400m markers

[toowise]

I noticed this sign that Ive not seen before, Its on the A534 heading into Congleton in Cheshire. Are there any more 400 m warning signs. There are after the normal 300, 200 and 100m signs..

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.16202 ... authuser=0

[c2R]

That's a good find - and nope, I've never seen any others anywhere...

[Ruperts Trooper]

Looking at Google Earth, there's no 100 marker as the verge is too narrow so common sense has ruled - the 200 marker is covered in vegetation but that's down to poor maintenance.

[toowise]

Looking at Google Earth, there's no 100 marker as the verge is too narrow so common sense has ruled - the 200 marker is covered in vegetation but that's down to poor maintenance.

Im fairly certain the 100m sign is there now even if its not on GSV ..I drive past there usually at least once a week , I'll have to keep a beady eye out for it now

[Euan]

I certainly have not seen any marker signs featuring four diagonal lines, although I do remember seeing a sign (can't quite remember where) with the lines sloping in the wrong direction for the side of the road it was on.

As an aside, do marker signs count hundreds of metres or hundreds of yards? I know the difference at shorter distances is minuscule, but the divergence does build up as the distances become greater.

[Ruperts Trooper]

I certainly have not seen any marker signs featuring four diagonal lines, although I do remember seeing a sign (can't quite remember where) with the lines sloping in the wrong direction for the side of the road it was on.

As an aside, do marker signs count hundreds of metres or hundreds of yards? I know the difference at shorter distances is minuscule, but the divergence does build up as the distances become greater.

100 yard intervals according to my Highway Code

[AndyB]

Definitely yards as per TSRGD

[nowster]

With the caveat that their placement is only approximate (ie. where a post hole can be dug and the sign made visible). The difference between metres and yards is 9.4%. It's quite possible that their actual spacings might be 90, 95 or 100m rather than 91.4m.

[Conekicker]

...whilst bearing in mind these signs are non-prescribed, unauthorised and thus unlawful obstructions to the highway. They achieve nothing, as the 40 signs where the limit changes seem to be visible from far enough away. If the local authority wished to make the change of speed limit more obvious to drivers at a greater distance, the lawful way to do it is to simply make the signs larger. This would also be cheaper than erecting the unlawful signs and be less environmentally intrusive.

If there remained a problem, then a yellow backing board could be placed in extreme circumstances. Not these unlawful eyesores.

But hey, just bung something up, no one cares and some people will think it's a good idea...

Edit: Let's also not mention that the 40 roundel road markings further along are also unlawful, as they are not the correct shape. There are some utterly clueless people in this game.

[Euan]

...whilst bearing in mind these signs are non-prescribed, unauthorised and thus unlawful obstructions to the highway. They achieve nothing, as the 40 signs where the limit changes seem to be visible from far enough away. If the local authority wished to make the change of speed limit more obvious to drivers at a greater distance, the lawful way to do it is to simply make the signs larger. This would also be cheaper than erecting the unlawful signs and be less environmentally intrusive.

Having the 400 yard marker sign would have been more justifiable if the speed reduction ahead was from the NSL down to 20mph, but certainly not 40mph. Typically the marker signs would go as far as 300 yards and come ahead of a change of limit from 60mph to 30mph, so maybe it might be worth considering a system where the number of multiples of 10mph which the speed is reduced from the NSL determines the number of 100s of yards that the marker signs appear from.

[Conekicker]

...whilst bearing in mind these signs are non-prescribed, unauthorised and thus unlawful obstructions to the highway. They achieve nothing, as the 40 signs where the limit changes seem to be visible from far enough away. If the local authority wished to make the change of speed limit more obvious to drivers at a greater distance, the lawful way to do it is to simply make the signs larger. This would also be cheaper than erecting the unlawful signs and be less environmentally intrusive.

Having the 400 yard marker sign would have been more justifiable if the speed reduction ahead was from the NSL down to 20mph, but certainly not 40mph. Typically the marker signs would go as far as 300 yards and come ahead of a change of limit from 60mph to 30mph, so maybe it might be worth considering a system where the number of multiples of 10mph which the speed is reduced from the NSL determines the number of 100s of yards that the marker signs appear from.

