Greville and King Engegement Analysis Report August 2015

Greville and King Streets – Community Consultation Analysis Report 1

GREVILLE AND KING STREETS

IMPROVEMENT PLAN COMMUNITY CONSULTATION ANALYSIS REPORT – AUGUST 2015


For further information about this document please contact: Name: Deven Russell, Research and Support Officer

Department: Communications and Community Planning

Division: Sustainable Future

Ph: 8290 1283

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.connect.stonningon.vic.gov.au

mailto:[email protected]


Contents

GREVILLE AND KING STREETS IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1

INTRODUCTION 4

Purpose of this report 4

Background 4

Scope of the improvement works 4

Greville and King Streets Concept Plan by area 5

Methodology 5

Communication activity 6

Engagement activity 6

SURVEY FEEDBACK OVERVIEW 9

What people like most and what could be improved 13

General Traffic changes 14

Amenity changes 14

One way traffic or shard zone 15

Shared street use changes 17

Shared Street Use and Permanent Street Closure 17

SURVEY RESULTS 19

Q1. What respondents like most about Greville and King Streets 20

Q2. What respondents would improve about Greville and King Streets 21

Q3. Traffic changes 22

Q4. Proposed changes 22

Q5. Prahran Town Hall 23

Q6. Shared Street Use (Allows for one way through traffic) or Shared Street Use and

Permanent Street Closure at Grattan Gardens 24

Q7. Shared street use 25

Q8. Shared Street Use and Permanent Street Closure 25

Q9. Why respondents normally visit Greville or King Streets? 26

Q10. How respondents normally travel to Greville or King Streets 26

Q11. How often respondents visit Greville or King Streets 27

POP–UP RESULTS 28

ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE 28


Introduction

Council is preparing draft concept plans to improve the pedestrian amenity along Greville and King Streets, Prahran. Those who live, work and visit the area participated either by survey or attendance at an information session. We have developed a couple of draft concept plans to give you an idea about how we’re planning to improve Greville and King Streets.

Purpose of this report

Information from this report will be used to inform the final design package which we will present to community members, including residents, traders, service providers and visitors to the area for further comment.

Background

The Greville and King Street improvement plan is based on themes and ideas from the Chapel Street Masterplan, Re-discover Chapel Street. The plan aims to improve the quality

of streets and public spaces to meet the needs of the increasing population that live, work and visit the area. Since the Masterplan’s implementation, several footpath extensions for additional key public spaces have been built, including Windsor Plaza at the Windsor Train Station and several ‘pause points’ for increased dining, trade and public seating. Improvements to Greville and King Streets are proposed for the next stage in delivering this Masterplan.

Scope of the improvement works

The key areas for improvements have been separated into sections to make it easier to provide feedback. These draft concept plans are based on feedback received from residents and traders, and are combined with an analysis of technical data including traffic, social and commercial impact assessments. An accompanying map of Greville and King Streets shows the areas we are seeking to improve. The next few pages will provide more information on the proposed changes.

The key design ideas are:

Changing the traffic flow to one-way west bound between Chapel Street and the

Prahran Train Station.

Changing Porter Street to one-way north bound between Greville Street and

Commercial Road with two way access from High Street to Leggett’s Lane to maintain

residential access.

Changing Grattan Street to one-way South bound with car parking maintained.

Creating a shared pedestrian and vehicle zone in front of the entrance to the Prahran

train station.

Grattan Gardens: Creating a local plaza space, with no kerbs and a paved surface

across the street in front of Grattan Gardens.

Changing the pedestrian crossings at Izett Street to create less conflict between cars

and pedestrians.

Removing two of the four plane trees in front of the Prahran Town Hall to allow for new

urban plaza space on Chapel Street.

The removal of three car parks (for more trees, seating and dining).


Fully pedestranised King Street between the roundabout and Chapel Street with

residential car parking access maintained to the east by removing seven car parks

Shared car and pedestrian space between Grattan Street and Izett Street.

Closed to traffic between Grattan Street and the access laneway with a shard street

between the laneway and Izett Street.

