Those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are
doom to repeat them
The City of Melbourne's refusal to subject Melbourne Bicycle
Lanes to review has only compounded problems and undermine public confidence.
The Lord Mayor Robert Doyle and others who claim that the
various segments of Melbourne's bike strategy are separate and as such not
related does not wash.
"Latrobe Street does not relate to Swanston Street
which is separate from Princes Bridge and that St Kilda Road is also a separate
issue to both"
Robert Doyle said that Latrobe Street could not be part of a
review because it was in place. Stephen Mayne said he would support a
review if it included Latrobe Street.
The logic that the proposed review did not include Latrobe
Street or that Princes Bridge is not related to the St Kilda Road bike path
astounds logic. Of course they are related, they form part of a network
of bike paths in the same way that various Streets , Lanes and Roads, trains
trams etc form part of the City road/transport network. They are explicitly
related and all directly impact and effect each other. They can not be
separated and should have been included in a ongoing review of Council's
transport strategy plan.
There has failed to undertake progressive strategic pubic
review of the roll out of its ill-considered Transport plan. The consultation
process undertaken was flawed in its implementation. Like the magician or
trickster that asks a serious of questions and then shows you the answer
written down on a hidden piece of paper.
We already know that the process and management of the
consultation was flawed. Most stakeholders we contacted have said they
did not think they were consulted, instead they were just informed and told
what was going to happen and their main concerns were ignored.
A major part of any effective consultation and design
project is the review process. The ability to stop and review a project at
various stages of the project, each aspect and segment. The City of
Melbourne has failed on all accounts and most can be attributed to the
administration of the process , the role of the responsible chairperson and
lack of review.
It all depends, of course, on what your goal is. If you have
a set idea and you goal is to bring that idea into existence no matter what the
cost then all kinds of mistakes will inevitably be made.
There are a number major problems and issues identified
with Melbourne's Bicycle Network planning, each one in turn has an
impacted on the other and every segment and aspect of the overall design ..
Disclaimer and warning
First it needs to be stated that a good designed bicycle
network should make a positive contribution to the transport mix to any city.
It must seek to address all stakeholders concerns and not favour any one
interest group above the interests of another. So before anyone goes on and
seeks to engaged in personal abuse and vilification lets be clear Bicycle Paths
are good and should be encouraged.
Those that engage in such personal abuse and attacks are
not helping to serve their cause. Writing abusive emails or making threats or
acts of intimidation might make you feel good at a football match but that is
all. Please note that all abusive comments are logged and recorded.
Having stated that there are a number of issues and
principles that need to be established to assist in planning the network.
Major roads should be avoided
Where possible a bike path should seek to use less congested
roads and streets. Canning Street, Carlton, is a good example of a inner city
bike path that works. It is a local street that carries minimal traffic
and is ideal for cycling. This is evident by the fact that it is Melbourne's
most popular bicycle commuter route.
Lane separation
The so called "Copenhagen Bicycle Lane" separation
design should be avoided and only adopted as a last resort. To date they have
not worked in Melbourne. Melbourne unlike Copenhagen has wider streets
and different overall traffic patterns.
Consideration should be given, in the first instance, to
installing a chevron line marking bike lanes, The bike lane on Claredon
Street, East Melbourne, should have been considered as a preferred option
before adopting a "Copenhagen Bicycle Lane" closed separation
option.
The Claredon Street Bicycle Lane design addresses
cyclists main concern for safety related to lane separation and risk of
"dooring". (Accidents that occur of inattentive drivers and
passengers of parked vehicles opening car doors in the path of an oncoming
cyclist). The Claredon Street design includes chevron line markings and
wider bicycle paths that allow a cyclist to travel away outside the danger
zone.
Not only are chevron segmented lanes safer they are also
cheaper and as such allow for construct "more bike path for our
buck". The Claredon Street design solution was recommend by Melbourne's
Senior Traffic Engineers but was excluded from consideration by management and
Cathy Oake, Chairman of the Council's Transport portfolio.
Financial resources are limited and any design should have
be subject to a cost benefit analysis.
The closed "Copenhagen style" bike lanes that have
a physical separation barrier are ten times more expensive to construct the the
Claredon Street option ., Closed lanes create congestion, restict use of the
road space by other users, including emergency access, and generate additional
safety issues concerns with other road users.
