Australia Major Capital Cities Central Business Districts & Work Trip Market Share 2006

Similar documents
Travel Patterns and Cycling opportunites

Summary of bicycle helmet law results in Western Australia

Investment in Active Transport Survey

What Could Increased Cycling Contribute to Reducing Australia s Transport Greenhouse Gas Emissions?

Economic Benefits of Cycling for Australia

Where to from HERE: Mapping multimodal. in Australia

Thursday 18 th January Cambridgeshire Travel Survey Presentation to the Greater Cambridge Partnership Joint Assembly

Executive Summary. TUCSON TRANSIT ON BOARD ORIGIN AND DESTINATION SURVEY Conducted October City of Tucson Department of Transportation

Design Principle Active Transport

Travel to Work Survey March % 40% 54% 10% 2% 5% 19% 6% 3% Headlines - FILTON. Main modes of travel (%)

Extracting Maximum Benefit from Parking Policy - 10 Years Experience in Perth, Australia. By Emmerson Richardson Sinclair Knight Merz

KLB Travel to School Survey - Summary Report

2011 Census Snapshot: Method of Travel to work in London

Market Factors and Demand Analysis. World Bank

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

A Selection Approach for BRT Parking Lots Nicolls Road Corridor Parking Study

VI. Market Factors and Deamnd Analysis

21/02/2018. How Far is it Acceptable to Walk? Introduction. How Far is it Acceptable to Walk?

2014 Metro Transit Customer Survey Highlights

Cyclist Safety in Australia

The role of the Authority in promoting sustainable transport. Gerry Murphy South East Regional Assembly 27 th May 2011

30 years of travel in Melbourne: 1978/79 and 2007/08

RTC TRANSIT OPERATING STATISTICS RTC RIDE RTC RAPID RTC INTERCITY SIERRA SPIRIT

January Project No

Bob Costello Chief Economist & Vice President American Trucking Associations. Economic & Motor Carrier Industry Trends. September 10, 2013

Vision Zero Task Force February 28, Collision Landscape Analysis

APPENDIX C Arlington Transit On-Board Survey Technical Memorandum

Satisfaction with getting to work 56% 15% 6% 6% Total distance travelled. miles per week

Rule Changes. National Jumping Committee. The following Jumping rule changes to become effective 12 July Current Rule.

BICYCLE NETWORK CRASH REPORT

REGIONAL HOUSEHOLD TRAVEL SURVEY:

AP-R361/10 AUSTROADS RESEARCH REPORT. The Road Safety Consequences of Changing Travel Modes

1999 On-Board Sacramento Regional Transit District Survey

Transportation Trends, Conditions and Issues. Regional Transportation Plan 2030

Satisfaction with getting to work 54% 14% 6% 5% Total distance travelled. miles per week

Child Road Injuries: Gauteng Status Quo Aliasgher Janmohammed (Ali)

The Journey to Work in Melbourne

The five potential solutions and some of their benefits and costs are listed in the following table: Ferry Patron Bike Parking Alternatives

PASSENGER SURVEY RESULTS

2011 Origin-Destination Survey Bicycle Profile

Safe roads for cyclists: an investigation of Australian and Dutch approaches

Integrated Regional Traffic Management. Michael Aherne Technical Director POLIS Conference 2009

Analysis On Night-time Public Transportation Access In Seoul: How Do People Travel At Night In Seoul Using Taxies?

Chapter 2 Current and Future Conditions

Satisfaction with getting to work 55% 17% 8% 7% Total distance travelled. miles per week

Preliminary Transportation Analysis

SANTA CLARA COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PLAN August 2008

Previous Transit Studies MTTF MEETING #

FFA Player Pathways Boys

South King County High-Capacity Transit Corridor Study

The Theory of Urban Fabrics: Understanding the Science of Planning Ci?es. The Journey. How did I get from Chemistry to Sustainable Transport.?

