RESIDENTS in Stanford-le-Hope are being called on to support a petition calling for improvements to a road crossing used by children to get to school which they beleive is dangerous.

The pedestrian crossing is on Southend Road, close to the town centre and the junction with Scratton Road, where St Joseph's Catholic Primary School is located.

The petition, which has already won significant support through comments on social media, has been organised by resident Ana Tormey, who says 'This is an unsafe crossing'.

The petition, which can be accessed via this link, calls on the highways authority to "Add traffic lights to the pedestrian crossing outside DS Wines and extend the parking restrictions. 

"The crossing is unsafe. There is not a clear line of sight for pedestrians pedestrians or drivers. 

"Adding traffic lights would increase pedestrian safety. 

"This is a popular crossing for both Stanford Town, Hardie Park and the school."

The crossing sits in the Stanford West ward and is supported by local independent councillor Neil Speight, though he warns council officers currently hold a different opinion.

This picture, taken by ward councillor Neil Speight, was submitted to the highways team as indicative of the problem with lines of sight for pboth pedestrians and vehicles approaching the crossing, but officers decreed it did not show a danger.

He says: "At the request of residents last year I raised this very issue.

"I think there is a very real danger presented by the positioning of this crossing and the inadequate signing and zig zags either side of it, particularly in the light of increased usage by families and children who have move into the nearby new housing estate.

"I shared my concerns, and those of residents, with the highways team but sadly they did not support the call for changes.

"They said what is in place is already an exceptional provision, made after residents' requests, but they did not beleive the issues I raised about line of sight, speeding vehicles and increased footfall were valid.

"The response I got is below:

The crossing was introduced in the 2016/17 financial year and was approved by the Head of Service at that time.

The investigation followed requests for a crossing point from residents with strong support from a local ward member.

While the crossing did not meet criteria there was support for a facility due to the proximity of the schools

The difficulty in providing a facility, as on many roads, is that

• the crossing point needs to be on or as near to the pedestrian desire line as possible or it will result in pedestrians crossing the road away from the crossing, which in itself is a road safety issue and positioning a crossing on a section of road which already has other infrastructure (such as driveway crossovers, on street parking, bus stops and proximity to junctions) is difficult.

"Regarding zig zag markings the officer said:

"A pair is one Zig and one Zag, and therefore the markings in this location count as four. Within the design the zig-zags for this crossing were shortened for two considerations:

• the proximity of the bus stops in the areas.
• the requirement for on street parking. There are properties adjacent to the location which do not have the opportunity to provide any alternative parking and need to park on street.

The options were to introduce a crossing with reduced Zig-zags or not to introduce a crossing at this location.

The sight sightline visibility was considered in relation to the measured 85th percentile speed (which is the figure used in all traffic engineering schemes) and the visibility of the Zebra crossing itself (which can be clearly seen by approaching vehicles from either direction).

Following the detail design, before the scheme was introduced, it was subject to a Level 2 Road Safety Audit (undertaken by an authorised external body). No concerns or comments were raised in relation to the safety of the crossing.

Upon completion of site the scheme was again subject to a Safety Audit (stage 3) where Auditors visited the completed site both during the hours of daylight and after dark/street lights. Again, no safety issues were raised.

"The officer went on to say:

As per standard procedure, all roads in the borough are monitored each year for accidents and any issues are identified. However, following your email, the Police personal injury accident records for this particular location have again been reviewed and confirm that there have been no accidents relating to this crossing during the past five year period.

As you will appreciate from the above, there is no justification on safety grounds for diverting officer time and council funding away from priority locations to review the zebra crossing any further at this time."

Councillor Speight concluded: "I do not agree with the reasoning put forward against the request. As usual we run up against the bureaucractic response of 'we can't do something until there's something that proves we were wrong'.

"In my opinion, that proof could well be the death of a child. There is nothing that can make that acceptable.

"I fully support this petition and will happily do so when it is presented to council. perhaps, though i am not holding my breath, the weight o public opinion and local support may spark a change of heart, so I hope as many people as possible sign up."