Nottingham/DfT FOI & Examples of
Unlawful Signing
 
Abridged Signing Law set by Parliament and the Secretary of State for Transport: 1. At the beginning of a limit of speed there will be a pair of terminal signs, one on each side of the road. 2. On ‘A’ class roads, where terminal signs are erected within 50 metres of a lamp column the signs will be independently illuminated, the lighting forms part of the character of the sign. 3. Where a speed limit begins on a side road, then a signle terminal sign can be used provided it is placed on the nearside of the carriageway for traffic entering that road and no more than 20 metres from the junction. 4. When the road is a side road and traffic emerges onto a main road with a higher limit, there is no need for terminal signing provided two repeater signs are erected on the main road, one to either side of, and no more than 100 metres from, the junction. 5. Rules 3 and 4 cannot be applied to crossroads with traffic light controls, a roundabout or a gyratory system. 6. Where rule 5 applies paired terminal signs must be placed on the side road for traffic turning into the main road, These signs can be no more than 20 metres from the junction. 7. The only signs a highway authority can employ on roads in their area are the prescribed traffic signs set out in the Regulations and Act of Parliament. 8. Statute Law demands the highway authority erect, alter or remove signs to comply with the precise directions given by the Secretary of State for Transport. NOW FOR THE PROBLEM: How many errors are needed for the local authority and the Police to no longer class them as minor? Is it acceptable for signs to take 36 years to be replaced? A610 Nuttall Road - There must be a pair of terminal signs for traffic entering the A610 not more than 20 metres from the junction, not the single sign 75 metres from the A6514 as seen in the photograph. See rules 3,4,5 & 6 A610 Nuttall Road -There must be a pair of 40 mph terminal signs on the A610 for traffic turning entering the A6514. See rules 4, 5 & 6. B690 / A6514 - Paired terminal signs must be erected one to each side of the road. See rules 1, 5 & 6. Selston Drive junction with the A6514. Pairs of signs must be erected for traffic turning onto the A6514. See rule 6. Harrow Road junction with the A6514. Signs for traffic emerging from a 20 mph speed limit into a 40 mph speed limit must state the correct speed, not 30 mph. See rule 1 & 8. Newlyn Drive junction of A6514. For traffic turning from the 40 into the 30, there must be at least pmr 30 mph sign not more than 20 metres from the junction Newlyn Drive junction with A6514. In the absence of repeater signs within 100 metres on the A6514 there must be a pair of 40 mph signs one either side of the road. See rules 1 & 6. Radford Bridge Road. For traffic entering from the A6514 there must be either; one prescribed 30 mph sign on the nearside of the road within 20 metres of the junction or, a pair of 30 mph signs, one either side of the road and no more than 20 metres from the junction. See rules 1 & 4. Radford Bridge Road. The highway authority must erect, alter and remove signing to give effect to the directions of the Secretary of State for Transport and only use the signs prescribed for the purpose. See section 85(2) RTRA 1984. This sign had to be removed from the highway no later than 1972 Hawton Crescent. Terminal signs must be mounted to the nearside of the road when used singly and be visible to traffic. See rule 3 & Coombes V DPP 2006 Hawton Crescent. Signs must be the size colour and type prescribed by Regulations: See Regulation 11 TSRGD 2002 and Section 64 RTRA 1984. A52/A6005 Beeston Slip Road. On roundabouts paired terminal signs must be provided for traffic entering the A6514. See rules 1 & 5 Scaleford Drive. Single terminal signs on side roads can only be on the nearside of the road. See rule 3. Scaleford Drive. For traffic exiting the side road onto the A6514 a pair of terminal signs must be provided no more than 20 metres from the junction. See rule 6. Selston Drive. Single terminal signs on side roads must be on the nearside of the road. See rule 3. Sutton Passeys Crescent. For traffic exiting the side road onto the A6514 a pair of terminal signs must be provided no more than 20 metres from the junction. See rule 6. Harrow Road. Authorities shall not use unlawful signs nor entice cyclist to commit criminal offences: Beechdale Road. When a single terminal sign is employed for traffic entering from the A6514 it can be no more than 20 metres from the junction. See rule 3. Franklin Gardens. When single signs are used for traffic entering the side road, the sign must be as prescribed by Regulations. See rule 7 & 8. Franklin Gardens. For traffic emerging onto the A6514 a pair of 40 mph signs must be erected on the side road no more than 20 metres from the junction. See rules 1 & 6. B690 / A6514. Traffic emerging onto the main road must be provided with paired terminal signs mounted either side of the road, not on the offside splitter island. See rules 1, 5 & 6. A610 northbound Nuthall Road. 40 mph terminal signing must be provided in pairs. See rules 1, 5 & 6. A610 northbound Nuthall Road. 40 mph terminal signing on an ‘A” road when mounted within 50 metres of a lamp column must be illuminated by another means of electrical lighting. See rules 2 & 8. CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MR BRIAN LYUS OBE, HEAD OF TM5, DfT, LONDON & THE NOTTS SAFETY CAMERA PARNERSHIP ETC From: "Brian Lyus" <Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.uk> To: "David PS1280 Firth" < David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.uk> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 14:25:14 +0100 Subject: RE: FW: FW: Signing issues David I can only offer you the Department's view of the necessary signing. It is based upon the virtual impossibility of making sense of the concepts in direction 9 of the "relevant road" and the "other road" at say a signalled cross roads.   