Guildford Tops Surrey’s Pedestrian Casualties Table

Published on: 7 Aug, 2016
Updated on: 9 Aug, 2016

Guildford Borough suffered 83 pedestrian casualties in 2015, more than any other local authority area in Surrey. Woking suffered 44 and Waverley 40, according to figures credited to the Department of Transport (DoT).

Surrey, with an increasing total of 444 pedestrian casualties, including 10 fatalities, went against a national trend of decreasing numbers of injuries.

Extract from the “CrashMap” showing Guildford town road traffic incidents resulting in casualties. Marker colours key: black = fatality; red = serious injury; amber = slight injury. Click to enlarge.

A “crash map” using DoT data shows collision clusters in Bridge Street, scene of a tragic double fatality earlier this year (2016), and the Guildford by-pass between the “Dennis roundabout” and the Guildford Cathedral exit. There were also eight incidents in North Street, five of which resulted in serious injuries.

Bridge Street has been acknowledged as a particular risk for pedestrians and Guildford Borough Council is known to have consulted Surrey County Council on the issue. It is hoped that the approved new Walnut Bridge, expected in 2017, will provide a safer route from the station to the town centre for pedestrians and cyclists.

The accident cluster on the by-pass has resulted, with one exception, in only slight injuries but accidents occurring there have often resulted in traffic queues that have spread into the town, as drivers look for alternative routes.

Nationally, although traffic volumes in 2015 rose by 1.6% compared with 2014:

Road deaths decreased by 2% compared with 2014, falling to 1,732.
The number of people seriously injured decreased by 3% to 22,137.
There 186,209 casualties of all severities.
Reported child casualties fell by 4% to 16,101, compared with 2014.

According to one DoT report, published in June: “There has been no clear trend in the number of fatalities since around 2011. Prior to that, and particularly during 2006 to 2010, the general trend was for fatalities to fall. Since that point, though, most of the year-on-year changes are either explained by one-off effects (for instance, the snow in 2010) or natural variation.

“The evidence, points towards Britain being in a period when the fatality numbers are fairly stable and most of the changes relate random variation.”

Responses to Guildford Tops Surrey’s Pedestrian Casualties Table

Dave Middleton Reply

August 8, 2016 at 11:53 am

To be honest, I’m surprised that the injury rate isn’t higher. I regularly drive into the town centre and am amazed by the number of pedestrians who, usually with their eyes glued to a mobile phone screen, walk straight out into the road without looking to see if the way is clear. Also, for some reason, pedestrians seem to think that it’s perfectly acceptable to walk in the middle of the road while texting on their mobile phones, paying no attention to what’s going on.

Last week I was driving slowly along Ward Street looking for a parking bay when I saw a young man walking in the middle of the road towards me, engrossed with the screen of his mobile phone. I came to a complete halt and was stationary for several seconds, only to have him walk straight into the front of my car!

As for pedal cyclists, well they seem to be a law unto themselves. They ignore red traffic lights, no entry signs, no right or left turn signs, in fact no road signs seem to apply to them and cycling on the pavement seems to be the norm.

By all means use the pavement with care if it’s free of pedestrians and safer than using the road, but cycling on the pavements on North Street and Bridge Street and the wrong way down the High Street, when they are thronged with pedestrians, is totally unacceptable.
- Paul Stevenson Reply
  
  August 8, 2016 at 3:48 pm
  
  “By all means use the pavement with care if it’s free of pedestrians and safer than using the road”
  
  Why is Dave Middleton inciting cyclists to break the law?
  - Dave Middleton Reply
    
    August 9, 2016 at 6:32 pm
    
    Yes, strictly it is against the law. But it’s also called common sense.
    
    I fail to see why anyone, including police officers, would object to a responsible cyclist using the pavement with care and consideration, if it’s free of pedestrians and safer than using a particular stretch of road.
    
    It’s all part of the give and take of life and getting on with people.
Jules Cranwell Reply

August 8, 2016 at 3:57 pm

It is reasonable to infer that, should the draft Local Plan be accepted, with another 90,000 vehicles on Surrey’s roads, the injury count, and death toll will only increase.

Has this been considered by planners?
Gordon Adam Reply

August 9, 2016 at 12:12 pm

When looking at accident information like Crashmap, it only provides the number of casualties and can be used as a comparative tool, year on year, area by area.

What is more important is the cause of the accidents as that would better relate to whether or not there the accidents are caused by a highway problem, rather than driver or pedestrian error.

Accident information is always used as part of assessing the impact of any development and to ascertain whether or not the proposed development would exacerbate the accident problem.

It is true that more traffic would increase the number of accidents but any planning authority would be seeking to mitigate the impact through contributions from the developer