Hundreds sign petition calling for crossing on busy section of A27

HUNDREDS have signed a petition clamouring for a pedestrian crossing on a busy road.

Tuesday, 11th October 2016, 6:00 am
Updated Tuesday, 25th October 2016, 6:56 pm
The junction between Peak Lane and Catisfield Road on the A27

A total of 360 people have called for Hampshire County Council to install a fully lit pedestrian crossing across the A27 at the junction between Peak Lane and Catisfield Road in Fareham.

According to Clive Nixon, from Fareham, who started the petition, the crossing is ‘absolutely essential’ and is ‘badly needed’ to help allow residents cross the road due to the four schools and two pre-schools nearby.

Mr Nixon, who takes his four-year-old son to Ranvilles Infant School every morning, said: ‘It’s just not on that we can’t guarantee the safety of children and elderly residents crossing that road without that junction.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

‘The council is spending so much money on road improvements and the Stubbington bypass but we can’t put a simple pedestrian crossing in when it’s badly needed?

‘That’s why I’ve set up the petition as it is about time we had this put in.’

Mr Nixon’s petition follows a previous one from earlier this year which attracted 157 signatures.

The crossing would cost the council about £300,000.

Councillor Connie Hockley, who represents Titchfield on Fareham Borough Council said: ‘This is something that I have supported for years. It absolutely needs to be looked at and if we keep pushing, we might just get it.’

Cllr Hockley added that due to current widening works on the A27, it would be ‘difficult’ for the county council to approve any proposals until the works are complete next summer.

She added: ‘I think it would be very difficult to bring through a proposal while the work is going on.’

Councillor Rob Humby, the county council’s executive member for transport said: ‘A controlled crossing has previously been explored for this site but conflict with entrances to private premises and the bus stop layby prevented measures being progressed further. Additionally, the criteria in terms of demand level were not met and therefore a controlled crossing facility is not currently feasible at this location.’