Home  


Ealing Cycling Campaign
Zebra versus Pelican Crossings


Haven Green
Replacement of Zebra Crossings with Pelican Crossings
Safety Concerns

Prepared by Ealing Cycling Campaign

Introduction

According to published research, the claim in Ealing Council's public consultation document that replacing the zebra crossings on Haven Green with pelican crossings, "will reduce the delay and danger for pedestrians crossing the road" is false. Evidence indicates that zebra crossings cause less delay to pedestrians and are safer.

Delay

Experience alone tells us that zebra crossings cause much less delay to pedestrians than pelican crossings. This is backed up by statistics. The results of two surveys indicate that the average delay on a zebra crossing is 2 seconds (1) compared with 18 seconds on a signalled crossing (2).

Although we know of no published research, it seems likely that the introduction of pelican crossings will also cause delays for cyclists. On a zebra crossing, cyclists can see pedestrians approaching, slow down, and will often time their approach to cross the zebra when it is clear. It is not always necessary to stop. This is not the case with pelican crossings.

It is our understanding that traffic engineers frequently use signal controlled crossings in order to "manage pedestrians in order to permit the movement of vehicles."(3) Although the Haven Green development is promoted as a public transport scheme, the result will be to take priority away from pedestrians and to give priority to cars, contrary to Ealing's stated transport policy. It is worth noting that any benefits in speed to buses in converting the crossings to pelican may be short lived. Evidence indicates that when new roads are built they are rapidly filled with vehicles, either making new journeys or choosing that route in preference to another. There is reason to assume that the same may happen when journey times on a route are (temporarily) reduced.

Safety

Our major concern, however, is that this scheme may also have negative safety effects. Research in London in the 1970s on replacing zebra crossings with signalised crossings found that the rate of accidents went up. We understand that "in all three studies pedestrian accidents within 50 metres of, but not on, the crossing showed a dramatic increase"(4).

Casualties by crossing type London 1977(5)

Type                          No. Casualties              No. Crossings            Rate

Pelican,                    340,                                  440,                               0.77,
Light-controlled,      819,                                 1500,                              0.56,
Zebra,                      1427,                                2850,                              0.50,

(The same paper also reports that "In Nottingham replacing zebras with pelicans has been followed by a higher proportion of severe injuries")

Our concern is that motorists are now to be given priority over pedestrians, while simultaneously some pedestrians may feel a false sense of protection. We are aware of a study from Manchester in which it was found that many cars struck pedestrians while the crossings were in favour of the pedestrians. It was found that 35% of male casualties, and 77% of female casualties were struck during the "steady green man phase"(6). We were also told at a meeting two years ago by a TfL engineer that zebra crossings were safer than pelican crossings. In the UK after years of favouring signalised "pelican" installations, zebra crossings now seem to be making a comeback particularly in city centre schemes involving traffic calming and pedestrian priority with new zebra installations in Edinburgh, York and Norwich. It is now argued that signalised crossings can have a detrimental effect on pedestrian safety as they may encourage the driver to look for signals and not for pedestrians (7). Our conclusion is that the crossings around Haven Green should remain zebra crossings unless the council can produce evidence that making them pelican crossings will make them safer and reduce delay for pedestrians.

Thanks to Galway Cycling Campaign for supplying text and information.

1, Griffiths, J.D., J.G. Hunt, and M. Marlow. "Delays at Pedestrian Crossings:2. The Development and Validation of a Simulation Model of a Zebra Crossing." In Traffic Engineering and Control, October 1984b.

2. Griffiths, J.D., J.G. Hunt, and M. Marlow. "Delays at Pedestrian Crossings: 3. The Development and Validation of a Simulation Model of a Pelican Crossing." In Traffic Engineering and Control, December 1984c.

3. Pedestrian Facilities, Meeting Report, D. A. P. Cullen, Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs, Transp., 1997 . 123 Nov.

4. How Safe are Pelican Crossings? New Scientist,24/6/76

5. Pedestrian Accidents, A Special Correspondent, British Medical Journal, 1, 101-104, 13/1/79

6.Behaviour and safety of pedestrians at pelican crossings in Greater Manchester, Barbara Preston, Traffic Engineering and Control, Dec. 1989

7. Research, Development, and Implementation of Pedestrian Safety Facilities in the United Kingdom, US Federal Highway Administration Publication No. FHWA-RD-99-089 December 1999


Home