The paper discusses the origins of local area traffic management (LATM) and the lessons gained from Australia's increasing experience with it. It notes that, while available reports are of some value, they tend to be uncritical. Although there are many examples of good LATM practice, and several fundamental issues can be regarded as well covered by reported experience, three areas of criticism are cited: (a) concentration on devices as ends in themselves; (b) engineering deficiencies of the treatments; and (c) failure to understand the special nature of residential streets. A number of suggestions follows, including: the need to recognise that LATM is not uniquely an `engineering' matter; the need to improve the quality of the works that take place; the introduction of a statutory `Zone of Care', to cover existing mixed traffic-pedestrian areas and extend the same operating concept to access streets; and the need for traffic planning support services within the states. Some fundamental questions remain, and it is concluded that a proper approach to LATM can most clearly be identified within the context of the land use/traffic/social system, rather than as one-off treatments or schemes. (A)
Abstract