The UK's road network, a critical component of national infrastructure, is exhibiting significant signs of deterioration. This deterioration, which has been attributed to a multitude of factors including wear and tear, utility installations, a loss of skid resistance, loading, and vegetation damage, has been exacerbated by years of underfunding. This has resulted in a substantial maintenance backlog and an expected final bill that is expected to run into billions of pounds.
The Prime Minister's recent acknowledgement of the network's degraded state underscores the severity of the issue. His acknowledgement that damaged roads, “can risk lives and cost families hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds on repairs” has been backed by the promise of millions of pounds of additional financial aid from central government to try and tackle the problem.
To understand the government’s response, you only need to look at recent (somewhat eyewatering) estimates of the likely bill to fix Britain’s roads.
Potholes are arguably one of the most visible signs of neglect, having become the bane of motorists and cyclists. According to the RAC, there may be as many as a million potholes, or six potholes for every mile of road in England and Wales.
The Local Government Authority estimates that the backlog of road repairs will take more than a decade to sort out and cost c.£17bn. This compares with local authority road maintenance expenditure in 2022/23, which was £4.5 billion. Of this, £2.7 billion was spent on structural treatment, £1.3 billion on routine and other treatment and £0.5 billion was spent on highways maintenance policy, planning and strategy.
Placing this within the context of expenditure per mile, in 2023, the County Councils Network predicted that within two years, councils in England would spend an average of around £26,000 per mile on road repairs, pothole filling, and new junction/network construction, with councils in London spending significantly more at £67,000 per mile.
As a result, central Government has stepped in. The Treasury announced in the October 2024 Budget that total local road maintenance funding in 2025/26 would be nearly £1.6 billion with the focus on taking action. All English local authorities will get 75% of the extra cash, however the remaining 25% will be withheld if a council does not publish a report on road maintenance, including detailing their progress on filling potholes (funding for Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish local authorities is devolved).
In focusing on the country’s road surfaces, it’s important not to lose sight of the state of repair of roadside technology, particularly as temporary traffic lights and motorway camera systems are likely to be deployed far more extensively while maintenance is carried out on the road repairs.
Again, the picture is fairly bleak. Despite the fact that the design and implementation of traffic management systems is regulated, failure is still relatively commonplace. In 2022, English local authorities were facing a maintenance backlog exceeding £80 million for traffic signals, and annual fault repair costs of more than £6 million, according to the Transport Technology Forum (TTF). Out of a sample of 83 authorities, nearly half reported backlogs above £1 million, highlighting widespread traffic management system challenges.
Meanwhile, motorway cameras, particularly on smart motorways, have also experienced significant reliability issues. A Daily Mail investigation in September 2021 found that 112 out of 804 CCTV cameras were non-functional, misaligned, or pointing away from the road. Outdated hardware, such as CCTV boxes dating from 2004 added to delays. However, please note that these findings were disputed by National Highways, which said it did not recognise the figures on the availability of CCTV.
Emma Westwood, Rittal’s Product Management Lead for the UK, says, “All too often these failures in traffic management systems are preventable. As I drive up and down the country, I can see the vital controls and monitoring equipment for the systems, housed by the side of roads, within wholly unsuitable sheet steel enclosures. If this equipment, which is worth thousands of pounds, is not properly protected from the elements or from physical damage, it will fail.
“The correct housings are not expensive but regular maintenance is - particularly on motorways – and never without human risk, which makes the fact that the maintenance can be avoided all the more difficult.”
Sheet steel enclosures may be used as housings for UK traffic management controls and monitoring equipment, but they do not confirm to optimum design principles for the adequate protection of outdoor equipment - leaving them vulnerable to damage, theft, vandalism, and extreme weather events.
Added to which there are the shocks, vibration, temperature fluctuations, moisture, salt and dust ingress that are impossible to avoid near a busy road.
As a result systems are failing, meaning roads and motorways have to be closed unnecessarily, and the network is beset with communications issues.
So, how can the road industry increase the resilience of traffic management systems in a cost-effective way, based on “right first time”?
There are various factors that will affect an enclosure’s protection capabilities, including its construction/build, design, materials and testing, and one of which can impact on the environment the monitoring and control equipment is kept within.
1. Design: rainwater falling on an enclosure that is not designed correctly will collect next to the door seal. Rainwater is both slightly acidic (because of the CO2 within the atmosphere) and contains other contaminants (including salt from the road surface) which will degrade the door seal, allowing water and dirt ingress. Furthermore, when rainwater freezes, it expands, pushing the door away from the enclosure body, which again will lead to leaks.
By contrast, a specially designed outdoor enclosure will have either a roof canopy or rainwater strip that stops the water from being trapped between the door and the body wall, thereby protecting the seal, meaning the enclosure will last longer and provide better protection.
2. Outdoor Enclosure Construction Materials: an enclosure that is made of sheet steel will rust and corrode in a relatively short time unless it is correctly designed and the right grade of steel (ideally, 316L).
Enclosures made of GRP (plastic) will (self-evidently) not rust.
Furthermore, GRP enclosures that are ULF1-rated will be certified as resistant to warping in the heat while also being able to withstand the type of harsh conditions encountered by the roadside, including high impact resistant against debris, and challenges like shock and pressure, even within tunnels (where heavy, fast-moving traffic can create significant pressure differentials and exert significant physical forces).
3. Protection for Human Operatives: as an added bonus, GRP enclosures are cost-effective, light-weight, and easy to handle, providing protection not just for the electrical equipment installed inside them but also for roadside maintenance operatives. Enclosures with Class 2 protection rating are insulated to 1000 volts of electrical current, however, protection requirements and safety measures vary according to installation site, industry and application, all of which is set out in standards, regulations and licensing conditions.
4. Deter Vandalism: enclosures containing electrical equipment are large, conspicuous, and because they are sited in publicly accessible areas, they are a potential target for thieves. A well-designed GRP enclosure with adequate locking mechanisms will make it more difficult for would-be thieves to gain access to the technology inside.
In summary, the type of enclosure for traffic management systems will vary by application, industry, and location.
However, it’s vital to ensure that the protection the enclosure offers is robust and appropriate, such that it can withstand the unique demands that are placed upon it into the future. It is, after all, protecting equipment that could cost thousands of pounds to replace, not to mention the additional cost and disruption should it fail. As we’ve shown, GRP enclosures are ideal for housing small remote communications or telemetry devices, relays, as well as control and lighting equipment.
It’s also easy to sort out retrospectively. Any recently installed equipment that has been placed in enclosures which are not suited to the surrounding environment can be placed within an outer housing that encases the entire original enclosure. This may reduce any disruption that may be caused by taking out and reinstalling the enclosure from scratch.