Inkerman St safety corridor update: Council prioritises car parking over a safe bike lane

At the council meeting on 15th May, Council had a huge crowd in attendance, filling the gallery and overflowing into the lobby.

On the table were two options: Option A, a protected bike lane on Inkerman St. Option B, a painted lane. Both options had improved pedestrian safety, including 3 crossings, and much larger car parking spaces to accommodate SUVs. Option A would result in the loss of 114 car parks, while option B would result in the loss of 14 car parks. Both incorporated the scheduled resheeting of Inkerman Rd (which accounts for a substantial proportion of the headline costs).

Per the council documents, Option A had better safety outcomes and better aligned with Council policy, to encourage sustainable transport options. It was supported by slightly more people in the consultation phase than option B. Despite this, in the summary the council officers noted that “Local businesses are concerned that parking loss associated with Option A may adversely impact their business” and therefore recommended Option B.

The contention that replacing car parking with a dedicated safe bike lane would adversely affect business was not backed up by any data—- in fact studies from around the world conclude that this kind of intervention leads to streets that thrive more than nearby streets without (e.g see this article https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-08/for-store-owners-bike-lanes-boost-the-bottom-line ).

There were around 60 speakers from the public registered, though in the end only around 40 spoke.

Jacob live-tweeted the public speakers here: https://twitter.com/Hailfromthepale/status/1790665119246295242?t=iAhxuIIT4hu5EOMzlwy_ug&s=19

Most of the comment was from people concerned about losing their parking. There wasn’t much engagement with the council report showing that there was adequate capacity on or near the street—- or perhaps just the thought of having to drive a little further was unacceptable.

There was also some great comment from speakers in support of the lane, including Pierre, a retired local who rides to the PCYC gym almost daily, the salvation army op shop, and Neighbours cafe. A health care worker who spoke passionately about the effect a serious crash can have on people’s lives. Henry (a primary school kid) who urged the councillors to think of the next generation. Rhonda was one of the other few speakers addressing climate change: “if not now when?” Jacob commented that as a Jew, there is a moral imperative to save lives; however saving parking is NOT a Jewish value.

In the Council discussion: Councillor Crawford moved that Option B be accepted. Crawford has previously been supportive of safe bike infrastructure, so this was disappointing. Councillor Martin said that in the case Option B didn’t get up, he’d move a hybrid option—- protected lane between St Kilda Rd and Chapel St, unprotected lane therefter. Councillor Nyaguy said that in the case that Option B was unsuccessful, he’d move to support Option A. Councillor Pearl advocated that the cost of Option B was too much. Councillor Clarke said that everyone has a right to park “as close as possible” to the front of their house.

Mayor Heather Cunsolo said that we should all take more responsibility as a community for keeping cyclists safe, including making head checks and doing the “dutch reach” (using the left hand to open the driver’s side door to avoid dooring). Note that in the Netherlands, cyclists are actually kept safe by separated bike lanes, modal filters, and low-vehicle environments. Relying on mindfulness is also not the Safe Systems approach— which views human life and health as paramount to all else, and “aims to create a system where mistakes and crashes do not result in death or serious injury”.

Option B was voted in. Voting in favour (I think): Crawford, Cunsolo, Clarke, Sirakoff, Bond, Baxter. Voting against: Pearl and Nyaguy. Abstaining: Martin. There was a division called.

A disappointing result. We had a chance to create a greener street, both in terms of actual vegetation and also one that supported sustainable and inclusive travel. We’ve missed that chance. Stay safe out there everyone.

Update 18/5: Port Phillip BUG has registered a formal complaint regarding the council officers’ recommendation for Option B. We believe this was unsupported by any professional expertise that the officers should have exercised; by the council’s policy objectives; and by the community consultation process.

Council fails to deliver on sustainable transport

Bike lanes are the latest conscripts in the City of Port Phillip culture wars: consistency and evidence are out.

