Chelmsford sign clutter, Threads merged x3 Options

[Incandescent]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-47175357

[Advertisement]

[captain swoop]

A psychologist fined for driving through a bus gate has won her appeal after arguing there were too many signs for the brain to process.

Bernadine King's penalty charge notice (PCN) was quashed after a tribunal ruled signage was "inadequate".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-47175357

[The Slithy Tove]

It the photo is the actual location, then the signage is nothing compared with some we've seen, especially in certain London boroughs where it really is confusing and overly-cluttered.

[The Slithy Tove]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-47175357

See also http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=125951

[DancingDad]

That is not cluttered.
I doubt the main photo is what is there now either, the offside sign behind the lady has been moved and now sports a yellow background.

[cp8759]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-47175357

A psychologist fined for driving through a bus gate has won her appeal after arguing there were too many signs for the brain to process.

The reaction from Essex County Council is dismal to be honest.

[DancingDad]

"Once you're committed to turn left on Duke Street, you have no way of safely turning around," she said.

Looks like she turned left from this island
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.7358271,0...3312!8i6656
With what looks like a very clear and uncluttered directional sign, pre warning.
Can also see the blue roundels ahead and it don't look too difficult or dangerous to pull a three pointer ?

Well done to her for the result but I reckon she bamboozled the adjudicator with science or mumbo jumbo.

I do dislike signs being placed on outer edges of footways, had the argument (and lost) with an adjudicator about this sort of placement at Goldsmith Tram Gate in Nottingham (won on unclear signage anyway but not that point)
And I have wondered if blue permissive signs have less visual effect then red (white/red) restrictive circles.
But we see plenty of people missing No Entry, No Right(left) Turn or No Motor Vehicle signs so unsure on that one either.

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 - 16:15

[notmeatloaf]

Not a psychologist but I would guess her appeal is based on having the yellow/black edging on the bridge? Humans tend to be drawn to yellow and black - then the blue signs are on a red background anyway. The council can't change the colour of the signs but they have guaranteed it will be low priority for your brain.

A yellow background on the sign sounds a good compromise.

As far signs at the edge of the footway, here the council go both ways. They either put residents zone signs at the back behind another signpost, or they put them right on the corner of a junction so if you are turning left into the zone the signs are at 90deg to you

[mickR]

No need to be a psychologist, The sheer numbers involved here mean something is clearly wrong!

[DancingDad]

No need to be a psychologist, The sheer numbers involved here mean something is clearly wrong!

Works out at around 3000 a month.
According to council, pre cameras and PCNs, would have been over 12,000 a month.
Which from the council's point of view would be a good result.
And 3000 penalties at 30 quid a pop (discount) tops up coffers nicely as well but let's not be too cynical on that

Looking at the signage on streetview, it doesn't look bad, could be better.
But it does beg the question why over 12K drivers a month chose to ignore before word of mouth about PCNs meant many stopped doing it.
And why 3000 are still being copped.
Is it a case of choosing to ignore the signs?
Or not seeing them?
Or as the psychologist says, too much for the brain to take in?
Or summat else?


There is no question in my mind that a significant portion are those who see the signs but choose to ignore. Same as people do with speed limits or yellow lines.
There is also little doubt in my mind that many do not know what the signs mean.
And there will be many who simply do not see, register the signs. We see many cases in the council section where you have to wonder how anyone could miss the signs but they do.

I fully agree that for that many a month to be copped, something is wrong.
But would not blame the council or signage alone in this one.

[nigelbb]

I suspect that many drivers do not know what a "Bus Gate" is. If it were labelled as a "Bus Lane" with the road a different colour there would be many fewer infringements.

This post has been edited by nigelbb: Sun, 10 Feb 2019 - 09:39

[Fredd]

And I have wondered if blue permissive signs have less visual effect then red (white/red) restrictive circles.
But we see plenty of people missing No Entry, No Right(left) Turn or No Motor Vehicle signs so unsure on that one either.

I suspect this is a large part of the problem. Where there's a complicated layout with a plethora of signs, particularly when it's unfamiliar, people prioritise looking for red prohibitive signs rather than blue signs that may or may not have anything to do with them. In a situation like that bus gate no entry signs with an exception plate for buses etc would likely have a much higher level of compliance.