For the price of the 350m St Kilda Road physical lane
separation proposal we could install 4Km of chevron bike lane and even more
bike lanes could have been upgraded for $2.6 Million spent on Latrobe Street,
making it much better and safer overall for cyclists and commuters alike.
The chevron lane separation design is overall a better
choice. An option that the City of Melbourne failed to give due and proper
consideration.
Public Safety
There are serious issues related to the safety of disabled
commuters, taxi and bus passengers with the "Copenhagen closed lane"
design. Drivers and passenger alighting from vehicles parked next to a 21
metre physical concrete barrier have to remain balanced on the separation
barrier and extra take care in crossing the neighbouring bike path to get
access to the adjacent footpath. A dangerous situation that discriminates
against disabled computers the most. Unloading from taxis and buses is
almost impossible. Try unloading a bus load of 20 or more passengers onto a
small narrow concrete strip away from the footpath as will be the case in St
Kilda Road.
Whilst bicyclists may be safe from dooring, motorist now run
the risk of opening doors in the path of passing traffic. Issues the council
had failed to mention in its report.
The other solution is to withdraw On-Street parking adjacent
to closed bike lanes but that would result in a loss of Council revenue.
Latrobe Street
Costing $2.6Million the Latrobe Street bike path that has
just recently been installed has already proven to be a disaster. It's design,
location and implementation is wrong, safety issues not properly considered and
a nightmare in terms of urban design, heritage, cleaning and storm water
drainage.
The problems with Latrobe Street are considerable and should
have been identified earlier in the design stage of the development and should
have been subjected to a review process now it is in place.
The fact that these issues were overlooked raises serious
questions in relation to the management and professional standing of the City
of Melbourne engineering services. (Most likely a managerial problem)
The failure and refusal of the City Council to undertake a
comprehensive review of previous bike lanes on Albert Street and the Northern
section of Swanston Street should have alerted the City council of the problems
that Latrobe Street is facing. Senior Engineers who did express these concerns
were ignored or overridden by management
Apart from the design issue the other significant problem
with Latrobe Street is the choice of transit route. Latrobe Street should never
have been chosen.
The City Council should have developed Abbecket Street or
Franklin Street as an alternative bike path option.
Latrobe Street is proving to a big embarrassment to the City
Council and this is the main reason why the Lord Mayor and management were
opposed the motion put forward by Councillors Richard Foster and Jackie Watts.
It would have been prudent and responsible for the City Council to pause for
one month and engaged the community by holding a mid project public review
before proceeding to make the same mistakes in St Kilda Road.
The City Council knows it is facing a major problem and is
desperate to try and keep the lid on it all in a futile effort to avoid it
boiling over or erupting adding to the inevitable in a total loss of
confidence in the Council's engineering services. After all they Council
approved the project and spent $2.6 Million creating the problem on Latrobe
Street.
Avoiding an open public review or attacking those that
advocate a review and rethink is not going to make the problem go away.
Like the Collins Class submarine patching up the project to
try and make it work is a be a big ask also. Piecemeal band-aid solutions to a
problem that should not have been created in the first place.
The City Council, as part of its consultation process
told stakeholders that there would be no loss of amenity or parking.
Already Council has had to consider removing on-street
parking. There are numerous issues related to the design of crossroad
intersections and driveway access that place both cyclist and motorists safety
at risk. In short the management and design of the project has little to
desire, it's far from the success the Councillors claimed it was.
Princes Bridge
Princes Bridge is a work in progress. Already the promises
made by the Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, have proven to be false.
Travel time across the bridge is twice as long then prior to the south bound
lane closure. the number of cars transiting from Swanston Street into Flinders
Street is 2 to 25% less then before.
Councillor Stephen Mayne reported that Council has estimated
that there has been a 12% reduction in traffic throughput out of Swanston
Street (this does not correspond with independent surveys. Prior to the
lane closure there were 20-22 cars per light cycle. Currently only 14-16 Cars
are exiting into Flinders Street per light cycle) The reduction in throughput
and performance could be address to some extent by tweaking the light
signaling, something that the Lord Mayor said the Council would do but to date
have not changed. It has been suggested that the Council Engineers had
planned to cause congestion and by doing so aimed to reduce the number of
motorists using the bridge.
Robert Doyle said that Princess Bridge Lane closure was a
trial but no one seriously considered this as anything other misdirection.
Alternative access
Most of the North bound traffic crossing Princes Bridge
turns right into Flinders Street and then turns again either at Russell or
Exhibition Street.
