Botched Roadsigns

Discussion about street lighting, road signs, traffic signals - and all other street furniture - goes here.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
jervi
Member
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: Haywards Heath

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by jervi » Tue Jan 12, 2021 16:08

It should be renamed Harambe in memory of Harambe.
F

User avatar
Bfivethousand
Member
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 22:16
Location: Derbyshire

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Bfivethousand » Tue Jan 12, 2021 19:12

Brenley Corner wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 08:51
Still in Kent.....this has appeared in the local press: LINK

It may or may not be true :wink:

Tony
Soooo... that's a (very good) Photoshop creation and the local rag has published it as the troof then? I never realised Horse was an urban term for heroin...

Regardless, the local knuckledragger commentator have as ever jumped on the incompetent Council (even though sign companies are just as likely to create such botches themselves)
Witham ain't a dancer
It's just south of Braintree

User avatar
Gareth Thomas
Member
Posts: 1401
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 13:43
Location: Temple Ewell, Kent
Contact:

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Gareth Thomas » Wed Jan 13, 2021 15:53

Brenley Corner wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 08:51
Still in Kent.....this has appeared in the local press: LINK

It may or may not be true :wink:

Tony
You beat me to it, although I did post it to the Facebook group.:-P

KCC have apologised and the sign has been taken down.....
Octaviadriver wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:29
Stevie D wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 14:02
nowster wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 13:43

How does it do that? Most people using the A2 there will be expecting to see London as a "follow this for everywhere else" destination.
If Canterbury was intended to have the same primary status as London then you would have London and Canterbury arranged as a block one above the other, with A2 to the right of both of them, aligned vertical-middle with the block.
Just like the previous sign used prior to the central reservation crossover being closed.
https://goo.gl/maps/QVUPekhtzYek1Qkh7
Indeed. And just like almost every other sign along the A2.

Kent is a big county, so there are plenty of destinations along the main routes other than London and Dover. Canterbury is a major tourist hub, the first major settlement on the A2 from Dover and the meeting place of so many roads that it deserves its primary destination status.

I would go for:
London (M2)
Canterbury
A2

And then replace it with "Faversham" once we had passed Canterbury..... :stir:
My journey with testicular cancer!
https://garethishalfnuts.wordpress.com/

"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
-Dr Emmett Brown

User avatar
Bfivethousand
Member
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 22:16
Location: Derbyshire

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Bfivethousand » Wed Jan 13, 2021 22:31

OK, so it wasn't photoshopped then...?

Why imply that it might have been?
Witham ain't a dancer
It's just south of Braintree

User avatar
Big Nick
Member
Posts: 3586
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 08:27
Location: Epping, Essex

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Big Nick » Thu Jan 14, 2021 16:27

Bfivethousand wrote:
Wed Jan 13, 2021 22:31
OK, so it wasn't photoshopped then...?

Why imply that it might have been?
To be fair, I thought it could have been because the edges of the wording was all blurry and pixelated.

Kevin Roads
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:32

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Kevin Roads » Fri Jan 15, 2021 16:43

This https://maps.app.goo.gl/5HYDr4WGDbh8GJ6K9 has always annoyed me.
Surely it should just have the NTR sign at the point/junction which you must return to? i.e. where the NTR starts.

SteelCamel
Member
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2020 15:46

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by SteelCamel » Fri Jan 15, 2021 18:31

Kevin Roads wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 16:43
This https://maps.app.goo.gl/5HYDr4WGDbh8GJ6K9 has always annoyed me.
Surely it should just have the NTR sign at the point/junction which you must return to? i.e. where the NTR starts.
To be honest I think it should just say "No Through Road". While it's possible to get out other than by coming right back here, it's not a sensible through route to anywhere. If it really needs clarification at this point it should say "No Access to Garth Road" which at least makes clear where it is you can't go through to.

