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

  Appropriate

• 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.

  No comment

• 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

  Support restrictions for younger users.

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

  No comment

• 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

  Perhaps upcoming future technology could have been included - eg. delivery robots. Broader benefits of alternative transport modes are often neglected - eg. community health benefits, congestion benefits.

• 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

  I feel that Australian cities are built for motor vehicles. As our cities grow, we must adjust our infrastructure to adapt to new forms of transport. I do not think it is reasonable to expect a bike lane to be built on every street, so different modes of transport must be able to co-exist. I think that there is too much road space currently allocated for parking, and we must move towards reallocating road space for community use and provisioning it for people walking and other smaller forms of transport. If footpaths were wider, there would more space to safely allow for different uses (bins, seating, mobility devices, people walking).

• 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) I agree with 10km/hr as the current standard on shared paths. Any slower and balancing will become an issue for bicycles and likely other devices. b) bicycle areas - I support 25km/hr as the current standard for ebikes. c) roads - road specific speed limit, although, more high pedestrian areas should be reduced to 30km/h.

• 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

  Yes, I support that decision.