I have already explained our reasoning in very great detail (see below); there's really nothing I can add.  If you have access to experts who take a different view, they will certainly be able to explain the reasons that they hold the opinions they do (it isn't clear from your email quite what those opinions are), and why they disagree with the Department's.  It is for them to explain their thinking, not me. Their never having considered these issues and never having heard our explanation previously, and issues of waste of energy and sign clutter, I fear, are not valid reasons for taking another view of what the law is; we are concerned here about what the law actually requires, not with how the law might be improved to require something different. In any event, the Department's views and those of your experts matter little; it is what the courts say that the law is that matters.   The signing we have suggested is intended to minimise the likelihood of successful legal challenge.  Brian >>> "Firth, David, PS1280" <David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.uk > 18/10/06 07:18:15 >>> Brian, Thanks for getting back to me regarding this Junction. I have taken the information to our recent engineering group meeting with Police ,City Council, County Council and Highways Agency where the contents of your e mail was discussed. Below are the thoughts that came out of that, and other recent meetings. I have copied and pasted an extract from  an e mail sent to me from Scott Talbot from the City Council Nottinghamshire Safety Camera Partnership would appreciate some further  guidance/explanation The extract is as follows Signs: Brian Lyus' email was shown to our local signs expert who said he had never heard of the signing at signalised junctions or roundabouts requirements. He contacted people at Leicestershire County Council who also have never heard this interpretation. At the last East Midlands Accident Reduction Working Group there were representatives from Derbyshire County Council and Leicester City  Council, neither of them knew of this interpretation. We are concerned that providing signs according to Brian's interpretation would be of no benefit to drivers as the two signs would be a minimum of over 40m apart (depending where we placed them). As such the offside sign would be completely out of the drivers view and so could be classed as pointless sign clutter and, since it needs to be lit, a waste of energy.  END Cold you please supply further evidence of your interpretation for me  to take back to the partners including any further thoughts you may have. I appreciate your early response Regards Dave Firth Project Manager NSCP -----Original Message----- From: Brian Lyus [mailto: Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.uk] Sent: 03 October 2006 13:49 To: Firth, David, PS1280 Cc: Ian Edwards Subject: Re: FW: FW: Signing issues  David I'm very sorry it's not been possible to give an earlier response to your further inquiry, although we did of course reply to the original 2005 request setting out our initial view. I have to start by saying that interpretation of the law, which of  course includes the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, is a matter for the courts and not for the Department.  I can only offer you the Department's view. One of the questions raised by Bob Richards is whether the diagrams in the old Chapter 9 of the Traffic Signs Manual are still relevant after 30 years.   This chapter, along with all the other chapters in the old loose-leaf edition of the Manual, was formally withdrawn in 1994. However, all the diagrams showing speed limit signs required for  different types of junction are in fact still valid, and work perfectly well for signing under TSRGD 2002.  Unfortunately the diagrams don't cover all eventualities, such as signalled junctions and roundabouts.  Bob said that Chapter 9 didn't include the case where a 30mph road is crossed by a 40mph road, although in fact it did, in Figure 3.  But you need to be careful in interpreting the diagrams, as they don't apply to signalled junctions.   This is because even though it is sometimes (although not always) still possible to say which road is the major route through a signalled junction, it is not possible to decide which is the "relevant road" and which the "other road" for the purposes of directions 8, 9 and 10.  I might be on the "minor" route, but when the signal is green and I'm proceeding on the now priority route through the junction how can I be said to be on a "relevant road" having a junction with the side of the "other" road? I cannot tell from the plans you have supplied which junctions are signalled and which are not.  