# Dorset Council saving money on road signage



## rayc (Jun 3, 2008)

At the entry to the 30mph limit in Swanage the limit sign has been doubled up as the bus stop. There is a bit of comment getting to the council as the sign is not visible when a bus is at the stop.


----------



## hblewett (Jan 28, 2008)

It is laudable that they are are trying to reduce the proliferation of signage, and I doubt very much if the bus hiding the sign would get anyone off a speeding ticket providing he one on the other side of the road is visible - that is why two are put up in the first place. 

And if it has saved some money as well, that's good - means someone was thinking!


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Working within the County Council (Dorset) dealing with such signs (this one has been mentioned!!) the last poster is correct. the Council has a policy of reducing (as much as possible) the number of road signs and posts.

As an ex traffic cop I can tell you that no-one would ever get off a speeding ticket as a result of such a co-locatiuon of signs. What difference would it make if another sign post was installed 1 metre away from the speed limit sign?? It would STILL be obscured by a bus waiting at the stop wouldnt it?? 

Nice try but no !!!


----------



## skydiver (Jan 12, 2010)

Top Gear are allways saying there are to many signs and i agree with them. Everyone know single roads are 30 unless a sign sayes otherwise and the less signs not only looks nicer epecially in the country but would possibly save a few lives in RTAS.


----------



## brillopad (Mar 4, 2008)

If you lot paid more council tax. they'd have the money to do things right. :lol: :lol: .dennis


----------



## rayc (Jun 3, 2008)

A new [lower} speed limit has been introduced on Wessex way, the main DC spur road into Bournemouth from the A31. it was 70mph NSL and then reduced to 50mph a few years ago. Part of that has now been reduced to 40mph. This reduced limit came into force in a blaze of publicity a week ago and after complaints the council have agreed that the new 40mph signs do not conform to regulations for the type of road.


----------



## JohnsCrossMotorHomes (Jul 21, 2007)

rayc said:


> A new [lower} speed limit has been introduced on Wessex way, the main DC spur road into Bournemouth from the A31. it was 70mph NSL and then reduced to 50mph a few years ago. Part of that has now been reduced to 40mph. This reduced limit came into force in a blaze of publicity a week ago and after complaints the council have agreed that the new 40mph signs do not conform to regulations for the type of road.


I noticed that (40mph) when I came down to the boat on Saturday, another waste of money, its a dual carriageway all the way to Poole so whats so special about this bit.

They are perpetually messing about with this road spending fortunes on it and its no different after they have finished to what it was before.

Peter


----------



## pippin (Nov 15, 2007)

Gwynedd Council Highways dept have just planted a number of tall posts in our local suburban streets.

They are the sort of posts that usually have double lorry-height traffic lights.

What have they mounted at the top of these posts?

20mph zone (bilingual) signs with a tortoise picture underneath!

The primary school is already protected by timed illuminated signs (which are left running in school holidays!) and speed humps.

Monstrous and a total waste of (our) money.


----------



## Oil-on-the-Road (Oct 16, 2009)

We recently spent a week in Vermont (New England). The State Government there has a very tough low-signage policy which I initially found un-nerving (though why I don't know since I was a passenger!) Single signs for exits from the Inter-State and a bare minimum of traffic regulation signs.

Mind you - the volume of traffic was probably a tenth of what it is on the M1, so you had much more time to spot and absorb the content of the directional signs that were in place.

The most common sign, in fact, was "DANGER - MOOSE CROSSING". Apparently these originally were yellow diamonds with a picture of a moose head - but they all got nicked :lol:


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

Mrplodd said:


> Working within the County Council (Dorset) dealing with such signs (this one has been mentioned!!) the last poster is correct. the Council has a policy of reducing (as much as possible) the number of road signs and posts.
> 
> As an ex traffic cop I can tell you that no-one would ever get off a speeding ticket as a result of such a co-locatiuon of signs. What difference would it make if another sign post was installed 1 metre away from the speed limit sign?? It would STILL be obscured by a bus waiting at the stop wouldnt it??
> 
> Nice try but no !!!


