Session 1: Small Transport Wins in Regional Victoria: Support Properity

Session: 1

Room: Supper Room

Session Title: Small Transport Wins in Regional Victoria: Support Properity

Format: Presentation and Group Discussion

Presenter Name: Benish (DoT)

Summary

• When transport is funded, the geographic disadvantage is not considered.

• Elderly populations are recognised, but not appropriately. Overall, we need bus services to capture these gaps in regional areas.

• Emphasis on systemic interventions, and single projects are not viable.

• Regional connections are often from direct A-B links to the CBD. This does not reflect the complexity of individuals’ transport needs. Consider medical services, do they need to travel to the CBD for these services? How can this be localised?

• Regional buses: Often only run in the morning and afternoon, but there is a gap in the middle of the day. The absence of a holistic timeframe means the service only services a small group of the community. Buses during just 'school-time' peak hours limit the capability of the service.

• Hyper Local, Flexible, Frequent, Integrated Towns and Cities are arranged as a 20-minute neighbourhood, but the infrastructure does not support these short, quick, and active trips.

• Consider old regional towns, these were established before cars and therefore inherently were pedestrian spaces. We can revisit this approach. We can look to the future, but sometimes we can look to the past.

• Responsive transport / On Demand: This is a new innovation. Barriers to access can affect the elderly. A case study (unnamed) moved away from fixed services, and the ridership decreased by 80%. Good in theory but needs to be carefully implemented. If additional care is focused on people with special needs.

• Challenges: The regional centres have services, but what about people who live in more rural areas. How can transport serve people who live "in the sticks"?

Session 1: Congestion Pricing

Session: 1

Room: Yarra Room

Session Title: Congestion Pricing

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Harry Barber

Summary

• What is congestion? How & where congestion should be priced?

• Car parking can have congestion prices.

• Congestion should be priced when vehicle load is within acceptable limits of the road capacity

• Data is a critical factor for analysing congestion and the optimum level needs to be established.

Session 1: Money Revenue Generation

Session: 1

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Money Revenue Generation

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Simon and James (Stantec)

Summary

• The focus of the discussion is how to increase revenue from transport facilities. Public transport will be assisting movement for people and be free to use.

• Public transport expenses are significant for operation and maintenance.

• The primary opportunity lies in congestion pricing, proper pricing for parking, and fare payment encouragement.

• The City of Melbourne receives a significant proportion from on-street parking, and shared car facilities. Encourage Public transport use has been provided by reducing discounts on particular days of the week, and discounts for a group of people.

• Maximising asset utilisation.

Session 1: Car Dependency

Session: 1

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Car Dependency

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Sebastian Aurisano

Summary

• Main Problems: Traffic jams, pollution, climate change. 25% of emissions come from transport.

• How to tackle it? Public transport, active transport, infrastructure. The pedestrian-oriented built environment is most critical. Autonomous and electric vehicles should also be considered. Electric vehicles tend to tackle pollution and climate change, but congestion will still remain.

• AVs might improve traffic jams but they may encourage urban sprawl.

• Car dependency has a gender impact, mothers need cars to take kids around. We can only use happy wheels if the urban built environment supports it.

• Minimum parking requirements based on floor area ratio should be reconsidered.

• Car sharing is important to diminish the parking issues related to autonomous vehicles.

• Private e-scooters should be allowed and encouraged in Melbourne.

Session 1: Transport strategy for Non-human and sustainability

Session: 1

Room: Regent Room

Session Title: Transport strategy for Non-human and sustainability

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Hayley Timmers (RMIT)

Summary

• How do we identify the key species or understand local biodiversity as one neighbourhood?

• How can we plan for non-human connectivity?

• Community advocacy reclaiming streets: Consider how people reclaim nature strips. Gorilla street trees on the upfield line.

• Community planting VicTrack: tracking which species pass which route in their everyday lives to reflect on the transport planning.

• How do we tackle KPI while making enjoyable connectivity for humans and non-humans?

• How should we assess possible environmental impacts on the site when we plan the strategy?

• There are important grasslands along the Sunbury line, these narrow strips of vegetation should not be managed without engaging Traditional Owners.

