Recent article from the UK discussing the 10 things that put people of cycling to work there.  http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/31/10-things-that-put-...

They have a modal share of 2.8%.  Last census Australia reported less than 1.3%

So why are we even worse than the UK?  Any uniquely Australian conditions you can think of?

Views: 428

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

PT is not as good as in the UK, so we have higher car ownership, therefore more inclined to drive to work.

Distance, maybe - In NSW (i.e. Newcastle, Sydney & Wollongong), 72.25% of commutes and 65.19% of work related trips (both are all modes) are >= 10km.

Data here:

http://www.bts.nsw.gov.au/Statistics/Household-Travel-Survey/defaul...

Specifically:

http://www.bts.nsw.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/95/e2013_06_hts_kti_summ...

I knew you'd respond if I slipped that in.

The UK has a higher rail modal share, which means that 2.8% cycling modal share in the UK is a much higher figure in terms of road users.  It may be as much as 5x higher onroad than here.

Also bear in mind that today was utterly magnificent for cycling to work here weather wise, and we get like 100 more magnificent days for cycling to work a year than the UK does.  I sometimes struggle to imagine why you'd live in Australia, work in an office, and then drive to/from work.

also - designing urban environments for cars, increases the distance between destinations, and causes people to not move when changing jobs, both of which cause journey times to not improve despite having cars (unnecessary congestion, and simple distance increases).  ie the fact that commutes are > 10km here is caused by cars, not causing us to need cars.  They are self fulfilling prophecies.

causes people to not move when changing jobs

Have you got a reference for people moving elsewhere? When I were a lad in the commuter belt just outside of London (i.e. the equivalent of the 'burbs here) no one really moved for work. Generally, the dad would either work locally and drive or get the train to London, the mum would work locally (as in <= 10-60 min drive) and drive, and kids would walk/PT (or maybe drive) to school/college. Higher PT usage, but still a lot of driving - just less into London than 'burbs to City here.

we can not compare the Eu urban environment with our sub-urban envorons.  our cities grew post the car and generally during prosperous times.  the trend to populate our cities is only in its infancy.

Plenty of scope here to ride to stations, the old triple your catchment area argument, but also need to remember most jobs aren't in the major centres ( only 25 % in the CBD, Parra, chats, hurst etc).

The average commute is 8.7 km, according to that link, so I can't quite see how 72% can be greater than 10km, or is it broken down into bands somewhere? ABS figures might be more accurate.

Maybe 8.7km for Australia, not for Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong...?

Fucking ning! Can you just let me format something please!!!

See table 4.4.7

http://www.bts.nsw.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/95/e2013_06_hts_kti_summ...

RSS

© 2019   Created by DamianM.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service