Station Road school crossing, Thames Ditton

Background

The crossing point by the station on Station Road, Thames Ditton is used not only by rail commuters but also, twice a day in term-time, by children of the Infants and Junior Schools with or without accompanying parents. At those times several hundred pedestrians, many with bikes, scooters or pushchairs, cross and re-cross Station Road. For over a decade we had a Lollipop person to ensure sensible regulation of cars and pedestrians so that crossing may be made safe and efficient for both. The last lollipop lady, Mrs Hall, resigned the post in the Autumn of 2006. Since then, it has been unfilled.

Many residents, especially parents, have been concerned with the likelihood of accidents at a point where four roads meet by the station bridge. Although measured traffic flows through the village were halved, speeds reduced and accidents reduced to close to zero following the introduction in 2000 of speed bumps and a 20mph zone, any parent who has done the school run on foot over the past year will know that there are quite frequent situations every week where accidents threaten. So far, they have been avoided.

Aerial

What's been done

Parents' concern has been channelled by Lucy Symons (contact number 020 8398 7963), whose children have attended both schools, to the school authorities and through RA County Councillor Peter Hickman to Surrey County Council officials. The schools, who are responsible for finding and administering a lollipop person, have advertised the post. The Residents' Association has also advertised the post on this website and in Thames Ditton Today magazine. Nobody has come forward to fill it. Meanwhile Surrey County Council’s Community Travel Advisor for the Elmbridge area, Lynne Howard, paid visits to the site and ensured that the flashing warning lights close to the crossing now work properly.

There are SCC Travel Plans which can be viewed online for the Junior School and the Infants' School.

While a lollipop person would be the quickest and most effective solution, we have also looked at other means of assisted crossing. This was the subject of a meeting on Friday 14 September at the site, between Peter Hickman, Lucy Symons, senior SCC Transport Officer Frank Apicella and Lynne Howard. RA webmaster and wife (who also have had children lately at both schools) attended so that you may be kept informed of current developments.

Issues arising

Safe or not?

The first point of issue is that while parents and residents consider that accidents are likely to happen at this crossing, Lynne Howard, who carries out monitoring visits to all the Elmbridge School Crossing Patrol sites and personnel once a year, visited the site at the beginning and end of the school day and assessed it as relatively 'Low Risk.' One reason for a low risk rating is that over the years the Highways Dept have introduced a 20 mph limit, have realigned the crossing, and installed barriers so there is just one crossing point. Therefore this crossing point is viewed as being as safe as outside most schools. There was of course the assumption that a lollipop lady would be present. Indeed, such risks as Lynne observed during her visits seemed to stem more from aggressive or thoughtless pedestrians than from aggressive or thoughtless motorists. In the absence of a lollipop person, however, the 'low risk' assessment is at odds with local experiences. Many motorists are considerate of school pedestrians and stop for them to cross, particularly during the morning rush hour when traffic flow is slow in any case. But some are less considerate. In the afternoon school run, especially, traffic moves more quickly and you frequently see a kind motorist stopping, whereupon children begin to cross, while a motorist coming the other way does not stop - leading to one of those risky moments. You will also quite often see inattentive drivers coming round the bridge using their mobile phones, or turning to chat to a passenger as they drive; and it must be said that mothers with children in the car are among these examples.

In March this year we started a theme in the website forum to record risky incidents so that a case could be built for action. Parents were notified of it. However, only three such incidents have been noted there in the following six months....

Lights and technically-assisted crossings:

Technically assisted crossings - belisha / zebra crossings or push-button traffic lights - have tight specifications laid down nationally. At the present crossing point, the pavement is too narrow to accommodate the necessary poles, particularly taken in conjunction with the barriers (which themselves must be set 18 inches from the kerb edge). Requirements such as free passage for wheelchairs would also preclude further narrowing by street furniture. SCC Transport note that the pavements remain too narrow further along Station Road, when considering moving the crossing point along a bit. It seems therefore that the prospects of getting an assisted crossing are not bright because:

Other solutions: What can be done right now?

It was felt that 'walking buses' to and from the two schools in question would be unlikely to solve the problem, not least because of organisational and logistic difficulties. Many parents have children at both schools.

The search for a solution turns again to a Lollipop Person. The schools (responsible for recruitment and admin) and parents' associations should be encouraged to tackle this. Perhaps between them the schools could share the lollipop role as part of specifications for existing jobs, or those jobs when re-advertised. Finding lollipop persons is not just a problem in Thames Ditton. Elsewhere in Surrey several lollipop posts remain unfilled. The question arises as to whether the salaries offered by the County for this work are attractive enough or should be increased. Peter will investigate with the SCC Educational authorities under whose budget this comes. Parents at the schools who are concerned that the post remains unfilled may also wish to examine whether their raising supplementary funds would help resolve the recruitment problem.

Meanwhile Transport officer Frank will see what more can be done to help drivers pay attention to the existing humped crossing point. He will ensure that the worn and indistinct white flashes on the hump, and the 'SLOW' sign on the tarmac (Basingfield Road side) are repainted and that a further 'SLOW' sign is painted before the crossing on the other side. He will examine the possibility of rendering the surface of the crossing hump in some distinct colour such as red or green. We argued strongly in favour although Lynne noted that there are safety arguments against, as well as for, this practice, in that pedestrians might assume they have right of way because of the different colour. Subsequent to the meeting, Peter took a close look at the situation in nearby Kingston where many humped crossing points have been topped with red bricks. These can be seen on all roads that feed into Maple Road Surbiton from the river, also in Union Street Kingston (at the Eden walk crossing). Clearly Kingston do not regard a different colour on top of humps to be a problem. Pedestrians there do not assume that they have the right of way.

Schools will be encouraged to refocus on educating children in pedestrian safety: we will speak to Governors. Lynne noted that her department offers such sessions to Year 3 children but that the Junior School had not taken this up over the past year (though they have done so periodically in previous years).

Lastly, we have asked our local police to try to be around the crossing point on occasion between 08.30 - 09.00 or 15.00 - 15.30 and they have responded positively. They cannot take on regular traffic duties but they can be there around then at unpredictable intervals and book motorists using mobile phones at that point. During the twenty minutes we spent at the site on Friday 14 September, sure enough we saw one driver using her mobile as she one-handledly negotiated the crossing and bridge...