There seems to be a lot of argument on this forum about wasting public money. If it was a couple of hundred pounds used from the "vanity project fund" that is put aside each year (200k), then I guess that's alright then. However, if it was only a couple of hundred pounds, the council would have no probelm with issuing that figure, would they??? Or is this just another example of a lazy local authority that hates giving information away???

Quoted from bill b

"West Berkshire Council could be called upon to remove unnecessary road signs which confuse motorists.
The Government is urging councils in England to cut down on road signs, railings and advertising hoardings in a bid to make streets clutter-free."

My point exactly! We all know that traffic flows much more smoothly when the traffic lights break down. Road signs, traffic lights and white lines should all be abolished.  We'd all drive much more carefully, £millions would be saved and poor people who can't afford satnavs would end up in the middle of nowhere which is the best place for them. We need leaders like Richard Garvie, whoever he is, to make this happen!!!

If Tony Vickers wants anything spent on cycling, lets spend it on road safety and encouraging more people to get on their bikes, not pointless signs. The main issue for me though, is that User23 was scrutinising my call for a review of planning decisions based on the cost, yet no objections to wasting money on vanity projects such as this. Did you know that West Berks has a £250k vanity project fund??? Ok, it's 250k set aside for councillor projects each year, but most of it is spent on things like this, which maybe benefit one or two people. Where is the value???

As has quite rightly been stated, cyclists wishing to turn right on this busy corner, risking their safety, will do so without the aid of traffic signs allowing them to do so!

Road Safety....