[emanresu]

I suspect this is a large part of the problem. Where there's a complicated layout with a plethora of signs, particularly when it's unfamiliar, people prioritise looking for red prohibitive signs rather than blue signs that may or may not have anything to do with them. In a situation like that bus gate no entry signs with an exception plate for buses etc would likely have a much higher level of compliance.

There have been a number of bus lane signage "faults" such as York, Nottingham and Newcastle. It wouldn't be out of place to have some form of check/balance at LA's where if there are "x" times the number of tickets expected issued at a spot that enforcement is restricted until the signs are made clear, and unequivocal. However where money is involved, sense goes out the window,

[notmeatloaf]

There has to, surely, be a strong argument that if the signs comply with TSRGD, they should be clear enough to motorists who are licenced on the basis that they understand traffic signs.

Obviously press release bait but scarily I actually think it's about right

63% of people don't know a blue circle is a mandatory order.
43% people thought the no motor vehicles sign meant cars and motorbikes only.

https://www.accidentadvicehelpline.co.uk/bl...ten-road-signs/

And were sharing the road with these people.

[Fredd]

Understanding traffic signs when sitting down with a book of illustrations is one thing. Comprehending the information in a (possibly unfamiliar) street scene, in all lighting, weather and traffic conditions, is quite another.

[DancingDad]

There has to, surely, be a strong argument that if the signs comply with TSRGD, they should be clear enough to motorists who are licenced on the basis that they understand traffic signs.

Obviously press release bait but scarily I actually think it's about right

63% of people don't know a blue circle is a mandatory order.
43% people thought the no motor vehicles sign meant cars and motorbikes only.

https://www.accidentadvicehelpline.co.uk/bl...ten-road-signs/

And were sharing the road with these people.

Would not be surprised.

The blue bus gate signs go back at least as far as TSRGD 1994 (not looked at earlier versions) so are not exactly new.
As said, the expectation is that if they are a road sign, drivers are expected to know them but.....
Were and are relatively rare and would be a new sign to many but that is still not an excuse that any adjudicator would or could accept.

As Fredd says, if a No Entry except.... immediate understanding would be higher but for some reason, DOT specifically reject that sign for this use, something about watering down the absolute prohibition.

I'm not sure that some signs adhere to the Worboy's principle that they should be readily and quickly understood even if never seen before.
The No Motor Vehicles (and variants) are a case in point.
As a young lad, I learnt that a red circle with a red diagonal line across it meant NO.... No Smoking, No Right/left Turn No U Turn and the like.
Then came a red circle without the diagonal which is supposed to mean the same ????
But simply looks like a speed limit sign with a picture on it.
What was wrong with including the diagonal?
And how does anyone intuitively know that a red circle with no pictogram means no vehicle of any type ??

[emanresu]

There is plenty of science behind sign design (See Semiotics and the tap example).

The penalties for deliberately misreading/ignoring the meaning of the signs is a behaviour shaping constraint/penalty. (See Poka Yoke if you don't have a manufacturing background)

When there is a surge of people penalised due to a failure in communication by signs there is no balancing behaviour shaping constraint on the LA - only the safety net of an adjudicator. That's after the LA have pocketed the money.

There has to be a balance in the system since it is clearly missing at the moment.

[roythebus]

There's far too many road signs, period. Too many are confusing to many.

I hate to think how many double deck bus drivers have ignored the height restriction on that bridge which used to be OK for lowbridge double deckers (13'6) back in the 1960s.

[notmeatloaf]

There's far too many road signs, period. Too many are confusing to many.

There aren't too many signs, there are too many drivers who don't view driving as a skill and thus make zero attempt to refresh their training.

That's combined with a Highway Code which is 90% stupidly obvious (get in the right lane if you want to turn right) and the stupidly stupid (if you are a cyclist and want to turn right dismount and push your bike). As such using it as a refresher is slightly pointless. All the stuff you might have forgotten is drowned out with pointless crap.

[cp8759]

There's far too many road signs, period. Too many are confusing to many.

There aren't too many signs, there are too many drivers who don't view driving as a skill and thus make zero attempt to refresh their training.

That's combined with a Highway Code which is 90% stupidly obvious (get in the right lane if you want to turn right) and the stupidly stupid (if you are a cyclist and want to turn right dismount and push your bike). As such using it as a refresher is slightly pointless. All the stuff you might have forgotten is drowned out with pointless crap.

I agree, in a perfect world your driving theory test would be based on the TSRGD rather than the HC but we have to be realistic.