Local councils have been given new powers that allow them to remove roadside signage.
The scheme comes from a Department for Transport initiative to declutter Britain’s roadsides, which labelled some of the estimated 4.57million-plus roadside signs as "unnecessary" and "pointless".
The Department for Transport is to be abolished, read more here
The RAC has criticised certain aims of the scheme, such as the targeting of speed limit repeater signs for removal now that they are no longer a legal requirement.
Others signposted for removal are those which signify new road features. Instead they will be given ‘remove by’ dates ensuring they are not displayed for longer than necessary.
The DfT claims that the scheme will save taxpayers £30 million by 2020. Energy wastage will also be reduced, because safety signs are legally required to be illuminated. A spokesperson from the DfT was quick to add that it's not a mandatory change, but an optional one.
Critics of the proposal
Neil Greig, director of policy and research at the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) questioned the logic of some of the proposals, saying: “We’re in overall support of what the Department for Transport is trying to do; there are far too many signs that have been left for too long, well after drivers have got the message about a road layout change.”
“Other aspects are about getting the balance right – a lot of signage is in place for the safety of drivers – which must be put first. Removing safety-conscious signage in the name of decluttering the roadside in road accident blackspots, should not happen - we’re very keen that safety-vital signage isn’t removed in the name of clutter.”
“The most contentious area is the removal of repeater speed limit signs. Drivers often do need to be reminded of the speed limit, particularly if the government is to be enforcing the limit more closely. Removing signage may make some drivers feel underinformed of the speed limit or even misled, if the signage of the speed limit isn’t enough.”
Join the debate
Add your comment
pointless road signs
I disagree with the IAM in the case of depleting signage at accident blackspots...has anyone considered that sign proliferation at such a spot is possibly information overload at the exact time when drivers need to be 100% attentive?
In the old days there used to be a sign which simply stated 'Accident Blackspot'.....simple, to the point, and probably its starkness is all that is needed. Back to the Future?
Councils seem to be increasingly profligate with OUR taxes these days....totally unnecessary and very expensive enormous signs announcing that you are entering a County Council's area are just ridiculous....who gives a shit about a council area?
A friend of mine is in the roadside furniture industry, so I know what these cost, and it aint cheap!.....and yet they cant afford repair the road, to trim foliage away from half hidden road signs or clean them. Some in my area haven't been cleaned in the last 10 years and aren't even remotely 'reflective' any more.
Maybe its time that the councils SHOULD become truly accountable for their spending. One things for sure, if they had to dip into their own pockets for the funding, these eyesores wouldn't exist.
Lastly repeater speed limit signs.....I have never understood why a 40 or 50 mph zone gets repeaters, but a 30mph (which presumably is a more dangerous zone) doesn't. Could it be an opportunity to make money in fines taking precedent over locals safety?
Hiding behind some ancient and ridiculous law about the distance between light posts is just madness in a sensitive and potentially fatal area, and how does a driver maintain concentration and measure that distance as he drives by....honestly you couldn't make it up, its like the clowns are in town!
In my view 30mph repeaters should be painted onto the tarmac every 300 yards, and maybe red reflector studs.
Don't get rid of repeater signs
Meanwhile, in Scotland...