Unauthorised and non-prescribed signs are not justifiable under any circumstances. If an authority feels there is a genuine need for a sign that is not prescribed by TSRGD, they should approach DfT to seek first advice, then authorisation. They should not invent their own sign, they have no legal authority to do so.

Chapter 1 of the Traffic Signs Manual clearly states:

The use on Public highways of non-prescribed signs which have not been authorised by, or on behalf of, the Secretary of State, is illegal and Authorities who so use unauthorised signs act beyond their powers. Additionally, an unauthorised sign in the highway is an obstruction. The possible consequences of erecting or permitting the erection of obstructions may be severe and those responsible could lay themselves open to a claim for damages; for example if the obstruction is the cause of accident or of injury in a collision or if the unauthorised sign injuriously affects a fronting property by blocking light or impairing visual amenity.

Additionally, we're supposed to be reducing sign clutter, not adding to it.

[Vierwielen]

I certainly have not seen any marker signs featuring four diagonal lines, although I do remember seeing a sign (can't quite remember where) with the lines sloping in the wrong direction for the side of the road it was on.

As an aside, do marker signs count hundreds of metres or hundreds of yards? I know the difference at shorter distances is minuscule, but the divergence does build up as the distances become greater.

According to Google Earth these posts outside Odiham are 83 metres apart. (Measurement was made easy by the existance of the "SLOW" marks on the road).

[Bryn666]

...whilst bearing in mind these signs are non-prescribed, unauthorised and thus unlawful obstructions to the highway. They achieve nothing, as the 40 signs where the limit changes seem to be visible from far enough away. If the local authority wished to make the change of speed limit more obvious to drivers at a greater distance, the lawful way to do it is to simply make the signs larger. This would also be cheaper than erecting the unlawful signs and be less environmentally intrusive.

Having the 400 yard marker sign would have been more justifiable if the speed reduction ahead was from the NSL down to 20mph, but certainly not 40mph. Typically the marker signs would go as far as 300 yards and come ahead of a change of limit from 60mph to 30mph, so maybe it might be worth considering a system where the number of multiples of 10mph which the speed is reduced from the NSL determines the number of 100s of yards that the marker signs appear from.

Unauthorised and non-prescribed signs are not justifiable under any circumstances. If an authority feels there is a genuine need for a sign that is not prescribed by TSRGD, they should approach DfT to seek first advice, then authorisation. They should not invent their own sign, they have no legal authority to do so.

Chapter 1 of the Traffic Signs Manual clearly states:

The use on Public highways of non-prescribed signs which have not been authorised by, or on behalf of, the Secretary of State, is illegal and Authorities who so use unauthorised signs act beyond their powers. Additionally, an unauthorised sign in the highway is an obstruction. The possible consequences of erecting or permitting the erection of obstructions may be severe and those responsible could lay themselves open to a claim for damages; for example if the obstruction is the cause of accident or of injury in a collision or if the unauthorised sign injuriously affects a fronting property by blocking light or impairing visual amenity.

Additionally, we're supposed to be reducing sign clutter, not adding to it.

England is noticeably out of step with Scotland and (I think) Wales which not only seem to love these signs but have even gone out of their way to make them specially authorised for use.

[James]

I didn't know we had brown ones as well!
https://goo.gl/maps/W5XBCfEQhFx

Any other examples of oddly coloured ones?

[Debaser]

England is noticeably out of step with Scotland and (I think) Wales which not only seem to love these signs but have even gone out of their way to make them specially authorised for use.

The research (Road Safety Research Report No. 100: Interaction Between Speed Choice and Road Environment by Leeds ITS for DfT) does at least suggest they work as village entry treatments (and contrary to the statement in paragraph 58 of Circular 01/2013 Setting Local Speed Limits). There seems to be plenty of other authorised stuff we stick up which just appears to be custom and practice - do we really need keep left bollards/signs on every refuge or splitter island?

[Bryn666]

England is noticeably out of step with Scotland and (I think) Wales which not only seem to love these signs but have even gone out of their way to make them specially authorised for use.

