Elizabeth Street Protected Bike Lanes: A history (1993 – 2019) – Part 1
Elizabeth Street is an east-west street in North Richmond, between Hoddle Street and Church Street. To the west, over Hoddle Street, it links to Albert Street, which hosts separated and then protected bicycle lanes heading into the central business district.
Note: the original Elizabeth Street history page has been split into Part 1 (1993 – 2019), Part 2 (2020 – 2023) and Part 3 (2024 – 2025) as it’s our websites most popular page since starting the site in 2005!
These pages contains amongst many things, a lot of text, images, links and embedded links so it may load differently on devices or slow connections. Please contact us if you have additional publicly available Elizabeth Street references that can be included here.
- Elizabeth Street Protected Bike Lanes: A history (1993 – 2019) – Part 1
- Elizabeth Street Protected Bike Lanes: A history (2020 – 2023) – Part 2
- Elizabeth Street Protected Bike Lanes: A history (2024 – 2025) – Part 3
The Elizabeth Street protected lanes in Richmond have a long history since circa 1993 as you can read on this page where we have collated publicly available information, including various reports, meeting notes, Collingwood / Richmond Strategic Bike Plan 1993, Eddingtons East West Link Needs Assessment, Victorian Cycling Strategy 2009, Hoddle Street Planning Study, Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015, City of Yarra Bike Strategy – 2016 Refresh, officer reports, community consultation, CALD outreach, online feedback and motions for and against included in Yarra Council agendas / minutes.
For historical context, the Elizabeth Street lane trial was first proposed in 1993 by the Collingwood / Richmond Strategic Bike Plan and again by VicRoads back in 2009. The lanes were installed temporarily in 2020 and made permanent at the Council meeting held in April 2023, with provision for final infrastructure to be designed in consultation with Homes Victoria as part of construction and masterplanning works in the local area.
In November 2024 newly elected conservative Yarra councillors introduced a motion that mentions negatively impacting Elizabeth Street bike lanes existance and safety despite considerable input from the community over decades.
Yarra Councillor votes in favour of the Elizabeth Street protected bike lanes since 2020: Cr Fristacky, Cr Bosler, Cr Yi Mei, Cr Stone, Cr Coleman, Cr Searle, Cr De Vietri, Cr Wade, Cr Nguyen, Cr Landes, Cr Crossland, Cr Mohamud, Cr O’Brien, Cr Glynatsi.
This page exists as a backgrounder to our current Yarra for safe streets campaign as apparently there has been, to broadly quote, ‘no community consultation’ in relation to these lanes, issues raised by community members and accessibility concerns.
Collingwood / Richmond Strategic Bike Plan: Bicycle/parking lanes. (Page 30) Caption: ‘Below: This lane in Highett Street, marked with bicycle symbols, is far too narrow (SBC guidelines recommend 4.0m but this lane is about 3.0m). Note the opened car door which extends to the traffic lane. The question of liability in the event of a cyclist being seriously injured should be of concern to the council.’
1993: Elizabeth Street lane proposed
July 1993: Collingwood / Richmond Strategic Bike Plan: Richmond Non-arterial Road Routes: East West Routes – 6.1 Elizabeth / Baker Street Route (Page 37)
‘This is an alternative route to Victoria Street, particularly for commuters as it accesses Albert Street. It enjoys traffic signals at the crossing of Church Street, Lennox Street and Hoddle Street as well as grade separation underneath the railway line approaching Hoddle Street. The road width of Elizabeth Street at between 14.4 and 15 metres has enabled the provision of bike and parking lanes on both sides. These vary in width from 3.6 metres to 3.8 metres. There is sufficient road width for these kerbside lanes to be 4 metres wide and they should be marked at this width next time the road is resheeted and lane marked. At the intersection with Albert Street, a kerb extension squeezes the route for westbound cyclists. The kerb should be modified as shown to provide a 1.5m bike lane. The outer traffic lane provides for traffic to turn left or go into Albert Street. A cyclist proceeding to Albert Street is vulnerable to a left- turning vehicle. An advanced stop line is proposed as shown so that cyclists are clearly visible to turning traffic’
Collingwood / Richmond Strategic Bike Plan 1993: East West Routes – 6.1 Elizabeth / Baker Street Route
2008: Elizabeth Street mentioned in East West Link Needs Assessment
March 2008: Sir Rod Eddington mentions in Investing in Transport: East West Link Needs Assessment ‘Project 4: A separated bike lane (‘Copenhagen’ style’) along Albert Street, East Melbourne, into Elizabeth Street, Richmond to Church Street. This would provide an eastern link for CBD commuters that crosses Lennox Street – an important north-south route. Estimated Cost: $2 million, total length: 2.5km’
20 August 2008: Yarra Bicycle Advisory Committee Minutes ‘Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) Task 2.5, There have been three meetings of the IMAP Task 2.5 group. The most important thing the group has done is to select high priority routes to be planned for improvement and (hopefully) separation. The routes in Yarra are: St Georges Road / Brunswick Street, Rathdowne Street, Heidelberg Road, Wellington Street, Gipps / Nicholson / Lennox / Elizabeth, Cremorne rail line path. Council has made some progress on planning separated routes in Yarra.’
2009: Victorian Cycling Strategy + City of Yarra: Bike Lane Separator Trial – Elizabeth Street
March 2009: Victorian Cycling Strategy: ‘Further priority projects under Victoria Transport Plan (VTP) Improve links in Albert Street and Elizabeth Street in line with works to be undertaken by Melbourne City Council.’ (Page 28)
July 2009: From City of Yarra: Bike Lane Separator Trial – Elizabeth Street, Richmond ‘Vicroads is conducting trials into a device which is aimed at providing better ‘separation’ between motor vehicles and on-road bike lanes. Essentially it is a narrow version of the yellow tram barriers i.e located on Bridge Road.The product will be put down on Elizabeth St in Richmond, from Hoddle St back to under the railway bridge, most likely at the end of July. It will be installed on the south side (i.e. westbound lane) and will probably be there for a few months. This is a location that the City of Yarra requested.
To get the most out of the trial, City of Yarra are keen to receive as much feedback as possible during the trial period and will pass all feedback received onto the consultants, SKM, undertaken the trial for Vicroads. It is anticipated that this product will provide considerable benefit to on-road cyclists, by discouraging infringing motor vehicles and improving actually and perceived safety through a degree of physical separation.’
2010: Hoddle Street Planning Study + Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015
August 2010: Hoddle Street Planning Study: Hoddle Cycling Evaluation Review System: ‘Aurecon, as part of the Hoddle Vision Team, and as a part of VicRoads Contract 7806 – Hoddle Street Study, undertook a Cycling Evaluation Review System (CERS) audit along Hoddle Street, between Swan Street (Olympic Boulevard) and the Eastern Freeway.
CERS and PERS (Pedestrian Evaluation Review System) are dynamic software applications used to assess and audit the quality of any pedestrian and cycling environment, which can assist in the identification of opportunities to improve pedestrian walking routes, public spaces and cycling infrastructure whilst supporting the effective targeting of resources. On site audits were undertaken on various days between 22/03/2010 and 14/04/2010. The area between Swan Street and Alexandra Parade has been investigated, as well as the routes to local train stations.
Hoddle Street was found to be dominated by vehicles, which generally creates an uninviting environment for pedestrians, cyclists and other users. The lane configuration along Hoddle Street varies from three to four lanes in each direction, turning lanes, bus lanes and kerbside parking. Also, Hoddle Street intersects with Swan Street, Bridge Road / Wellington Parade and Victoria Parade, which have through tram lines running east-west across Hoddle Street.’
Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015: Part 1 | Part 2 ‘Following the completion of Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP) Action 2.3, Yarra began planning separated treatments for some of the “highest” priority routes identified in IMAP. These include Brunswick Street, Heidelberg Road, Wellington Street, Rathdowne Street, Gipps / Nicholson / Lennox / Elizabeth Streets and the Sandringham Rail line path through Richmond and Cremorne.’ (Page 25)
Figure 7.1.1 (b) Strategy 1 – Local Routes – Actions – Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015 (Page 32)
Figure 7.1.1 (b) Strategy 1 – Local Routes – Actions (Page 33) Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015
1.3 Richmond East-West Route: 12.5 Appendix 5 – Maps of the Bicycle Routes Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015 (Page 72)
1.7 Abbotsford/Richmond Route: 12.5 Appendix 5 – Maps of the Bicycle Routes Yarra Council Bike Strategy 2010–2015 (Page 74)
June 2010: Albert Street protected bike lanes constructed in East Melbourne. The future Elizabeth Street lanes are the direct east-west connection through Richmond to the inner east suburbs.
The Age: Good vibrations for new cycle lanes in East Melbourne (6 June 2010) One of the eastern suburbs’ main routes into the city, Albert Street, East Melbourne, will have its speed limit cut to 50 km/h as new bicycle paths become operational from tomorrow.
The new dedicated bicycle lanes run alongside the pavement and are marked with green ”vibra” lines, which causes vehicles to vibrate when they stray into the bicycle lane. The bicycle works have shifted cars away from the curb. During off-peak times, one lane of parking and a single lane of traffic will be available. During peak times – between 6.30am and 9.30am inbound and 4pm and 6pm outbound – there will be a clearway to allow for two lanes of traffic and the bike lanes.
Lord mayor Robert Doyle said the new bicycle lane was a mix of the Copenhagen-style paths which shift cars away from the curb to make way for bicycles and the green vibra line used in other parts of the city such as Rathdowne, Elgin and Queensberry streets. “Our new bicycle lanes on Albert Street show that through simple design changes it is possible to significantly improve safety for riders without disrupting other forms of city traffic,” Mr Doyle said.
The path cost $340,000 to install and adds 2.05 kilometres of on-road bicycle lanes to the cycling road network. There are about 55 kilometres of on-road bicycle lanes and about the same amount of off-road bicycle facilities in the City of Melbourne.’
December 2010: Melbourne City Council: ‘Item 5.4: The purpose of this report is to recommend that the Future Melbourne Committee approve modifications to the Albert Street separated bicycle lane treatment, specifically extending the inbound bicycle lane treatment from Clarendon Street to Powlett Street, and installing a consistent outbound clearway time which operates from 4pm to 6.30pm, subject to VicRoads approval, between Gisborne and Hoddle Street.’
Return to top of page2015: Yarra Council Elizabeth Street Works: remove the cyclists squeeze point
29 January 2015: Yarra Council Bicycle Advisory Committee Minutes – Elizabeth Street Works ‘Elizabeth Street has just been reconfigured to remove the cyclists squeeze point between vehicles and the fence and throttles the street down to a single traffic lane onto Albert Street allowing Melbourne to fill the missing gap on Albert Street with a buffered bicycle lane for the two blocks westbound. Expect to see the buffered bicycle lanes on Albert Street in the coming months.’
2016: City of Yarra Bike Strategy – 2016 Refresh + Richmond East-West ‘Copenhagen’ style route
September 2016: City of Yarra Bike Strategy – 2016 Refresh – Strategy 1 – Better On-Road Bicycle Network
‘1.3a Richmond East-West (Elizabeth St) Create a fully separated Copenhagen bike lane on Elizabeth Street. VicRoads Strategic Cycling Corridor. VicRoads Strategic Cycling Corridor.
1.3b Richmond East-West (Elizabeth / Baker / Church St Intersection) At the Baker / Elizabeth / Church St intersection install bike head start signal and reconfigure the intersection layout to improve approach bike lanes. VicRoads Strategic Cycling Corridor.’
City of Yarra Bike Strategy – 2016 Refresh – Strategy 1 – Better On-Road Bicycle Network
2019: Yarra Council: Elizabeth Street Bike Lane Upgrades
3 December 2019: Yarra City Council Meeting Agenda: Item 11.6 Elizabeth Street Bike Lane Upgrades
‘Purpose: To seek endorsement for a 12 month ‘iterative trial’ to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street. Key Issues: Travel demand in Yarra is rising rapidly as a result of population growth and there is a pressing need to deliver transport projects that respond to this as efficiently and effectively as possible. Cycling has a high level of priority in City of Yarra policy documents with Elizabeth Street being an important local east / west road and also a key cycle route. However, it currently provides a hostile and intimidating environment for cyclists due to narrow bike lanes that place cyclists between parked car doors and large volumes of moving traffic.
There is a long standing commitment to delivering a protected bike lane facility on Elizabeth Street in the Bike Strategy Refresh 2016. In the 2019/2020 budget resolution, Council committed $400,000 for the delivery of protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street in 2019/20.
The Urban Forest Strategy (UFS) also identifies Elizabeth Street as a high-priority location for tree planting as it is a thermal hotspot, with limited existing tree canopy, significant volumes of pedestrian activity and a large vulnerable population. Taken together, these documents outline a clear long-term vision for this street which includes protected bike lanes and a significant increase in trees and canopy. Delivering transport projects of significance that align with adopted policy is very challenging as it requires the reallocation of busy, highly contested street space which is a sensitive topic in the community.
The Wellington Street protected bike lane project cost $4.5m and took Council nearly ten years to deliver with 11 separate supporting reports tabled for decision makers as part of this process. Contention around possible impacts, and a general divergence of views on various aspects of the project, contributed to the significant amount of time it took to plan for the project before any works could be delivered.
In response to the lessons learnt from Wellington Street, the broader challenges around project delivery and the constrained budget situation, officers propose that an ‘iterative trial’ approach is used to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street. This would allow the delivery methodology and the design treatment to be tested before further longer term decisions are made by Council that consider the outputs of the trial. It will also mean that upgraded bike facilities can be installed in the requested 2019/20 financial year timeframe.
Financial Implications
Stage 1 (the trial) would be delivered using 2019-2020 budget resources. Stage 2 (the permanent solution) would require funding in the 2020-2021 or 2021-2022 budget.
Proposal
In summary, the proposal is that Council:
(a) endorses the use of a 12 month ‘iterative trial’ (commencing in the first half of 2020) to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street; and
(b) requests a report detailing the performance of the trial, to determine the future state of the bike lanes, within 6 months of the conclusion of the 12 month period.
Purpose
This report details:
(a) the delivery approach proposed to deliver this project to meet the desired timeframe;
(b) how the proposed delivery approach will benefit the Elizabeth Street project;
(c) the capital works recommended by officers from the road design options identified; and
(d) the long term vision for Elizabeth Street and the method of working towards it.
Council has a number of strategies and policies that promote cycling, traffic calming, placemaking, the use of sustainable and active transport and tree planting.
Cycling has a high level of priority in City of Yarra policy documents given it is space efficient, practical, environmentally friendly, convenient, healthy, and cheap form of transportation that aligns with placemaking objectives.
Elizabeth Street is an important local east/west road and also a key cycle route but currently it provides a hostile and intimidating environment for cyclists due to narrow bike lanes that place cyclists between parked car doors and large volumes of moving traffic.
There is a long standing commitment to delivering a protected bike lane facility on Elizabeth Street in the Bike Strategy Refresh 2016. This project would complement the protected facilities installed by Melbourne City Council west of Hoddle Street on Albert Street some time ago.
Alternative east-west options for cyclists in the local area are limited with Bridge Road, Victoria Street and Swan Street all classified as strategic cycling routes but all are busy traffic routes, with trams, narrow bike lanes or non-existent bike and significant car dooring hazards.
