The residents of Clift Crescent, Heagney Crescent and Hambidge Crescent and other road users have written to Ministers, members of the ACT Legislative Assembly and Roads ACT regarding their concerns about traffic volumes, speeding and other road safety and amenity issues on these streets.
Roads ACT has developed the Traffic Warrant System (TWS) to identify the need for traffic management and road safety measures on residential streets. This system takes into consideration the total traffic volume, traffic speed, crash history and land use of each street to provide a ranking. Clift Crescent, Heagney Crescent and Hambidge Crescent ranked relatively high on the 2009 TWS.
On 2 May 2012 a motion was passed in the ACT Legislative Assembly calling on the ACT Government to consult and initiate traffic calming measures on Clift Crescent.
In November/December 2012, Roads ACT collected feedback about issues of concern from residents of Chisholm, Richardson, Gilmore and the wider community.
The feedback received included 222 hardcopy survey responses and 16 online submissions. Ten people also attended an information session at the Caroline Chisholm School on 29 November 2012.
Key areas of concern raised by the community included speeding, dangerous intersections and 'rat running' through the suburbs.
The concerns identified as requiring immediate solutions were speeding and excessive traffic volumes.
The technical analysis of traffic data showed that 85th percentile speeds* are above the speed limit on Goldstein Crescent (near Isabella Drive), Beattie Crescent, Heagney Crescent, Hambidge Crescent and Clift Crescent (near Johnson Drive).
Traffic volumes on Goldstein Crescent (near Heagney Crescent) and Hambidge Crescent (near Isabella Drive) also exceed the desirable limits for the road environment.
(*the speed at which 85% of the surveyed traffic is travelling at or below)
A traffic management scheme was developed to improve traffic conditions on Clift Crescent, Heagney Crescent and Hambidge Crescent, as well as issues on surrounding streets identified during the analysis of traffic data and from community feedback.
The objectives of this scheme were to:
The technical principles behind this scheme were:
For more information view a summary of the proposed treatments.
The community was consulted again in March/April 2013 to seek views on the proposed treatments for improvement.
The feedback received included 202 hardcopy responses and 89 online submissions. Forty people also attended the public display/information session at the Caroline Chisholm School on 14 March 2013.
This feedback included:
In view of the results of the technical analysis and the feedback received from the community, and considering the technical effectiveness of the proposed treatments, the final scheme has been modified and now incorporates some alternative treatments suggested and supported by the community.
It is important to note that the final scheme is an overall 'master plan' for the area and that not all proposed devices will be installed at once. The master plan will guide the implementation of the scheme over a number of years due to annual budgetary constraints.
For information on the master plan View a PDF of the final scheme for implementation (please note: this map contains elements which cannot be made accessible. If you are experiencing difficulty accessing the information in this map please contact 13 22 81 to request a hard copy).
Priorities have been assigned to the proposed treatments based on the results of the technical analysis and feedback from the community.
The priority 1 treatments are:
Some of these priority 1 treatments were implemented in mid-2014.
*Please note this document contains elements which cannot be made accessible. If you are unable to access the information in this plan, please contact 13 22 81 to request a hard copy.
In early 2015, six months after the implementation of the priority 1 measures, the Chisholm, Richardson and Gilmore traffic management scheme was evaluated to determine if the measures in place had achieved the stated objectives of reducing travelling speeds and increasing overall road safety.
The technical evaluation included a 'before' and 'after' comparison of traffic speed, volume and crashes. Community feedback was also sought regarding the effectiveness of the treatments, and a total of 339 responses were received. The key findings from the overall analysis are outlined below.
Given the overall technical success of the implemented scheme, the implemented measures on Clift Crescent and Baskerville Street will be retained. Traffic conditions on Heagney Crescent, Hambidge Crescent, Goldstein Crescent, Beattie Crescent, Deamer Crescent, Norriss Street and Proctor Street will continue to be monitored. Any further improvements, if required, will be considered in future programs, when funding becomes available, in consultation with residents of the respective streets.