It is worth remembering that not too long ago, in November 2008, and as blogged by Sutton Living Streets at the time, councillors in another part of the borough rejected an offer by Transport for London to install signalised pedestrian crossings at the Windsor Castle junction near St Philomena’s School in Carshalton. Interestingly, although 50% of respondents to the consultation had supported the proposal, with 45% against and 5% giving conflicting or incomplete information, the councillors’ view at the time was that any changes made to the operation of the junction would have the potential to antagonise pedestrians and motorists. An amazing enough admission, but even more stark given that this was made one year in to the travel behaviour change programme Smarter Travel Sutton! Anyway, that is another story….

Now we have the situation, evident from viewing the video featuring Councillor Heron Campaign to save Collingwood Road pedestrian crossing, that traffic speeds are an issue but that the only way to provide children with a safe environment in which to access their school is to keep the signalised crossing. In other words, keep the status quo again, don’t change anything. All will be well if the crossing is retained, the traffic can continue to move at speed, the children can safely cross the road.

But I see these proposals as a real opportunity for councillors to discuss with TfL alternative, “new thinking” ideas (the mitigating solutions). Perhaps, for instance, the toucan and pelican crossings on Collingwood Road could be replaced by tiger and zebra crossings. (A tiger crossing is apparently a new version of a zebra crossing but marked in a way that highlights the crossing is shared with cyclists). Perhaps the road could be narrowed and pavements widened. Perhaps the speed limit could be lowered. Perhaps the guard-railing could be removed. Perhaps the road-layout could be changed. Perhaps Collingwood Recreation Ground could be extended out into Collingwood Road (that’s out-of-the-box thinking)! All of these ideas together could enhance the urban realm and improve the link between the housing estate on one side of the road and the shops on the other (in addition to dealing with the issue of safely crossing the road). In short, make the area a better place to live and to visit. So the process of discussing the potential removal of the signalised crossings could be the catalyst to so much more.

John Dales director of transport and movement at urban design consultant Urban Initiatives, has recently written an excellent article Small schemes enjoy their day in the sun in which he describes the four short-listed schemes in the less-costly category at this year’s Urban Transport Design Award ceremony in July. One of these was a ‘traffic-flow improvement scheme’ in Linslade, Bedfordshire. The scheme included the removal of a series of signalised junctions and crossings, but overcame the potential for pedestrians being disadvantaged through the inclusion of many new zebra crossings corresponding to pedestrian desire lines. In addition to delivering the primary objective, the completed scheme resulted in an enhanced level of pedestrian priority over traffic.

Who knows, in a couple of years time what started out as a discussion on the possible removal of signalised crossings on Collingwood Road could end with the London Borough of Sutton being short-listed for an Urban Transport Design Award. But, having reviewed the opening salvos from the councillors, I think this will only be achieved if our councillors are helped to understand the “new thinking” in street design, and are shown some examples of what can be achieved. Any article written by John Dales would, I believe, be a good place to start.