Merri-bek Councillors voted on a Council officers report that recommended ripping up the Kent Road, Pascoe Vale protected bike lanes that were installed as a trial measure during the pandemic in 2021. The trial for the 320 metre long bike lanes has run for two years and involved substantial ongoing consultation. Council’s own citizen advisory committee on Sustainable Transport declared No Confidence in Council delivering active transport infrastructure

The bike lanes form part of a muncipal cycling route linking the civic centres of Glenroy to Coburg. After one year of operation in the trial, after community consultation ocurred, the form of the protected bike lanes was changed, with a slighlty smaller footprint for the dividers.

Some drivers have continued to speed and fail to respect other drivers in giving way on a road with a wide one lane with parking on both sides. Some of the parked cars have parked on the medium dividers or in the bike lane reducing bike lane passage.

Council is pursuing putting in a safety crossing near the Medical Centre for pedestrians crossing Kent Road.

So what are some of the problems:

1. The report associated with the recommendation highlights one of the reasons for ending the trial with the closure of the bike lanes is due to poor driver behaviour and maintenance issues. Ripping up the bike lane due to poor driver behaviour would seem to reward that poor behaviour. 

2. The alternate preferred ‘shimmy route’ proposed by Council Officers is indirect, and involves more elevation change (hill). It will inhibit cycling between Glenroy to Coburg. Although it keeps a small section of bike lane on Kent Road from Valerie street to Cromwell street as a bidirectional lane, the rest of the route is on residential streets with cycling sharrows painted on the road and no other cycling infrastructure improvement.

3. More families are using e-bikes locally in the northern suburbs, often used by women and children. These are longer and heavier bikes. Removing the bike lanes may well move these people to using the footpaths (with children they are legally able to ride on footpaths) posing a conflict and increased safety risk to people walking. So you are moving a slight inconvenience to car users to increasing a safety risk to people walking in an area with people visiting a medical clinic. 

4. Re-prioritising car use, when we need to do exactly the opposite at this crucial point in time with the climate emergency. We are at a crucial time with climate change accelerating. We need to change transport behaviours, to reduce transport emissions and do so rapidly to meet Council’s and state government climate targets. Protected bike lanes do this. Caving in to car culture sends exactly the wrong message.

5. Ripping up the separated bike lane will incur substantial reputational loss for Merri-bek’s climate, and sustainable transport credentials. This will have a long term impact on staff moral and make attracting good staff in Council employment in future much more difficult. 

6. Council has declared a climate emergency and needs to take difficult decisions to address this for the general public good.

Merri-bek are literally ripping up their climate target aspirations along with their bike lanes. It’s a real kick in the teeth for past transport strategy consultations and recent consultations for the next Transport Strategy (see our submission on the Discussion Paper). 

Removing the Kent Road bike lanes looks increasingly like part of a pattern by Officers at Merri-bek rolling back a commitment to expand active transport municipality to address safety and reduce transport emissions:

• first with the recent Budget downgrade to protected cycling infrastructure (see our submission, and Councillors reversing some of the downgrading),
• now the Kent Road recommendation to rip up the protected bike lanes, and
• next is a down-grading of De Carle St plans (see current consulation on De Carle Street, Coburg traffic calming redesign at Conversations Merr-bek). 

During public question time there were 5 people called to make their statement or question: three in favour of the bike lanes and two against.

No confidence in Council delivery of active transport infrastructure

Merribek Council own Sustainable Transport Advisory Committee made a statement that they were only consulted by Council Staff on the previous evening, and accused this action as tokenism. The statement was detailed about the importance of protected cycling infrastructure and also addressed the particular situation of these bike lanes.

Council’s own citizen advisory committee on Sustainable Transport essentially declared NO CONFIDENCE in Council helping to deliver active transport infrastructure.

Bernard and Andrea from the Sustainable Transport Advisory Committee to Merribek Council made the following statement in Question Time, as transcribed from the video of the meeting:

This is a statement from the Sustainable Transport Advisory Committee (STAC) on item 7.1. Council required us to amend it. This is a shortened version, but Councillors have all received the full statement.

STAC is absolutely opposed to Council removing of the Kent Road protected bike lanes and relying instead on an unsafe shimmy.

