Action for Public Transport (N.S.W.) Inc.

On 28th February 2005, Action for Public Transport (APTNSW) attended the first day of a two-day Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Workshop hosted by Austroads and Australian Roads Research Board (ARRB) Transport Research at the Stamford Sydney Airport Hotel. The 35 delegates included 19 from local councils and 10 from the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA). As well as defending public transport users, the APTNSW delegate also spoke up for cyclists and pedestrians.

The stated purposes of the workshop included familiarising people with current best practice in traffic calming and LATM design, and presenting the background material underpinning the new revision of the Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice on LATM.

The workshop was based on the Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Guidelines, Part 10 Local Area Traffic Management. This publication was released by Austroads in 2004 as an Interim Guide within the existing Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice Series. Over the next three years, the existing series will be restructured and enhanced, and will be published as an on-line Traffic Management Series.

Both in the presentations and in the Guide, bicycles received lots of attention, pedestrians rather less, and buses less still. There was no mention of bus stops, although, to be fair, they are usually not applicable to an LATM scheme.

The APTNSW delegate did not have many opportunities to argue for better facilities, but the mere presence of such a delegate at an LATM workshop will serve as a continuing reminder of the BBB Brigade to participants and presenters.

The sessions were fairly predictable. Much emphasis was placed on the risk assessment process and the recording thereof because of the threat of legal claims. A law practitioner gave a session solely on legal liability. The message was, prepare risk assessments for everything and document your decision (whether to act or to do nothing). Councils, authorities and contractors should identify all risks, and calculate the likelihood of them happening and the consequences if they did happen. In the decision to proceed or not, it was legitimate to have regard to the cost, and the constraints of the budget. Activists might take note and include the threat of legal claims as a supporting argument in their representations for various changes.

In these sessions, the “warrants” were very important. A warrant is “a statement of those conditions at which intervention is considered to be required. By implication, it is a quantitative and objective basis for taking action”. (Or for not taking action.) Some improvisation with the criteria and interpretation of the results is allowed, and even expected.

In summary, according to what was said and what is in the Guide, the BBB Brigade is well protected, but whether these guidelines are put into practice consistently and universally is another matter.

For further information see http://www.austroads.com.au/.