Greville and King Streets Concept Plan by area

Methodology

The consultation included:

The development of a communication and engagement activation plan

Distribution of communication and consultation material

Consultation processes and engagement activities

Analysis of consultation data

Preparation of key findings and recommendations report

During the preparation of the consultation and engagement plan, consideration was given to

the approach, response rate and attendance levels of the Chapel Street Masterplan, Re-

discover Chapel Street consultation.

Data was collated in Excel. Where possible, data was analysed quantitatively and put into a

graph. When analysing the qualitative data from open-ended questions, attention was given

to the variety of responses, as well as giving a ranking of popularity of responses (through

counting responses of a similar theme).


Communication activity

Communication activities were used to promote the

consultation, including:

Dedicated webpage

www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/grevilleking

Advertisements in the Stonnington Leader

o 14 July 2015

o 21 July 2015

o 28 July 2015

Article placed in InStonnington (delivered all

residents)

o June/July edition

o August/September edition

Direct mail of 8pp brochure and 4pp survey, mailed to 7,000 residents and traders

Social media posts (Facebook and Twitter) using #grevilleking

Posters distributed to traders and Service Centres

Media release

Engagement activity

Online or hard copy survey

This survey sought feedback on a range of issues including what respondents like/dislike

about Greville and King Streets, traffic, amenity, travel and why respondents travel to the

centre. Hard copy surveys were sent to all owners and occupiers within the Greville and King

Streets area including free post envelopes. The same survey was provided online. 288

surveys were received.

Information sessions

Three information sessions were held to provide key stakeholders with vital information

about the proposed plans. Staff from the City Works, Communications and Community

Planning departments and consultants were available to discuss the improvement plan with

residents, answer questions and provide feedback. The sessions were:

Tuesday 28 July, Functions on Chapel – Traders session

Wednesday 29 July, Functions on Chapel – Community session

Saturday 1 August, Functions on Chapel – Community session

At each session there were:

Staff to ensure customer service and expert advice

Large maps of the proposed improvement plan

iPads to provide feedback via online a survey

Hard copy surveys to complete and submit at the session or to return via mail with a

reply-paid envelope.

288 surveys received

and included

1406 individual comments


Three Community/Trader

workshops with

44 attendees

approximately


Pop-up events on Greville Street

There were a number of pop-up activities where City of Stonnington staff were available to discuss the improvement plan with residents. These sessions took place on the following dates:

Saturday 18 July outside Prahran Library, 10 – 11am

Saturday 25 July in Grattan Gardens, 10 – 11am

Thursday 30 July on the corner of Greville Street and Macquarie Street, 8 – 11a

Complementing the engagement sessions were a range of signage, communication materials and on-street prototyping to draw attention to the proposed changes and engage the community to gather feedback. These included:

On-street decals advertising the consultation process and indicating the location of pop-

up consultation sessions.

On-street stencils indicating the types and locations of proposed changes.

Bin signs providing a summary of the ways to

have a say in an eye-catching manner.

3 pop-ups

300 attendees

171

comments and votes

175 surveys handed out


Survey Feedback Overview


This page has been intentionally left blank.


Analysis

Overview


The following commentary is an overview of the feedback from

the survey, information session, popups and letters/email and

covers each of the questions in the survey. Further information

can be obtained through the range of data images following this

including graphs and tables.

Survey

Overall 288 completed the survey. Of these, the majority were local residents (76%/169

respondents) followed by landholder (25%/55 respondents) and business owner/

trader (15%/34 respondents).

The majority of respondents who visit Greville Street come to dine or drink (70%/154

respondents) followed by retail shopping (60%/134 respondents) and just passing through

(40%/90 respondents). Respondents who visit King Street mostly just pass through (26%/57

respondents) followed by dining or drinking (11%/26 respondents) and retail shopping

(7%/16 respondents).

The majority of respondents who travel to Greville Street walk (78%/174 respondents)

followed by car (57%/127 respondents) and train (24%/53 respondents). King Street had

similar results walk was the most popular mode (32%/71 respondents) followed by car

(26%/57 respondents) and train (4%/9 respondents).


Approximately 44 residents and traders attended the three sessions at Functions on Chapel.

Pop-up

Approximately 300 people were engaged through the pop-up consultation sessions by providing comments or having conversations and taking away surveys to complete. 171 comments and votes were provided and between 150-200 hardcopy surveys and postcards handed out at the consultation sessions.