Intermodal Connections with Light Rail in Phoenix, AZ Wulf Grote, P.E. Director, Planning & Development

Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses. Wave 2

Metropolitan Council Transportation Committee

Webinar- Importance of Multi- Modal Transit Connections and Fare Policy for Regional Transit Mobility & Equity

Notes to Benefit-Cost Analysis

GROWING CYCLING TOURISM IN VICTORIA

Attachment C: Benefit-Cost Analysis Spreadsheet

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Canada. UK France. Walk, Bike, Transit Share of Trips

Notes on Transport and Land-use (adapted from Lectures by Suman Maitra, Lecturer, URP, BUET) Table 2: Theoretically expected impacts of land use

Optus expands 3G mobile network across wide national footprint. Investor/Media Briefing 30 th January, 2007

Boat Trail Key Stage 1. Summary. Workshop Contents. Learning Outcomes

Bicycle Queensland s Brisbane Council Election Priorities

National Cycling Participation Survey 2017

Changes in Travel Behavior Affecting Transit

CURRICULUM VITAE Stuart Friezer COMPUTER SOFTWARE CAPABILITIES

Westmead Innovation Precinct

ITEANZ Seminar - On Your Bike Cities safe enough for travel by bicycle?

Report on trends in mode share of vehicles and people crossing the Canal Cordon to 2013

Customer Satisfaction Tracking Report 2016 Quarter 1

Using GIS and CTPP Data for Transit Ridership Forecasting in Central Florida

DRAFT BUENA VISTA 2020 TRANSPORTATION PLAN

SL8100 Submersible LED Profile. Linear Lighting

Extract from TELECOMMUNICATIONS PERFORMANCE MONITORING REPORT No. 66 September Quarter 2009

Set of plans containing details for game day operations of the Ballpark. Plans set forth the responsibilities and the specific actions of:

Appendix T 1: Additional Supporting Data

No-car lanes in Tyneside results from modelling and stakeholder analysis

Understanding ridership drivers for bus rapid transit systems in Australia

Projections of road casualties in Great Britain to 2030

Current Travel Needs and Operating Conditions (See pages 4 9 of the Discussion Guide)

INTRODUCING SPECTACULAR MONUMENTS AS CITY IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY

Application of SUTI in Colombo (Western Region)

BICYCLE USAGE QUEENSLAND

Pennsylvania Highway Statistics

Midtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis

1. What is an End of Trip Facility

Governor s Transportation Vision Panel

VIRGINIA RAILWAY EXPRESS

An Assessment of Potential Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions from Proposed On Street Bikeways

Project Report for. "Estimating Modal Splits"

Devonport City Cycling Network Strategy

Travel to Work Survey March % 58% 32% 9% 7% 5% 16% 20% 12% Headlines - Bristol LA Area. Main modes of travel (%)

EAST VILLAGE SHOPPERS STUDY A SNAPSHOT OF TRAVEL AND SPENDING PATTERNS OF RESIDENTS AND VISITORS IN THE EAST VILLAGE

The Case for New Trends in Travel

If drivers and cyclists can be alerted of potential incidents ahead of time the roads will be safer for all users.

Geneva-Harney Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study

AUSTRALIAN RANKING TOURNAMENT STRUCTURE 2017 AND BEYOND

BOWMEN OF MELVILLE. Shooting Calendar: Jan-Apr Whiteman Park AWA Council Meeting

Konstantin Glukhenkiy Economic Affairs Officer

Transcription:

Australia Major Capital Cities Central Business Districts & Work Trip Market Share 2006 Brisbane

Table 1 Area Summary SYD MEL BRS ADL PER Average Motorized 68.8% 76.8% 76.7% 81.8% 81.7% 77.2% Non-Motorized 5.6% 4.9% 4.7% 4.6% 3.7% 4.7% Personal Mobility Total 74.4% 81.7% 81.3% 86.4% 85.4% 81.8% Public Transport Only 18.4% 12.0% 11.6% 8.8% 8.5% 11.9% Public Transport & Car 2.6% 1.9% 2.4% 1.1% 1.7% 1.9% Public Transport Total 20.9% 13.9% 13.9% 10.0% 10.2% 13.8% @ Home 4.7% 4.4% 4.8% 3.7% 4.4% 4.4% Employment Share 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Intermodal Factor 12.3% 13.5% 16.9% 11.2% 16.7% 14.1% Area: Statistical division. Principal Journey to Work Mode: Includes only modes where specified. Trips with 2 o3 3 modes counted as public transport. All data derived from Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2005 Census Comparison with earlier data not reliable due to changes in geography