STAC is profound disappointment that Council officers failed to seek our advice prior to making this decision. What is the point of a Sustainable Transport Advisory Committee if not to provide advice on safe walking and cycling infrastructure decision making?

The Officer recommendations are contrary to Council’s policies on active transport and the Council Plan. The Planning Scheme clearly outlines a road user hierarchy that prioritises walking, cycling and the use of public transport over cars. Protected bike lanes are vital for the safety of people riding, and to keep footpaths safe for people walking.

The report identifies poor driver behaviour on Kent Road yet it recommends the removal of the protected bike lanes that keep people safe. Council plans to build an unprotected shimmy route on back streets, people will always need to ride down Kent Road to travel to access services. Many will now ride on the footpath.

If these bike lanes are ripped out, it will severely damage Merri-bek’s proud . It will severely damage Merri-bek’s hitherto proud reputation on sustainability. It will undermine plans to build protected bike lanes across the whole state. Because if Merri-bek can’t do it – who else can? And it will empower the people who are trying to stop safe active transport -so cars can to continue monopolising the road space.

We are facing a climate emergency. We cannot delay taking strong action on sustainable transport. We have a rising population, and a cost-of-living crisis. Safe cycling infrastructure is vital to meet these imperatives.

The Parliamentary Inquiry on Vulnerable Road Users heard much evidence about the need for protected bike lanes. Road safety authorities were alarmed at the number of distracted drivers. with the majority admitting to using a handheld mobile phone.

Merri-bek urgently needs safe protected bike lanes to ensure that we all can choose to ride. Protected bike lanes are vital for pedestrian safety. Without protected bike lanes, many will cycle and e-scootering on the footpaths. The effect on elderly residents will be devastating. Being startled by an e-scooter can lead to falls, sometimes with terrible consequences.

Kent Road is an ideal location for protected bike lanes, to ensure that residents are safe while walking and cycling. Reducing the street width to one lane of traffic is a vital traffic calming measure.

After seeing this report, Sustainable Transport Advisory Committee members declared that they do NOT have Confidence that Council will will help deliver active transport infrastructure in Merri-bek.

Councillors, please retain this vital piece of infrastructure. And reaffirm Council’s commitment to building a safe, separated bike network.

Transcript of STAC statement to Council Meeting from video recording

The STAC statement raises a governance issue that Council officers appear to consult with citizen advisory committees sometimes more as an after-thought, a token measure, than actually engage with them on policy or strategy development. Cr Conlan picked up on this and also highlighted a similar instance with the First Nations Advisory Committee on The Voice referendum.

Councillors vote to remove protected bike lanes

Councillors first considered an alternative motion to keep the protected bike lanes, but after extensive debate the motion was lost 4 in favour, 5 against.

The officer recommended motion was then put to remove the protected bike lanes by 31 December 2023. This was amended to include a report on what protected bike lanes could be considered in the streets in the vicinity. A majority supported the amendment in the motion. The officer recommended motion, as amended, was voted with 5 in favour, 4 against.

Councillors who voted to save the bike lanes were: 

• Cr Conlan
• Cr Panopoulos 
• Cr Pulford 
• Cr Riley 

Councillors who voted to remove the bike lanes were: 

• Cr Tapinos 
• Cr Harte 
• Cr Bolton 
• Cr Yildiz 
• Cr Davidson 

Councillors Pavlidis and Carli-Hannan were on leave. 

Evidently the decision to remove the bike lanes was in spite of about 50 emails to councillors, to the 5 or so against.

Councillors who voted to rip up the bike lanes tonight gave the classic line that they ‘supported bike lanes, but just not on Kent Road’. Lots of fine rhetoric how they support cycling, just not in this particular situation: one part of the Glenroy to Coburg cycling route.

More to come…

References:

See Media coverage: Patrick Hatch, 12 September, 2023, Merri-bek may rip up bike lanes as backlash reaches Pascoe Vale, https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/merri-bek-may-rip-up-bike-lanes-as-backlash-reaches-pascoe-vale-20230912-p5e3yg.html

Merri-bek Council Meeting – 13 September 2023 on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xd8cJBoHMs