In the 2019/2020 budget resolution, Council committed $400,000 for the delivery of protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street in 2019/20.
Background
- Population growth is putting ever increasing pressure on the municipality’s transport network. Simultaneously there is an urgent need to reduce transport related emissions and get infrastructure delivered which gives people genuinely attractive sustainable transport options.
- Yarra has long had acknowledged these challenges in its Strategic Transport Statement 2006 and more recently in declaring a Climate Emergency. A further challenge is the pressure on Council budgets which means there is a pressing need for Council to look at ways of ‘doing more with less’ wherever possible in an environment where community expectations are higher than ever.
- Project delivery processes and funding allowances for sustainable transport projects have not kept pace with development and population growth resulting in increased congestion, increased conflict between transport modes and a reduction in the attractiveness of traveling by active transport modes and sustainable transport. These trends will continue to worsen unless Council adopts processes and practices that better match the policy intent, so that key transport projects can be delivered more quickly and more cheaply.
- New innovative and responsive delivery approaches are required to deliver major bike projects to date. The following paragraphs provide some context around existing delivery challenges for bike projects, lessons learnt and the proposed way forward for this particular project.
Challenges in delivering cycling projects
- Wellington Street was the first protected bike lane project to be delivered in the City of Yarra. It has been received generally favourably and is in some respects a signature project for Council with the second phase recently officially opened by the Mayor and the Local Member of Parliament. It is recognised that more facilities such as this need to be provided if Yarra is to improve on its existing seven per cent mode share by bike for work trips to the 15% mode share target by 2015 as stipulated in the 2010 Bike Strategy.
- A ‘traditional’ project planning and design delivery approach was used on Wellington Street which featured ‘up front’ extensive consultation, multiple design iterations and a heavily design engineered capital works program. It took Council nearly ten years to deliver this project with 11 separate supporting Council or Confidential Council reports tabled for decision makers, equating to one Council report for every 100 metres of bike lane. Staff resource requirements to produce this volume of supporting material were very significant.
- Capital costs were approximately $4.5 million with the majority of funding provided by State Government across the 2 stages. Without external funding it may not have been possible for Council to deliver this project given the financial capacity of the Council.
- There are no State Government proposals to fund Elizabeth Street at this time and if a traditional planning, delivery and design approach is taken to project delivery it will not be remotely possible for anything to be delivered within the desired timeframe and allocated budget. If the traditional approach is used it would take at least three years to deliver this project.
- A view has been expressed amongst some community members and groups that Council should ‘just get on with it’ when it comes to delivering bicycle infrastructure upgrades, as encouraging cycling is a consistent Council policy position having a long established urban cycling culture (compared to most other metropolitan Council areas) and seeing itself as a leader in the sustainable transport space. The reality is that ‘traditional’ delivery approaches take a great deal of time, particularly for significant cycling projects that require road space reallocation, which is often a sensitive topic amongst some sections of the community. Some members of the community who really want change, believe Council is not doing enough to implement its policies.
- Council officers have looked at alternative approaches to the planning and delivery in response to these challenges that have emerged elsewhere. These are a departure from the ‘standard way of doing things’ but are more flexible and can produce often better final outcomes with the initial start-up of the project achieved more quickly and at a reduced cost.
- ‘Iterative trials’ are a new, innovative way of working that are steadily gaining traction around the world as Governments look to deliver new projects and new types of project to get desired outcomes in busy urban areas where:
(a) space is often limited and highly contested;
(b) wider project impacts and benefits are difficult to quantify and cannot be really understood in advance; and/or;
(c) community and decision maker opinion is divided to some degree on:
(i) the potential impacts of a project (be they deemed good or bad on an individual basis);
(ii) whether a project should go ahead; and
(iii) what should it look like and what it should do. - All of these aspects were present on Wellington Street which was a complex and a somewhat contentious project for Council to deliver at the time given that protected bike lanes are very rare in Melbourne (albeit common on some other cities). This contention around possible impacts contributed to the significant amount of time it took to plan for the project before any works could be delivered.
- It is therefore proposed that an ‘iterative trial’ approach is used for delivering the separated bike lane project in Elizabeth Street. If this approach is successful then it may be rolled out for other Council bike projects in order to progress them.
- An ‘iterative trial’ approach (sometimes called ‘pilots and trials’, ‘low-cost rollouts’, and ‘rapidrollout’) offers a method of delivering transport and urban design projects using a ‘low-cost, light-touch,– high-impact’ approach where trial designs can be rolled out quickly and be tested in real world environments before more permanent and costly upgrades are undertaken.
- There is already a commitment to providing separated bike lanes on this street in the adopted Bike Strategy Refresh. The trial is about testing the delivery methodology to see how it performs.
A new way of delivering projects
- The delivery and transport challenges facing Yarra as a busy inner city Council are not unique and governments and other agencies across Australia and internationally are looking at alternative ways of tackling them. Although ‘iterative trial’ approaches are relatively new to Australia, there are many examples of this type of approach being used overseas with great success.
- The most famous example of the iterative trial approach was undertaken at Times Square (in New York) where large areas were converted into a pedestrian plaza using little more than Astroturf, low-cost paint and cheap folding chairs. The results proved highly successful, so it was followed with a second pilot, which involved a mix of permanent paving and a temporary plaza design. A third pilot continued the process installing more permanent fixtures and temporary upgrades, before the final and current infrastructure was installed seven years after the initial pilot. In many cases multiple rounds of iteration are not required but this example is provided to highlight the responsive nature of this approach.
- State Government (Dept. of Transport) is now actively considering iterative trial approaches and has been in discussions with Council officers.
Core components to successful infrastructure delivery
- There are seven basic components when delivering infrastructure:
- Both the traditional approach and an iterative trial approach incorporate these elements. There are, however, significant differences between when and how these elements (including consultation) are undertaken.
The traditional approach vs. an iterative trial approach
- An iterative trial approach is multi-staged and linked to a long-term vision for how something should look or operate. The early stages focus on delivery of a ‘low-cost, light-touch, highimpact’ design to evaluate how it works in a real life setting for a specified period of time (e.g. 12 months). If the trial design is proven to work well following an evaluation process then higher cost, more durable, permanent infrastructure can be installed. In some cases the initial low-cost solution is modified in response to onsite evaluation in the permanent design as part of lessons learnt.
- The table below provides a summary of how the iterative trial approach would differ from the traditional approach in the context of delivering protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street.
- For a trial to be viable, the infrastructure needs to be:
(a) easily altered or removed;
(b) low-cost;
(c) fit-for-purpose; and
(d) able to last the length of the trial without unreasonable maintenance requirements. - Materials fitting this criteria are commonly in use for temporary construction and traffic works.
Examples include:
(a) paint;
(b) temporary removable line marking (line marking tape);
(c) planter boxes;
(d) flexible plastic bollards; and
(e) ‘bolt-in’ kerbs, road humps and lane splitters. - These types of materials are suitable for Elizabeth Street.
- It is noted that an iterative trial approach is not appropriate for all projects e.g. where:
(a) major works would be required to deliver ‘fit-for-purpose’ infrastructure (e.g. bike lanes over cobbled lanes/channels, off-road paths, most rail infrastructure);
(b) full project funding is already in place (e.g. VicRoads funding) to deliver a ‘best practice’ final design and/or there is consensus between stakeholders on all project aspects (which is rare in transport projects); or
(c) projects are small, not contentious and where extensive consultation would not ordinarily be required (e.g. installing signage, raised threshold treatments, kerb outstands).
Elizabeth Street: Background
- Elizabeth Street, Richmond is a 40kph local road carrying 10,000 vehicles a day and 1,000 cyclists per day that runs east-west between Hoddle Street and Church Street. The route is designated a Strategic Cycling Corridor by the State Government.
