Council rejects crossing for major Perth road

The entrance to Terry Tyzack Aquatic Centre from Alexander Drive, Image: Google
The entrance to Terry Tyzack Aquatic Centre from Alexander Drive, Image: Google

A PROPOSED pedestrian crossing for a major road in Yokine has been knocked back.

Stirling councillor Suzanne Migdale sought establishment of a crossing on Alexander Drive from Yokine Reserve to Terry Tyzack Aquatic Centre.

Currently, pedestrians give way to cars and can wait on a median between the four lanes of traffic.

In a report presented to the December 3 council meeting, the City said it did not support a formal road crossing because it did not meet Main Roads requirements.

The report said a 2015 investigation found the number of pedestrians and cyclists crossing Alexander Drive was “significant short” of what Main Roads required to support a crossing.

It said numbers would not have significantly increased in the past five years because there had been no major changes to development on either side of the road.

According to the report, the City had previously considered installation of traffic lights at the Alexander and Wordsworth Avenue intersection, which could potentially include a pedestrian crossing, but approval also rested with Main Roads and said it was unlikely to be supported.

“In recent years, the traffic signal approval process through Main Roads WA has become increasingly complex and difficult, to the point where very few Black Spot applications for new signals have been approved for the entire metropolitan area,” it said.

Cr Migdale supported the findings and council voted not to proceed.

Step forward for Beaufort Street crossing

At the same meeting, council voted to monitor pedestrian numbers on Beaufort Street in Mt Lawley.

The City will spend $6000 on a contractor to undertake video surveys to find whether a pedestrian crossing is warranted between Second and Third avenues.

A City report said previous investigations undertaken in 2002 and 2013 found the number of pedestrians using the area did not meet Main Roads minimum criteria for a crossing.

But it recommended a subsequent investigation because of the amount of time that had passed and development that occurred in the area since the last data was collected.