Actually it gets worse. The actual no through road sign is here. So to avoid it you should turn here? The narrow lane on the right is also an (unsigned) NTR, you should have turned at the previous crossroads (where there are no signs at all).

Kevin Roads
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:32

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Kevin Roads » Fri Jan 15, 2021 19:10

Thanks for replying, SteelCamel.

I agree, 'No Access to Garth Road' would be a more informative and correct sign at that point.

I didn't express myself very well in my post, I wanted to make the point that a NTR sign doesn't need an 'Ahead' plate, it should just be placed after the last point at which you can go through to another exit.

Good spot with the NTR signs that are further on (these are the old-style so I suspect are the original ones) which, as you say, are themselves incorrectly placed; they should be on the exit of the crossroads.

Whilst on NTR signs, I've noticed a couple of places where a sign is placed at the entrance to every street of a NTR system when all that is needed is a sign at the entrance to the NTR.

Kevin

Rambo
Member
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 19:56
Contact:

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Rambo » Fri Jan 15, 2021 22:03

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4152529 ... 312!8i6656

Give Way and a stop sign?
The font doesn't look right on the stop sign so maybe a home made version put up by the locals..

jervi
Member
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: Haywards Heath

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by jervi » Sat Jan 16, 2021 00:20

Rambo wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 22:03
https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4152529 ... 312!8i6656

Give Way and a stop sign?
The font doesn't look right on the stop sign so maybe a home made version put up by the locals..
Fake stop sign.
Font/size doesn't seem right, plus its mounting is... well.. unique

jervi
Member
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: Haywards Heath

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by jervi » Sat Jan 16, 2021 14:40

So Google Street View has made a round of Brighton in October last year, so I can have a more detailed look at the signage on the new A23 road layout at Valley Gardens.
Much of it shows that the A23, isn't the A23, instead signing things as (A23) https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.82288 ... 384!8i8192
This "bus lane" seems like it is more to make money than any other use. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.82899 ... 384!8i8192
Also the signage is for an upcoming bus lane, normally shown 30m before the start of the lane. Its not the correct sign for the situation. Also instead of the "camera enforcement in use" sign, they could of used a normal camera sign. This lane is enforced, as you can see the camera on the light column on the right. I'd ague that this lane and its enforcement is dangerous since you are crossing over a high-use cycle crossing and pedestrian crossing, while also reading the signs all while trying to avoid a 25m bus lane that serves very little purpose.

Also this sign seems to think to the right is the A23, but London isn't in the patch. And that ahead is the A270, while it is actually a C class road that leads to the A270.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.82923 ... 384!8i8192

jervi
Member
Posts: 994
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: Haywards Heath

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by jervi » Mon Jan 18, 2021 19:04

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.81494 ... 312!8i6656
1. "Superstore Marina" isn't a destination, should just be "Superstore"
2. "Brighton Marina Village" isn't a tourist destination, sure "Brighton Marina" may be.
3. What lane is "Brighton Marina Village in. If it is both left and centre why isn't there a solid line under it
4. The size of the height warning isn't correct
5. Parking doesn't need the description, there are two public car parks at the marina, one at the superstore, the other at the multistore carpark.
6. Town Centre is really squished. Plus the size of the right lane is much smaller than 1/2 of the largest, which is against design.
7. The Sign above the lane has "(A259)" while this one has "A259"
8. i360 patch has notable colour, size and padding differences
9. "Get in Lane" where only two lanes exist at that point
10. x-height of the sign seems too small

Conekicker
Member
Posts: 2864
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Conekicker » Mon Jan 18, 2021 20:04

jervi wrote:
Mon Jan 18, 2021 19:04
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.81494 ... 312!8i6656
1. "Superstore Marina" isn't a destination, should just be "Superstore"
2. "Brighton Marina Village" isn't a tourist destination, sure "Brighton Marina" may be.
3. What lane is "Brighton Marina Village in. If it is both left and centre why isn't there a solid line under it
4. The size of the height warning isn't correct
5. Parking doesn't need the description, there are two public car parks at the marina, one at the superstore, the other at the multistore carpark.
6. Town Centre is really squished. Plus the size of the right lane is much smaller than 1/2 of the largest, which is against design.
7. The Sign above the lane has "(A259)" while this one has "A259"
8. i360 patch has notable colour, size and padding differences
9. "Get in Lane" where only two lanes exist at that point
10. x-height of the sign seems too small
Picky, picky, picky :roll:
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.