- To the west of Hoddle Street Albert Street (Melbourne) has protected bike lanes. To the east of Church Street, the route continues along Baker Street and Johnson Street to connect to Victoria Street. Although this is a key cycling corridor it presents a hostile, intimidating environment for cyclists; which discourages cycling outside of ‘the fit and the fearless’.
- Kerbside car parking is provided on the north and south, with painted bike lanes between parked cars and a single traffic lane in each direction. It is predominately a residential street with some commercial and mixed-use developments towards the Hoddle Street end. At its western end, a large off-street multi storey (250 space) privately owned undercover car park is provided on Butler Street approximately with parking costs starting from $13 per day. Apartment blocks also exist at this end of Elizabeth Street which contain large amounts of dedicated off street car parking.
- The section between Lennox Street and Church Street is flanked by public housing estates on its northern and southern side. These estates contain significant amounts of off-street parking for exclusive use by residents and visitors. The housing estates on the southern side contain approximately 1,000 off street car parking space for residents and 48 spaces for visitors. The housing estates on the northern side contain 138 car spaces for residents and 14 spaces for visitors, DHS staff, emergency vehicles and loading.
- Street trees are planted within the footpath between Lennox Street and Church Street. Smaller trees are planted within the footpath between Hoddle Street and Lennox Street with some larger trees (within kerb outstands), along with some small trees within the roadway between car parking bays. Some trees within the roadway have been in place for a few years, but have stunted growth; other trees are young and not well established. Some photos of Elizabeth Street are provided at Appendix 1 to provide further context.
- The VicRoads Crashstats database details all injury crashes on road throughout Victoria. The records show that 12 crashes have occurred on Elizabeth Street over a recent five year period. Eight of these crashes involved a cyclist. Cyclists are over represented in the crash statistics as they make up approximately 10% of the daily trip volume but are involved in approximately 35% of the crashes. It is noted that a large proportion of incidents involving cyclists go unreported so do not show up in official numbers. Near misses are also likely to be common and are also not recorded.
- Data from the City of Melbourne suggests that bike riders feel 83 per cent safer in protected cycling lanes. Delivery of protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street would address safety issues and complement the existing protected bike lanes on Albert Street which have been further upgraded to include better separation at intersections. N.B. council officers are also working on separate plans to the east to improve cycling conditions on Baker Street and Johnson Street.
The Long-Term Vision for Elizabeth Street
- It is important to visualise the long term vision for Elizabeth Street.
- The Bike Strategy Refresh 2016 identifies the need to provide protected bike lanes along Elizabeth Street, and specifically recognises that car parking will need to be removed on one side of the street to achieve this. Cycling levels in Richmond, and in the south-eastern area of the City of Yarra, generally are significantly lower than those in northern areas of the municipality. Differences in the quality of the cycle network between these areas are a key determinant of respective cycling rates.
- There is a perception amongst some members of the community that Council is not delivering cycling infrastructure in the south-eastern areas and is more concerned with improving cycling facilities in the north where cycling rates are higher and it is easier to provide better facilities due to the layout of the road network. Regardless of the accuracy of these perceptions, it is clear that cycling facilities in Richmond need to be significantly upgraded if cycling rates are to substantially increase in line with adopted targets originally intended to be reached by 2015.
- The Urban Forest Strategy (UFS) also identifies Elizabeth Street as a high-priority location for tree planting as it is a thermal hotspot, with limited existing tree canopy, significant volumes of pedestrian activity and a large vulnerable population. Taken together, these documents outline a long-term vision for this street which includes protected bike lanes and a significant increase in trees and canopy. A concept plan showing the long-term vision for Elizabeth Street is provided in Attachment 1, a cross section provided below.
45. The long-term vision features:
(a) eastbound and westbound protected bike lanes – with car dooring buffer zones, concrete separators with sufficient width to provide general comfort and allow safe overtaking during periods of heavy use;
(b) single eastbound and westbound traffic lanes which are narrowed slightly to reduce vehicle speeds;
(c) significant new tree planting within the footpath, within the bike lane buffer zone and between parking bays (48 new trees in the roadway and 31 new footpath trees); and
(d) green surface treatment at intersections and other conflict points.
46. Road space reallocation would be required to achieve this vision, specifically:
(a) car parking bays on the north side of the street would need to be removed; and
(b) existing (juvenile) street trees within the roadway, and in the path of the proposed protected bike lanes, would need to be removed and relocated.
- Council officers have thoroughly considered retaining as many on-street car spaces as possible whilst delivering the long-term vision as set out in the adopted policies. It is noted that all existing mature trees are retained.
- The traffic lanes in the proposed design have been narrowed to reduce speed and accommodate bike lanes, however, these lanes still have sufficient width for cars and trucks as per road standards
- No changes are currently proposed to the Hoddle Street and Church Street intersections. Both are Department of Transport managed roads and any changes to these intersections would require State Government approval which is likely to be both difficult to obtain without large amounts of supporting justification work and would be very expensive due to engineering works required to change the intersection layout. It should be noted that the cycle lanes in the immediate vicinity of Hoddle Street were upgraded in 2016.
Achieving the long-term vision on Elizabeth Street
- Delivering the long-term vision using traditional project processes would mean that the project would not be delivered in the timeframe desired for the following reasons:
(a) the requirement to reallocate street space and remove some car parking bays would mean a long multi-stage consultation process in an attempt to reach consensus. There may be also some concerns about tree relocation although it is important to note that mature trees providing good canopy cover would not be impacted by this project;
(b) the potential for ‘decision making inertia’ is relatively high as attempts are made to resolve conflicting positions between providing genuinely safe and attractive cycling facilities vs. retaining car parking. Multiple rounds of consultation and Council reports around these topics would be required which take significant amounts of time to produce; and
(c) the long-term vision involves significant up-front capital funding necessitating the diversion of budget from other areas, or ‘banking funds’ over multiple years. Delivering a permanent solution now would be a significant capital investment which is not budgeted. - If a traditional approach is used, it would be a number of years before protected bike lanes or new trees in the roadway are actually delivered.
Short-Term Iterative Trial – Options for Elizabeth Street
- Three design options for providing protected bike lanes have been identified for the trial at the western end of Elizabeth Street between Hoddle Street and Lennox Street. These options factor in impacts to car parking and trees, and it is proposed that one option is delivered and evaluated on a trial basis.
- At the western end each design option aligns with the long term vision and takes a low-cost, light-touch approach so that works can be relatively easily altered or reversed at a reasonable cost if needed. It should be noted that a road re-sheet is scheduled for 2021. This provides an excellent opportunity to either deliver a permanent design if the trial is successful; or remove the trial infrastructure and return the street to its existing layout, following an assessment of the trial.
- Each of the three design options (western end) delivers a protected bike lane facility eastbound and westbound and maintain one traffic lane in each direction. The design options differ in terms of their impact on existing car parking bays, straightness of bike lane and trees:
(a) design option A provides the upgraded bike lanes without impacting any existing trees planted in the roadway. This results in bike lanes that weave in and out between kerbside trees located in the roadway and parking bays which is far from ideal from a street legibility and safety perspective as traffic lanes would have kinks and bends in them. Retaining all the trees would also mean that more parking has to be removed and more space within the street is made redundant and not useable due to lane angles and geometry;
(b) design option B removes or relocates these juvenile trees from the southern side of the road, but retains trees to the north. This means the same safety and legibility concerns noted above apply to the east-bound bike lane; but the west-bound bike lane is straight and significantly more car parking can be retained; and
(c) design option C straightens both bike lanes out to provide safer and more attractive bike lanes. This means that more juvenile trees need to be removed or relocated, however, parking removals are minimised and the street legibility would be improved. - Council’s arborist has indicated that if the juvenile trees within the roadway need to be removed for the trial, many of them would be able to be relocated to other locations across the municipality. Any stunted trees are not likely to be able to relocated as they are in poor health.