Session 2: Micro Mobility Design Challenge

Session: 2

Room: Supper Room

Session Title: Micro Mobility Design Challenge

Format: Creative Workshop

Presenter Name: Oscar Hayes (City of Melbourne) and Liz Irvin (Stantec)

Summary

• There is potential for Melbourne to be scooter friendly. Micro mobility design guide is the focus of the project. Infrastructure design issues were discussed.

• Parking is the most important issue for e-bikes.

• Can dedicated bike lanes be shared with e-scooters?

• To increase safety: consider speed limits and road rules regulation.

• Queensland has speed regulations for footpaths and bike lanes.

• Three themes were discussed by groups:

  • #Parking: Considered the parking at the train stations, and bus stops. What does the space look like and is charging provided? How secure will these spaces be and who owns them?

  • #Going area: Shared space with no to low car, using road spaces filtering.

  • #Arriving: Engineering design.

Session 2: Better Buses: The Future Frequent Network

Session: 2

Room: Yarra Room

Session Title: Better Buses: The Future Frequent Network

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Peter Parker (Melbourne on Transit)

Summary

• Better Bus Network: Sustainable Cities Campaign, better buses for Melbourne's West with a particular focus on the West. We need a top-level service. Perth was looked at as a precedent, noting most other states have a much higher frequency.

• Why is bus advocacy so challenging? The goal for 2030, is how can we shift the focus away from the high-income areas within Melbourne's southeast. The community is interested and political instability provides an opportunity for change.

• After the recent election, there may no longer be any safe seats. https://melbourneontransit.blogspot.com/2022/07/un-135-future-frequent-network.html This will not only support the suburban rail loop but will serve more people. Every ten minutes and seven days of the week.

• The Principle Public transport Network: Gave birth to smart bus routes, these run every 15 minutes. However these smart services are in the East (10) only one of these services is in the inner west, in Sunshine.

• The Useful Network: Every 20min service. Blog by Peter Parker. https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1eIBtYp3YqK7VDYkbcJW-XanMUHUIl2NE&ll=-37.8103655796008%2C145.02267822356933&z=9

• Laura: Images and maps are helpful. But to advocate consider how people may not need to own multiple cars, these messages are important. Improving people's lives. The future frequent network connects people to jobs. Local community benefit is integral.

• Route alignment has been discussed. How will this be branded?

• Question: How will these services align with the existing services? Ten-minute service to align with trains and trams. Look at the network coordination framework, this has not been applied to buses but there is an opportunity to apply this theoretical understanding.

• Focus on a small number of routes, done well.

Session 2: Fund Raising for Local Projects

Session: 2

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Fund Raising for Local Projects

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Jane Waldock (Metropolitan Transport)

Summary

• Politics in local governments.

• Time constraints from start and end of a project.

• Lack of inter communication between LGs and state governments - community engagement at all levels.

Session 2: Open Street: Messaging for Mobility

Session: 2

Room: Regent Room

Session Title: Open Street: Messaging for Mobility

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Zoe and Leyla (City of Merri-bek)

Summary

• Getting the language right for livable, lovable neighbourhoods.

• Streets, not roads! Open not closed! Crashed not accidents terminology!

• What sort of consultation is the best for people? This is dependent on the local context, and it is important, to be honest, and transparent. Prioritise people, not transport modes.

• The importance of plain language to disseminate information. Changing the terminology of the open street.

• The meaning of road closure is no motor vehicles and increasing the flexibility of street use.

• Open street provides the neighbourhood with enhancing community bonds.

• How do we communicate with neighbours?

• Benefits: children’s safety, healthier communities, and more social space.

• What sort of signage makes all people comfortable using the space? How do we accommodate new emerging transport modes such as e-scooter? Whose priority is the first?

• Potential for site rhythmanalysis to identify the behavioural patterns of the place.

Session 3: Has Covid Killed Public Transport?

Session: 3

Room: Supper Room

Session Title: Has Covid Killed Public Transport?

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Phillip Mallis (City of Yarra)

Summary

• Covid has a significant decrease in PTV patronage. This is ongoing post-covid. Surprisingly, bus ridership has performed better. Consider the buses that service hospitals, and places of employment that cannot be completed by working from home.

• Infrastructure Victoria outlined that CBD employment has decreased. WFH has increased working in suburban areas.

• Trip purpose: Important to consider, however, the shortfall of the census is that it captures travel to work. The VISTA data set is more robust, and this is taken every 2 years.