Letter/email

Three emails were received from traders on Greville Street.


What people like most and what could be improved

Survey

Respondents were asked what they currently like most about Greville and King Streets.

Most comments indicated that the retail shops (30%/86 comments) are the best thing about

Greville and King Streets followed by village feel/atmosphere (25%/71 comments) and

cafes/restaurants (24%/67 comments).

Respondents were then asked what they would improve in Greville and King Streets. Two

hundred respondents answered this question. The majority would like the traffic flow to

improve (30%/76 comments), of these comments most said a one-way street would improve

traffic flow. Widened footpath/improve pedestrian amenity (29%/74 comment) was also

mentioned as an improvement followed by increase trees and green space (17%/44

comments) and more outdoor dining (5%/14 comments).

Widened footpaths are also reflected in question 4 were 73%/202 respondents agree with

extending the width of the footpath to improve, seating and dining in Greville Street. Of the

respondents who support this idea the majority where residents (77%/130 respondents) and

landholders (69%/38 respondents).

Pop ups

Attendees provided a range of responses on ways to

improve the street. These for the most part aligned with

the changes proposed, with the exception of a desire to

see the shop owners work together to improve the look

of the streets (e.g. uniform / colourful facades) as well as

suggestions related to disability access, cycling and

history.

Comments have been categorised into the following 11

core themes, in order of popularity:

Pedestrian focused (9 comments): including

wayfinding, better connections, wider footpaths.

Street experience (9 comments): temporary events, markets and alfresco drinking and dining.

Green space (8): including new street trees and a more varied selection in species.

Business diversity (6): including emphasis on boutiques that contribute to Greville Street’s ‘edgy’ character.

Safety (4): including the provision of better lighting in Grattan Gardens and near Prahran Train Station / Leggetts Lane.

Streetscape aesthetics (4): including better upkeep of shop fronts and uniform awnings. This could be inspired by project such as the painted ladies in San Francisco with bright painted buildings.

“Variety of retail shops”

“Improve

traffic flow”

(Indicative comments)


New public infrastructure (3): such as a public toilet block in Grattan Gardens and inclusive public spaces.

Bicycle focused (3): including dedicated bike lanes and a bike share scheme.

Disability access (1): including flushed kerbing, a wheelchair accessible public toilet and signage at wheelchair eye level, charging point for scooters

History (1): street elements to reflect and tell the story of the unique role of Greville St in Melbourne’s history

Public art (1).

General Traffic changes

Survey

The majority of survey respondents supported all three

proposed changes. Changing the traffic flow to one-

way west bound on Greville Street between Chapel

Street and the Prahran Train Station was the most

supported option (63%/169 respondents), followed by

changing Grattan Street to one-way south bound with

car spaces maintained (58%/157 respondents).

Responses to changing Porter Street to one-way north

bound between Greville Street and Commercial Road,

with two-way access from High Street to Percy Street

to maintain residential access was collated (52%/143

respondents).

Of the survey respondents who supported changing the traffic flow to one-way west bound

on Greville Street between Chapel Street and the Prahran Train Station, the majority were

local residents (61%/101 respondents) and landholders (61%/34 respondents). Of the

traders/business owners there was an even split between both supporting (47%/16

respondents) and not supporting (47%/16 respondents) this option.

Amenity changes

Survey

Survey respondents were asked if they supported a number of amenity changes outlined in

the proposal. The majority of respondents (83%/227 respondents) supported changing the

pedestrian crossings at Izett Street to create less conflict between cars and pedestrians

followed by extend the width of the footpath to improve planting, seating and dining in

Greville Street (73.7%/202 respondents) followed by creating a local plaza space, with no

kerbs and a paved surface across the street in front of Grattan Gardens (73%/195

respondents). A number of respondents (36%/101) don’t support removing two of the four

plane trees in front of the Prahran Town Hall to allow for new urban plaza on Chapel Street.

Then respondents were then asked what they would like to see in front of Prahran Town

Hall. Most comments indicated that more seating (35%/80 comments) should be considered

“More

attractive seating”

(Indicative comments)


followed by public art (31%/72 comments), better lighting (29%/66 comments) and more

tress and gardens (10%/22 comments).

