Statutory signage or optional? Narrow road ahead

[ColdRolledAsphalt]

Can anyone tell me where a B road narrows to less than two passable lanes is a 'road narrows' sign statutory or optional? Reason I ask is because the Highways Authority where I live seems to be suggesting the town council applies for some sort of funding from a highways panel or even funds installation itself? I wonder what the DRMB or similar says?

[Bryn666]

Can anyone tell me where a B road narrows to less than two passable lanes is a 'road narrows' sign statutory or optional? Reason I ask is because the Highways Authority where I live seems to be suggesting the town council applies for some sort of funding from a highways panel or even funds installation itself? I wonder what the DRMB or similar says?

As with any warning sign its placement is discretionary based on guidance from TSM Chapter 4, however paragraph 4.1.1. suggests the situation you describe would warrant signs and these should be the responsibility of the highway authority.

[wallmeerkat]

Seems hit-or-miss "discretionary", even on stretches where one side is signed, the other may not be
https://www.google.com/maps/@54.4724353 ... ?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.5052024 ... ?entry=ttu

[Conekicker]

Where a road is less than 5.5m wide there should be no centre line. So if you're driving on a road that has a centreline and it suddenly disappears, that should be clue enough that the road is now "narrow". Thus there's no pressing need, (and certainly no statutory requirement), for a vertical sign.

Indeed, there's an argument that providing one would devalue the sign for situations where it REALLY is needed. There are many, many places particularly in rural areas - where roads narrow to less than 5.5m. Providing a sign at each end of a narrow stretch would be a significant drain on the -public purse. The costless, maintenance-free non-provision of a centreline effectively does the same job?

Which highway authority is trying to pass the buck? Hopefully they are doing it out of ignorance rather than deliberately. Name and shame please.

[ColdRolledAsphalt]

Sure it's Essex.Here's a pic of the offending area. Is the white line ending enough here or does it need 'narrow road ahead' signs?

Screenshot 2024-02-07 122332.png (129.67 KiB) Viewed 867 times

[Bryn666]

Sure it's Essex.Here's a pic of the offending area. Is the white line ending enough here or does it need 'narrow road ahead' signs? Screenshot 2024-02-07 122332.png

The amount of verge scrubbing suggests this area has quite a few issues with swept paths. Can you provide a link to Google as that screenshot is very small and the location is hard to read.

[Nathan_A_RF]

It would help if the road markings weren't an utter mess
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.65075 ... ?entry=ttu

[Bryn666]

OK, so looking at the wider context:

You have a large splitter island immediately turning into a narrow single carriageway. The only warning sign is a two-way traffic sign, supplemented by a road narrows on both sides and "single track road" plate.

I return to my comment that this exactly where a sign would be compliant with the guidance in Chapter 4 because the exit from the roundabout is misleading.

[wallmeerkat]

On a trip to Seasalter it would've been nice to have had advance warning of narrow road plus a near 180 degree bend

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.33424 ... ?entry=ttu

[Chris5156]

It would help if the road markings weren't an utter mess
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.65075 ... ?entry=ttu

It looks like the centre line has been extended way past the point where it’s suitable, in an attempt to guide traffic to the left side of the splitter island. Given its around a corner it maybe wasn’t obvious before. But that’s a totally non-standard way to do it and its meaning is very ambiguous. In the opposite direction you just have an inexplicable white line pushing your traffic lane down to nothing.

[ColdRolledAsphalt]

Thanks Chris/Bryn. So do you disagree with Conekicker that a narrow lane warning sign is unneccessary and not required in this situation please? Does Chapter 4 make it a requirement or just a 'nice to have' or a 'not needed at all'?

[Conekicker]

Thanks Chris/Bryn. So do you disagree with Conekicker that a narrow lane warning sign is unneccessary and not required in this situation please? Does Chapter 4 make it a requirement or just a 'nice to have' or a 'not needed at all'?

There is no statutory requirement to provide the sign. It's a "nice to have" at best but then leaves a highway authority open to requests for the sign at other locations, on the grounds of, "Well you provided it at location X". Not a good precedent to set.