- Typically tree removal or relocation would not form part of a trial as these are at the more permanent end of the works spectrum. However, the trees located in the road pavement that would be relocated as part of the trial are not mature, have a marginal visual presence (see photo’s) and do not contribute significantly to the look and feel of the street at this time. The relocation of these trees would also be required to deliver the long-term vision. On this basis, assuming the long-term vision is delivered at some point, it is more a question of when these trees are relocated rather than if. Following on from this logic, if trees need to be relocated it makes more sense to do this now as part of the long term vision before the trees grow and establish themselves making it either more difficult or not possible to relocate them.
- The visual impact and sensitivity around these trees would also be increased if they are left as is but removed/relocated later. A number of other trees are provided in the footpath: these would not be impacted in any way by the trial.
- Further, tree planting would occur in the footpath as part of this project, meaning the number of trees located in Elizabeth Street would increase under all trial options. Trees would be relocated further away from power lines which means they have more space to grow vertically and less pruning is required which reduces maintenance costs. These are a significant benefit of the project and far better align the street with the outcomes sought in policy.
- A single design option has been presented at the eastern end as there are no trees located in the road, hence multiple design options are not required.
- Concept plans showing each of the trial design options are provided at Attachment 1. By reference to the photographs in this attachment it should be noted that:
(a) a significant number of street trees within the roadway are very small;
(b) overhead power lines are a constraining factor on tree planting and types of tree to be planted;
(c) the existing on-road bike lanes are narrow and put cyclists close to car dooring hazards and between moving traffic and parked cars;
(d) the northern footpaths between Lennox and Church are too narrow for footpath tree planting (having regard to pedestrian and disability requirements);
(e) large mature trees would not be impacted in any way by this project;
(f) existing trees in the roadway get bumped by cars as they are parked; and
(g) the eastern section or Elizabeth Street is relatively bare and in need of additional tree planting. - Under each design option road widths would be maintained to allow the passage of cars and trucks to include emergency vehicles such as fire engines along with refuse trucks.
- A summary of each design option for protected bike lanes is provided below:
Officer Comments on Design Options
- By reference to the design options table the following should be noted. A straight bike lane is generally preferable to a bike lane that bends around trees located in the road from a safety and useability perspective (trees would inhibit sightlines between cyclists and pedestrians crossing near the trees). Under design option A the bike lane bends in and out in order to minimise tree relocation. These bends mean that more parking has to be removed and there is a lot of undefined/redundant road space. In summary, the design is most compromised in terms of useability and safety and parking impacts maximised to maintain existing on-road trees.
- The on-road trees are small and currently have a very low presence in the street environment. On this basis, the cost of maintaining a relatively small number of under developed trees in their existing location appears excessive in the context of this project, particularly given that these trees can be relocated and the project would result in a net increase in trees during the trial scenario. Of the 11 on road trees removed in design option C, only 4 or 5 cannot be replanted elsewhere as they are stunted not healthy. Council is also likely to receive a significant amount of criticism from cyclists and probably other uses of the street for providing a bike lane that is ‘bendy’ without a genuinely good reason (it is unlikely that cyclists will think that retention of small trees should take precedence over
cyclist’s safety). - All trial design options would provide at least 35 new trees as any reduction in trees in the western section is more than off-set by additional trees in the eastern section. In the permanent design additional trees would be added in both sections
- Under design option A (and a lesser extent option B) Council is also likely to be criticised by motorists for providing ‘bendy’ traffic lanes. The net number of trees would be increased further should the trial be successful and the long-term vision is delivered (how this is achieved is explained in the section discussing the permanent street design proposal).
- The table shows the number of existing parking bays and the number of parking bays provided under each option. Under design options A and B, there are a number of locations where parking bays can be provided without a buffer between the car door and the bike lane. These are optional spaces that have been squeezed into the space available to reduce parking removals. Installing these spaces would reduce the safety and comfort for cyclists and people getting in and out of cars given car doors from these spaces would intrude onto the bike lane.
- The absence of a buffer is relatively common in the City of Yarra albeit not on routes where bikes are located between parked cars and the kerb. In this situation (without a buffer) passengers in a car are not used to checking for approaching bikes as typically these doors open onto the footpath. To use these ‘unbuffered’ car spaces, vehicles would need to park very close to the bollards to stop vehicles from parking across the bike lane. These bollards are more likely to be hit and require maintenance than bollards located within the buffer zone.
- The officer recommendation is that car parking bays without buffers should not be provided as the quality of the route would be significantly undermined simply to retain a relatively small number of parking bays and trees in the roadway.
- The cost of delivering the trial would be approximately $400k; this cost consists of capital works, data collection, maintenance and evaluation and is broadly consistent across all of the design options. These costs include capital works and supporting work activity to include:
(a) tree removal and relocation (juvenile and stunted trees only);
(b) linemarking;
(c) removal of existing linemarking;
(d) installation of kerb separators and flexible bollards;
(e) maintenance of trial related materials (bollards etc.);
(f) existing juvenile trees can be relocated, hence the net tree impacts of delivering the best design outcome are minimal; and
(g) it is the most standard proven design of the options put forward (‘bending’ cycle lanes around trees in the manner shown in design options A and B is a relatively unique and sub-optimal design).
- The officer recommendation would be to trial design option C in the western section on the basis that:
(a) it provides the straightest, safest and most user-friendly protected bike lanes in line with its designation as a strategic cycling corridor;
(b) the treatment for motorists is the most standard;
(c) it best aligns with the long-term vision for the street;
(d) fewer parking spaces need to be removed than other options which maintain existing tree locations;
(e) the potential number of parking spaces with a dooring buffer is maximised;
(f) existing juvenile trees can be relocated, hence the net tree impacts of delivering the best design outcome are minimal; and
(g) it is the most standard proven design of the options put forward (‘bending’ cycle lanes around trees in the manner shown in design options A and B is a relatively unique and sub-optimal design). - For the eastern section, the officer recommendation is that only one option be trialled on the basis that:
(a) it is the only option available in this section; and
(b) the design reflects the policy relating to Elizabeth Street in the Bicycle Strategy Refresh and the Urban Forestry Strategy; and
(c) the traffic lane widths for cars and trucks are acceptable.
Officer Recommendation: Hoddle Street to Lennox Street
A cross section of the preferred trial option is shown below:
- Officers (including landscape architects and arborists) have looked to ‘green’ the trial as much as possible. The location of planter boxes in the 1.5 meter buffer zone has been considered, however, it was decided that planter boxes are not appropriate for the following reasons:
(a) the boxes would require a significant amount of maintenance (watering, removing rubbish etc.);
(b) if the boxes are damaged in any way then this generates a lot of work in terms of clean up and realignment of the planter boxes. Larger boxes themselves are also very heavy and require heavy equipment (mechanical handling) to move a displacement of heavy planter boxes in that instance, road closure and traffic management would also be required which are high impact high cost activities; and
(c) smaller planter boxes would not survive in high heat and are more likely to be hit by cars. - Importantly, in the suggested permanent design, street trees are proposed to be planted in this buffer; hence the lack of greenery in the buffer is only a temporary outcome.
- A safe systems audit has been undertaken by an independent consultant on the trial design options and the results of this are shown below. A low score is desirable from a safety perspective and the table shows that design option C at the western end, and the proposal for the eastern end, would significantly improve safety.
Proposed Parking Modifications
- Some changes to parking management is also proposed in response to reductions in parking on this street and to support the trial. These changes are mostly to unrestricted parking to minimise impacts to residential permit holders, and also bring parking management approaches more in line with the adopted Council parking management strategy. A summary of proposed changes to car parking are provided below.