While only 22 respondents commented on having trees and gardens, there was a significant

amount of respondents (36%/101 respondents) against the removal for trees in front of

Prahran Town Hall in question four.

Pop-ups

Respondents were asked if the supported the changes to Izett Street, (10) indicated support

for the proposed changes. The overwhelming majority of people we spoke to express a

belief that the existing pedestrian crossing should be changed to improve pedestrian safety

and amenity, and reduce confusion for drivers. People also indicated support for making

Greville Street one-way if it would make this intersection safer.

Respondents were asked if the supported the changes to

create a Town Hall Plaza, In total 80% (4) of votes and

many comments indicated support for the proposed

changes in this section, while one person indicated they

had some concerns. There was a general sense that the

look and feel of Town Hall Plaza could be improved

through new softer landscaping treatments and the

provision of public artwork. Some people made the

comment that trees need to be selected carefully to suit

the street and not cause allergies. Some concerns were

raised about the removal of existing street trees on

Chapel Street to improve the connection with King Street.

These concerns seem to be alleviated when it was

demonstrated that these losses would be offset by

additional trees elsewhere and that the landscape

architects had recommended removal to increase canopy

cover and overall tree health.

Letter/email

Two emails received by traders were in favour of the idea of widening and improving

footpaths down Greville Street. One trader extended on this saying if car spaces were

removed to make footpaths wider he would only support it if it creates more footpath dining.

One trader was happy with Porter Street continuing to be one-way.

One way traffic or shard zone

Survey

Survey respondents were asked if they prefer either shared street use (allows for one way

through traffic) or shared street use and permanent street closure at Grattan Gardens. A

small majority of respondents prefer shared street use (33%/86 respondents) followed by

“Like the opportunity to close off for events”

“Restricting

trade!”

(Trader comment)


shared street use and permanent street closure at Grattan Gardens (28%/73 respondents),

neither option (24%/64 respondents) and both options (16%/43 respondents).

A small majority of local residents support shared street

use (33%/55 respondents) followed by shared street use

and permanent street closure at Grattan Gardens

(28%/48 respondents). Of the traders/business owners

the majority were against both options (41%/14

respondents). The majority of respondents aged between

25-44 years old (38%/30 respondents) support shared

street use. Respondents aged 45-54 (27%/13

respondents) were an even split between both options

whereas most respondents aged 55-64 years (30%/15

respondents) were against both options.


Respondents were asked two options of temporary or permanent closure of Greville Street

outside Grattan Gardens. The community who cast the votes was generally in favor (4

respondents) of temporary closures of Greville Street whereas most community members

were against (2 respondents) permanent closures.

A small majority of traders were in favor (5 respondents) of temporary closure. There was a

general sense that this would be a great opportunity to close the road for events. Four

traders were opposed to this closure believing it would be too much of an impact on traffic

flow and parking.

A small majority of traders (4 respondents) were opposed to permanent closures believing it

would restrict trading. Three traders were in favour of the idea.

Two residents were against the idea of redirecting traffic on Porter Street to northbound from

the intersection with Greville Street believing it would limit property access.

Pop ups

Respondents were asked two options of temporary or permanent closure of Greville Street

outside Grattan Gardens. In total 70% of votes (21) were cast in favour of temporary

closures only, while 30% (10) preferred removing cars permanently. Many people responded

positively to the idea of allowing temporary events to attract more visitors to the area and

reinvigorate the Greville Street precinct. Many also noted that a temporarily closed space

could test the waters for a permanent closure.

Concerns raised related to impacts of redirecting traffic on Porter Street to northbound from

the intersection with Greville Street. These concerns were generally voiced by local

residents who felt they would be inconvenienced in terms of access to their properties,

especially those located on Leggett’s Lane. Residents were particularly concerned when

they thought Greville Street could be closed off.

“Remove car parks on one side no matter what is decided”

(Resident comment)


Letter/email

Two emails received by traders were opposed to permanent closure of Greville Street

outside Grattan Gardens, stating that this will effect traffic flow and be hard for customers to

access shopping. One trader is in favour of option temporary closure believed this is the

better option of the two.