Whoever did the roadmarkings needs shooting. Especially if it's been done like that deliberately.

What is the accident record at this location - if the answer is, "There isn't one", then I'd strongly suggest the sign isn't needed.

[ColdRolledAsphalt]

Ok Many thanks Conekicker. Yes, no accident record at that exact location. I was just after a highway engineer's viewpoint on what was statutory and what wasn't. Presumable speed limit signs are though, in general I mean not just at this location? And Give Way signs. I just wondered what the dividing line between statutory and non-statutory was when it comes to signage. We have complained about the white-lining and hopefully the council does have a statutory duty to fix that eventually.

[Conekicker]

Ok Many thanks Conekicker. Yes, no accident record at that exact location. I was just after a highway engineer's viewpoint on what was statutory and what wasn't. Presumable speed limit signs are though, in general I mean not just at this location? And Give Way signs. I just wondered what the dividing line between statutory and non-statutory was when it comes to signage. We have complained about the white-lining and hopefully the council does have a statutory duty to fix that eventually.

Terminal speed limit signs (i.e. where the speed limit changes) are required. Give Way signs (vertical or horizontal) aren't.

[WHBM]

no accident record at that exact location. I was just after a highway engineer's viewpoint on what was statutory and what wasn't. Presumable speed limit signs are though, in general I mean not just at this location? And Give Way signs. I just wondered what the dividing line between statutory and non-statutory was when it comes to signage. We have complained about the white-lining and hopefully the council does have a statutory duty to fix that eventually.

As one brought up with rural, single lane roads, there was no issue with these. Bear in mind that statutory requirements on signage are just for legal requirements such as speed limits, one way streets, etc. Other signage is at the discretion of the engineer - who commonly have an approach to minimise accidents and incidents as much as they can, and are pretty knowledgeable on what might be needed where. Nowadays the vast majority of potential or actual hazards have been engineered out.

And as I write here regularly, The Roads Are As You Find Them, and it is incumbent on you, the driver, to then Drive On Sight and navigate them appropriately. There is not a sign at the end of a dead-end street to guard against people driving off the end. There may be one at the start, warning of it being a no through road, deciding which ones to sign is up to the engineer. I live on one such in inner London, which also has narrow single lane sections and is ultimately all dead ends. No signage, no issue.

[ColdRolledAsphalt]

Thanks, yes it's coming back to me from my days as a highways press officer, many years ago. Round signs are statutory, triangular ones are not...is that about right?

[Conekicker]

Thanks, yes it's coming back to me from my days as a highways press officer, many years ago. Round signs are statutory, triangular ones are not...is that about right?

Mandatory or regulatory, not statutory. Subtle difference.

[AndyB]

All road signs are statutory as they have to comply with regulations

As a general rule, the more minor the road the less signage it will have. A curve with a dozen chevrons in each direction on an A road will be lucky to have a single board with two chevrons at an identical curve on a minor road. On a conventionally marked minor road, you're expected to notice that the middle line is gone and you don't have anything to stay on the left hand side of any more.

I think that's a considerable part of the reason for formal passing places on single track A and sometimes B roads: you expect to have little difficulty passing other traffic on a major road, but on minor public roads away from the Scottish highlands and islands you're expected to use your noggin to find a safe place to pull over if you meet someone on a road less than 5.5m wide.

On the example given, here's my guess. When the roundabout was constructed, the road might have had a conventional splitter island and narrowed down to S2 quickly, the white line petering out after a few stripes into S1. The mandatory left turn was added either when the service station was constructed or afterwards for traffic management reasons, and the road wasn't widened for long enough to guide traffic into the S1.

Incidentally, are you sure it's a B road? It looks more like an unclassified road, which definitely wouldn't normally bother with a Road Narrows sign.

[Chris5156]

Incidentally, are you sure it's a B road? It looks more like an unclassified road, which definitely wouldn't normally bother with a Road Narrows sign.

Agreed, it’s unclassified on every map I can find.