Showing posts with label Australia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Australia. Show all posts

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Catching up on biking down under



During my fellowship I have had the opportunity to look at bike infrastructure in no less than six cities and I am pleased to report Philadelphia is doing very well compared to our counterparts in Australia and Taiwan. I'll write about cycling in Taiwan in a separate post, for now let me catch you up on what I saw down under. Philadelphia has three important advantages when it comes to cycling as means of transportation: we’re a largely flat city, we have dense residential areas within two miles of our job hubs in Center City and University City, and our often narrow streets (even those without bike lanes) are more comfortable to ride on than the wide expanses and fast move vehicles that make up streets in many other part of the world.

Australian cities are working to increase the rates of cycling for the same mix of reasons we are: cycling is a low impact form of transportation that when it replaces auto trips both improves air quality and reduces congestion and cycling is a great way for citizens to become more physically active. Australia is facing an obesity epidemic not so different from ours and has come to the realization that how we design and operate our communities can impact how we live.  Shocking, I know. 

There are also two important differences between Philadelphia and Australia. Transportation officials in Philadelphia are not so much working to spur demand for cycling, but working to keep up with demand. Australia has a mandatory helmet law. I always wear a helmet. After an accident more than a decade ago that put a crack straight though my helmet I have been known to harass friends who don’t wear one. That said, I don’t think mandatory helmet make a lot of sense and the Dutch even argue against helmet wearing all together. Speaking of helmets, if you haven’t see the invisible helmet, check this video out. 

The mandatory helmet laws have also been blamed as a key inhibitor to the success of bike share programs in Australia.  Both Brisbane’s bike share and Melbourne’s bike share are known to be struggling and requiring operating subsidies.  This is in contrast to North American and European bike share programs that have largely succeed without operating subsidies.   In Brisbane, I think the main inhibitor; however is the lack of good cycling infrastructure. There are few bike lanes (though some great trails) and the wide streets lead to high speed traffic.  
Peacefully sharing the space in Melbourne


Brisbane bike share system struggles to attract riders



Melbourne by contrast has the infrastructure and cyclists including those on bike share are a common site.  The Royal Automotive Club of Victoria (like the AAA of Victoria), who operates the bike share program, is addressing the helmet program by making them available at 7-11s for just AUS$5. RACV is a major advocate of multi-modal investments and provides road side assistance for bikes. As Brian Negus, RACV's policy director told me, "Our members don't just travel by car and we have interests in representing all their transportation needs."


Sydney has made considerable efforts to expand its bike lane network, but the political response last May from state elected officials was to require the City to get approval for any and all transportation related decisions. Though, perhaps to the states chagrin, the committee set up to issue the approvals just endorsed more bike lanes. 

Here are some links to bike plan documents for Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. We in Philadelphia and the US may be doing well on cycling infrastructure, but after looking at some of these sites I think you’ll agree our  government websites could use some upgrades.

New South Wales Cycling Information - http://www.bicycleinfo.nsw.gov.au/

Thursday, November 15, 2012

The Melbourne Consensus


One of the most intellectually exciting parts of this experience has been to engage with some serious debates about the future of transportation infrastructure in Australian cities and be able to engage with an openness that can only come from not having a personal or professional stake in the outcome. This is the first of two posts of my observations about the investment future of Melbourne and Sydney.

Melbourne and the State of Victoria seem to have largely reached a consensus on the future of infrastructure development. Calls are coming from inside and outside of government for considerable investment in public transportation, making the most of the existing road network, filling critical gaps in the road network and paying close attention to how infrastructure investment can drive development patterns. Some of the key players, including the Committee for Melbourne (similar to Select Greater Philadelphia), Vic Roads, the Victoria Department of Transportation, the recently created Public Transport Victoria and the Royal Automotive Club of Victoria have all expressed similar visions and priorities.  Each organization acknowledges funding constraints, while painting a picture of how transportation infrastructure can shape the region.

Vic Roads is smartly focusing on how to best leverage the existing road network through its SmartRoads program. Vic Roads exemplifies the best in thinking across transportation modes from what is at its core a highway department.  Gary Liddle, the Vic Roads CEO, explained to me that he is working to evolve the organization from a purveyor of transportation infrastructure to a provider of transportation services for people and goods.  Fundamental to providing that service is the maintenance and expansion of the infrastructure, but infrastructure that doesn’t move people and goods is meaningless. The short video below outlines the SmartRoads approach.  

In the US, the SSTI initiative is comprised of state DOT’s that are flirting with these ideas, but I would argue haven’t been provided the political space to advance them.

The consensus bodes well for Victoria being able to make investment rhetoric a reality.