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.

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 5: Parking and Business Viability

Session: 5

Room: Regent Room

Session Title: Parking and Business Viability

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Patel

Summary

• Traders want car parking. An intercept survey found parking concession does not impact availability.

• DoT focuses on the reuse of the parking assets than replacement.

• Commercial pricing of the parking may be decided by the preference of or the parking value of people.

• One of third of the parking space reduction went unnoticed in a busy business area.

• Parking permits also delay and increase the expenses of the business.

• Dynamically allocation of parking is also important. Sharing the right message to the community or politicians would also promote a change of thinking and understanding that the cost of living increases more with more parking spaces.