5 ms·

I live in St Kilda, Australia and our council recently changed one of our iconic streets to almost exclusively be for pedestrians and trams. Businesses protest

I live in St Kilda, Australia and our council recently changed one of our iconic streets to almost exclusively be for pedestrians and trams. Businesses protested for months about potential lost business, however as a resident I feel so much safer walking down the street. It feels like foot traffic has increased there, too. It's such an improvement. I also like to think tunnels to apartment buildings could help us take more cars of the road and create more green spaces for people in the future.

whatshisface 8y ago
>Businesses protested for months about potential lost business Out of curiosity, how did that pan out? Closing off an area to road traffic is basically a re-prioritization towards nearby residents, and away from distant visitors and the commerce that they engage in, so it would be interesting to know how badly the latter groups suffer.
- kingo55 8y ago
  Hard to say, I think businesses haven't been affected too badly. I've seen some closures but there were closures back when vehicles were permitted all the way through the street, too... Distant visitors still arrive by tram loads. And parking, whilst terrible, is available close by. When you think about switching the area back to allow cars again, you begin to realise how little you needed that street to begin with. It was mostly for people showing off their cars and loud music.
  - noobermin 8y ago
    >It was mostly for people showing off their cars and loud music. While it's seems like a shoddy observation, it's surprising how much car usage isn't really about transport but about status or psychological relief. "Going for a drive" is equivalent to "going for a walk" in much of the US.
- dylan604 8y ago
  I would imagine having parking structures/places to accommodate those from out of the area to still be able to drive there, park, and then proceed on foot.
clairity 8y ago
i'm on board with putting express roads and parking underground (even though the costs are high) and making the extra space available for humans, pets and lower speed transport like bikes and scooters. i'd also advocate making licensing for vehicles much harder and increasing the enforcement and punishment of distracted driving.
- pasta 8y ago
  An alternative to underground is 'at the back'. For example you can have a car free shopping street where cars can only park at the back sides of the shops.
  - reificator 8y ago
    Which quickly becomes the front for businesses advertising to passersby.
    - tomjakubowski 8y ago
      Those businesses would be foolish not to advertise on both sides. There is a kind of strip mall in Marina del Rey, CA that advertises businesses on the back entrances for cars driving by on busy Lincoln Blvd (with some parking back there, too), but has the main entrances on a pedestrian-facing side away from Lincoln.
    - ocschwar 8y ago
      Not with Boston's Quincy Market. The stores face two pedestrian streets. The back sides are for cars, and they're just utilitarian alleys.
- leetcrew 8y ago
  how do you increase the enforcement of distracted driving?
  - kingo55 8y ago
    Cameras overhead. There is a trial to catch drivers on their phones in Sydney IIRC. Edit: found it https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/17/drivers-using-mobile-phones-in-nsw-to-be-caught-with-new-cameras https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/17/drive...
reaperducer 8y ago
our council recently changed one of our iconic streets to almost exclusively be for pedestrians and trams. For whatever it's worth, Chicago tried both of these things, and they didn't work out. The main shopping drag, State Street, was pedestrianized in 1979. You can see it for a few seconds in the film National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. It didn't work. It was re-opened to traffic in 1996, and is now far more vibrant than it used to be (though, with a number of other contributing factors since nothing exists in a vacuum in a large city).[1] Maybe people weren't ready for that in the 1980's, though the region has a number of outdoor shopping malls, in spite of its cold weather. I also like to think tunnels to apartment buildings could help us take more cars of the road and create more green spaces for people in the future. Again, Chicago did this. 40 city blocks are linked underground (and a few via bridges). I like the Pedway, but it's mostly vacant space, sleeping homeless people, and bad smells.[2] Except for rush hours, it's pretty much derelict. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_(Chicago)#State_Street_shopping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_(Chicago)#State_S... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pedway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pedway
- allcentury 8y ago
  In the wiki article and in the tribute article linked (https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1996-11-15-9611150249-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1996-11-15-961115...), it doesn't really give any insight on why it was a 'disaster'. Have anymore to share? I'm really interested.
  - eherot 8y ago
    It seems like this is an unsubstantiated claim. At the time that this change was introduced, Chicago was at the tail end of one of the longest economic declines that it has ever experienced. Several huge retailers that were located in the area closed around the same time. The hope was that changing this street into a pedestrian mall would save it from economic collapse. Unsurprisingly, it did not as the forces at work were much larger than anything that could be fixed by changing the traffic pattern on a single street. https://chi.streetsblog.org/2013/03/11/why-was-the-state-street-pedestrian-mall-a-failure/ https://chi.streetsblog.org/2013/03/11/why-was-the-state-str...
megaremote 8y ago
Do you mean Ackland st? A small part of it was blocked off, there are still far too many cars going down there. But it is a great start. St Kilda is a such an awesome area, but like lots of places far too many cars. Melbourne has a serious problem with cars, most of the large parks even include roads running through them. Even with a fantastic inner city tram system, too many people are addicted to cars.
- kingo55 8y ago
  Yep, that's the one... Only the Acland St / Barkly St intersection is gone. It's enough that most vehicles don't head down the street. They could easily expand the pedestrian section further up the street - and I'd like to see it too, but smaller measured steps will probably be more sustainable until parking gets "solved".

