[talk-au] access=destination

[Liz]

On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 1:10 PM, James Livingston <doctau at mac.com> wrote:
> > On 15/01/2010, at 8:45 PM, Liz wrote:
> >> so perhaps the signs are actually meaningless in law
> >> they appear in council minutes so perhaps its a local council job
> >
> > From my searching, it looks like councils are responsible for putting up
> > these signs and I couldn't find any actual legal definition of what they
> > mean too.
> >
> > I did find a couple of reports of requests by residents to get them
> > applies to their streets, and those weren't about noise. They were about
> > kids playing on the street and almost getting hit by vehicles, both cars
> > and bicycles.
> 
> Interesting, can you post a link? As a cyclist, it never occurred to
> me to avoid these streets - if anything, I preferred them, as they
> tend to be quiet, and often quite interesting.
> 
> For the time being, it might be best to tag them with a specific
> "local_traffic_only=yes" or something, so we know exactly what is
> being encoded.
> 
> Steve
> 
A [favourite search engine] search for "local traffic only" gives 844,000 
overall
so far I have found that "local traffic only" is not enforceable in Ontario, 
Ohio
and that they are Local Council decisions in NSW, Qld, SA.
they may be for "special events" eg V8 supercars in Townsville last year, or 
permanent for traffic reduction - excess cars down side streets with any type 
of resident complaint
every example is stuck inside a pdf....