Road signage regulations should be radically reviewed since they take money from authority budgets, meaning that they can afford fewer schemes with real benefit.

For example, when I'm cycling along, do I need *five* signs to show that I can pull in to cross a slip road on to a glass-strewn one yard long piece of tarmac?  Perhaps one single sign to warn motorists that cyclists may be crossing.  Going down dual carriageways you see hundreds of examples like these, when the money could have been spent on decent cycle lanes!

Equally, how about the "cyclists dismount" sign and the shared cycling path sign were removed from the road vocabulary, being replaced by a general permission for cyclists to cycle slowly on the pavement, with a highway code rule to prioritise pedestrians in that circumstance?  It'd save millions, which could be re-invested in pavement widening, making it actually safer rather than just covering someone's back side…

Why is this idea important?

Lots of money is wasted in cycling signage when the basic facilities are disjointed and inappropriate.  Let's focus on risk and reallocate funding…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.