I seem to remember being in the same building as the engineer responsible for the design of this scheme a couple of years back. He was by no means a sign expert, more of the typical "I've looked at the few pictures, I know what I'm doing" type, whereas I will keep to standards and use existing examples as much as possible - mainly because Departures from Standard are a pain in the arse and take forever.
My experience of him was that I was once asked to design a P&R sign he wanted in a specific way, for a separate scheme on the M5. I suggested that it wasn't to current standards and that he should consider designing it correctly before installing anything that's non-compliant. He went off in a huff and decided to do his own thing anyway.
My feeling is that if I was involved in any way with the M32 he'd have done the same thing.
It annoys me that people decide to try and be clever when there are existing examples of signing and road layouts out there to be used.
Inadequate M32 signage leads to fines overturned
Moderator: Site Management Team
Re: Inadequate M32 signage leads to fines overturned
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase
1973-2007 Never forgotten
- some extreme-right nutcase
1973-2007 Never forgotten
Re: Inadequate M32 signage leads to fines overturned
Its a poor design. Marked on the road as a normal exit, close to an existing junction, its understandable that some drivers may exit in error (despite the signage)
As said before, the best action would be to move the cameras to allow non bus traffic to turn back onto the M32, enforcing the restrictions on the small bit of road that connects to the surface streets.
As said before, the best action would be to move the cameras to allow non bus traffic to turn back onto the M32, enforcing the restrictions on the small bit of road that connects to the surface streets.
Re: Inadequate M32 signage leads to fines overturned
The entire design of the M32 bus slip roads leaves much to be desired, weird geometry, narrow alignment, and weird signs. So a typical HE scheme then...Arcuarius wrote: ↑Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:35 I seem to remember being in the same building as the engineer responsible for the design of this scheme a couple of years back. He was by no means a sign expert, more of the typical "I've looked at the few pictures, I know what I'm doing" type, whereas I will keep to standards and use existing examples as much as possible - mainly because Departures from Standard are a pain in the arse and take forever.
My experience of him was that I was once asked to design a P&R sign he wanted in a specific way, for a separate scheme on the M5. I suggested that it wasn't to current standards and that he should consider designing it correctly before installing anything that's non-compliant. He went off in a huff and decided to do his own thing anyway.
My feeling is that if I was involved in any way with the M32 he'd have done the same thing.
It annoys me that people decide to try and be clever when there are existing examples of signing and road layouts out there to be used.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck