Botched Roadsigns

[roadtester]

I think this one may have been mentioned before but when you re-enter the A74(M) southbound after stopping at Gretna Services, the exit from the roundabout is signed M74 rather than A74(M).

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.01053 ... 6656?dcr=0

[vlad]

I think this one may have been mentioned before but when you re-enter the A74(M) southbound after stopping at Gretna Services, the exit from the roundabout is signed M74 rather than A74(M).

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.01053 ... 6656?dcr=0

Can we put that one down to wishful thinking?

[Big L]

This is the right sign. The one that has replaced this one, further back up the slip road, isn't. It's not on GSV, but they seem to have put the other version in, the 'mainline with a lane merging from the left' version.

Is this a legitimate sign?

[ellandback]

Is this a legitimate sign?

Think we've had that one before and the answer is 'no'.

Surely this isn't a thing?

[Bryn666]

Purely advisory as they're not prescribed as far as I can see.

[ellandback]

I wasn't driving so wasn't paying that much attention, but pretty sure the road actually had a 30 limit, despite the 20 roundels on that sign being in red. There's no sign of any proper 20 repeaters on GSV anyway.

[Conekicker]

Purely an unlawful obstruction as they're not prescribed as far as I can see.

Fixed that for you.

[Owain]

Is this a botch?

It is possible to turn onto the A13 at this point, but not from the direction we are travelling. The meaning is perfectly clear (i.e. No Left Turn), but surely there is a sign for that purpose?

The No Entry sign could potentially mislead drivers into thinking that cars will only be coming out of the side road, and that none of the oncoming traffic will be looking to turn into it.

[Chris5156]

Is this a botch?

It is possible to turn onto the A13 at this point, but not from the direction we are travelling. The meaning is perfectly clear (i.e. No Left Turn), but surely there is a sign for that purpose?

The No Entry sign could potentially mislead drivers into thinking that cars will only be coming out of the side road, and that none of the oncoming traffic will be looking to turn into it.

I agree, and I think that is a bodge. The road isn't protected by no entry signs, the reason you can't turn into it from there is because of a restricted turn at the junction. So the symbol on the sign should be a "no left turn" roundel.

People think these things don't matter - including sign designers, as this thread shows well enough - but seemingly pedantic details like that do matter, and you've just given an excellent example of why.

[Owain]

People think these things don't matter - including sign designers, as this thread shows well enough - but seemingly pedantic details like that do matter, and you've just given an excellent example of why.

Thanks.

On a purely pedantry level, the maker of this sign clearly has something against Shipley. Or maybe just wasn't paying attention at school.

[lefthandedspanner]

On a purely pedantry level, the maker of this sign clearly has something against Shipley. Or maybe just wasn't paying attention at school.

It's also got unnecessary green patches - that part of the A647 isn't primary.

On the subject of patches and plates, this thing on the Huddersfield ring road is pretty shoddy (as is the ring road's general standard of signage.)

[jonnyf90]

Did a double take at THIS today near Wimbledon. Never seen an "except by left turn" plate added to a No Entry.

Cheers

[lefthandedspanner]

Last time I went down York Road in Leeds, heading towards the city centre, there were two signs on opposite sides of the road indicating the lane layout at the next junction, one with a green background and the other with a white background but otherwise identical, implying the road is simultaneously primary and non-primary. (The green one was correct.) The white one must have been put up recently, as it's not on Streetview.

[Bfivethousand]

This...

Only just noticed this one yesterday - continue over the brow of the bridge and you will find that there is no junction to the left, just a somewhat dicey one to the right.

[Big L]

This road hasn't had this number for at least 20 years. I thought we had a thread for this kind of out-of-date sign, but I couldn't find it.

[Stevie D]

This road hasn't had this number for at least 20 years. I thought we had a thread for this kind of out-of-date sign, but I couldn't find it.

Although to be fair, the sign looks as though it has been there long enough that it was correct when it was put up, and it's so hard to read now that as far as most people are concerned it might as well not be there anyway!

[Paul7755]

This...

Only just noticed this one yesterday - continue over the brow of the bridge and you will find that there is no junction to the left, just a somewhat dicey one to the right.

There is a dropped kerb that would have presumably given access to a now fenced off site - perhaps that was why they were once needed.

Paul

[vlad]

There are plenty of signs attached to this wall that aren't official.

I presume it's some sort of art project but I can't find any information about it.

[Owain]

There are plenty of signs attached to this wall that aren't official.

I presume it's some sort of art project but I can't find any information about it.

Do you think that the crashed car is also intended to be a 'feature'?

[Truvelo]

This sign isn't quite right. The numbers are in bold, the yellow is off which looks even worse in real and there's no gap between A and 5

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.84481 ... 312!8i6656