Notes: One authorised vehicle space is used by Yarra Trams for staff change over. These bays would be relocated to Church Street. The other authorised vehicle space is for use by a school bus program. This program is no longer running and officers have been advised that a specific space for this activity is no longer required.
Summary Comments Regarding Car Parking
- There is a significant amount of off street parking on Elizabeth Street, relative to other streets
in Yarra. The majority of this parking is free dedicated parking for residents in private apartment blocks or DHHS properties. As with all streets in Yarra, there is parking demand on the street itself. NB. International research shows that people generally prefer to park on street if is it available as this is often the most convenient option even when large amounts of off street parking is provided. - Parking is a contentious issue in Yarra and there are various views which range from ‘there is nowhere near enough car parking and no parking should ever be removed’ to ‘far too much public space is given over to car parking which undermines placemaking and creates traffic’. Transport data is being assessed as part of an Inner Melbourne Action Plan transport study that has recently commenced. One early finding of this work is that Richmond has the highest number of internal car trips for work per day of any ward in inner Melbourne at approximately 800 trips.
- It should be noted that Richmond is one of the largest wards, however, the volume of short internal work related car trips it generates per day is equal to 1 hour of net traffic flow on Swan Street which has a capacity of approximately 400 cars per direction per hour.
- The large number and short distance of car trips in Richmond suggests that parking is
(a) generally available (be it off street or on street) and
(b) that parking is cheap to use. NB. these statistics for Richmond are provided for information and strategic context and are not a commentary on who uses parking on Elizabeth Street and for what purpose specifically.
Measuring the Performance of the Trial
- Clear project objectives and measurable definitions of success are required to assess the trial and inform decisions on next steps. The objectives of the trial are to:
(a) increase the number of cyclists using the corridor;
(b) increase the percentage of riders that are women or children (a higher than average percentage of women or children is typically associated with routes that are safer);
(c) reduce the volume and speed of motorised traffic on the street;
(d) traffic lanes are manageable for cars, trucks and service vehicles;
(e) maintain access for residents and businesses as much as possible;
(f) improve amenity for pedestrians;
(g) increase enjoyment, comfort and safety for cyclists;
(h) provide robust, value-for-money infrastructure, and
(i) plant more trees as part of the full implementation. - The following data analysis and survey work would be collected during the trial to assess performance against objectives:
(a) traffic volumes, speeds and manoeverability;
(b) cyclist volumes and demographics;
(c) pedestrian volumes;
(d) any reported crashes and near misses involving vulnerable road users;
(e) parking occupancy rates;
(f) comments regarding access by residents and businesses;
(g) infrastructure costs (delivery and maintenance); and
(h) cyclist intercept surveys
Running a successful trial on Elizabeth Street
- The trial process is a significant departure from long established, existing Council processes, especially with regards to consultation approaches. This departure is necessary to gain the benefits of the trial – however, some community members may object to a change in the process itself particularly if they are not supportive of the project being trialled or the long term vision. For example, in the past some community members who have not wanted pocket parks near their home.
- Some community members may complain that they are not being consulted with or given an opportunity to voice their opinions as part of the trial process. It will be important for Council to emphasise that consultation would take place during the trial, and community feedback would be taken into consideration and inform whether the project is permanently delivered or the road is reverted back to original state.
- Careful communications and engagement would be required to explain why a trial process has been adopted and to create community support for both the change in process and the project itself. When using the trial approach the steps associated with the traditional approach are mostly the same; however, the order and purpose does change particularly regarding consultation. Instead of large amounts of consultation being undertaken on a prospective basis before a permanent design can be delivered, the endeavour is to get a trial design installed relatively quickly and then to undertake consultation in a live environment where everyone can see what has been delivered and how it is being used.
- (a) design and surveys;
(b) appropriate monitoring and evaluation;
(c) communication activities; and
(d) maintenance and repair work.
- Using the iterative trial approach it is anticipated that protected bike lanes would be able to be provided at approximately 20% of the cost and in 10% of the time (to have it installed) that it took to deliver protected bike lanes on Wellington Street. Such an outcome would be very positive and raise the national and international profile of the City of Yarra in the cycling space as a progressive Council that is taking innovative approaches to project delivery to get more done, more quickly, and cheaper (initially), but also to a good operational quality.
Planning, delivering and managing the trial on Elizabeth Street
- It is recommended that a trial run for 12 months and be managed, monitored and evaluated using the iterative trial process.
Stage 1 – Preliminary notification – Initial stakeholder consultation
- Preliminary notification would focus on directly affected stakeholders including properties directly fronting Elizabeth Street between Hoddle Street and Church Street. The purpose of this would be to:
(a) notify affected residents, property owners and businesses of the trial informing them that:
(i) the design of the street will need to change;
(ii) there is a commitment to delivering an improved protected bike lane facility on Elizabeth Street in the Bike Strategy Refresh 2016; and
(iii) this will impact on-street parking availability at certain times in certain locations.
(b) identify priority issues that need to be managed during the trial – including:
(i) loading requirements for businesses;
(ii) emergency and disability access; and
(iii) waste collection arrangements.
(c) identify potential concerns which should be noted and monitored throughout the trial.
- The purpose of this stage is specifically to disseminate information about what a trial involves, the capital works proposed and to undertake fact finding. At this particular stage of the process Council should not actively be seeking feedback on the following matters:
(a) the iterative trial as a delivery model or concept;
(b) the road design to be trialled and what this means for people looking to park on the street;
(c) priorities on Elizabeth Street be it traffic, bikes, parking trees etc.;
(d) the merits of this project versus a similar alternative project on another road in the area;or
(e) broader strategic transport priorities. - If practical matters of significance emerge from this process that will impact the trial then these will need to be considered and responded to before rollout. For example, if Council is informed that a specific unique truck type needs to be able to make a right turn into a property then changes to the trial will need to be made to accommodate this. NB. This specific scenario is highly unlikely as officers have undertaken extensive site inspections to understand how the street is used.
- At this stage the trial process requires that the project process should not be held up by endeavours to resolve all potential minor or ‘convenience issues’ and other comments raised. For example, residents may complain that unrestricted parking has been changed to 2P or permit only.
- These types of concerns will be noted and monitored once the trial has commenced. In the case of this particular example, further changes to parking restrictions can be made relatively easily during the trial, or as part of the permanent solution if the new 2P parking was not used, and resident parking demand was deemed to be high.
- It is anticipated that the trial would take approximately four weeks to deliver on the ground. However, it is noted that demands on contractors are currently very high due to the large amount of work that is going on across Melbourne. Should Council approval be provided for this project then the City Works team will progress the procurement process as a matter of urgency.
- At this stage officers are unable to guarantee that the works will be delivered this financial year as ultimately this is dependent on a third party that meets Councils tendering process having the capacity to deliver the works. If the works are unable to be delivered this financial year then the trial would be delivered as soon as possible in the next financial, year most probably within eight to ten weeks. Updates on progress with tendering the works and the delivery timeframe would be communicated to Councillors via E-Bulletin.
Stage 2 – Trial commencement
- It is anticipated that the trial would take approximately four weeks to deliver (for context Wellington Street took over three months to deliver). The trial design would be refined to address any identified priority issues from the preliminary consultation stage. The trial infrastructure would then be installed by Council staff / contractors.
