Undeniably an attractive design (before the line painters got there)

Well, entirely unsurprisingly, it hasn’t magically made the inherent conflict between tram passengers and cyclists go away.

There is no magical solution for the fact that pedestrians and cyclist still cross paths.

But has it improved the situation or made it worse?

I’ve traversed the area as both cyclist and pedestrian, and these are my initial impressions.

Cyclist approach

Well, it’s wide and smooth to ride on, but despite Robert Doyle’s protestations, it isn’t immediately obvious where one is supposed to ride and where the waiting passengers are supposed to stand and walk.

I was a bit concerned that the fancy bluestone surface might be a bit slick in the wet but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

Stepping on

Part of the design is to separate the road level for each mode—foot, bike and tram—the act of stepping down from the pedestrian area to the shared space should cue-in pedestrians that they are moving into a different space. This effect is diluted as for much of the length of the curb there are wide, gently sloping ramps (presumably for mobility aid access—a major reason for installing a raised-platform tram stop), which means there is no sense of stepping down (at least, I didn’t notice it). But elsewhere there is a noticeable step down at the edge of the footpath.

Like water

People, like water, follow the path of least resistance. In the afternoon large numbers of people get off trams on the southbound side, then queue to cross at the lights, heading for the train station. And in order to get to the crossing, they take the shortest route—down the bike lane:

People, like water, follow the path of least resistance

As a tram passenger, I found this was the natural thing to do. Bear in mind that this doesn’t feel like stepping down onto a road or even a safety zone—it feels like stepping down into a safe pedestrian-friendly space. Inevitably, people are going to walk with a bit less caution than they otherwise would when leaving a tram.

The cyclist’s experience of this is to ride through a narrow tunnel of people wandering aimlessly along the bike lane. This is sure to lead to verbal, and possibly physcial, clashes between cyclists and pedestrians.

Inviting criticism

Lord Mayor Robert Doyle invited criticism by making much of the top-notch bluestone that’s been used in the upgrade, saying it’s like paving the streets in gold—the sort of thing every rate-payer loves to hear. I don’t see it myself—it appears to be largely indistinguishable from concrete. I guess it’s attractive. But in an interview with 3AW’s Neil Mitchell, Doyle states that this installation is effectively a prototype: “We always said we would open this one first, we would see how it operates knowing there would be difficulty and confusion. And that means when we do Bourke St and Collins St then the onus is on us to get it right”. Why then would you use the most expensive materials when the design may need later modification as we learn more?

Counter-intuitive

But one of the main criticisms of the new setup is that it’s confusing. But is this really a problem? Let me run a half-baked idea past you: maybe a lack of signage and markings (and the consequent ambiguity) is a good thing.

David Engwicht talks about intrigue and uncertainty as mechanisms to bring about calmer traffic—and this is a place that needs calm traffic flow (even after the removal of most motorised vehicles).

Engwicht’s first proposition is “It is a myth that the only way to improve safety is to increase predictability”. It’s counter-intuitive, but it makes sense when you think about it: increase predictability and vehicles (in this case, bikes) can move faster, which increases the risk of collisions with pedestrians. But decrease predictability and increase the need for ‘negotiation’ and vehicles will move slower.

Hang on, I’m a commuting cyclist—why am I advocating slowing down cyclists? Because everything about the design of this new tram stop screams “shared space”. No amount of yellow lines and bike stencils on the ground is going to stop people sauntering along in the ‘wrong’ place, in the ‘wrong’ direction, without paying enough attention.

But it seems that the City wants to increase predictability on the new tram stop with lines and stencils being laid down, and no doubt all sorts of warning signage is also being prepared. Interestingly, if I hadn’t been specifically looking out for them I’d scarcely have noticed the new road surface markings. Like some others, I’m a bit disappointed that we weren’t prepared to give a fair trial to a true shared space before giving up and daubing paint all over the place and putting up ‘thou shalt not’ signs.

