View the feedback we have received on the NTC Consultation RIS - Barriers to the safe use of personal mobility devices paper.

• Question 1: Are the requirements in the proposed regulatory framework appropriate? Are there any requirements that should be removed, included or modified? Please provide a rationale to support your position

  The Framework should be modified to allow for more then one motor as many PMD's namely Skateboards have 2 -> 4 motors to compensate for their smaller motors and the braking characteristics (strength) is directly effected by this. Also the length should be extended as to allow for electric powered bikes which don't follow the pedal assist category but fall outside of the guidelines as they can reach close to 2 meters around 1700mm to 1900mm approximately.

• Question 2: Is 60kg a suitable maximum weight for a PMD? If not, what is a more suitable weight and what other factors should be considered? Please provide a rationale to support your position.

  60KG is a suitable restriction.

• Question 3: Should children under the age of 16 years old continue to be permitted to use  a motorised scooter incapable of travelling more than 10km/h on level ground on roads and paths? Or should they be able to use any device that complies with the proposed PMD framework? (see Appendix A). Please provide a rationale to support your position

  They should be allowed to used a scooter that can't travel faster when 10km/h but should also be allowed to use a PMD under the new framework when accompanied by an adult or guardian.

• Question 4: Do you agree with the criteria selected to assess the options? Are there any key impacts not covered by these criteria?

  Yes, nothing not covered.

• Question 5: When considering the safety risk assessment, access and amenity impacts, broader economic impacts, as well as compliance and enforcement impacts; has the impact analysis sufficiently considered all relevant variables and available evidence? What other factors could be included in the analysis? Please provide any additional evidence. (See Appendix E - Impact Analysis

  Nothing else to be covered

• Question 6: What do you believe is the most appropriate road infrastructure for PMDs to access: footpaths, separated paths, bicycle paths and/or roads? Please  provide a rationale to support your position

  Access for PMD's should be option 4 as the primary attraction to PMD's are they're flexibility to the environments but assess to main roads (over 50 km/h) should only be used when there isn't a suitable alternative at the time or is being used to get to a suitable infrastructure area. Many area's in outer Sydney or outside Sydney have poor access to separate paths or bicycle paths in the area such as country town many streets have speed limits greater then 50km/h but other infrastructure may not be accessible or exist at the time.

• Question 7: What is an appropriate and safe maximum speed that PMDs should be permitted to travel across the various infrastructure: (a) pedestrian areas,       (b) bicycle areas, and (c) roads? Please provide a rationale to support your position

  a) 15km/h - Pedestrian area's have a diverse range of infrastructure with some areas having a very wide and smooth paths and other are narrow and can hardly be ridden entirely. Riding PMD's at 10km'h can be more difficult then 15km/h and would completely remove the point of riding a PMD as a fast walk is only slightly slower. b) 25km/h - Bicycle area's are similar to roads with the removal of care and other users are traveling at roughly the same speed as the other users so there is no reason for limiting the users in the infrastructure. c) 25km/h - riding a PMD below 25km/h could present a safety risk around other road users as there is an increased risk or car drivers miscalculating the riders real speed if not allowed to travel faster. Also most PMD's can travel very safely at 25km/h so there's no reason for limiting here.

• Question 8: Do you agree with the overall assessment that Option 3, Speed Approach 1    is the option that best balances mobility and safety? If not, which option and speed approach do you prefer? Please provide a rationale to support your positio

  I personally believe that option 4 and speed approach 1 would be most suitable with my reasons for option 4 being explained in Q6 (Access for PMD's should be option 4 as the primary attraction to PMD's are they're flexibility to the environments but assess to main roads (over 50 km/h) should only be used when there isn't a suitable alternative at the time or is being used to get to a suitable infrastructure area. Many area's in outer Sydney or outside Sydney have poor access to separate paths or bicycle paths in the area such as country town many streets have speed limits greater then 50km/h but other infrastructure may not be accessible or exist at the time.) I agree with speed approach 1 one but I believe that 15km/h in pedestrian area's would be best rather then 10km/h. I have personally used a PMD on my university campus and I can safely travel at 15km/h and I never had a negative incident with another pedestrian. 25km/h can even be safe during period of low traffic.. The issue with a 10km/h limit is that if an individual has a large portion of their trip on pedestrian paths being limited to 10 km/h removes the reason to use the device. This could also result in users just ignoring the rules and traveling at any speed in these area's as they will be breaking the speed limit anyway. Another issue is they area's such as outside barrangroo towers and other area's like it 25km/h would be completely safe but they would be classified as pedestrian so maybe extending or creating a new category such as mixed pedestrian/bike paths would be useful to fill the gap.