Walkers Cyclists given priority in road hierarchy drive.

[The 2nd Womble]

http://m.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/ ... 2x7gk.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Pedestrians and bicycles would sit at or near the top of a "road user hierarchy'' with private motor vehicles bringing up the bottom, under a suggestion by Greens MLA Shane Rattenbury.
Mr Rattenbury, the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, also wants an inquiry to consider whether it should be a criminal offence for drivers to threaten pedestrians or cyclists.
And the keen cyclist has recommended that learner drivers be required to demonstrate awareness of safety issues related to vulnerable road users.
Advertisement
In response to lobbying by Mr Rattenbury, an ACT Legislative Assembly committee is conducting an inquiry into vulnerable road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and motorbike riders. In a submission to the inquiry, Mr Rattenbury has suggested the committee consider whether the ACT should follow the federal government in adopting a formal road user hierarchy that governs the way urban planning and design is undertaken.
Under the hierarchy, priority would be given to pedestrians, followed by bicycles, public transport, service vehicles and finally private motor vehicles.
"It is important for the ACT government to investigate how it can provide priority to vulnerable road users, both in newly developed areas and in areas that are being redeveloped,'' Mr Rattenbury said.
"Providing priority has the direct effect of improving safety but it also indirectly benefits safety by encouraging more use of 'active transport'.
"It is well established that the more people that use active travel in an urban environment, the safer it becomes for those users overall.''
Where possible, cyclists would be separated from motorised traffic on shared paths and Copenhagen-style bicycle lanes.
Mr Rattenbury said vulnerable road users should be defined in ACT transport laws.
Some submissions to the inquiry recommended that a legal onus be placed on motorists involved in accidents with pedestrians or cyclists to prove they were not at fault.
Mr Rattenbury said he was not advocating such a change to the law but did support improved learner driver training focused on vulnerable road users. He encouraged the committee to consider whether people found guilty of driving offences involving vulnerable road users should have to attend special education courses.
Mr Rattenbury said several American states had enacted laws to prohibit certain actions that endanger vulnerable road users.
These include car drivers who harass cyclists by swerving or throwing objects at them.
"A law such as this would not only discourage and penalise this behaviour but make clear that the ACT is a jurisdiction that encourages and supports people using sustainable transport,'' he said.
Mr Rattenbury said 40km/h speed limits in town centres had been well received by the public and trials of lower speeds should be considered for other areas, including suburbs with large numbers of older and younger residents.

[il padrone]

Mr Rattenbury said several American states had enacted laws to prohibit certain actions that endanger vulnerable road users.
These include car drivers who harass cyclists by swerving or throwing objects at them.
"A law such as this would not only discourage and penalise this behaviour

As I understand the road rules, throwing objects out of a moving vehicle is already illegal, just needs more emphaisis and rigour in enforcement. Deliberately swerving at a cyclist could well be regarded as dangerous driving, dependent on the circumstances.

More and more new rules is not the answer. Police who give a damn and take real action is the crucial key.

[The 2nd Womble]

Agreed.

[Mulger bill]

More and more new rules is not the answer. Police who give a damn and take real action is the crucial key.

But, but... I thought "tough new laws" were the cure to all humanities problems...

[g-boaf]

We need LAW AND ORDER! Vote for me and I'll implement LAW AND ORDER!

How many times have we heard those get tough style words.The more things change, the more they remain the same.

Pedestrian and cycling priority is a major way to reduce traffic congestion. More people on bikes and less in cars will help that.

[Tomca74]

the general public seem to be unaware or conveniently ignore the fact that use of roads (walk PT Cycle) is a human right. Driving a car is only a privelege.