Cycling is very popular in our city; most of us have a bike in the shed, and Port Phillip has the third-highest mode share in Melbourne [1]. Research research reveals that 70% of CoPP residents would like to ride more, but experience barriers--- chiefly, we don't want to ride with motor traffic [2]. Cities around the world have massively increased their ride share (and decreased air pollution and congestion) by building out protected bike lanes. Locally, the new lanes on St Kilda Rd have already increased ridership by around 300% [3].

In 2018, the council planned to build out a network of protected bike lanes over a decade [4]. This is a sparse skeleton of safe routes--- while everyone would be within 1km of a route, you may be riding the last 5 minutes home on shared neighbourhood streets. Back then, the bike lanes were the most popular among all the elements of the transport plan; in the review of the plan last year, protected bike lanes and intersections remained the popular actions for supporting people on bikes.

So this all sounds reasonable, right? Not according to some of our councillors: bike lanes are "popping up everywhere!" If only! The plan was for around 25km to be built by 2028; they've built only 2.5km of this.

According to one councillor, you "can't ride a bike if you've got groceries, small children, are elderly or disabled". Not only is this just wrong, it's missing the point-- having a bike lane nearby doesn't force you to use it, it just gives you more options. Even if you don't use it personally, it will get other cars off the road, leaving more space for you to drive and park.

Finally, to the claim that loss of parking will force small traders out of business. It's a reasonable fear, but there's no evidence for this: council studies show that remaining nearby parking will be adequate. The evidence is in the other direction: walking and cycling improvements can increase retail spend by up to 30% see e.g [5]. Similar studies also show that traders consistently overestimate the role that parking has in their success [6]. According to Shane Gardner, manager of bath house Wet on Wellington (City of Yarra) new bike lanes would "put 30 jobs at risk"--- that was 10 years ago. Now, the busy Wellington St bike lanes are rated as one of the safest places to cycle in the city--- and Wet on Wellington is still in business.

Last Wednesday, Council voted to replace the flagship bike lane policy with a weaker plan to make a "range of interventions" like painted bike symbols, sharrows, kerb outstands and street art. The thing is, when the DoT put exactly such a range of interventions in our streets two years ago, this very council demanded that they be ripped out.

On Wednesday, Council voted to "advocate to State Government to deliver protected bike corridors". Again, when the State Government proposed a protected bike corridor along Kerferd Rd (including substantial funding), this council advocated against it.

In a culture war, consistency goes out the window.

Cr Bond says "I'm proud to be part of the most anti-bike Council in Port Phillip's history", but the whole community is missing out: on state government investment in road safety, on reducing transport carbon emissions, on better health through active transport.  And our kids are missing out on the simple pleasure of riding independently.

[1] Beck, Ben, et al. "Spatial variation in bicycling: a retrospective review of travel survey data from Greater Melbourne, Australia." (2021).

[2] Pearson, Lauren, et al. "Barriers and enablers of bike riding for transport and recreational purposes in Australia." Journal of Transport & Health 28 (2023): 101538.

[3] Department of Transport and Planning, Bicycle Counter Data. Link to latest stats.

[4] Move, Connect, Live, Integrated Transport Strategy 2018-28

[5] Transport for London, Walking and Cycling Economic Benefits summary pack, https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/economic-benefits-of-walking-and-cycling, and further references therein.

[6] Note to Store Owners: Not All Holiday Shoppers Drive, D. Zipper, Bloomberg, 9 Dec 2021, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-08/for-store-owners-bike-lanes-boost-the-bottom-line

INKERMAN ST BIKE LANES: Concerns addressed

Concern: Separated bike lanes create more traffic congestion.  

Answer: More transport options means less people NEED to drive. This reduces congestion. Less congestion means faster trips for all— including drivers. And better transport means more patrons to support our local businesses.

Most urban trips are less than 5km, a distance that can easily be covered by a number of  micro-mobility and active transport options such as bikes and scooters.  

Concern: All trees and existing vegetation will be removed.  

Answer: On the contrary, as part Option A, a net of 26 trees will be added to streetscape, increasing tree  canopy cover and biodiversity while providing shade, passive irrigation, and improved water quality.   The reallocation of space away from cars will help in reducing air pollution, but will also contribute to a healthier  and more sustainable urban environment.  