Shared street use changes

Survey

The majority of survey respondents supported all three changes. Temporary closure for

designated events was the most supported option (69%/182 respondents) followed by

providing more trees, seating and dining (67%/176) and shared car and pedestrian space

between Grattan Street and Izett Street (49%/126 respondents. Almost 30% for

respondents did not support shared car and pedestrian space between Grattan Street and

Izett Street.


Three residents were in favor of the idea of a shared car and pedestrian space between

Grattan Street and Izett Street. Furthermore two residents liked the idea of removing car

parks on one side of the road. Two residents were against this idea believing it would limit

property access.

Shared Street Use and Permanent Street Closure

Survey

Of the two options, majority of respondents supported providing more trees, seating and

dining (requires removal of 10 car spaces) (58%/156 respondents) whereas a small majority

of respondents did not support closed to traffic between Grattan Street and the access

laneway with a shared street between the laneway and Izett Street (42%/110 respondents).




Survey Results


Q1. What respondents like most about Greville and King Streets

Currently what do you like most about Greville and King Streets?

Number of respondents: 281 of 281 total survey respondents.

Four themes were identified and demonstrated in the indicative comments below.

Theme 1

Retail/shopping

86/30% respondents said:

“Variety of retail shops”

“The alternative retail shops”

“Quirky shops”

Theme 3

Cafes/restaurants


“The cafes and shops. It's a great area

to live in”

“Small shops and cafes”

“Cafes and bars”

Theme 2

Atmosphere/ Village feel


“Feels like a little modern village”

“The 'small village' atmosphere”

“The culture, diversity and atmosphere.

Great vibe.”

Theme 4

Good Access


“Provides easy access for cars and

pedestrians”

“Easy access to Prahran station”

“King St is an important means of access to Chapel St”


Q2. What respondents would improve about Greville and King Streets

What would you improve in Greville and King Streets?


Four themes were identified and demonstrated in the indicative comments below.

Theme 1

Improve traffic flow/one way

street 76/30% respondents said:

Theme 3

Increase trees and green space


“Improve traffic flow”

“Reduce cars and make the whole

road paved for pedestrians, change to

local traffic only, one-way”

“Make it all one way traffic from Chapel

Street”

Theme 2

Improve pedestrian amenity/widened

footpaths 74/29% respondents said:

“Wider footpath for walking”

“Pedestrian access

(footpaths need to be wider)”

“Improve pedestrian amenity”

“More trees and greenery please”

“More trees, the palms are the best”.

“Green and open spaces”

Theme 4

Increase outdoor dining 14/5%

respondents said:

“More outdoor dining, improve

vibrancy”

“Space for sidewalk dining”

“Increase outdoor dining /cafes”


62.6%52.4%

58.1%

7.4%

14.7%13.3%

28.5% 30.0%25.9%

1.5% 2.9% 2.6%

Between Area 1 and Area 4 - Changing the traffic flow to one-way west bound on

Greville Street between Chapel Street and the Prahran Train Station.

Area 1 - Changing Porter Street to one-way north bound between Greville

Streetand Commercial Road, with two-way access from High Street to Percy Street to maintain residential access.

Area 2 - Changing Grattan Street to one-way south bound with car spaces

maintained.

Support Neutral Don’t support Can’t say

Source: Corporate and Community Planning2015Figure 1: Question 3Number of respondents: 273 of 288

69.1% 73.0%83.2%

36.7%

73.7%

51.6%

12.8%9.4%

8.4%

23.6%

7.3%

18.3%

15.8% 17.2%7.0%

36.4%

18.2%

23.1%

2.3% 0.4% 1.5% 3.3% 0.7%7.0%

Area 1 - Creating a shared pedestrian and vehicle zone in

front of the entrance to the Prahran train

station.

Area 2 - Grattan Gardens: Creating a

local plaza space, with no kerbs and a

paved surface across the street in

front of Grattan Gardens.

Area 3 - Changing the pedestrian

crossings at Izett Street to create

less conflict between cars and

pedestrians.

Area 4 - Removing two of the four

plane trees infront of the Prahran

Town Hall to allow for new urban

plaza on Chapel Street.

Area 4 - In Greville Street, extend the

width of the footpath to

improve planting, seating and dining.