• During COVID, car transport increased for work, recreation, and services.

• Cycling: The bike counters have shown LOWER bike use in 2022. In the lockdown, cycling ridership managed to remain consistent, which is impressive considering fewer people were commuting to work. With the overall drop in cycling volume from 2018-2022, we are returning to 2010 levels.

• Challenges: There are blind spots in the data collection. Trip purpose is limited. The data is not consistent, symmetry is essential. The frequency needs to also be increased. The data also needs to be accessible, in a spreadsheet form, why is data presented in a pdf in 2022?

• Data Gaps: We do not collate PTV crowding, vehicle crowding, tram patronage by line, or PTV journey purposes.

• Classpass format: We need better options to purchase Myki use. A deal when you receive ten passes and it is cheaper. The people who least afford it cannot. New York has a weekly cap, this would incentivise. Weekly deals could really help shift from car dependency. Instead of annual deals, look for weekly. Off-peak transport is a great deal, but people did not really know about it, it needs to be communicated best.

• The lack of tolerance for incomplete data has impacted the release of patronage data. Tense conversation! What happens when places do not have the resources to navigate the criticisms? We need a better picture of patronage and there are many behind the scene challenges that affect how data is circulated and presented.

• Privacy concerns towards Governments collecting qualitative data.

• How can we capitalise on the post-covid interest in getting back in the community. Should we encourage people to WFH or come into the office? Who gets to make these decisions?

• The message needs to be spread, if we say nothing driving will continue to increase at default.

• Congestion charging: Will this work, or will people continue to drive and accept the costs? Generally, individuals are resilient to change, therefore intense advocacy and education are essential.

Session 3: Victoria Transportation Integration Plan

Session: 3

Room: Yarra Room

Session Title: Victoria Transportation Integration Plan

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Catherine McNaughton

Summary

• Call on the Victorian government to work with councils and communities to develop metro and Victoria regional transport and land use plans.

• Create the places communities want.

• Assess infrastructure proposal to demonstrate maximum community and environmental benefits.

• Prioritize equity and people.

• Achieve net zero greenhouse gas emission transport and land systems.

• Include traditional owners’ perspectives, knowledge and country plans.

• Include full community engagement. As required under the transport integration act 2010 and climate change act 2017.

• Ad hoc projects have demonstrated limited community benefits, lack of integration, and limited linked benefits.

• Consider the scales of challenges that arise with population growth; changing commuting and living patterns, technology, climate and biodiversity emergencies.

Session 3: Zero Traffic Growth with Increasing Population

Session: 3

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Zero Traffic Growth with Increasing Population

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Lisa (DoT)

Summary

• The community complains about inadequate parking, yet people are aware of the traffic congestion.

• Consider a defined restriction for parking per household.

• Policy needs to be specific.

• Considered the opportunity of car sharing.

• How can we support younger generations and public transport use?

• We need to allow for time to see the behavioural change as infrastructure and restrictions will not radically change the car-dependent scenario.

• Restricting owning a car until a certain age could also be a way to ownership control.

Session 3: Active Transport Integration

Session: 3

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Active transport integration

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Danny Davis

Summary

• FLAIR: Flexible, local, accessible, integrated, and responsive.

• Accessibility in stations should be increased.

• High patronage for better bus stops.

• App-based information needs to be reliable.

• Multimodal journey app timetable should be user-friendly.

• Sharing data between companies will increase journey reliability.

Session 3: Political advocacy for better transport service

Session: 3

Room: Regent Room

Session Title: Political advocacy for better transport service

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Peter Parket (Melbourne on Transit)

Summary

• Transformed transit for Melbourne Political volatility has both positive and negative impacts.

• How to decrease the number of vehicles in outer suburbs to introduce public transport systems with high frequency and good connectivity. Is poor frequency why car use remains widespread?

• Recommended book: The making and unmaking east-west link.

• Bus services are the key to establishing an integrated transport network.

Session 4: The Inside 'Scooter' - Melbourne E-scooter Trial

Session: 4

Room: Supper Room

Session Title: The Inside 'Scooter' - Melbourne E-scooter Trial

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Samaj and Ronard (Neuron)

Summary

• Data Overview: Feb to June 2022 Average transport distance 2.16km. Average trip durations 15.5 mins, Average trip per day 7408 trips. Total trips 1194300 trips. Total distance 2580066 km.

