Thursday, 14 August 2008
IN OUR VIEW: Safe crossings for school kids Print E-mail
Daily Herald   

It's understandable that parents of students at Utah Valley schools are concerned about traffic safety. Also understandable is their frustration with the difficulties involved making improvements.

Salem Hills High School will open its doors soon, and parents and Nebo School District officials want a stoplight at a busy nearby intersection. But the Utah Department of Transportation says the traffic load doesn't warrant a stoplight there yet.

A similar situation exists near the new Lakeview Elementary School in Provo. Parents and the Provo School District have asked for a stoplight on Geneva Road. Here, too, UDOT says traffic studies show a light isn't called for.

Yet anybody can see the cars zipping along Geneva Road at high speed. Because there's no light, the district will launch its own safety plan. It will have a permanent bus stop there, at an annual cost of at least $8,000, just to ferry kids across the street.

Sad to say, parents are justified in worrying. Too many drivers ignore pedestrians.

It's gotten so bad that the Utah Highway Safety Office -- in conjunction with police departments, including those in Provo, American Fork and Spanish Fork -- has been taking part in a nationwide program called Operation Crosswalk Enforcement. In this effort a police officer in plain clothes, as a kind of decoy, crosses a marked intersection as vehicles approach. The officer notes vehicles that fail to stop, as required by law, and radios the license plate numbers to colleagues parked down the street, who hand out tickets.

One frightening indicator is that the decoys find that even wearing bright clothing isn't enough to alert some drivers, and officers have had some close calls as vehicles roar through crosswalks. In at least one Utah city, the decoy officer resorted to carrying bright-colored balloons, and even then some motorists failed to yield.

If law officers find themselves having to step lively to stay out of the way of motorists, the dangers to children are far greater.

It's not that nothing can be done. It's all too rare, but possible, for government to respond to public concerns with a little energy and imagination. For example, American Fork has narrowed one street so that students going to Shelley Elementary will have a shorter walk.

The ongoing danger is frustrating to parents and school officials at Salem Hills High and Lakeview Elementary. Parents and school officials point out that when school opens there will be more vehicles on the scene, not to mention bunches of kids trudging to class or hurrying home when the final bell rings. So why not go ahead with measures to make intersections safer for those students?

Traffic officials say they are bound by regulations that don't let them guess how much more traffic may be drawn to an area. It's true that guesses are not good enough when speaking of ordinary highway questions. But where the safety of school children is at stake, government should display more flexibility and urgency.

For heaven's sake, make an educated guess.

Come to think of it, it's not much of a guess. It's a certainty that within a couple of weeks hundreds of students, parents, teachers and staff, in cars and on buses or on foot, will be going to and from those schools, Monday through Friday.

UDOT says it will conduct further studies on traffic at Lakeview and Salem Hills High after school starts. It can only be hoped that students will be safe until then, and that the agency will get beyond data and open its eyes to the dangers.

Bureaucratic inertia is annoying always, but when children's safety is at stake it's time to stop holding rigidly to abstract rules and shift into action.

Article views: 882  
User Rating: / 0
PoorBest 
Discuss (2 posts)
swskafte Aug 14 2008 16:53:04
This thread discusses the Content article: IN OUR VIEW: Safe crossings for school kids

Finally, the first sensible editorial in the Herald in some time.

You need to understand that UDOT's primary interest is to keep traffic moving as fast as possible. Child safety, or that of any pedestrian (read second-class citizen) is of little consequence. What will determine the placement of a traffic light is traffic volume, not child safety. It's insane. We've built our communities around the car, and we swallow the horrid annual stats with little complaint. How many children have been killed by cars already this year? Its sickening. We all drive. As more of us join our children as pedestrians, the more well see its time to take the streets back. But many parents, who can blame them, will drive their kids to these schools. Traffic will increase, but not safety. Keep in mind, by far the most likely place a child in the US will die is in a car, not in front of it. So driving is not solution.
#387311
leftintheuc Aug 14 2008 17:06:59
Of course, this sensibility will not last. Already the parrots at the Herald are busy at work trying to fault the environmentalist for dangerous school crossings. Expect this to turn into an irrational blather promoting drilling in Southern Utah. (Tomorrows IN OUR VIEW: If only we would drill in Southern Utah, the Utah driver would no longer be worried about gas prices and susbsequently would drive their kids to school, keeping them far safer than their dangerous walks. But the environmentalist wants our children placed in harms way by forbidding us our God given right to drill. For shame, Al Gore. Peace prize, indeed!)

The herald editorial board has one agenda only. When that becomes glaringly obvious like it has over the course of the last week, they throw in stories about keeping kids safe.
#387314


Discuss this article on the forums. (2 posts)
Generated in 0.30357 Seconds