Area 5 - Fully pedestrianised King Street between the

round about and Chapel Street, with

residential car spaces access

maintained to the east


Source: Corporate and Community Planning 2015Figure 2: Question 4Number of respondents: 275 of 288

Q3. Traffic changes

Do you support the following traffic changes outlined in the proposal?


Q4. Proposed changes

Do you support the following changes outlined in the proposal?



Q5. Prahran Town Hall

What would you like to see in front of the Prahran Town Hall (e.g. public art, lighting, more

seating)


Five themes were identified and demonstrated in the indicative comments below.

Theme 1

Increase seating 80/35%

respondents said:

Theme 3

Better lighting 66/29%

respondents said:

Theme 5

Less homeless/unfortunate

people 14/6% respondents said:

“More seating to eat lunch”

“More attractive seating”

Theme 2

Install art 72/31% respondents

said:

“Public art including graffiti art”

“More lighting and public art”

“Better lighting which celebrates the

historic buildings”

“Lighting on the building”

Theme 4

More trees and gardens 22/10%

respondents said:

“Less homeless/drunk people.

Less people asking for money”

“Less 'unfortunate' people.

It's distracting and undesirable to

walk past”

“Increase the trees - beautify with plant

boxes”

“Garden beds with flowers and small

scrubs”


Q6. Shared Street Use (Allows for one way through traffic) or Shared Street Use and

Permanent Street Closure at Grattan Gardens

Do you generally support the following?


32.6%

27.7%

15.9%

23.9%

Option 1 – Shared Street Use (Allows for one way through traffic)Option 2 – Shared Street Use and Permanent Street Closure at Grattan GardensBoth optionsNeither option



48.8%

66.9% 69.5%

19.8%

10.6%

17.2%27.1%

21.7%12.6%

4.3% 0.8% 0.8%

Area 2 - Shared car and pedestrian space between Grattan Streetand

Izett Street.

Area 2 - Providing more trees, seating and dining (requires removal of six car spaces).

Area 2 - Temporary closure for designated events.



40.2%

58.4%

13.0%

6.7%

42.1%

33.7%

4.6% 1.1%

Area 2 - Closed to traffic between Grattan Street and the access laneway with a shared street between the

laneway and Izett Street.

Area 2 - Providing more trees, seating and dining (requires removal of 10 car spaces).

Support Neutral Don’t support Can’t saySource: Corporate and Community Planning 2015Figure 5: Question 8Number of respondents: 267 of 288

Q7. Shared street use

Do you support the following changes outlined in Option 1 – Shared Street Use


Q8. Shared Street Use and Permanent Street Closure

Do you support the following changes outlined in Option 2 – Shared Street Use and

Permanent Street Closure?



0.5%

57.2%

8.1%

23.9%

6.8% 7.2%

78.4%

1.4%0.0%

25.7%

3.6% 4.1%1.4% 2.7%

32.0%

0.9%0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Bus Car Cycle Train Tram Taxi Walk Other

Greville Street King Street

Source: Corporate and Community Planning 2015Figure 7: Question 10aNumber of respondents: 260 of 288

Q9. Why respondents normally visit Greville or King Streets?

Why do you normally visit Greville or King Streets?


60.4%

69.4%

18.0% 20.7%14.0%

33.3%40.5%

55.4%

16.2%12.6%

7.2%10.8%

4.1% 4.1%5.4%

2.3%

25.7%

3.2%

9.5%4.5%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Greville Street King Street

Source: Corporate and Community Planning 2015Figure 6: Question 9aNumber of respondents: 267 of 288

Q10. How respondents normally travel to Greville or King Streets

Why do you normally visit Greville or King Streets?



52.7%

26.6%

7.2%4.1% 3.6% 4.1%

17.6%

9.0% 10.4%

5.4% 6.3%

18.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Daily 2-3 times/week Once/ week 2-3 times/ month Once/ month Less than once/ month

Greville Street King StreetSource: Corporate and Community Planning 2015Figure 8: Question 10aNumber of respondents: 260 of 288

Q11. How often respondents visit Greville or King Streets

How often do you visit Greville or King Streets?



29

Pop–up Results

30

Engagement Overview

The City of Stonnington has developed a Masterplan proposing widespread improvements to

Greville and King Streets. To test these improvements with the community and users of these

streets, CoDesign Studio was engaged to deliver three on-street consultation sessions as well

as complementary communications and street prototyping activities. Together, these activities

have enabled local residents, workers, traders and visitors alike to provide input into the future

design outcomes for the Greville and King Street precinct.