Conclusion

Overall, it doesn’t seem significantly different from the previous arrangement. From a traffic movement perspective, the same effect could have been had much more cheaply by making the same stretch of road car-free (e.g. by putting up some barriers to motor vehicles) and leaving the passengers, riders and tram drivers to sort it out on the unmodified roadway. But it does look great (or at least it did before the line-painters got to it)…I’ll leave others to decide whether looking fabulous is worth the price tag.

Imagine you’re approaching this stretch of road at about 40kph—actually quite easy to do, as you’ve just come off a steeper downhill section, so it’s not unusual for anyone to be coasting along at a fair clip here. Notice any particular hazards at this point?

Could you spot the hazard here at 40kph?

Let’s go in a bit closer:

If you hit this, where will you land?

Yep, that’s a base of one of those flexi-poles that I didn’t much like when they were installed last year. A number of these poles have been bent and a couple have snapped off, leaving the near-invisible base as a collision hazard for cyclists. And if a cyclist gets tipped off after crashing with that, where are they going to land…?

That this has been broken for weeks (and possibly months) without repair reflects poorly on the City of Melbourne’s willingness and/or ability to maintain dedicated cycling facilities. Not good when these lanes carry 17% of total vehicles in the morning peak on Albert St.

Upgrated

In fairness, it’s not all downside. Both of you might remember this dangerous drain cover:

An unforgiving grate

Astonishingly, that wheel-jamming hazard was simply left there unmodified as part of the initial installation. Well, over a year later, it’s had an upgrade:

A grate upgraded

That’s an improvement, but really that should have been fixed in the first place.

Any good at all?

Having sworn off Albert St in favour of Victoria St, I have found myself back there a bit more often, in spite of my ongoing concerns including:

• increased likelihood of clashes with entering traffic on the eastbound/downhill lane,
• turning lane conflicts—being dumped into a turning lane is still dangerous by design,
• the increased difficulty in merging into the main traffic flow to make a right-hand turn, and
• those damn poles are still a collision hazard (even when they aren’t broken).

I’ve also noticed a tendency for cars to stop in (and block) the bike lane during clearway times, something that drivers wouldn’t have dreamt of doing before the bike lanes were there.

But if I’m back on Albert St, does that mean I’m a convert? No way: I remain a committed bike lane agnostic. Maybe Albert St is better with curbside lanes than without, but for me it is just the least worst option on that part of my commute route.

On Tuesday, just on a whim, I rode to work on the Gardiners Creek Trail rather than my usual on-road route. And I must say, there was some impressive destruction. Kudos to Boroondara and Stonnington councils, workers from both sides of the creek were out in force clearing up, repairing damaged paths and top-dressing the playing fields.

Anyway, here’s a sample of what I saw.

High water line

In the background, the creek has receded but is still well above normal levels. The debris and high water line shows that the water nearly reached road level at this point.

The high water mark, as shown by the debris stuck in the fence at shoulder height, indicates that the water really was up. You can't see the creek from this point because it's behind the trees in the background.

Dominoes

This high fence in the Malvern Valley Golf Links, which is two fairways away from the creek, toppled like a row of dominoes.

Under the freeway, all the scaffolding for the M1 Project had got a little tilted too.

Judging by the debris left on railings in this area, the water level under Glenferrie Road would have been well above head height.

Deposits

Sand, silt, mud and debris were deposited all along the creek.

This children's sandpit is actually a 2.5m wide sealed path.

The underpass at Toorak Road was closed and workers were already clearing away the sediment. Note the pile of silt already removed from the path.

Not strictly Gardiners Creek Trail, here Stonnington Council workers clear up the path through Kooyong Park. Note the small tree stump to the left of the path…

…this tree was attachd to that stump the day before. It took a bit of getting past.

Water, water, everywhere

Patterson Reserve had acquired a new ornamental lake—which was already starting to stink a bit.

I don’t have a photo of the grounds at St Kevin’s College but it too was turned into a lake (and later a stinky swamp) by the surge of water. Interestingly, the grounds of both St Kev’s and Scotch College are protected by levees. Scotch’s slightly high levee appears to have held, maybe St Kev’s lower one didn’t and/or there was a major drainage failure.