Concern: It creates access issues for emergency vehicles.  

Answer: With careful planning and thoughtful design, separated bike lanes can coexist seamlessly with emergency  access requirements.  

With Option A, there is no central barrier on the road, emergency vehicles can travel centrally on the road with  vehicles pulling to the side when required. Additionally, the proposed lanes are wide enough (2.2m “SUV-wide”)  that smaller vehicles can also go through them in emergency situations.  

We can look abroad for additional evidence. The city of Paris has seen the average response time for  emergencies falling below seven minutes, with firefighters and first-responders attributing it to the city’s  recent deployment of cycle paths.  

Concern: Separated lanes are dangerous because cars sometimes turn into the lane at  intersections without looking.  

Answer: It is very important to make intersections safe for all vulnerable users of the road.  Option A comes with protected intersection designs which include curb extensions to prevent cars from turning  into the lane without looking, signalling improvements to give pedestrians and cyclists a head start, as well as  road surface markings providing clear visual indication of a potential conflict point.  

Concern: This is for people who don’t even live here.  

Answer: This project responds to ongoing local safety issues and personal injury risks experienced by the  community and seeks to increase local transport choices. It supports local connectivity, giving people the  choice to walk or cycle to nearby safely destinations, including shops, parks and services.  

Concern: This is for cyclists, and not everyone can ride a bike.  

Answer: This project is about making Inkerman safer for all vulnerable users: pedestrians, kids, active transport  users, but also people who rely on mobility aids or devices such as wheelchairs, walkers or strollers. Informal mid-block crossing is difficult for people with limited mobility as they may be required to navigate level  changes and moving traffic. As part of Option A, new raised pedestrian crossings with flashing lights are proposed  to make it safer and easier for people of all abilities to cross Inkerman Street.  

Furthermore, all the existing accessible parking spaces on the south side of the road will be retained.

Latest on our Inkerman St campaign.

Why we need a protected bike lane on Inkerman St

Inkerman St is one of the most dangerous routes in Port phillip

This is not just for people on bikes, but also for pedestrians and drivers. In the 5 year period to 2022, 33 crashes were recorded, with 13 involving bike riders and 10 involving pedestrians [1]. The plans for a protected bike lane also include the option of slowing traffic down to 40km/hr and incorporating extra pedestrian crossing points, which should improve safety for all users.

A painted bike lane is not consistent with road design guidelines for a road this busy

There are around 6300 vehicle movements in each direction daily along Inkerman St [2]. Australian roads guidance is that a road with this level of vehicles, and speed limit 50km/hr, should have segregated lanes [3].

BIKE LANES ALLOW KIDS AND YOUNG PEOPLE TO TRAVEL INDEPENDENTLY

Young people need to get around: to go to school, to visit friends and family, to get to sports and other activities— to live their lives as full members of our community. If they can ride or scooter safely, they can get out of ‘mum’s taxi’ and develop their own independence.

To reduce air pollution

Air pollution in East St Kilda is well above WHO safe air recommendations: a recent Guardian report estimated the PM2.5 levels as 7.4 µg/m3 [4]; the safe air recommendation is less than 5 µg/m3. By encouraging a modal shift towards less polluting modes of transport, we can improve the air quality, particularly for people living directly alongside very busy streets.

To fill in the missing link for travel to and from the south-east

There are very few protected bike lanes for travel to and from the south-east of Melbourne. Gardiner’s Creek trail is about 4km north of Inkerman. The Bay Trail is about 4km south. With a bike lane along Inkerman St and Inkerman Rd, the new St Kilda Rd bike lanes would join with the Djerring Trail (under the sky rail), allowing convenient access from the city, through East St Kilda, to Caulfield and beyond to Dandenong.

This missing link is a vital part of the network!

Sources:

[1] Report to City of Port Phillip Council, October 2023

[2] VicRoads Open Data Hub, accessed September 2023.

