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 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 5: Gender, Transport, and its Numerous Intersections

Session: 5

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Gender, Transport, and its Numerous Intersections

Format: Open Discussion

Presenter Name: Zoe (Merri-bek), Elise (CrowdSpot), and Adam (Merri-bek)

(Photograghed by Benish

Summary

• Highly skewed and underrepresented numbers of women and non-binary people in cycling in Melbourne and Victoria. Removing the barriers to entry of bicycle riding

• The gender gap in cycling (Elise): Absence in policy for people that do not identify as men or women. We need to shift the conversation from increasing cycling opportunities for women to increasing the opportunity for anyone facing barriers. Some barriers include: safety, and raising children. Transport data should be provided with a gender breakdown.

• People ride to train stations when the alternatives are poor.

• Designing cross-community routes rather than just 'journeys to work'. There is no data on these journeys because they are currently not catered for. No safe infrastructure that allows women to give things a try and have the opportunity to "fail".

• Safety exists in many forms, including injury risk and the perceived safety of other people using the space.

• Lighting is a concern in footpath safety. Roads have lights, but footpaths do not. However, lighting is not the only concern for gender inclusion.

• Findings: Girls stopped using bicycles when moving from primary school to high school. Boys are given more freedom to travel to school independently.

• It's about pushing that market, activating new infrastructure, and making sure people are aware. Consider micro-mobility as a mitigating solution for last-mile, after-dark trips.

• Many people in typically female-dominated jobs will use scooters and won't cycle -

• E-cargo bike trials (Zoe): - Doing persona route mapping, rich heat map of trips women are choosing. Most people who haven't cycled or used cargo bikes are returning to cycling after having children. Mapping is showing routes taken, routes being avoided, and what streets young families and women are riding on. If we do more of these trials, we can target infrastructure and show where we should be investing it.

• Need quantitative and qualitative data - the stories of community members

Session 6: Parking Minimums

Session: 6

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Parking Minimums

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Lachlan Burke (Movement and Place Consulting)

Summary

• Parking minimums are set by the council and are resisted by the business owner.

• Parking is most of the time provided more than requirements.

• Making people use active transport would make parking opportunities for the people with issues.

• We need some kind of management if accessibility is being impacted by the lack of parking. The car parking minimums have also made some businesses apply for waivers to their complexity and expense for small businesses.