It would be desirable if Princess Bridge was closed to all
non essential vehicular traffic.
The freeing of Princes Bridge from vehicular traffic would
allow for better public transport interchange services but this can only be
done if there was an alternative river crossing East of Princes Bridge.
The Swan Street Bridge is not suitable and is already
suffering severe congestion by traffic transiting in a West East direction.
The other option is for the construction of a second
bridge bridge connecting Linithgow and Batman Avenue providing a
North-South traffic alternative.
Flinders Street
Next on the Council's agenda is the South bound lane on
Princes Bridge,
In order to construct a south bound bike lane the City of
Melbourne in association with Vicroads needs to reduce the volume of traffic
and the number of lanes using Flinders Street and tuning left into Swanston
Street. Most of the cars on Flinders street are exiting the Eastern end of the
City and travelling South. Flinders Street West of Swanston Street.is
already restricted to one lane traffic .
The construction of an alternative river crossing off
Batman Avenue joining Linlithgow Avenue on the South side would ease
traffic demand on Flinders/Swantson Street South on to St Kilda Road.
The Council's solution is to remove a lane of traffic which
will generate congestion which in turn will reduce the number of cars through
displacement.
Road Safety and Consultation
One major criticism of the Council's consultation process
was the failure of the City Council to publish all the submissions received.
Instead the council published an edited summary provided by the
administration. The failure and refusal of the city council to publish the
submission has added to the mistrust and loss of confidence overall in
the consultation process.
Most of the "consultation" that did take
place was in the form of information of what was already decided. There was
little to no consideration of variable alternatives. Many of the
stakeholders contacted said they did not think the City Council listened or
considered their opinions or concerns. They were just heard out or sent
information so the Council could claim it had consulted widely.
A major part of the consultation undertaken was with the
members of the bicycle lobby meeting on coffee shops and various venues, this
was disproportionate to other road users.
Earlier on in May that the Council's "Pedestrian,
Bicyclist and Motorcyclist safety plan had to be deferred as Motorcyclist
and Scooter Riders were not consulted in the first draft presented to Council.
Motorcyclists and scooter riders face the same problems as cyclists in terms of
safety and they rightly felt their concerns were not being addressed and in
many cases the priority given to cyclists was compounding problems related to
their safety
Council Engineering Services Department also
overlooked a number of other significant stakeholders in the consultation
process. Missing from the list of was Ambulance Victoria and the
Metropolitan Fire-brigade who were not listed on the road safety plan .
There is ongoing concern that the various bike paths, tram
stops and lane reduction has compromised Melbourne's emergency response
capability.
St Kilda Road "Copenhagen lanes" will also impact
on emergency services response times between the Alfred Hospital and the
City.
There is a recognized urgent need for a series of "Emergency
stress testing" to ascertain the preparedness of the City to cope with
an emergency or possible terrorist attack. We can not afford to ignore or put
off this issue much longer. The sooner it is addressed and a comprehensive
stress plan is implemented the sooner we can identify problems and restore
confidence in the cities preparedness to copy with an emergency.
Major Stake holders sidelined
Organization such as Vicroads, the RACV, Bus proprietors,
Street Traders, Emergency Services, the State Disability Advocate and the Taxi
industry have all had their concerns down graded or discarded. Details
and copies of their submissions have not been made been published on the
Council's web site.
War in Cars: Engineering Congestion
Instead of managing traffic the City Council is engaged in a
war on cars by "Engineering Congestion" in the belief that
Cars will bypass the city. This will ave a flow on effect and impact on small
business retailers who fear losing customers to the suburban shopping centres.
Retailers are already suffering from the city's high cost of car parking.
City Council will do anything to avoid criticism or
accountability
Last Tuesdays refusal to engage the community on public
debate and undertake a review, before pushing ahead with designs that are
proven to not work provides little hope or confidence that the Council is
prepared to address important issues, other than placing the perceived
needs of cyclists ahead of all other road users and stakeholders.
No satisfactory explanation has been given for not
alternative solutions that are better, cheaper and more effective.
Welcome to Melbourne "Bike obsessed" City Council.
A Council that will go to any length to limit to prevent any rethink or review
of its Transport plan
Greens Councillor, Cathy Oake, is chairman of the council's
transport portfolio
Robert Doyle
Ken Ken Ong
Stephen Mayne
Richard Foster
Beverley Pinder-Mortimer
Jackie Watts
Illustration: Matt Davidson. 