Gone

But, of course, I’ve left the best until last:

This tangled mess is the Solway Street Bridge…

…or what's left of it.

(Much more impressive photos on Melbourne Cyclist.)

Yes, this is the same Solway Street Bridge that was closed for about 18 months awaiting replacement before the two local councils decided that a patch-up job would be adequate. (At this point, I’d like to highlight what I said in May 2007. Aren’t I the smug one?)

What now?

According to a small note in a presentation made last year:

Solway Street Bridge
A new bridge will be constructed in 2011/12 FY to improve the width and alignment of the existing bridge. This is part of the larger project to build the missing link in the Gardiners Creek Trail between Solway Street and Warrigal Road.

I think we can safely assume that this work will be brought forward to the 2010/11 FY—surely local residents couldn’t be kept waiting another 18 months to have access returned here? I certainly support Zed’s recommendation to contact the council (I’d say both councils and Melbourne Water) requesting the immediate replacement of this bridge.

Incidentally, I wonder if pitt&sherry will be invited to tender on the new bridge?

In any case the new bridge had better be pretty flood tolerant, it looks like Melbourne suburbs are likely to flood more often…

Great Ocean Road Classic on Vimeo

Instant legend

Susie Weber rode her bike to hospital to deliver her baby. [via JSOnline]

Not being part of the problem

How not to buy stolen bikes online: “There is no such thing as a free lunch or a cheap, expensive bike. If it looks dodgy, it is.”

Cycle chic

• Hot chicks and their fixies
• Bike Fancy

HPV

• The velomobile: high-tech bike or low-tech car?
• Velomobille + ice [twitterer]
• Pedal-powered hydrofoils!

DIY, Mexico-style

Guerilla DIY bike lane created by Guadalajara citizens!

Bottle hygiene

• How safe is your water bottle?
• Cleaning water bottles made easy

Air time

Giants Of Dirt Part 2 featuring one serious nutjob on a BMX. Love it. [twitterer]

Gravel Grinders

Melbourne Gravel Grinders first ride is on next weekend at Hurstbridge.

The last word on lightweight mudguards

Birds of a feather fender together…

Wax it up and ride

Chain Waxing Revisited, “for the non-believers in the crowd”.

Red light runners?

An article in Accident Analysis & Prevention found that “The majority of Melbourne commuter cyclists observed (93.1%) stopped at the red light.” [twitterer]

Tourist-envy

• Cycling Gypsies: “In July 2008 we quit our jobs, sold whatever couldn’t fit on the back of our bikes and pedaled into the sunset with our two doggy co-pilots.”
• “While Out Riding is a photo-story blog charting a bike journey south from Prudoe Bay, Alaska, along quiet dirt roads where possible. At the moment I’m not completely sure where I’ll end up…”

Real leadership required

• Public transport for outer suburbs: Units not crucial
• It’s crunch time for Melbourne: we need a congestion tax
• Beijing car restrictions backfire
• A critical review of the legal penalties for drivers who kill cyclists or pedestrians: “Every year as many pedestrian and cyclist fatalities occur on Britain’s roads as all combined homicides”
• Mia Birk: “What do you see as the biggest obstacle to turning any city into a cycling city? Political will.”

This “war on cars” thingy

• “War On Cars”: A History [twitterer]
• In search of the famous ‘war on motorists’
• The War On the Carless

Commuting and cyclocross

Have you ever considered a cyclocross bike for commuting?

Cyclocross racing and commuting have a few things in common. Both are for the hardy, attracting cyclists who don’t mind riding in foul weather, over imperfect terrain or in adverse conditions.

Kids

• "Get off F—book and go ride a bike!"
• Want a safe place to raise kids? Look to the cities [twitterer]

Design

• Aesthetic of the Impractical [Thanks tom]
• Bike Portage Strap
• Bamboo Bikes [Thanks woowoowoo]
• The Rael road bike concept includes accident recording technology. [Thanks tom]

Smart use of technology

Why cyclists should use GPS

No excuse

The No Excuse Zone Map “shows the distance a healthy person can cycle within half an hour, to or from Melbourne’s city centre”.