Table 2 Central Business District Summary SYD MEL BRS ADL PER Average Motorized 25.5% 29.3% 58.2% 44.1% 39.3% Non-Motorized 6.9% 7.9% 6.8% 5.0% 6.7% Personal Mobility Total 32.4% 37.2% 65.0% 49.2% 45.9% Public Transport Only 57.1% 51.5% 30.0% 40.2% 44.7% Public Transport & Car 9.0% 10.5% 4.1% 10.2% 8.4% Public Transport Total 66.1% 62.0% 34.1% 50.4% 53.1% @ Home 0.4% 0.8% 0.9% 0.5% 0.6% Employment Share 54.4% 45.0% 71.1% 50.0% 55.1% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 3.24 4.55 3.40 5.03 4.05 Intermodal Factor 13.6% 16.9% 12.0% 20.2% 15.6% No data for Brisbane CBD

Table 3 Outside Central Business District or Inner Area Summary SYD MEL BRS ADL PER Average Motorized 77.8% 82.1% 85.8% 88.0% 85.9% 83.9% Non-Motorized 5.3% 4.5% 3.9% 4.0% 3.5% 4.2% Personal Mobility Total 83.1% 86.7% 89.7% 92.0% 89.5% 88.2% Public Transport Only 10.3% 7.6% 3.7% 3.3% 4.9% 6.0% Public Transport & Car 1.2% 0.9% 0.5% 0.3% 0.7% 0.8% Public Transport Total 11.5% 8.5% 4.3% 3.6% 5.7% 6.7% @ Home 4.2% 4.8% 6.0% 4.4% 4.9% 4.9% Employment Share 45.6% 55.0% 22.3% 28.9% 50.0% 40.4% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 0.55 0.61 0.31 0.37 0.56 0.48 Intermodal Factor 10.8% 10.8% 12.8% 9.5% 13.2% 11.4% Brisbane data for area outside inner area. No CBD data.

Sydney Profile EMPLOYMENT SHARE 100.0% 16.8% 83.2% Auto Driver 60.9% 20.4% 69.4% Auto Passenger 5.8% 3.6% 6.3% Truck 1.1% 0.1% 1.3% Taxi 0.4% 0.8% 0.3% Motorctcle/scooter 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% MOTORIZED 68.8% 25.5% 77.8% Bicycle 0.7% 0.7% 0.6% Walk 4.9% 6.1% 4.7% NON-MOTORIZED 5.6% 6.9% 5.3% TOTAL PERSONAL MOBILITY 74.4% 32.4% 83.1% Public Transport Only 18.4% 57.1% 10.3% Public Transport & Car 2.6% 9.0% 1.2% PUBLIC TRANSPORT: TOTAL 20.9% 66.1% 11.5% @ HOME 4.7% 0.4% 4.2% Total 1,736,824 291,612 1,445,212 Total in Journey to Work Data 1,530,072 263,715 1,266,357 Share of Public Transport Ridership 100.0% 54.4% 45.6% Share of Employment 100.0% 16.8% 83.2% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 1.00 3.24 0.55 Intermodal Factor 12.3% 13.6% 10.8% CBD Definition: Inner Sydney & North Sydney place of work