Maybe Dorset County Council have hit on a way of increasing the number of fines they can impose on unsuspecting drivers. :roll:


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Spacerunner

That comment is just plain daft !! Think about it, who enforces speed limits these days, its not even the Police any more, its "Safety Camera Partnerships" and the GOVERNMENT gets ALL the money !!!! The Council sure as hell dont get any !!!!!!

As far as Wessex Way in Bmth is concerned that is operated by Bournemouth Borough NOT Dorset County Council. 

The speed limit has been reduced because there have been a large number of injury collisions where the slip roads join from the top of Richmond Hill, so the idea is faster traffic will not keep running into the rear of traffic emerging (perhaps when they shouldnt) from the slip roads into the main flow of traffic. just think how you would feel if it was YOU that had ben involved in an injury collision. I bet YOU would expect "something" to be done to reduce the risk wouldnt you ??

PM if you want further info


----------



## Jennifer (Mar 24, 2009)

Dorset County is prolific for enforcing the speed regulations, without having any figures, they must be the highest County for speeding fines. Myself I am all in favour of 40 mph on the Wessex Way, and what I would like to see, is where there is a slip road that causes a "bottleneck" as is the case at the Richmond Hill junction on the Wessex Way, traffic should be directed to move over to the outside lane, and this should be enforced.
We all know what causes hold ups on motorways, especially when approaching road works, and that is that "know it all" who carries on to the end of the approach to the sign, and we all hate these people. I am also in favour of multiple use of poles for signage, anything that will cut down on expense has got to be good. How would anyone be able to be doing more than 30 mph when passing a stationary bus, surely, its just common sense.


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

Mrplodd said:


> Spacerunner
> 
> That comment is just plain daft !! Think about it, who enforces speed limits these days, its not even the Police any more, its "Safety Camera Partnerships" and the GOVERNMENT gets ALL the money !!!! The Council sure as hell dont get any !!!!!!
> 
> ...


I would have expected the enforcing authority, whoever they are, to make sure that a speed limit sign was placed where it could be seen *at all times*. 
They must be as daft as me to site a speed restriction sign so low down. How long is it going to be before the pond life deface it or rip it down.

Which means it will have to be replaced, again and again. :?


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Just take a pace backwards at look at the situation logically.

So how would you feel if a removals van is parked at the side of the road unloading into someones house and the 30 mph terminus sign is hidden by it. Some muppet comes down the road at 60, ploughs into your MH injuring you and your passengers. are you then going to say "oh its alright mate, the 30 mph sign was obscured so its not your fault you were doing 60??" No of course not.

In case you are not aware if there is a system of street lighting then by default that road is subject to a 30 MPH speed limit UNLESS there are signs (repeaters) showing a HIGHER limit is in force. No exceptions no variations thats the law!!

Just for the avoidance of doubt I will repeat myself. LOUDLY :roll:

ALL OF THE MONEY FROM SPEEDING FINES GOES DIRECTLY TO THE GOVERNMENT IT DOES NOT GO TO THE LOCAL COUNCIL

The photograph at the top of this post does, I am sure, give a false immpression of exactly how high this 30mph sign actually is.

In practice all such signs are mounted at least 2.1 metres above the level of the ground so people dont bang their heads on them. if you look at the picture you will see that the post supporting the 30 roundel is galvanised, thats a (standard length 2.1m) council installed post. the EXTENSION carrying the bus stop is painted red so thats a BUS CO post. I should know, I'm the bloke that is responsible for putting up these traffic (NOT bus) signs!! I WILL check on this particular sign ASAP but I would put a fair sum on the fact that what I have said above is accurate.