The research (Road Safety Research Report No. 100: Interaction Between Speed Choice and Road Environment by Leeds ITS for DfT) does at least suggest they work as village entry treatments (and contrary to the statement in paragraph 58 of Circular 01/2013 Setting Local Speed Limits). There seems to be plenty of other authorised stuff we stick up which just appears to be custom and practice - do we really need keep left bollards/signs on every refuge or splitter island?

The decluttering TAL does advise that keep lefts can be removed, although there is a risk that in doing so you lose the mandatory requirement to pass the island on the correct side...

[Brigham]

The decluttering TAL does advise that keep lefts can be removed, although there is a risk that in doing so you lose the mandatory requirement to pass the island on the correct side...

GOOD. It's much easier (and safer) with a clear road ahead to pass a bunch of cyclists AND the island, than to try and squeeze in on the left of it.
Using the roads needs common sense, and the guidelines need to reflect this.
It's getting like France, where EVERYTHING is forbidden unless it specifically isn't

[Duple]

...whilst bearing in mind these signs are non-prescribed, unauthorised and thus unlawful obstructions to the highway. They achieve nothing, as the 40 signs where the limit changes seem to be visible from far enough away. If the local authority wished to make the change of speed limit more obvious to drivers at a greater distance, the lawful way to do it is to simply make the signs larger. This would also be cheaper than erecting the unlawful signs and be less environmentally intrusive.

Having the 400 yard marker sign would have been more justifiable if the speed reduction ahead was from the NSL down to 20mph, but certainly not 40mph. Typically the marker signs would go as far as 300 yards and come ahead of a change of limit from 60mph to 30mph, so maybe it might be worth considering a system where the number of multiples of 10mph which the speed is reduced from the NSL determines the number of 100s of yards that the marker signs appear from.

Unauthorised and non-prescribed signs are not justifiable under any circumstances. If an authority feels there is a genuine need for a sign that is not prescribed by TSRGD, they should approach DfT to seek first advice, then authorisation. They should not invent their own sign, they have no legal authority to do so.

Chapter 1 of the Traffic Signs Manual clearly states:

The use on Public highways of non-prescribed signs which have not been authorised by, or on behalf of, the Secretary of State, is illegal and Authorities who so use unauthorised signs act beyond their powers. Additionally, an unauthorised sign in the highway is an obstruction. The possible consequences of erecting or permitting the erection of obstructions may be severe and those responsible could lay themselves open to a claim for damages; for example if the obstruction is the cause of accident or of injury in a collision or if the unauthorised sign injuriously affects a fronting property by blocking light or impairing visual amenity.

Additionally, we're supposed to be reducing sign clutter, not adding to it.

This is Cheshire East Council we are discussing here... the majority of their actions are unlawful or not prescribed !

This is round the corner from my house and I never understood why they went to the efforts of putting the marker boards, they could have just moved the limit over the brow of the hill and then there would be no requirement for the signs anyway.

I assume when the link road opens it will become a 30 anyway.

[Vierwielen]

I certainly have not seen any marker signs featuring four diagonal lines, although I do remember seeing a sign (can't quite remember where) with the lines sloping in the wrong direction for the side of the road it was on.

As an aside, do marker signs count hundreds of metres or hundreds of yards? I know the difference at shorter distances is minuscule, but the divergence does build up as the distances become greater.

100 yard intervals according to my Highway Code

... but there are many instances where road signs use the conversion of one yard equals one metre.

[Arcuarius]

I certainly have not seen any marker signs featuring four diagonal lines, although I do remember seeing a sign (can't quite remember where) with the lines sloping in the wrong direction for the side of the road it was on.

As an aside, do marker signs count hundreds of metres or hundreds of yards? I know the difference at shorter distances is minuscule, but the divergence does build up as the distances become greater.

100 yard intervals according to my Highway Code

... but there are many instances where road signs use the conversion of one yard equals one metre.

Not quite. They're meant to be spaced out by the metre but with a 10% leeway, in case they can't be installed in exactly the right place for whatever reason. In practice, measuring in either 100 yards or 91 metres are as near as makes no difference.