
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>Signing for side road closures</title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730772</link>
<description></description>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 7 Jun 2026 17:13:27 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2023 18:35:41 GMT</pubDate>
<copyright>Copyright &#xA9; 2023 Institute of Highway Engineers</copyright>
<atom:link href="https://members.theihe.org/forums/topic_rss.asp?group=214541&amp;id=1730772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<item>
<title>Signing for side road closures</title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730772</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730772</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I am seeking some advice for the following situation.

When a side road ahead is closed with a S14(1)TTRO what is the correct signing sequence on the approach assuming a standard two-way 30mph road? 

I would typically expect:

Road works ahead with arrow sub plate;
Road ahead closed;
No left or right turn sign

If the road is closed across the junction mouth then there is no access then no vehicles can access it. However, it has been suggested that the no left/right turn signs can not be used as they need s specific TTRO for their use. Is this correct? Would a typical S14(1) not meet the requirements, in that if a junction entrance to a road is closed then a turn into the junction is not permitted? Should a no leftright turn sign only be used with a specific TTRO and therefore be routinely omitted from the design?

The second point I have encountered is that some councils have stipulated that at the closure point a No entry sign is also mandatory along with the road closed sign. Is this necessary and needed and thus there for a road closed sign with red/white block board not sufficient?

Thank you,

Kevin Holland

]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2023 15:46:17 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730785</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730785</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I'd only expect to see a no left/right turn sign if the junction was open and traffic might be tempted to make the turn, such as <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.378746,-1.4900411,3a,49y,243.17h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBkDPJD3ynYh1a2s-RrA5aQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en">here</a>.
If the junction is coned/barriered through they can't physically make the turn, so there's no real need for no left/right turn signs.
Approach signing should be the 7001 with arrow subplate as you say plus a "ROAD CLOSED AHEAD" sign. If you want to be a bit more informative, the leeway in S13-9 would allow you to install "ROAD CLOSED ON LEFT/RIGHT AHEAD" signs. Remember we're no longer constrained to what was permitted on the old P7010.1 working drawing.
As for the no entry, again I'd only expect to see it if the junction was open and traffic might be tempted to enter the road. Look at it this way, if the road was being permanently closed, (typically by being kerbed through), a local authority wouldn't also erect no entry signs would they? So why are they needed in a temporary situation where the closure provision is made by cones, 7105 barriers and a "ROAD CLOSED" sign (the latter for the hard of thinking?!). Remember that the legal meaning of a 7105 is "Position of barrier to mark length of road closed to traffic..."
If you installed no left/right turn and no entry signs your order would have to say you were closing X Road, not permitting traffic to make a left/right turn into it and also not permitting traffic to enter it. Wouldn't that be triplicating the message rather pointlessly? Although I wish you good luck in convincing some local authority officers of that, given how some of them are stuck in their ways. All your order really needs to say is you are closing X Road. Appropriately signed, everything else falls into place from that.]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2023 16:42:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730806</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730806</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Thank you Andy. I accept your arguments entirely. The justification used for no-turn signs was that they were additional traffic-facing signs to deter traffic slowing at the junction mouth (more of an issue on busier high-speed roads) and clarified which ahead road was closed, but your points make perfect sense. I've yet to successfully argue against a central London highway authority about the no-entry signs they insist upon but accepting their superfluous design input for expediency and acceptance is necessary. Many thanks.]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2023 18:12:46 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730816</link>
<guid>https://members.theihe.org/forums/posts.aspx?group=214541&amp;topic=1730816</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The client is always right. Sometimes... :-)]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2023 19:35:41 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