Stage 3 – Engagement and data collection during the trial
- Data collection to assess performance and wider-scale consultation would begin once the trial commences. Data collection would focus on the metrics identified earlier. This stage would again engage with parties recently consulted during the preliminary notification stage, and be expanded further to also target:
(a) cyclists using the route (using online surveys and intercept surveys);
(b) other affected users (e.g. pedestrians and vehicles on Elizabeth Street); and
(c) any other stakeholders identified during the preliminary consultation stage. - The purpose of Stage 3 is to:
(a) understand how the trial is going and what people think in terms of what is working, what is not working, what (if anything) should be changed and how it should be changed;
(b) collect data to assess performance;
(c) monitor and evaluate any concerns identified in the preliminary stage; and
(d) maintain an open dialogue with stakeholders. - Councillors would be kept up-to-date with how the trial is going via bulletins which detail community sentiment towards the project and the outputs of initial survey work undertaken after three months. It is proposed that count data be collected every three months to understand how many people are cycling along Elizabeth Street in all weather conditions and seasons.
Stage 4 – Evaluation and Next Steps
- An evaluation report would be presented to Council to consider options for the next stage of the process at the completion of the 12-month trial period. It is expected the trial infrastructure would remain in place a further six additional months while:
(a) the evaluation report is prepared,
(b) Council makes a decision on the next steps; and
(c) Council staff or contractors are programmed to carry out the next stage of works.
- The evaluation report would consider:
(a) whether the trial design has successfully delivered the desired outcomes;
(b) whether other impacts associated with the trial justify changes to the design or longterm vision for Elizabeth Street; and
(c) recommendations for next steps. These are likely to include:
(i) extend the length of the trial as is (to collect further information or to delay capital investment in a more permanent solution);
(ii) extend the length of the trial with some tweaks (to see if these tweaks are worth including in a potential permanent design);
(iii) trial a different road layout (if it is thought an alternative trial will work better);
(iv) deliver the permanent solution (if the trial has been a success and budget to deliver capital works is allocated); or
(v) cease the trial and return the road to its original layout (if the trial is deemed to have failed). - The scheduled road re-sheet of Elizabeth Street in 2021-22 provides an ideal opportunity to deliver the recommendations regarding next steps to a high finish (including returning the road design to existing if the trial is deemed unsuccessful).
The Permanent Solution
- The proposed permanent solution is based on design trial option C, specifically provision of:
(a) straight bike lane (due to the relocation of existing trees on the roadway);
(b) green surface treatment in the bike lane at conflict points;
(c) bike symbols in the bike lane;
(d) three metre traffic lanes;
(e) concrete separators (to replace the temporary bollards used for the trial);
(f) planting of 27 new trees in the road (in the buffer between the traffic lane and parked cars (these would be canopy type trees as there are no power lines in this location); and
(g) planting of approximately 15 new trees by removing four car parking spaces (these would also be canopy trees). - A plan showing the proposed permanent design solution is provided at Attachment 1. This may change at a later date to consider any modifications required in response to the findings of the trial.
- Council would make decisions on the permanent design solution at the conclusion of the trial
- this is not something that needs to be discussed at length or resolved at this stage.
External Consultation
- VicRoads have been informed about the trial as this project is occurring on a local road and does not involve ‘major traffic control items’ it does require VicRoads approval. Yarra Trams have also been contacted as Elizabeth Street is close to a tram terminus where there are tram driver crew changes and associated facilities.
- The Department of Housing and Human Services have been contacted to understand matters regarding car parking provision and third party open space. Other checks and consultation are being undertaken with service providers to understand the location of services and access requirements.
- A safe systems audit, undertaken by an independent external consultant was also commissioned for all project options.
Internal Consultation (One Yarra)
- Extensive discussions regarding the trials approach and design options have been undertaken with the following teams via a project working group:
(a) Sustainability and Strategic Transport;
(b) Communications and Engagement;
(c) Traffic and Civil Engineering;
(d) Urban Design (including landscape architects);
(e) Parking;
(f) Open Space; and
(g) City Works (including arborists).
Financial Implications
- Stage 1 (the trial) would be delivered using 2019-2020 budget resources. Stage 2 (the permanent solution) would require funding in the 2020-2021 or 2021-2022 budget.
- The parking team have stated that reductions in parking would result in approximately $60K per year less revenue from parking infringement notices.
Economic Implications
- No known direct economic implications.
Sustainability Implications
- The use of the iterative trial approach to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street would help facilitate more sustainable transport outcomes for the street in a faster, more cost-effective manner.
- The project would encourage more people to use sustainable transport modes, and also involve significant tree planting which aligns with the Urban Forest Strategy and the emerging Climate Emergency Plan.
Social Implications
- The use of the iterative trial approach would help facilitate safe bicycle accessibility along this strategic cycling corridor. Protected bike lanes are shown to be attractive to wider demographics of cyclists than painted bike lanes adjacent traffic lanes.
- Making cycling a viable travel option for community members increases social inclusion by giving people more options regarding how and where they travel.
- Cycling is a very cheap mode of transport especially in comparison to buying and running a car so is more inclusive from this perspective.
Human Rights Implications
- There are no Human Rights Implications related to the use of the iterative trial approach to the Elizabeth Street project.
Communications with CALD Communities Implications
- Council officers would liaise with the communication and engagement teams to consider CALD community consultation requirements throughout the project.
Council Plan, Strategy and Policy Implications
- Using the iterative trial approach to the Elizabeth Street protected bike lane project aligns with multiple adopted policies contained within the following documents:
(a) the Strategic Transport Statement;
(b) the Bicycle Strategy 2010-2015;
(c) the Bicycle Strategy Refresh;
(d) the Urban Forest Strategy;
(e) Yarra Road Safety Strategy 2016;
(f) the Yarra Car Parking Management Plan, and
(g) the Council Plan. - The approach to this project also aligns with Council’s commitment to responding to the climate emergency.
Legal Implications
123. There are no known legal implications for Council.
Other Issues
124. No known other issues
Options
- The options for Council are:
Option 1 – Deliver an iterative trial under design options (including either A, B or C for the western section). Under this option works would be delivered in mid-2020;
Option 2 – Deliver the Elizabeth Street upgrade using the traditional approach. Under this option works are likely to be delivered between 2023 and 2026;
Option 3 – Defer a decision, or
Option 4 – Decide not to deliver a protected bike lane on Elizabeth Street. - The officer recommendation is for Option 1 an ‘iterative trial’ to be pursued; Within this:
(a) Trial design option C should be pursued for the western section (Little Hoddle Street to Lennox Street), and
(b) Trial design option A should be pursued for the eastern section (Lennox Street to Church Street).
Conclusion
- Elizabeth Street is an important east west road; it is also a key cycle route but provides a hostile environment for cyclists due to narrow bike lanes which place cyclists in close proximity to parked car dooring issues and large volumes of passing traffic.
- There is a Council commitment to delivering an improved protected bike lane facility on Elizabeth Street in the Bike Strategy Refresh 2016 and a budget allocation of $400K was committed in the 2019/20 budget.
- This project was originally scheduled for delivery by 2015 in the 2010-2015 Bike Strategy; there is now a desire for this project to be delivered this financial year. The Wellington Street protected bike lane project is similar to this, it cost $4.5m and took Council nearly ten years to deliver with 11 separate supporting reports tabled for decision makers as part of this process.
- Council officers have looked at alternative approaches to the planning and delivery that have emerged elsewhere. These are a departure from the ‘standard way of doing things’ but are more flexible and allow often better outcomes to be achieved more quickly and at a reduced cost.
- Officers propose that an ‘iterative trial’ approach is used to deliver this project. This would allow the delivery methodology and the actual design treatment to be tested for a 12 month period before further longer term decisions are made by Council that consider the outputs of the trial. A report on the future of the project, or long term permanent design, would then be presented to Council within six months of the conclusion of the trial.
- This approach is a new way of seeing progression on separated bike lanes and would put Council in an innovative delivery space. Very careful communication would be required with the community to manage this process as it is different; the Communications team are already involved in this process.