Al__S
Member
Posts: 426
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:56

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Al__S » Mon Jan 18, 2021 20:14

jervi wrote:
Mon Jan 18, 2021 19:04
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.81494 ... 312!8i6656
1. "Superstore Marina" isn't a destination, should just be "Superstore"
2. "Brighton Marina Village" isn't a tourist destination, sure "Brighton Marina" may be.
3. What lane is "Brighton Marina Village in. If it is both left and centre why isn't there a solid line under it
4. The size of the height warning isn't correct
5. Parking doesn't need the description, there are two public car parks at the marina, one at the superstore, the other at the multistore carpark.
6. Town Centre is really squished. Plus the size of the right lane is much smaller than 1/2 of the largest, which is against design.
7. The Sign above the lane has "(A259)" while this one has "A259"
8. i360 patch has notable colour, size and padding differences
9. "Get in Lane" where only two lanes exist at that point
10. x-height of the sign seems too small
I clicked forward round the corner and I screamed in sheer horror

User avatar
skiddaw05
Member
Posts: 1692
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 21:33
Location: Norwich

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by skiddaw05 » Wed Jan 20, 2021 23:35

An oversized patch here, the larger text means it's wider than the sign they've attached it to

As an aside, how many of us can claim to have a traffic sign (botched or otherwise) in their front garden?

Octaviadriver
Member
Posts: 1399
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 20:20
Location: Powys

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Octaviadriver » Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:36

skiddaw05 wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 23:35
An oversized patch here, the larger text means it's wider than the sign they've attached it to

As an aside, how many of us can claim to have a traffic sign (botched or otherwise) in their front garden?
It is a commercial property rather than a private house. If you go back to 2008 on Streetview, it was a pub, then it became a Co-op Local, then it was for sale but from the latest available view, its use is unknown, though it still retains the Co-op's green door from the side road.

User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 1108
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by the cheesecake man » Thu Jan 21, 2021 12:45

skiddaw05 wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 23:35
As an aside, how many of us can claim to have a traffic sign (botched or otherwise) in their front garden?
I wonder if they get rent for it?

User avatar
Chris Bertram
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 12657
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by Chris Bertram » Thu Jan 21, 2021 13:08

the cheesecake man wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 12:45
skiddaw05 wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 23:35
As an aside, how many of us can claim to have a traffic sign (botched or otherwise) in their front garden?
I wonder if they get rent for it?
I used to live in a house with a telegraph pole against our front wall in the small flowerbed between that wall and the footpath. As I recall we used to get what were called annual "wayleave" payments for this, though they were very small (the equivalent of 5s/year), having been set by regulation long ago. (I've just checked, and the pole has moved slightly along the road, so the current owners won't even get this). I don't remember ever being troubled by men scrambling up ladders to reach the business end of the pole, and they'd probably do any work from a high platform these days.
“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!

User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4184
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by traffic-light-man » Thu Jan 21, 2021 19:06

skiddaw05 wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 23:35
As an aside, how many of us can claim to have a traffic sign (botched or otherwise) in their front garden?
This property in Kirkcaldy has a signal controller in the front 'area'.
Simon :driving:

TS
Member
Posts: 476
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 17:18
Location: Bournemouth

Re: Botched Roadsigns

Post by TS » Fri Jan 22, 2021 14:51

It isn't 88 miles to the public footpath; it is footpath no.88!
20210122_120728.jpg
20210122_120728.jpg (54.45 KiB) Viewed 225 times

Post Reply