Citation

Brindle BE. Aust. Road Res. 1991; 21(2): 37-55.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1991, Australian Road Research Board ARRB)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Australia has been a world leader in the implementation of measures to moderate the impacts of traffic in living areas. We have called this 'Local Area Traffic Management' or 'Residential Street Management'. Similar measures have been applied in many other countries, modified to suit their local conditions. In Germany, measures to support 30 km/h speed limits and zones of care and to improve street environments (similar in type and scope to those in Australia) have been described as 'verkehrsberuhigung'. This translates as 'traffic pacification' or 'traffic calming'. Recently, the latter term has been used to describe a much wider concept of traffic management and suppression in cities. Exaggerated claims have been made about the extent of application and success of such programs. This paper points out the distinction between theory and practice and suggests a way of seeing these approaches to 'traffic calming' as complementary. It also points out the nature of social and structural changes that would be required to achieve the traffic calmed cities currently being visualised. Three levels of traffic calming are identified, and a distinction is drawn between physical or management measures on the one hand, and social or cultural characteristics on the other. Doubt is expressed about the reliability of theories of travel as a function of urban character, and our ability to implement them effectively.