----------



## JohnsCrossMotorHomes (Jul 21, 2007)

Jennifer said:


> Dorset County is prolific for enforcing the speed regulations, without having any figures, they must be the highest County for speeding fines. Myself I am all in favour of 40 mph on the Wessex Way, and what I would like to see, is where there is a slip road that causes a "bottleneck" as is the case at the Richmond Hill junction on the Wessex Way, traffic should be directed to move over to the outside lane, and this should be enforced.
> We all know what causes hold ups on motorways, especially when approaching road works, and that is that "know it all" who carries on to the end of the approach to the sign, and we all hate these people. I am also in favour of multiple use of poles for signage, anything that will cut down on expense has got to be good. How would anyone be able to be doing more than 30 mph when passing a stationary bus, surely, its just common sense.


There is one like that further up, can,t remember what junction, but that takes common sense and Bournemouth Council are rather short of that!

Peter


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

Mrplodd said:


> Just take a pace backwards at look at the situation logically.
> 
> So how would you feel if a removals van is parked at the side of the road unloading into someones house and the 30 mph terminus sign is hidden by it. Some muppet comes down the road at 60, ploughs into your MH injuring you and your passengers. are you then going to say "oh its alright mate, the 30 mph sign was obscured so its not your fault you were doing 60??" No of course not.
> 
> ...


My, my you're quite obsessed with speeding fines aren't you?

Don't forget to take your tape measure and camera with you when you do the inspection. :roll:


----------



## rayc (Jun 3, 2008)

Mrplodd said:


> Just take a pace backwards at look at the situation logically.
> 
> So how would you feel if a removals van is parked at the side of the road unloading into someones house and the 30 mph terminus sign is hidden by it. Some muppet comes down the road at 60, ploughs into your MH injuring you and your passengers. are you then going to say "oh its alright mate, the 30 mph sign was obscured so its not your fault you were doing 60??" No of course not.
> 
> ...


You can say it as loud as you like but it is not true. The government give councils road safety budgets and expect a return. The councils in Dorset, [ at least 4], have tiers of road safety engineers who depend upon the grant for their jobs. Councils are not in the Safety Camera Partnership for nothing.Their transport budgets depend upon it and that is why they have studies for work place parking charges etc.

In any event Dorset Council have admitted that their policy to comply with government KSI accidents has failed with no improvements since 2006. They have now had to introduce a year long campaign with a dedicated Police team targetting accident hotspots to try to make the targets and keep their funding. Incedentally I understand that the cost of the Police team for the year is £800,000. They have said that this will be funded from the profits of Driver Awareness Courses that will be offered to qualifying drivers. They will therefore ensure that sufficient drivers are offered the courses to fund them and cover the Police costs.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

No I am not obssesed with speeing fines but I am obsessed with road safety matters.

I have personally dealt with many fatal road traffic collisions over the years so I would suggest that I am beter placed than most to comment on such things.

I am aware of the "No excuse" campaign currently being run in Dorset.

Would such a campaign even be necessary if the Chief Constable provided sufficient staff to enforce road traffic law in the first place instead of relying on cameras which are at sites nearly everyone is now aware of (including mobile sites)?? Why not write and ask him?

Essex started these sort of campaigns off and to be fair they did have a significant impact on the KSI figures (any way why should the council get the blame for road crashes, surely its the fault of the driver? If its the councils fault why doesnt everyone crash at the same location??)

There are now less than 50% dedicated traffic patrols in Dorset than there were in 1990, what has traffic volume done in the mean time ???

Thanks for the tip about taking a camera and tape measure, I would never have thought of it otherwise!

I will not be adding any further posts to this thread. I have said my piece and I will now stop. However as and when I check this road sign out I will post the result. Yes even if my assumption is incorrect, I am not afraid to admit I am wrong if that is shown to be the case.


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

Amen!


----------



## teemyob (Nov 22, 2005)

*Signs*



skydiver said:


> Top Gear are allways saying there are to many signs and i agree with them. Everyone know single roads are 30 unless a sign sayes otherwise and the less signs not only looks nicer epecially in the country but would possibly save a few lives in RTAS.


LOL
Yes like the signs warning you of signs of speed bumps!


----------

