To help the Council save money to meet the government’s austerity measures the Local Authority is recommending that our school crossing patrol is removed. A Local Authority survey has said that our site does not meet the criteria to justify keeping it and they are not recommending any mitigating measures such as an ‘engineered crossing’, i.e. a zebra crossing or light-controlled pedestrian crossing.
The crossing sites were assessed by using the national criteria for evaluating SCP sites called PV Squared (PV2). This is based only on the number of pedestrians that cross at any location and the number of vehicles that pass through the crossing point.
It is our opinion that this survey, and the decisions based on it, are flawed and may put lives at risk.
- The Local Authority states that “Where appropriate, PV2 may also take into consideration other factors such as speed, visibility, accidents and width of carriageway.” However, they have not made clear whether speed has been taken into account. Of the 80 crossing sites survey only 4 had a higher average term-time traffic speed than our Nursery School. All four of these, and many with significantly lower speeds, were deemed to meet the criteria for keeping their crossing patrol.
- PV2 does not take into account the nature of the traffic passing through. Our crossing site is on a road that carries a very high volume of heavy goods vehicles –with a much greater stopping distance than lighter goods vehicles or cars.
- PV2 does not take into account the road layout. Our crossing site is less than 10 metres from the entrance to a Truck Hire company on the opposite side; it is 15 metres from the entrance to another industrial site on the same side; further away the speed limit rises to 30mph with a roundabout in one direction and more industrial access roads in the other. There is no safe alternative crossing point.
- According to recent research “These guidelines (PV2) fail to identify the type of crossing facility which should be provided in the given conditions. So, there is a need to improve the existing pedestrian crossing warrants.” (Re-Examination of PV2 Criteria for Developing Pedestrian Crossing Warrants, Jain & Rastogi, 2017, Transportation Research Procedia 25C (2017) 1710–1719) – available online at www.sciencedirect.com
The factors outlined above suggest that the survey carried out may have underestimated the real risk to the families and young children using our crossing. It is in the top 5% for speed of traffic, carries high volumes of HGVs and there is no nearby safe alternative crossing.
Eight years ago the Local Authority made a judgement that a crossing patrol was necessary. They are now re-assessing as a cost-cutting measure. The traffic outside the school can be extremely dangerous and there are no alternative safe places to cross.
Charmaine, our lollipop lady, and Abdi, Heidi and Tony before her have been far more than just a traffic calming measure. They are also our eyes and ears outside the school to keep our children safe. They have on occasion been the last line of defence preventing children who have become separated from parents from running into the road. They also have a safeguarding and welfare role beyond traffic – alerting us to potentially dangerous situations and unwelcome visitors. They have calmed down tense situations with angry motorists and ensured that people park safely. They are integral to our school community and essential to our children’s safety.
The public consultation begins on Tuesday 13th June. We would encourage you to go to www.bristol.gov.uk/yourneighbourhood to have your say before Tuesday 5th September when the consultation ends.
Please also sign the petition at Reception to help us make our voices heard through the consultation and lobby our MPs and councillors.
