bollards on the islands at the circles in Dundee are being replaced with solar power LED affairs, good for the environment but bad for my blood pressure when every single one on the exit arm seems to be a diagram 610 rather than a blank roundel Here's a prime example.

So continuing around the roundabout is illegal?

Indeed, it's a four way left turn!

[Bryn666]

The keep lefts will only be vinyl stickers... just go peel them off one night.

[chris486]

Indeed, it's a four way left turn!

A free-flowing roundabout - how ingenious - what will they think of next?

[AutomaticBeloved]

Paris Street roundabout in Exeter

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.72519 ... uQtS6Q!2e0

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.72504 ... Z27wXQ!2e0

This sign is backwards to the way it should be given that it faces traffic entering the roundabout but lists directions from the way the traffic has come!

[Westie]

What is your folks' take on signs where primary destinations are in lower case?

Such as:

Huntingdon
kettering

A6086

I'll grab a picture tomorrow when I go out shopping for a new badminton racquet.

[Fahad]

Not capitalising the first character of a name is absolute idiocy

[urbanfox]

It's to compensate for 'W'Hampton' at M54, J2

[Ben710]

The keep lefts will only be vinyl stickers... just go peel them off one night.

I just wondered about the legality of this, you're technically defacing the sign, but you're changing it so its correct... (I'm not advocating individuals modifying signs by the way).

[Andy33gmail]

The keep lefts will only be vinyl stickers... just go peel them off one night.

I just wondered about the legality of this, you're technically defacing the sign, but you're changing it so its correct... (I'm not advocating individuals modifying signs by the way).

Surely it's still criminal damage, even if compensates for someone's professional negligence / wreckless endangerment / some other sensationalist claim. Plenty of parallel examples in other situations, none of which I know the answer to either:
-What if you smashed into a vending machine to give a diabetic chocolate while waiting for the paramedic?
-What if you threw a driver's keys down a drain because you were sure they were about to drink drive?
-What if you left an infact unsupervised for an otherwise inappropriate length of time, so you could talk someone down from a tower block?

[Nathan_A_RF]

And most pointless Give Way of the year goes to...
http://goo.gl/maps/tw2FZ

[ForestChav]

And most pointless Give Way of the year goes to...
http://goo.gl/maps/tw2FZ

Why is it pointless?

[Andy33gmail]

There's no conflict. If I'm wrong, cite this in numpty overload

[Johnathan404]

It's to highlight that mainline traffic has priority over the new outside lane. I've spotted a few around here, applied as a patch to low-speed collision hotspots. Personally I think they look really messy, you could fix it by removing the first few hundred yards of centre line.

The Highways Agency recently undid an example they applied at M27 J10. Originally it was two lanes plus merge followed by right-hand lane drop, then it was painted down to one lane becoming two with a give way line watching on, which I thought was really dangerous, now it's a sensible lane gain on each side.

[Nathan_A_RF]

And most pointless Give Way of the year goes to...
http://goo.gl/maps/tw2FZ

Why is it pointless?

It's in the middle of the lane and giving way to nothing

[ForestChav]

And most pointless Give Way of the year goes to...
http://goo.gl/maps/tw2FZ

Why is it pointless?

It's in the middle of the lane and giving way to nothing

No it isn't. It is showing traffic turning right into the right hand lane that it has to give way to traffic from the other direction heading into the same lane. It isn't pointless at all.

[Jam35]

quote="ForestChav"]

And most pointless Give Way of the year goes to...
http://goo.gl/maps/tw2FZ

Why is it pointless?

It's in the middle of the lane and giving way to nothing

No it isn't. It is showing traffic turning right into the right hand lane that it has to give way to traffic from the other direction heading into the same lane. It isn't pointless at all.[/quote
What it intends to do is pretty obvious, but the broken hatching and half of the rest of the lane markings are in the wrong place. Still a botch.

[ForestChav]

What it intends to do is pretty obvious, but the broken hatching and half of the rest of the lane markings are in the wrong place. Still a botch.

I agree it's ugly (it's certainly a contrived way to sign a right-turn give way) but it isn't "pointless" or "giving way to nothing".

[Glen]

Traffic changing lane should be giving way to traffic already in that lane, so it's contradictory to have both lanes giving way to each other with no properly defined priority.

But it's probably been done as a response to accidents resulting from traffic moving to the right lane without being aware of traffic joining from the right.

If it is supposed to give priority to the straight ahead direction over both lanes it should be marked differently with the right lane forming before the road from the right joins.

[ForestChav]

Well not really. Most junctions where this layout exists have the right turn lane becoming the right hand lane of the 2 with the "straight on" lane becoming the left lane of the two.

So traffic turning right would have priority in the right lane over traffic going straight on changing lanes into the right hand lane.

[Andy33gmail]

ForestChav, if that is so, I believe I would have misinterpreted it

With the centre line beginning immediately, to me a lane change would be after the give way, so the vehicle moving right should give way. As mentioned, the dotted line should be removed if this is the intention