It would appear, as far as I can see from the tiny images, that all junctions have been signed as if they were not signalled.  However, it is my understanding that some junctions are in fact controlled by traffic signals.  In the Department's view, signalled junctions where the speed limit on one road is different to the limit on another need full signing.   That is to say, the concession allowing a single sign on the near side of the "relevant road" cannot be applied,  and a pair of signs is needed, one on each side of the road, within 20 metres of the edge line of the road with which it has its junction. In the case of a dual carriageway road, the signs are needed on each side of the relevant carriageway.  Note that a refuge, traffic island or splitter island is not a central reservation, so a sign erected on one of these does not count.  Similarly, traffic approaching the junction on any arm where the limit changes must see a pair of terminal signs (as Figure 3 in Chapter 9) placed not more than 20m from the junction. Note that all terminal speed limit signs on a principal road (i.e. an A road) must be directly lit if within 50m of a street lamp. The roundabout signing at Western Esplanade/ Aspley Road appears to have single terminal speed limit signs mounted on the exit splitter islands.  This quite plainly does not accord with the statutory requirements, however they are interpreted.   The Valley Road roundabouts appear to be satisfactory, at least as far as the provision of terminal signs is concerned (subject to their also meeting the illumination  requirements). To summarise, it seems that to put the speed limit signs here beyond challenge, all signalled junctions should have full signing, e.g. where a 40 road crosses a 30, with the 40 being treated as the major route, pairs of 30 signs should be provided on both side arms for traffic turning left or right from either direction from the 40 route onto the 30.  Traffic joining the 40 route will need a pair of 40 terminal signs  mounted back-to-back with the above 30 signs, which must be on each side of the road (not on splitter islands) and not more than 20 metres from the junction. The order will need to be consistent with this, i.e . in this case it must provide that the limit on the 40 route continues through the junction uninterrupted, and that the 30 limits begin at and on each side of the 40 route.  If the signs cannot be provided within 20 metres of the junction (which looks as if it might be the case at the Valley Road/Nottingham Road junction), the order will need to specify that the 40 limit extends into Nottingham Road, and the pairs of terminal signs must be placed in accordance with that order. On the 40 route, 40 repeaters must be provided at regular intervals. It is strongly recommended that these should be sited in accordance with the advice in TA leaflet 1/95.  In the case of unsignalled 30mph side roads abutting the 40 route, it is OK for these to have a single 30 sign on the near side for traffic entering from the 40 route.  It's also fine for there to be no 40 terminal signs for traffic leaving the side road and entering the 40 route, but only if there is a 40 repeater on each side of and within 100 metres of the side road.  Direction 9(5)(b) makes no concession for the case where a continuous central reservation prevents vehicles from turning right, i.e. so that a repeater isn't required on that side of the junction, but a court might.  But it seems from the plan that at some such junctions there's no 40 repeater  within 100 metres even on the side in which traffic proceeds.  If that's so, the limit is likely to be unenforceable for traffic which emerged from such a road, and possibly for all traffic on the route, depending on the view the court takes of such a major irregularity.  According to the plan, there are several yellow signs incorporating a speed limit repeater sign (diagram 670) and a camera warning sign (diagram 879).  The yellow part of the sign is shown as having a black border.  If the signs have been manufactured as drawn, with a black border surrounding the yellow, they are unlawful.   Prescribed signs may be mounted on a yellow backing board, but backing boards cannot be embellished with black borders, red and white stripes, pink spots or anything else you can think of. I hope this clarifies the main issues for you; I'm quite happy to elaborate where necessary. Best wishes, and apologies once more for the delay Brian >>> "Firth, David, PS1280" < David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.uk> 02/10/06 14:05:39 >>> Good afternoon Brian,  I spoke to you a couple of weeks ago to confim that you received the below, which you had. You said that you were hoping to get back to me round about W/E 24th September. As you are aware we have been seeking advice in this case since late  2005, and the partnership would appreciate an early response. Please can you let me know the current position. Regards Dave Firth Project Manager NSCP 0115 8444022 -----Original Message-----  From: Firth, David, PS1280 Sent: 11 September 2006 09:11 To: 'Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.uk'; Richards, Bob