Mar 28, 2018
The Government has announced new funds to help deal with the enormous pothole problem around the UK that is widely accepted and welcomed by all. However, the £100 million set aside for the repairs is ‘a drop in the ocean’ compared to the estimated £9 billion needed to fix the UK’s roads urgently, say the RAC.
The UK road system is effectively wearing out. Ten years of austerity cuts to normal investment levels (pre-2008) means upgrading road repairs has fallen to such a degree that the tarmac is losing its strength and falling apart. The cold snap of weather in early 2018 has simply accelerated and exposed the fragility of a road system that needs massive investment to repair or replace.
Weather problems
The new funding was announced this week by Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, following a period of severe weather that has caused more damage to the UK’s roads and footpaths. Mr Grayling said the £100 million cash injection would pay for around two million potholes to be filled.
In the announcement, he confirmed that the unusually severe spell of freezing weather has caused much damage to roads and that local councils need more funding to help deal with the problem. The aim is to help motorists and cyclists make their journeys without continually dodging potholes or serious road accidents.
Mixed response
While the Local Government Association (LGA) were pleased with the move, there was guarded optimism in the movement to deal with what is a much bigger problem. According to the LGA, the cost of fixing all the potholes in England and Wales alone would cost more than £9 billion.
Martin Tett, the LGA transport spokesman, said that it is a positive move that the Government has listened to local councils and made more funding available to repair the roads affected by the recent harsh weather. However, the funding is only 1% of what is needed to deal with the overall road condition problems.
The response from the RAC was along the same lines. Head of roads policy, Nicholas Lyes, said: “The announcement was welcome, and that the money would boost local council’s ability to deal with crumbling roads”. However, their data shows that patrols were attending over 200 breakdowns a day relating to potholes in the week after the cold snap.
Fatal cyclist problem
The RAC also has estimated that £9 billion is needed to deal with the issues in road conditions and view this new money as ‘a drop in the ocean’ compared to what is needed. They also highlight the dangers of poor quality road surfaces including expensive damage to cars and even the potential to be fatal to cyclists.
This case was continued by the Cycling UK charity who said they were disappointed that the fund was only designed to do ‘patchwork jobs’ and is already too little, too late. They likened the situation to a doctor putting a broken leg in plaster before setting the fracture – the bone is still weak, poorly healed and as likely to break again.
In fact, the number of cyclists killed or seriously injured due to the poor condition of roads has tripled in the last decade. 71 people were killed or seriously injured in 2016, an increase from 22 in 2006. This rise is well above the general increase in cyclists’ numbers for that period which has increased by around 50%.
Ticking road timebomb
Experts point out that potholes are just part of the problem – the ageing road network is a ticking time bomb that needs to be dealt with. One report from the Annual Local Authority Road Maintenance (ALARM) showed that there is a £556 million funding gap in what local authorities in England and Wales alone have and what they need.
The report went on to say there are 24,400 miles of road that need essential maintenance in the next year. It is the same distance as driving from Birmingham to Beijing three and a half times. Moreover, more worryingly, they estimate that 20% of the highways across the country have less than five year’s life left in them, an increase from just 12% two years ago.
While the latest Government funding is a positive step forward, there is little doubt that much more is needed to avoid drivers having to spend their time worrying about potholes on top of everything else on the road.
One hopes we see the Chancellor take action in the Autumn budget and find the money required to repair the UK road infrastructure. It is after all the backbone of the economy and is one of the single most significant contributors to productivity, something which the Government recognises we need to invest in as a country.
Do you agree that the country’s roads are falling into a distressed state? Do you think the £100m pothole fund is enough or an insult to what is needed? Let us know in the comments below.
Mar 22, 2018
Described as a “national disgrace” and a “culpable blight”, it seems that the era of excessive and ridiculous road signs is coming to an end. In a report published by the Road Signs Task Force (RSTF), kindly provided to PetrolPrices.com by The Times it shows that the number of road signs has doubled in 20 years to an insurmountable 4.3 million across Britain’s roads.
This “national embarrassment” of our once proud institution of road signs has come to boiling point. Some 21 sign types are deemed pointless by this report, including traffic light warning signs and cycle warning signs that are not needed and in some cases not even visible to road users.