whatshisface 8y ago

>Businesses protested for months about potential lost business Out of curiosity, how did that pan out? Closing off an area to road traffic is basically a re-prioritization towards nearby residents, and away from distant visitors and the commerce that they engage in, so it would be interesting to know how badly the latter groups suffer.

kingo55 8y ago
Hard to say, I think businesses haven't been affected too badly. I've seen some closures but there were closures back when vehicles were permitted all the way through the street, too... Distant visitors still arrive by tram loads. And parking, whilst terrible, is available close by. When you think about switching the area back to allow cars again, you begin to realise how little you needed that street to begin with. It was mostly for people showing off their cars and loud music.
- noobermin 8y ago
  >It was mostly for people showing off their cars and loud music. While it's seems like a shoddy observation, it's surprising how much car usage isn't really about transport but about status or psychological relief. "Going for a drive" is equivalent to "going for a walk" in much of the US.
dylan604 8y ago
I would imagine having parking structures/places to accommodate those from out of the area to still be able to drive there, park, and then proceed on foot.

clairity 8y ago

i'm on board with putting express roads and parking underground (even though the costs are high) and making the extra space available for humans, pets and lower speed transport like bikes and scooters. i'd also advocate making licensing for vehicles much harder and increasing the enforcement and punishment of distracted driving.

pasta 8y ago
An alternative to underground is 'at the back'. For example you can have a car free shopping street where cars can only park at the back sides of the shops.
- reificator 8y ago
  Which quickly becomes the front for businesses advertising to passersby.
  - tomjakubowski 8y ago
    Those businesses would be foolish not to advertise on both sides. There is a kind of strip mall in Marina del Rey, CA that advertises businesses on the back entrances for cars driving by on busy Lincoln Blvd (with some parking back there, too), but has the main entrances on a pedestrian-facing side away from Lincoln.
  - ocschwar 8y ago
    Not with Boston's Quincy Market. The stores face two pedestrian streets. The back sides are for cars, and they're just utilitarian alleys.
leetcrew 8y ago
how do you increase the enforcement of distracted driving?
- kingo55 8y ago
  Cameras overhead. There is a trial to catch drivers on their phones in Sydney IIRC. Edit: found it https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/17/drivers-using-mobile-phones-in-nsw-to-be-caught-with-new-cameras https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/dec/17/drive...

reaperducer 8y ago

our council recently changed one of our iconic streets to almost exclusively be for pedestrians and trams. For whatever it's worth, Chicago tried both of these things, and they didn't work out. The main shopping drag, State Street, was pedestrianized in 1979. You can see it for a few seconds in the film National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. It didn't work. It was re-opened to traffic in 1996, and is now far more vibrant than it used to be (though, with a number of other contributing factors since nothing exists in a vacuum in a large city).[1] Maybe people weren't ready for that in the 1980's, though the region has a number of outdoor shopping malls, in spite of its cold weather. I also like to think tunnels to apartment buildings could help us take more cars of the road and create more green spaces for people in the future. Again, Chicago did this. 40 city blocks are linked underground (and a few via bridges). I like the Pedway, but it's mostly vacant space, sleeping homeless people, and bad smells.[2] Except for rush hours, it's pretty much derelict. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_(Chicago)#State_Street_shopping https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Street_(Chicago)#State_S... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pedway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pedway

allcentury 8y ago
In the wiki article and in the tribute article linked (https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1996-11-15-9611150249-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1996-11-15-961115...), it doesn't really give any insight on why it was a 'disaster'. Have anymore to share? I'm really interested.
- eherot 8y ago
  It seems like this is an unsubstantiated claim. At the time that this change was introduced, Chicago was at the tail end of one of the longest economic declines that it has ever experienced. Several huge retailers that were located in the area closed around the same time. The hope was that changing this street into a pedestrian mall would save it from economic collapse. Unsurprisingly, it did not as the forces at work were much larger than anything that could be fixed by changing the traffic pattern on a single street. https://chi.streetsblog.org/2013/03/11/why-was-the-state-street-pedestrian-mall-a-failure/ https://chi.streetsblog.org/2013/03/11/why-was-the-state-str...

megaremote 8y ago

Do you mean Ackland st? A small part of it was blocked off, there are still far too many cars going down there. But it is a great start. St Kilda is a such an awesome area, but like lots of places far too many cars. Melbourne has a serious problem with cars, most of the large parks even include roads running through them. Even with a fantastic inner city tram system, too many people are addicted to cars.

kingo55 8y ago
Yep, that's the one... Only the Acland St / Barkly St intersection is gone. It's enough that most vehicles don't head down the street. They could easily expand the pedestrian section further up the street - and I'd like to see it too, but smaller measured steps will probably be more sustainable until parking gets "solved".