Cc: ' Ian.Edwards@dft.gsi.gov.uk'; ' david.rosier@dft.gsi.gov.uk' Subject: FW: FW: Signing issues Hi Brian, Thank you for your below e mail dated 7th August. Nottinghamshire Safety Camera Partnership are still seeking advise from the DfT regarding correct signage around the A610  Please find the attached Zip file which should give your department full details as below. We would appreciate  your early response Regards David Firth Project Manager NSCP -----Original Message-----  From: Brian Lyus [mailto:Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.uk] Sent: 07 August 2006 10:50 To: Firth, David, PS1280 Cc: Ian Edwards; Roger Mackintosh  Subject: Re: FW: Signing issues Dave Thanks for this letter of 7 August, which I have not previously seen. As I explained when we spoke just now, I asked a month ago for a proper scale plan, indicating where the speed limit orders say the limits change.  It's difficult to give firm advice when we don't know the full story. Scott's letter, setting out what he thinks is the appropriate signing, says nothing about any junctions being signalled.  The fact that he's apparently following the layouts in Chapter 9 (which was formally withdrawn in 1994, although it remains basically sound) suggests that none are, as Chapter 9 did not deal with signalled junctions or roundabouts. However, the photographs previously supplied suggest that at least one junction here is signalled.  Unfortunately his diagram does not indicate which junction is which, e.g. which is the A610, so it's difficult to relate photographs to the diagram.   Previously supplied material also suggests that the road layout at some of these junctions is more complex than the schematic drawing implies. Nor is it clear from the diagram, as no priorities are shown, which is the relevant road and which the "other" road in terms of directions 8 to 10.  Where a junction is signalled, it becomes impossible to say which road is the "relevant" road and which the "other" road.   If anyone thinks this is possible, let him work through directions 9 and 10 and  explain how!   In these cases, terminal signs must be provided on each side of the road; the concession to display only one, on the near side, cannot apply.  I see that previous emails have included an extract from one of my presentations on speed limit signing; these always point out that the relaxation cannot apply to signalled junctions. Turning to the diagram, the 40mph signs and national speeed limit signs at the top left hand corner appear to be the wrong way round.     The numbers of each required depend on which is marked as the priority road (presumably the dual carriageway road if unsignalled) or if the junction is signalled. It's not really possible to say much more without knowing which (if any) junctions are signalled. Brian >>> "Firth, David, PS1280" < David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.uk> 07/08/06 09:03:42 >>> Hi Brian, Forwarded as discussed Please can you let us have your response at your earliest opportunity Regards Dave Firth  Project Manager NSCP 07866 233891 -----Original Message----- From: Scott Talbot [mailto:scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.uk ] Sent: 26 July 2006 09:46 To: Firth, David, PS1280 Subject: RE: Signing issues Scott Talbot-Hartshorn Safety Camera Project Co-ordinator Nottinghamshire Safety Camera Partnership  *: (+44) 0115 91 56648 6: (+44) 0115 91 56550 *:  <mailto:scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.uk > scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.uk Road Safety Nottingham City Council Lawrence House  Talbot Street Nottingham NG1 5NT -----Original Message----- From: Firth, David, PS1280 [mailto: David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.uk] Sent: 26 July 2006 08:13 To: scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.uk  Subject: Signing issues Morning Scott, Please can you confirm that you received my e mail last week regarding the signing on the ring road ( I have not had a "read receipt") (I also noticed yesterday that the cameras just prior to the Aspley  Lane Round about also need of attention to meet rule 3) mailto:Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.ukmailto:David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.ukmailto:David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.ukmailto:Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.ukmailto:David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.ukmailto:Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.ukmailto:Ian.Edwards@dft.gsi.gov.ukmailto:david.rosier@dft.gsi.gov.ukmailto:Brian.Lyus@dft.gsi.gov.ukmailto:David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.ukmailto:scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.ukmailto:scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.ukmailto:scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.ukmailto:David.Firth@nottinghamshire.pnn.police.ukmailto:scott.talbot@nottinghamcity.gov.ukshapeimage_2_link_0shapeimage_2_link_1shapeimage_2_link_2shapeimage_2_link_3shapeimage_2_link_4shapeimage_2_link_5shapeimage_2_link_6shapeimage_2_link_7shapeimage_2_link_8shapeimage_2_link_9shapeimage_2_link_10shapeimage_2_link_11shapeimage_2_link_12shapeimage_2_link_13shapeimage_2_link_14