Boris Bike hot spots

Boris Bikes/Barclays Cycle Hire Average Journey Times

Rental

Off I went to the vending machine for a fairly straightforward rental process, except for the terms and conditions. Kudos to anyone who can honestly say they’ve stood there and read through all 72 screens.

Next I was given a six-digit code and told to use it to release the bike I wanted. It took me a sec to work out where to tap in the code at the bike (I was looking for a standard 10-digit PIN pad) until I noticed that my code was made up of 1s, 2s and 3s, and that there are three numbered buttons on the rack beside each bike. (Too late I also noticed the helpful diagram on the ticket I’d printed.) Tapped in the number, yanked the bike free and I was away.

The bike

Right, what can this jalopy do? First test was to see how it drops off the kerb onto the road. Not bad, and so it should be on such a sturdily built bike.

The bikes seem to be built equally to sustain some rough handling from legit users and to resist casual assault by late-night drunken vandals. What you get is a comfortably long wheelbase, a step-through frame, three widely-spaced gears in the hub, hub brakes, and a big-arse seat that seems to have been modelled on a Spear & Jackson Number 3 shovel.

The whole construction has a heavy-duty feel to it, but the ride itself is OK. This is definitely a bike for cruising on: the very upright sitting position and a top gear that left me spinning faster than I’d prefer encouraged one to kick back and relax a bit. (And was it true? Were cars giving me a bit more space because I was pootling along on a ‘tourist’ bike?)

Public transport?

I share James May’s scepticism about bike share schemes that:

by being yoked to the rack system, the bicycle, this ultimate symbol of mobility and freedom for the masses, effectively becomes public transport: it doesn’t leave from precisely where you are and doesn’t arrive at exactly where you want to be. Unless you work as a bicycle rack attendant, the very point of the bicycle is somewhat defeated.

But as there were racks in a straight line between where I started and where I wanted to go, there seemed little to be lost by giving it a go: at least it’s public transport that’s punctual and arrives exactly when I want it to. Unless there are no free spaces at the destination rack… A check of the Melbourne Bike Share Station map showed that there was a single spare slot at the rack I was heading for. If that single space were taken when I arrived, I faced an uphill ride, taking me out of my way, to the nearest alternative racks. Fortunately I was in luck (there were actually two spare spaces when I arrived) and my first bike share ride was not marred by an enforced detour.

The need

So who needs bike share? As a regular bike commuter, I don’t. It was fun to take a blue bike for a spin, and I might do it again but I don’t feel a pressing need to do so. It’s just as easy (and free) for me to use my own bike to get about town for short trips.

Although Melbourne has a serviceable short-trip public transport system in its trams, the share bikes may well find a niche serving a similar need. And I have noticed the popularity of the blue bikes with bike path trundlers, heading out well beyond the cluster of bike share stations, so there’s obviously some appeal there.

I hope the bike share scheme turns out to be successful, not because I or any other regular cyclist needs it, but for benefits such as:

• it lowers the barrier of entry for people to try urban cycling (Who knows? They may like it and take to cycling more generally),
• it puts more bikes on the road, normalising bikes for transport and bolstering the ‘safety in numbers’ effect (if you happen to subscribe to that view), and
• it’s just a great way for visitors to get around and see the city.

Failure is always an option

For all of these reasons and more, I truly hope the bike share is a long-running success story. My concern is that our mandatory helmet laws will end up scuttling the bike share scheme. How sustainable is it for the scheme to subsidise helmets sold in nearby shops? And to what extent does the need to find, buy or bring a helmet discourage people from the spontaneous freedom of just taking a bike and going? (I have overheard people standing at the racks say, “You need a helmet? Well, let’s not bother.”)

And while I don’t believe bike share primarily benefits regular cyclists, it is we who will bear the brunt if it does go down the gurgler. For years afterwards, it would be used by the opponents of cycling to beat up on cycling lobbyists and cyclists in general, because all that public money got wasted on a ‘cycling white elephant’—even though regular urban cyclists didn’t ask for it or need it.

So, let’s hear it for bike share. As someone might have said, may it live long and proper.