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: drussell@stonnington.vic.gov.au
Web: www.connect.stonningon.vic.gov.au

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 Planning2015
Figure 1: Question 3
Number 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 vehiclezonein
front of the
entranceto the
Prahran train
station.
Area 2 - Grattan
Gardens: Creating a
local plaza space,
with no kerbs and a
paved surface
across thestreet 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 thefour
planetrees infront
of thePrahran
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
Number of respondents: 275 of288
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 oneway through traffic)
Option 2 – Shared Street Useand Permanent Street Closureat Grattan Gardens
Both options
Neither option
Source: Corporate and Community Planning 2015

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
spacebetween Grattan Streetand
Izett Street.
Area 2 - Providing moretrees,
seating and dining (requires
removal of six car spaces).
Area 2 - Temporary closurefor
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).
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
GrevilleStreet King Street
Figure 7: Question 10a
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%
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
Q11. How often respondents visit Greville or King Streets
How often do you visit Greville or King Streets?

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.

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.

Greville and King Engegement Analysis Report August 2015

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à Greville and King Engegement Analysis Report August 2015

Similaire à Greville and King Engegement Analysis Report August 2015 (20)

Plus de Stonnington

Plus de Stonnington (8)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Greville and King Engegement Analysis Report August 2015