- Use of this methodology would also provide Yarra with some valuable insights into how this approach performs and how it aligns with broader challenges of limited capital funding, finite officer resources, a divergence of views on proposed projects and the need to press ahead with implementing policy.
- Decisions by Council would signal the start of a process of using the trial method to get the project delivered this financial year as desired by the Council budget allocation.
Recommendation
- That Council:
(a) note the officer report regarding the proposed Elizabeth Street protected bike lane project;
(b) note the alignment of this project with the Council adopted Bike Strategy Refresh and the Urban Forest Strategy;
(c) note that improved cycling lanes on Elizabeth Street also enhances safety on a regional cycling route;
(d) note that in order to provide this protected lane, some kerbside carparking is required to enable the reallocation of road space;
(e) note the Council budget (19/20) allocates $400K for the implementation of protected bike lanes in Elizabeth Street from Hoddle to Church Streets; and
(f) note that the preferred design option for the protected bike lanes are ones that are of sufficient width to provide the safety and comfort of cycling. - That in the context of the above, Council:
(a) endorse a 12 month ‘iterative trial’ to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street as part of a regional cycling route in a timely manner;
(b) endorse the installation of:
(i) Trial design option C for the western section (Little Hoddle Street to Lennox Street); and
(ii) Trial design option A for the eastern section (Lennox Street to Church Street) as outlined in the cross sections of those trial designs in the report;
(c) require all car parking spaces to have a car dooring buffer zone for safety of cyclists;
(d) instruct officers to now commence with the production of detailed design drawings and other procurement related work in order to initiate the trial;
(e) note that works would commence as soon as possible to deliver the trial;
(f) note the construction timeframe of approximately four weeks to deliver the trial once commenced;
(g) note that officers will provide further details of expected timeframes for the installation of the trial as information to Councillors;
(h) authorise officers to commence notification to abutting property owners and occupiers as part of the development of the detailed design outlining the purpose of the 12 month trial and the key components for community understanding; and
(i) note the installed trial design option would remain in situ between the conclusion of the trial at 12 months and the production of a report to Council detailing the performance of the trial as soon as is practicable following the 12 months trial, but within 6 months.
- That officers arrange for data collection during the 12 month trial in order to enable evaluation of the trial.
- That Council authorise the Director, Planning and Place Making to instruct staff to make any necessary adjustments to the trial layout during the period of the trial and until Council forms an opinion on its future.
- That Council further note that if the 12 month trial is deemed to be successful by Council, following a report by officers, that progression will then occur by officers for a permanent solution (with or without changes as determined by the full Council).
Attachment 1 – Elizabeth Street trial and bicycle lane (Part 1)
Attachment 1 – Elizabeth Street trial and bicycle lane (Part 2)
3 December 2019: Yarra City Council Meeting Minutes: 11.6 Elizabeth Street Bike Lane Upgrades (Page 20-22)
Recommendation
- That Council:
(a) note the officer report regarding the proposed Elizabeth Street protected bike lane project;
(b) note the alignment of this project with the Council adopted Bike Strategy Refresh and the Urban Forest Strategy;
(c) note that improved cycling lanes on Elizabeth Street also enhances safety on a regional cycling route;
(d) note that in order to provide this protected lane, some kerbside carparking is required to enable the reallocation of road space;
(e) note the Council budget (19/20) allocates $400K for the implementation of protected bike lanes in Elizabeth Street from Hoddle to Church Streets; and
(f) note that the preferred design option for the protected bike lanes are ones that are of sufficient width to provide the safety and comfort of cycling. - That in the context of the above, Council:
(a) endorse a 12 month ‘iterative trial’ to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street as part of a regional cycling route in a timely manner;
(b) endorse the installation of:
(i) Trial design option C for the western section (Little Hoddle Street to Lennox Street); and
(ii) Trial design option A for the eastern section (Lennox Street to Church Street) as outlined in the cross sections of those trial designs in the report;
(c) require all car parking spaces to have a car dooring buffer zone for safety of cyclists;
(d) instruct officers to now commence with the production of detailed design drawings and other procurement related work in order to initiate the trial;
(e) note that works would commence as soon as possible to deliver the trial;
(f) note the construction timeframe of approximately four weeks to deliver the trial once commenced;
(g) note that officers will provide further details of expected timeframes for the installation of the trial as information to Councillors;
(h) authorise officers to commence notification to abutting property owners and occupiers as part of the development of the detailed design outlining the purpose of the 12 month trial and the key components for community understanding; and
(i) note the installed trial design option would remain in situ between the conclusion of the trial at 12 months and the production of a report to Council detailing the performance of the trial as soon as is practicable following the 12 months trial, but within 6 months. - That officers arrange for data collection during the 12 month trial in order to enable evaluation of the trial.
- That Council authorise the Director, Planning and Place Making to instruct staff to make any necessary adjustments to the trial layout during the period of the trial and until Council forms an opinion on its future.
- That Council further note that if the 12 month trial is deemed to be successful by Council, following a report by officers, that progression will then occur by officers for a permanent solution (with or without changes as determined by the full Council).
Councillor Jolly left the meeting at 9.01pm
Councillor Jolly returned at 9.04pm
Public Submissions
The following people addressed Council on the matter:
Jeremy Lawrence; and Troy Parsons.
Council Resolution
Moved: Councillor Bosler, Seconded: Councillor Searle
- That Council:
(a) note the officer report regarding the proposed Elizabeth Street protected bike lane project;
(b) note the alignment of this project with the Council adopted Bike Strategy Refresh and the Urban Forest Strategy;
(c) note that improved cycling lanes on Elizabeth Street also enhances safety on a regional cycling route;
(d) note that in order to provide this protected lane, some kerbside carparking is required to enable the reallocation of road space;
(e) note the Council budget (19/20) allocates $400K for the implementation of protected bike lanes in Elizabeth Street from Hoddle to Church Streets; and
(f) note that the preferred design option for the protected bike lanes are ones that are of sufficient width to provide the safety and comfort of cycling. - That in the context of the above, Council:
(a) endorse a 12 month ‘iterative trial’ to deliver protected bike lanes on Elizabeth Street as part of a regional cycling route in a timely manner;
(b) endorse the installation of:
(i) Trial design option C for the western section (Little Hoddle Street to Lennox Street); and
(ii) Trial design option A for the eastern section (Lennox Street to Church Street) as outlined in the cross sections of those trial designs in the report;
(c) require all car parking spaces to have a car dooring buffer zone for safety of cyclists;
(d) instruct officers to now commence with the production of detailed design drawings and other procurement related work in order to initiate the trial;
(e) note that works would commence as soon as possible to deliver the trial;
(f) note the construction timeframe of approximately four weeks to deliver the trial once commenced;
(g) note that officers will provide further details of expected timeframes for the installation of the trial as information to Councillors;
(h) authorise officers to commence notification to abutting property owners and occupiers as part of the development of the detailed design outlining the purpose of the 12 month trial and the key components for community understanding; and
(i) note the installed trial design option would remain in situ between the conclusion of the trial at 12 months and the production of a report to Council detailing the performance of the trial as soon as is practicable following the 12 months trial, but within 6 months. - That officers arrange for data collection during the 12 month trial in order to enable evaluation of the trial.
- That Council authorise the Director, Planning and Place Making to instruct staff to make any necessary adjustments to the trial layout during the period of the trial and until Council forms an opinion on its future, unless these changes are major, where Councillors should be informed of these.
- That Council authorise officers to engage with DHHS to determine impact on DHHS tenants of trial bike lane and provide data back to Council on the occupancy rates of DHHS parking to ensure no undue impact on DHHS tenants.
- That Council further note that if the 12 month trial is deemed to be successful by Council, following a report by officers, that progression will then occur by officers for a permanent solution (with or without changes as determined by the full Council).
Carried Unanimously
Return to top of page