Page 293 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 February 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It is not proposed to implement 40-kilometre-per-hour speed limits in the vicinity of community facilities which are not linked to shopping centres. In these cases, it is considered that other signage or traffic management treatments would be more appropriate. However, the location of community facilities should be considered when setting the boundaries of 40-kilometre-per-hour precincts around shopping centres.
It needs to be recognised that a certain level of engineering works will be necessary to support a lower speed limit. Indicative costs for signage and traffic calming to install a 40-kilometre-per-hour precinct would be around $200,000 for a town centre and $150,000 for a group centre, subject to the amount of traffic calming already in place.
As well as developing model guidelines based on the points above, the ARRB Group prepared documentation for a consultation process with road safety stakeholders and the public on this issue. The consultation process was undertaken in late 2009, and I am pleased to now report on the outcomes. Key road safety stakeholders, including road user groups and community councils, were sent a copy of the consultation report and invited to provide comments. They were also invited to attend a stakeholder consultation workshop on 3 December.
Comments from key road safety stakeholders broadly supported the extension of 40-kilometre-per-hour speed limits, where justified, noting that this would be in line with safe system principles and best practice in other places around the world. However, stakeholders have also made the points that any new requirements will need to be consistent and clear to motorists and that the signage and traffic calming infrastructure used should not create new hazards for cyclists or motorcyclists.
Members of the public were also invited to complete an online questionnaire and view the consultation report via the TAMS website. Hard copies of the questionnaire and report were also available from Canberra Connect shopfronts and ACT public libraries. The public comment period commenced on 24 November and closed on 18 December. During this period over 760 responses were received. Feedback from the online questionnaire indicates mixed support for the extension of 40-kilometre-per-hour speed limits, with strong views held on both sides. While the majority—54 per cent—of respondents supported or strongly supported the concept a significant proportion—45 per cent—were opposed or strongly opposed.
Although there were a range of sensible and supportive comments from the online questionnaire, other comments indicate strong anti-cyclist and anti-pedestrian feelings, reflecting a view that vulnerable road users should take responsibility for themselves rather than disadvantaging motorists. There was also a view from some that the proposal was over-regulation and a waste of taxpayers’ money, and a general frustration was expressed by some critics at the focus on speed management rather than other road safety issues, such as improved infrastructure and driver training.
These comments indicate that more work is required to explain exactly what is proposed in relation to reducing speed limits in certain areas and to convince ACT motorists of the need to address speed and speeding issues. I must say, I continue to be disappointed by the attitude of many motorists in the ACT, particularly around the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video