Kevin Roads wrote: ↑Wed Sep 22, 2021 07:35If the roundabout is perceived to be a hazard, maybe because it's hidden by the bend, then surely the sign itself (without horrendous yellow surround) gives sufficient warning of the hazard (although most drivers would consider the roundabout to be a normal road feature and just deal with it), as well as showing directions. If it's considered that the sign isn't readable, for whatever reason, then make it bigger. Yes, this last idea probably costs more money....
Couldn't possibly cost more money than the yellow border though, because adding that has made the sign bigger anyway!
If there's a hazard here then the thing you need is a warning sign, and if the warning sign isn't being noticed then add a yellow backing board to that.
Big L wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 21:53
So, yellow borders are to highlight particular hazards or to try to improve non-compliance? the size of that border...
That looks awful. Who thought that was a good idea?
If the roundabout is perceived to be a hazard, maybe because it's hidden by the bend, then surely the sign itself (without horrendous yellow surround) gives sufficient warning of the hazard (although most drivers would consider the roundabout to be a normal road feature and just deal with it), as well as showing directions. If it's considered that the sign isn't readable, for whatever reason, then make it bigger. Yes, this last idea probably costs more money....
Non-compliance? Maybe there has been a spate of vehicles just driving straight over the roundabout.
I wonder what rubbish reason would be given to justify that eyesore?
The only thing I can think of (as I know that location reasonably well, it's in Franche on the northern edge of Kidderminster) is that it's a dark green sign in front of a dark green background with lots of trees. But even then the yellow border is outsized.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums? Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Patrick Harper wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 09:43
That's definitely wrong, brands aren't permitted except for junction names.
There's plenty of signs for motorway services with brands on, often logos not just names.
The national rail logo is a brand and often appears on signs.
I assume these are allowed?
Patrick Harper wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 09:43
That's definitely wrong, brands aren't permitted except for junction names.
There's plenty of signs for motorway services with brands on, often logos not just names.
The national rail logo is a brand and often appears on signs.
I assume these are allowed?
Logos are allowed on services signs, as are operator names, but not brand names as destinations.
I'll be generous and call this one enterprising rather than botched as the A31 doesn't really resemble a dual carriageway for a few hundred metres beyond the roundabout. Perhaps some justification for the non-standard design.
16 Sodium atoms walk into a bar
followed immediately by Batman
Bfivethousand wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 21:55
I'll be generous and call this one enterprising rather than botched as the A31 doesn't really resemble a dual carriageway for a few hundred metres beyond the roundabout. Perhaps some justification for the non-standard design.
It is incorrect. But not sure what you mean that it "doesn't really resemble a dual carriageway for a few hundred metres beyond the roundabout". Its a dual carriageway from the roundabout, but that shouldn't make a difference to the design of the sign on its own.
It should be similar to the sign below taken from Chapter 7. All it needs is the little free flow left turn stroke.
roundabout free flow left example.PNG (15.26 KiB) Viewed 2569 times
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.08162 ... 312!8i6656 The merge signs here are also incorrect. The one on the left suggests the lane on the right merges into the one on the left and that is not at all prescribed since we don't do right side merges. And its not a merge at all either, since its just a lane gain.
Bfivethousand wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 21:55
I'll be generous and call this one enterprising rather than botched as the A31 doesn't really resemble a dual carriageway for a few hundred metres beyond the roundabout. Perhaps some justification for the non-standard design.
But not sure what you mean that it "doesn't really resemble a dual carriageway for a few hundred metres beyond the roundabout". Its a dual carriageway from the roundabout, but that shouldn't make a difference to the design of the sign on its own.
I was just of the mind that the centre reservation becomes wide and heavily vegetated for a short distance on leaving the roundabout, concealing the opposite carriageway from view. This sort of thing can discombobulate some drivers a bit - I don't know if there's any history of such along there but I put that forward as some potential logic for the odd signface design which as previously mentioned is clearly non-standard.
16 Sodium atoms walk into a bar
followed immediately by Batman
Bfivethousand wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 21:55
I'll be generous and call this one enterprising rather than botched as the A31 doesn't really resemble a dual carriageway for a few hundred metres beyond the roundabout. Perhaps some justification for the non-standard design.
The black HGV flag sign just behind it is definitely botched. It’s in advance of the junction so it should be a rectangular sign with an arrow instead.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.04680 ... 312!8i6656
Saw this one today when out cycling. I approach from the other direction (leaving the junction) and I initially thought it would be an upside down giveway sign, so had a look at it as I went past and I saw that mess.
Its a left turn with priority sign, with tape on the right side to make it same stroke width. Completely botched & reported.
Patrick Harper wrote: ↑Thu Sep 16, 2021 14:17
On reflection I guess such names would come under the TSRGD's catch-all 'generic description of a facility'. The only other piece of documentation I can find related to this is Highways England's National Highways' CG 153 transport note.
"Ikea" is quite common on signs. To be honest I'm not sure what else you can put on the sign in a situation like that. You've already got "Superstore" and "Retail Park" pointing the other way, so you need to distinguish Ikea from the other shops - and I don't really see how you can do that without using the brand name.
I also notice that the other entrance is on "Ikea Way" - are brands allowed in street names?
"Ikea" is quite common on signs. To be honest I'm not sure what else you can put on the sign in a situation like that. You've already got "Superstore" and "Retail Park" pointing the other way, so you need to distinguish Ikea from the other shops - and I don't really see how you can do that without using the brand name.
I also notice that the other entrance is on "Ikea Way" - are brands allowed in street names?
C, E flat and G go into a bar. The barman says "sorry, we don't serve minors". So E flat walks off, leaving C and G to share an open fifth between them.
Never argue with an idiot. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.
"Ikea" is quite common on signs. To be honest I'm not sure what else you can put on the sign in a situation like that. You've already got "Superstore" and "Retail Park" pointing the other way, so you need to distinguish Ikea from the other shops - and I don't really see how you can do that without using the brand name.
I also notice that the other entrance is on "Ikea Way" - are brands allowed in street names?
This one catches people out as from a distance it looks like it's telling you to pass the the right. If you go back to 2009, you can see the previous sign, whilst also botched was at least the correct type.