Consultation sessions

These sessions took place on the following dates:

Saturday 18 July outside Prahran Library, 10 – 11am

Saturday 25 July in Grattan Gardens, 10 – 11am

Thursday 30 July on the corner of Greville St and Macquarie St, 8 – 11am

The sessions aimed to:

Inform people about the ongoing project to improve Greville Street.

Communicate, in a simple easy to understand way, the improvements being considered.

Gain feedback on key design elements.

Complementary prototyping and communications activities Complementing the engagement sessions were a range of signage, communication materials and on-street prototyping to draw attention to the proposed changes and engage the community to gather feedback. These included:

On-street decals promoting the consultation process and indicating the location of pop-up consultation sessions.

On-street stencils indicating the types and locations of proposed changes.

Bin signage provided a summary of the ways to have a say in an eye-catching manner.

The results of the consultation sessions have been compiled into the following report, concluding with a set of recommendations for the next phase of the project.

31

Summary of findings

Overall, people were supportive of improvements proposed for Greville and King Streets and

many aspects of the plan were not seen as controversial.

Most positive: People responded very positively to having more (carefully selected) street

trees and fixing the intersection at Izett Street. Overall, they were also supportive of making

Greville Street one-way if this helped to improved safety, including at Izett Street, and created

more space for pedestrians, outdoor activities and trees.

Concerns: Most of the concerns raised came from residents in the area impacted by the

changes to traffic flows, surrounding Porter and Grattan Streets. People registered concerns

about the impacts on their ability to get into and out of the area by car.

Locals: Most locals were in favour of creating a better pedestrian environment, especially

those that do not heavily rely on a motor vehicle for transport. Some of the locals we spoke to

have been living in the same area for over 10 years and have seen the area change; they

often recited concerns about the decline in Greville Street over the years and their desire to

see targeted improvements made to help revitalise the area.

Traders: Traders and shop staff could see potential in the proposed changes where they were

directly linked to introducing more and new uses of the street. They often acknowledged the

difficult trade-off between improving the street environment to make Greville Street a

destination and restricting car space and the need for car parking.

Bang for the investment buck: Some residents and traders wanted to be sure that the

improvements would provide a return for the street and were seeking information linking

changes to outcomes, new uses and benefits.

Implementation impacts: A number of people – both residents and traders – asked questions

and raised concerns about the staging and timing of the implementation, which related to

minimising impacts on businesses.

King Street: There was less feedback provided about King Street, with many indicating

confusion about where this street was located.

32

Recommendations

Based on the observations of the street, conversations and analysis of community feedback,

CoDesign Studio provides the following recommendations for the future implementation of the

project:

Most community concerns focus on the impacts of individual or cumulative traffic flow changes. Trials of these proposed changes could assist in seeing if these concerns will be realised.

Many community members and traders felt the shop owners as well as their tenants could play a powerful role in making Greville Street a unique destination. This could be encouraged.

Consider prototyping the proposed closure of King Street to draw attention to this area and signpost the proposed changes. This could also be used to further involve traders and the community with the project.

Consider careful staging of the project. Lead with elements, which will have the greatest impact and time implementation to minimise impacts to businesses.

Link changes with initiatives that ensure new spaces are well used. For example, community programming to activate new shared space.

33

Additional

correspondence

34

Letter 1

This letter was from a trader who was opposed to permanent closure of Greville Street outside

Grattan Gardens stating that this will effect traffic flow and be hard for customers to access

shopping. But was in favor of temporary closure believing this is the better option of the two.

The letter was also in favour of the number of amenity changes outline in the proposal e.g.

Increased greenery and landscaping, Improved pavement surfaces and widening of footpaths

Letter 2

This letter was opposed to permanent closure of Greville Street but was happy with Porter

Street continuing to be one way.

Letter 3

This trader was in favour of the idea of widening and improving footpaths down Greville Street.

In addition he supported car spaces being removed to make footpaths wider but only if it

creates more footpath dinning.

35

Government & Nonprofit

Greville and King Engegement Analysis Report August 2015