Session 2
Room: Supper
Format: Presentations and Panel Discussion
Session Title: Bike Share
Presenter Name: Jacqui / Adrian Webb/ Elizabeth Kim, Transport for Victoria
Presenter best contact email:
Notes:
Uber has approached Melbourne to start a bike share scheme.
DOT – Looking at future of bike share since 2- 3 years. (Regulatoy)ry – encourage or discourage private entrance, funding arrangements (value for money)
Elzabeth Kim – It was a great scheme to begin with. The way contract ran from year to year –
Bike share scheme was not right sized for Melbourne.
Price competitive but difficult to sign up to it .
Easier sign up was needed.
Introduced the app since last year – 50% of rides came from there- growth in ridership by 20%.
RACV – Had several organization problems in delivering bike share
Foot print of the project – too few docks
Planning and getting support for such networks is very important
Real estate is a problem – problems with cafes/foot path space.
Lot of pushback from communities
Important aspects:
Density – Melbourne’s system was too far apart
Location
Tourists-
Infrastructure
Safety – working on intersections
Works well with grid systems
Info system – how any bikes are there around?
All the above have to work together.
London – Business-people and tourist.
Bike share was not makings sense in Melbourne because it was duplicating public transport. However, it is about looking at where in the CBD and carefully considering the origins and destinations. Fastest mode in some cases.
What is the purpose of bike share? Halo effect?
Adrian – Does not see share bikes as a big part of the mobility.
There are several market segments.
Private sector is better at identifying opportunities.
End of bike share is a good thing.
Bike share as a way to provide connectivity across radial areas.
Value question – Bike share is an expenditure, but all other forms of public transport are also not profit making.