Signs to be removed
In the report, the RSTF provide a list of all the signs that are recommended to be axed, mainly due to safety and overcrowding concerns. It says that road signs should be used as a means of make clear notice to drivers based on what they cannot see ahead and notify them of what is coming. In the case of many signs, they have been created unnecessarily because the driver can see what is coming ahead anyway.
The second point is that by having too many signs, the driver may be distracted by looking at a sign not needed rather than paying attention to driving. There are no statistics about how unnecessary road signs could lead to accidents, but RSTF do make clear that minimalism of road signs should improve driving standards and focus driver attention overall.
The following is a list of the main signs that the RSTF recommends should be axed from Britain’s roads.
Warning signs
Warning signs such as traffic lights ahead, roundabout warning signs and skid risk signs are all recommended to be removed. Traffic lights ahead signs were described as “entirely unnecessary” because if the lights can be seen, then they themselves are the warning.
It is thought that nine out of ten warning signs could be removed. Similarly, roundabout warning signs were deemed useless, especially if people can already see the roundabout. Skid risk signs were condemned as well, as they are only temporary and therefore should not be up for more than is necessary, as they should only be put up when the road is in repair and should be taken down as soon as the risk is removed. Other signs to be delegated to the dump are junction ahead signs, cycle warning signs and yellow backing board signs.
Informative signs
One of the most annoying things on British roads is the ‘New Road Layout Ahead’ sign and other such temporary road signs. Often put up after roadworks, driving around roads, one must see multiple ‘temporary’ signs dotted around. These signs seem to stay up longer than the legal three months and provide nothing but an annoyance to drivers.
The RSTF report recommended that a fine of £500 should be put in place for every ‘temporary’ sign that councils don’t remove in time, of which the profits would go into the national road repair fund. Another pointless information sign is the somewhat ironic “sign not in use” sign. By using this sign, it negates the fact that nine times out of ten, the ‘sign not in use’ sign could have been removed altogether.
A particular favourite amongst drivers, the classic Box Brownie sign (image of a camera) has now been declared redundant as technology starts to take over where speed can be tracked at any point by mobile camera detectors rather specific fixed locations.
Roundabout sponsorship signs have also drawn criticism, due to safety and the non-uniform design they often have. Such signs are recommended to be highly regulated to avoid excessive and unnecessary use, as councils may be tempted to increase the size to appease higher paying customers.
Information signs also included in the list are end of motorway regulations, hard shoulder for x yards, certain brown tourist signs, housing development signs and roundabout countdown markers not on high-speed roads.
Regulatory signs
One of the main road signs that cause people issues is the rather ambiguous Clearway sign. The RSTF report has a huge problem with rural clearway signs and those used on arterial routes, as most of the roads on these routes are not places where there would normally be stopping. As the report says “Clearways should only be introduced where there are historic instances of stopping that an authority wishes to end.” If there is no feasible reason why these signs should be up, then why are they up at all?
Cycle track signs are another one that is destined for removal. With the recommendation being to scrap these signs completely, the obvious solution is to clearly paint the signs, which the report mentions and recommends. The other category involved is zone signs, which include controlled parking zone and other zone signs, low emission zone, safer HGV zone and the congestion charge zone.
What is coming next?
So what is that the RSTF is suggesting Highways England and the Department for Transport (DfT) do about these recommendations? The RSTF main suggestion is to create an amendment to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions Act (TRSDG) stating that all signs mentioned above are no longer legal on roads and that they should all be removed by a specified date.
While there is clearly a significant issue on our roads, there is no doubt that removing thousands of signs would be costly and take up time but can be incredibly useful. Not only aesthetically, but also by keeping people safe and removing yet another distraction as they try and navigate around the ever-confusing British road network.
As the RSTF report says “the principle of minimalism should be paramount.” When creating road designs, consideration should be taken on the necessity, not the potential. If a sign does not need to be there, why is it there? If signs are excessive and causing potential safety issues then what is the need is for them?
Auditing all signs within each local council or authority has also been recommended. Some authorities have already done this, and this has allowed local councils to see and understand what signs were unnecessary and what an improved road system looks like after they’ve been removed.
Can you think of any roads signs near you that you think are completely useless? Why do you think there are now 4.3 million road signs and many are useless? Let us know in the comments below.