[3] Source: VicRoads Guidance for Strategically Important Cycling Corridors

[4] Source: Guardian Australia, 4th May 2023.

Inkerman St safe cycling corridor background

TAKE ACTION!

Write to your Councillors and tell them you want a protected bike lane on Inkerman St.

Inkerman St is one of the routes identified in the City of Port Phillip’s Integrated Transport Strategy to be prioritised for protected safe cycling. It is also classified by the Victorian government as a strategic cycling corridor.

In May 2021 Port Phillip council officers prepared an update on the Inkerman Safe Travel Corridor. Inkerman St between Orrong Rd and Fitzroy St was identifed as the highest priority bike corridor for council delivery.

Factors influencing this include:

• As a connector between the (soon-to-be-completed) St Kilda Rd separated bike lanes and Caulfield station/ Monash Caulfield/the Djerring trail (under the skyrail on the Dandenong line), this is of high strategic value

• This street has a poor safety record, with 50 crashes recorded in the 5 years to 2019, 16 involving bike riders and 17 involving pedestrians.

• The existing narrow painted bike lanes do not mitigate the safety risks to bike riders.

• Usage of the corridor by people on bikes is high and increasing.

OPtions for the safe cycling corridor

This report presented three options for improvement. (A fourth option, a bi-directional path on one side of the road, was not pursued due to low safety benefits.) The italicised text and images following are from the report.

Option 1: Wide protected bike lanes with parking on one side of the street

Option 1 separates the bike lane from parked cars with metre wide islands at kerb height that provide a place for passengers to enter or exit a parked vehicle. This is the safest option for all users. Inkerman Street is wide enough so that, with the removal of the central median, the bike corridor can be included without reducing the number of cars that can drive on the road.

Option 1 will require 124 of 189 parking spaces to be removed.

Option 1 is the safest option for bike riders and Council officers recommend developing a concept for this option.

Option 1 is the preferred option for keeping the street open for everyone to use: people on bikes, scooters, and e-bikes, travelling at different speeds, can easily share the bike lane. By making the protected lanes attractive for all these users, it also keeps the traffic lane free for faster-moving (40km/hr) vehicles.

Option 2: Narrow kerbside bike lanes with parking on both sides of the street.

Option 2, like Option 1 is a kerbside bike corridor with a protective kerb. Option 2 retains more parking by reducing the width of traffic and bike lanes. This will limit areas where faster riders (including e-bikes and e-scooters) can overtake to breaks in the separator kerb including areas where there is no parking, at intersections, or they may ride in the traffic.

While Option 2 retains parking on both sides of the road, about 46 parking spaces will be removed adjacent to driveways to provide sightlines between drivers and bike riders. In addition, up to 20 spaces will be removed to support turning movements and avoid reducing intersection capacity.

Option 3: Painted buffers without a physical barrier.

The third option uses painted buffers rather than a physical barrier (low kerbs). While bike lanes with painted buffers on both sides are safer than the current painted bike lane, they do not provide a physical barrier between moving or parked cars and people riding bikes.

City of Melbourne surveys found that 22% of respondents would be confident to ride on typical bike lanes painted on roads, 46% of would aim to ride if double buffered bike lanes were provided while 86% of respondents would ride in protected bike lanes.

Buffered bike lanes require a maximum of 50 parking spaces to be removed to improve sightlines at driveways and intersections.

What about the glen eira section?

Inkerman St is in the City of Port Phillip up to Hotham St. Between Hotham and Orrong Rd it is shared between the City of Port Phillip (north) and the City of Glen Eira (south). East of Orrong it is in Glen Eira (and then named Inkerman Rd).

The City of Glen Eira’s transport strategy has a target of 50% of all trips to be taken by non-car transport by 2031. However this is purely aspirational, with few actions to support it. The main action for cycling was to “Plan and design a pilot cycle corridor improvement project with a protected cycleway to encourage an increase in cycling.” The location chosen for this corridor was Inkerman Rd, which shares the same strategic benefits as the connecting Inkerman St.

