2022 Melbourne Sessions

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 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: 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)

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.