• Contribute to supporting Melbourne's major events; 41% of users said that the environmentally friendly nature of e-scooters was a factor.

• The shared bike lane network has also a low rate of accidents.

• 65% of scooter users indicated they made a purchase at the start or end of their trip.

• Daily public complaints decreased quickly after the launch.

• Concerns: Parking, footpath use, user noncompliance, reporting systems.

• Will private e-scooter users become public e-scooter users if the regulations are tightended?

Session 4: Public Transport Data Collection

Session: 4

Room: Yarra Room

Session Title: How can we reduce parking with car sharing?

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Josh (Infrastructure Victoria)

Summary

• Good data will be received if the service is simple.

• Ticketing data is very difficult to use as fewer touch on and off in Victoria.

• Train myki data is much better for touch on and off in Victoria compared to the other states.

• Queensland trip data is complete and open to the agencies.

• VISTA data is scarce and time-dependent.

Session 4: How can we reduce parking with car sharing?

Session: 4

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: How can we reduce parking with car sharing?

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Darcy (GoGet)

Summary

• Carshare facilitates placemaking and intermodal transport.

• Consider Peel Street where curbside parking slots were replaced by bike lanes.

• Users drive 50% less than before they joined the service. Increase access, and reduce costs/VKT. Car-sharing to tackle last-mile issues.

• 4 Key Benefits of onsite carshare -> reduce project costs (1 parking space $50k-$100k), improve project delivery timelines, reduce environmental impact and provide amenities to the local community.

• Requirements for onsite carshare -> a parking bay, mobile signal for the carshare vehicle, 24/7 controlled access. In front of/behind the security barrier. They provide different types of vehicles to meet different demands, such as vans to allow people to move houses.

Session 4: Free Public Transport

Session: 4

Room: Regent Room

Session Title: Free Public Transport

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Rosie (City of Stonnington)

Summary

• Only 30% of operating costs are funded currently, funding has to come from somewhere.

• Free Tram Zone takes pedestrians off the street and requires more services, increasing costs due to increased demand, mode shift away from walking, loss in revenue and spike in demand.

• The issue is not limited to cost, but access particularly for those with poor access (outer suburbs). Not many big systems that are free, there are smaller ones. Instead put tram revenue in areas which need it for example Melton, and Clyde.

• Look at the full network and where a free zone would increase the uptake of public transport (not away from pedestrians).

• Costs too much to travel to/from regional Vic (over $20) on VLine. Lower price of regional passengers.

• Transport has to become a service: Means-tested pricing, flexible/dynamic fares based on demand.

• Transport projects are measured by travel time savings, which is very narrow.

• Who is going to integrate these services?

• Consider safety when considering mode choice and MaaS, which fills a gap when people do not feel safe walking.

Session 5: How do real people travel around the city loop?

Session: 5

Room: Supper Room

Session Title: How do real people travel around the city loop?

Format: Workshop

Presenter Name: Chris Loader (DoT)

Summary

• Based on people's lives experience, they choose the best answer to each transfer scenario.

• A workshop to understand how people recognise the station as a node and identify the gap between recommended transfer routes on Google maps or PTV and actual human preferences.

• People tend to prioritise how they feel when they are at the station rather than to what extent the station is convenient to transfer. But generally, frequency of getting the line is the most important thing.

• What if you cannot travel directly to your destination station? Would you transfer? Where? Why?

Session 5: Cultural Landscape

Session: 5

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Cultural Landscape

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Heather (Geelong City Council)

Summary

• Aboriginal people have settled in Moorabool and Barwon Rivers, but those lands were not preserved based on their cultural landscape.

• Evidence of heritage is limited to tangible things, however, consider the intangible method of First Nations Storytelling. First Nations' cultural heritage and identity are often framed through the western planning system and the inclusion as stakeholders.

• Strong People Strong Country Policy- developed and led by First Nations People. Introduces a re-framing where inclusion is explored through how the identity of the Traditional owners is dependent on the health of the Country and their environment.

• This is a shift away from policies that looked at inclusion from a stakeholder perspective, that in a way forced First Nations people to engage with the western/colonial planning system. How can policies support First Nations individuals that do not live in their Country, this is particularly common as a consequence of the Stolen Generation.