Maitland City Council has defended its decision to remove a pedestrian crossing from outside a Rutherford pharmacy.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Pharmacist Phill Slater told the Mercury last week he was concerned that the removal of the crossing from outside Amcal Max in Rutherford would lead to someone being hit by a vehicle.
Council’s infrastructure planning and development engineering manager Stephen Hawes said plans to install the crossing should have gone before council and the local traffic committee, made up of police, Roads and Maritime Services personnel, local MPs and council representatives.
“This did not happen before the crossing appeared. Council had no alternative but to remove the crossing as it was on a public road and did not comply with standards,” Mr Hawes said.
“Council has recognised the issues with traffic and pedestrians in the Rutherford precinct and prior to Arthur Street works being complete the area will be investigated to become a 40km/h high-pedestrian activity zone.
“In the interim, council has installed road humps at the other crossing points and intends to place another, in East Mall, just north of the removed crossing point and in West Mall.”
Numerous residents took to Facebook after the Mercury’s story and most expressed dismay at the removal of the crossing.
“That one should never have been removed, it would have made more sense to remove the one around the corner leaving the one across to IGA in place,” Chantal Battersby wrote.
“It makes no sense to have to two crossings going straight out in front of the new building. One should be where you have to cross to get back to IGA.”