Traffic island outside March Museum should be extended to split zebra crossing into two sections

The crossing outside March Museum - with the nearby traffic island.

The crossing outside March Museum - with the nearby traffic island. - Credit: Archant

I REFER to your report and the letter from Trevor Bevis of your March 1 edition regarding the Fountain and the traffic lights, in March.

It seems to me that those who are calling for the traffic lights to be switched off or removed have overlooked the fact that the present four light-controlled crossings at the Fountain junction will still be needed by pedestrians.

Or are they just going to have to take their chances?

As Mr Bevis said: “Drivers act by them” [the traffic lights], to which I would add “and so do pedestrians”, especially the elderly, disabled, blind and partially sighted.

Speaking of pedestrian crossings, why not extend the traffic island outside March Museum a few yards south so as to include the adjacent pedestrian crossing?

You may also want to watch:

This would then divide the crossing into two separate sections, each of which could be crossed independently, especially by the not-so-nimble who take longer to cross.

There is plenty of room for a mid-way ‘refuge’ within the existing hashed white line area which occupies a third of the total width of the highway.

Most Read


High School Close


Via e-mail

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter