STAINDROP parish councillors are continuing to fight for a pedestrian crossing on the main road through their village despite being repeatedly turned down by county bosses.
Parish councillors ramped up their campaign for a crossing after one was put up outside Glaxo, in Barnard Castle, on a road they claim is much less busy and dangerous than their main street.
Parish clerk Tom Bolton told councillors during their September meeting that a county council officer had said they receive more requests for pedestrian crossings than they can fund through the county’s road safety budget.
Staindrop also did not meet the requirements for a crossing, the officer had said in an email to the clerk. The council says it wouldn’t be safe to have a crossing there.
Mr Bolton added: “What he says is the criteria isn’t met because overall there is no desire line on what is a long section of road, so pedestrians cross along the whole length of the A688, rather than at a specific area.
“He did set out in his email that the crossing at Glaxo was funded by the company with a contribution from the council. The crossing was assessed and the finding was that a crossing at this location was justified.”
Mr Bolton advised that the cost of a pedestrian crossing ranges from £70,000 to £80,000, and potentially higher “if utilities are involved” .
Cllr Ed Chicken responded: “I think there is weasel words in relation to Glaxo (GSK). Are they saying even if you need a crossing, or the crossing is justified, you have to put your hand in your pocket? Is that the issue?”
Cllr Roger Humphries added: “At Glaxo two times a day there are people crossing at the same point to get into the car park and that is it. I cannot believe that in objective absolute terms that is a greater highway danger than the position in Staindrop.”
Cllr Ian Royston said he crossed the main road in Staindrop several times a day, but rarely at the same point. He added, however, that people would cross at a single point if a pedestrian crossing existed.
Cllr Royston said: “The lollypop lady stands in exactly the same place every day.”
Parish chairman Cllr David Reed said: “The ideal would be to have it in the middle of the village. We should do really because of the volume of traffic that comes through the village. it is unbelievable.”
He added that even more people would be crossing the street if a recent proposal for 50 homes in the village becomes a reality. The council decided to ask county officers for more details of traffic surveys done at Glaxo as well as the most recent surveys done at Staindrop. They also plan to raise the issue with county councillors for the village George Richardson and James Rowlandson.
Stephen Reed, planning and development manager at Durham County Council, said: “We have corresponded with Staindrop Parish Council about the request for a zebra crossing and have explained that, unfortunately, it is not safe to progress at this location as it does not meet Department for Transport safety criteria.”
![A COUNTY councillor is backing a campaign to get a pedestrian crossing in Staindrop. Frustrated parish councillors in the village summoned their county council representative Cllr George Richardson to their latest meeting to discuss several issues, including the call for a safe way to cross the A688. Earlier this year their request for a crossing was turned down by the county council’s highways officers. Parish council chairman Jonothan Raper described the reasons for the refusal as “spurious” and called on Cllr Richardson to support their campaign. He added: “One of the arguments they made was there is no clear line of desire when they studied the village – well this isn’t a clear line of desire because there isn’t a crossing, people cross whenever they can. “When the lollipop person was there, one of the things I noticed was people would walk all the way down to the lollipop person to cross the road to go to the shop or to go to the school.” He added a problem of parking at the primary school is exacerbated because people are too afraid to walk their children across the road. Cllr Richardson said he had supported previous attempts for a crossing point with the first being made about 15 years ago. He added: “We went fairly well down the road with that and they looked into it. The only recommended place was where the bus stop is and to get the visibility splays, people on the other side of the road would lose their parking. “That didn’t go down well so it just died a death.” Cllr Raper said he suspected the real reason for the officers’ refusal was the cost of installing a crossing. He added that much of the cost could be recovered from savings made on not having to employ a lollipop patrol. Cllr Raper said: “A lollipop person only provides a benefit of crossing for three hours of the day. You are getting 21 extra hours of crossing time [with a pedestrian crossing].” Cllr Richardson said he would raise the issue with the county council’s cabinet member for highways, Cllr John Shuttleworth.](https://teesdalemercury.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/georgeR-120x86.jpg)