Anti-bike lane campaign Starting in 2019, there was a concerted anti-bike lane campaign by some residents of Inkerman Rd. Key concerns were safety and loss of parking (as well some other expressed concerns such as people from outside the area using “their” street). The campaign was very heated, with councillors requesting that they not be harassed by people opposing the bike lanes.

In November 2022 Glen Eira Council officers released a massive report (over 500 pages) on the Inkerman Safe Cycling Corridor Trial. They recommended a bi-directional bike lane on one side of the road. (This was probably due to it requiring fewer car park removals, despite this lay out being identified by Port Phillip as having lower safety benefits for bike riders).

On 22 November, the Council carried a motion that Council “Ceases all work on the project and no longer proceeds to community consultation”. The motion was carried 5/4 with the support of Crs Esakoff, Magee, Cade, Parasol and Zmood.

Current situation

While the eastern section in Glen Eira is a lost cause with the existing Glen Eira Council members, in Port Phillip between Hotham and Fitzroy St we can still choose to make a street that is open for everyone to use.

As of writing (March 2023) we are waiting for the Port Phillip Council to consider the concept designs prepared by Council officers. After that, it will go out to community consultation.

Councillor's Ride February 2020

Our latest Councillor’s ride was for Canal Ward, but in fact we spent a good deal of time in Lake Ward. Our focus was the planned protected bike routes on council’s Integrated Transport Strategy.

Slightly blurry, but the traditional pre-ride photo!

Councillors Tim Baxter, Katherine Copsey, Dick Gross and Louise Crawford joined us. Mayor Bernadene Voss sent her apologies, as did local MPs James Newbury and Martin Foley.

The route we took is here. Highlights were:

• Old bike friendly pinch points on north end of Tennyson St, Elwood. While these are a little narrow for people on wide bikes or trailers, they do the job of traffic calming while keeping people on bikes from being squeezed. We compared this to the new plastic medians further south on Tennyson. The councillors indicated that those pinch points were a mistake and would not be repeated (and some have been removed).

• Future ITS bike route 8, on Dickens St. This is a fairly wide street forming a great connection between Balaclava and the beach. Currently there is very little bike infrastructure on the route, though there is an advanced stop box at Beach Rd.

• St Kilda Marina. The council is currently planning the renovation of this. The design will be done by the successful private tenderer, but the guidelines emphasise the primacy of pedestrian and cyclist movement through the site. There were some different opinions about the possibility of a drawbridge across the entrance—- while this would give people more access to the breakwater, it also has an estimated cost of $5 million.

• Bay Trail between Marina and the Jetty. We spoke about the conflict in these areas at peak times, with cyclists who just want to pass through mixing it with pedestrians, dawdlers and tourists enjoying the space. We suggested the possibility of re-routing the path behind the sea baths. Another possibility is to make the on-road lane fully separated at this point, to accommodate both the roadies and the people using the Bay Trail.

• Bay Trail at Catani Gardens. In 2019 the Bay Trail here was closed for two weeks to accommodate a music festival, with cyclists given a so-called “detour” along Beaconsfield Parade. This was not suitable for many Bay Trail users. The councillors said that that would not be repeated, so thank you to everyone who gave feedback to council at the time.

• Connection between the Bay Trail and Fitzroy St. This is a bit of a mess.

• Fitzroy St. The bidirectional trail here is often nominated as one of the areas where cyclists feel least safe, because drivers do not think to look for people travelling in the counterflow direction. Let’s not build more of these.

• ITS route 6, Grey St and Inkerman St. Glen Eira Council recently confirmed that the continuation of this route, along Inkerman Rd to Caulfield, will be their Safe Cycling Corridor pilot project. It will connect the off-road bike path below the SkyRail, to the future protected bike lanes on St Kilda Rd. This is currently quite challenging to ride, with Grey St having no bike lanes and Inkerman St having only narrow lanes in the door zone. We discussed whether it would be possible to retain two lanes of parking on Inkerman St with separated bike lanes. There is currently a median that could be removed to free up space for this.

Thanks to every one who came along!