Melbourne Profile EMPLOYMENT SHARE 100.0% 9.9% 90.1% Auto Driver 70.1% 23.5% 75.3% Auto Passenger 5.2% 4.6% 5.3% Truck 0.8% 0.0% 0.8% Taxi 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% Motorctcle/scooter 0.5% 0.8% 0.5% MOTORIZED 76.8% 29.3% 82.1% Bicycle 1.3% 2.3% 1.2% Walk 3.5% 5.6% 3.3% NON-MOTORIZED 4.9% 7.9% 4.5% TOTAL PERSONAL MOBILITY 81.7% 37.2% 86.7% Public Transport Only 12.0% 51.5% 7.6% Public Transport & Car 1.9% 10.5% 0.9% PUBLIC TRANSPORT: TOTAL 13.9% 62.0% 8.5% @ HOME 4.4% 0.8% 4.8% Total 1,549,747 153,393 1,396,354 Total in Journey to Work Data 1,352,725 136,507 1,216,218 Share of Public Transport Ridership 100.0% 45.0% 55.0% Share of Employment 100.0% 9.9% 90.1% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 1.00 4.55 0.61 Intermodal Factor 13.5% 16.9% 10.8% CBD Definition: Inner Melbourne place of work

Brisbane Profile EMPLOYMENT SHARE 100.0% 27.3% 72.7% Auto Driver 66.9% 43.8% 75.7% Auto Passenger 6.9% 6.6% 7.1% Truck 1.2% 0.2% 1.6% Taxi 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% Motorctcle/scooter 1.3% 1.5% 1.2% MOTORIZED 76.7% 52.5% 85.8% Bicycle 1.1% 1.7% 0.9% Walk 3.6% 5.0% 3.0% NON-MOTORIZED 4.7% 6.7% 3.9% TOTAL PERSONAL MOBILITY 81.3% 59.2% 89.7% Public Transport Only 11.6% 32.2% 3.7% Public Transport & Car 2.4% 7.1% 0.5% PUBLIC TRANSPORT: TOTAL 13.9% 39.3% 4.3% @ HOME 4.8% 1.5% 6.0% Total 793,852 216,670 577,182 Total in Journey to Work Data 690,979 189,868 501,111 Share of Public Transport Ridership 100.0% 77.7% 22.3% Share of Employment 100.0% 27.3% 72.7% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 1.00 2.85 0.31 Intermodal Factor 16.9% 18.1% 12.8% CBD Definition: Data not available Inner Area Definition: Inner Brisbane (SLA) place of work

Adelaide Profile EMPLOYMENT SHARE 100.0% 20.9% 79.1% Auto Driver 73.8% 48.7% 80.4% Auto Passenger 6.3% 8.3% 5.8% Truck 0.7% 0.1% 0.9% Taxi 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% Motorctcle/scooter 0.8% 0.9% 0.7% MOTORIZED 81.8% 58.2% 88.0% Bicycle 1.5% 2.6% 1.2% Walk 3.1% 4.2% 2.8% NON-MOTORIZED 4.6% 6.8% 4.0% TOTAL PERSONAL MOBILITY 86.4% 65.0% 92.0% Public Transport Only 8.8% 30.0% 3.3% Public Transport & Car 1.1% 4.1% 0.3% PUBLIC TRANSPORT: TOTAL 10.0% 34.1% 3.6% @ HOME 3.7% 0.9% 4.4% Total 471,601 98,539 373,062 Total in Journey to Work Data 406,611 84,481 322,130 Share of Public Transport Ridership 100.0% 71.1% 28.9% Share of Employment 100.0% 20.9% 79.1% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 1.00 3.40 0.37 Intermodal Factor 11.2% 12.0% 9.5% CBD Definition: Adelaide place of work

Perth Profile EMPLOYMENT SHARE 100.0% 9.9% 90.1% Auto Driver 73.5% 35.3% 77.8% Auto Passenger 6.5% 7.7% 6.3% Truck 0.9% 0.0% 1.0% Taxi 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% Motorctcle/scooter 0.7% 0.8% 0.6% MOTORIZED 81.7% 44.1% 85.9% Bicycle 1.2% 2.0% 1.1% Walk 2.5% 3.0% 2.4% NON-MOTORIZED 3.7% 5.0% 3.5% TOTAL PERSONAL MOBILITY 85.4% 49.2% 89.5% Public Transport Only 8.5% 40.2% 4.9% Public Transport & Car 1.7% 10.2% 0.7% PUBLIC TRANSPORT: TOTAL 10.2% 50.4% 5.7% @ HOME 4.4% 0.5% 4.9% Total 621,689 61,786 559,903 Total in Journey to Work Data 538,238 54,340 483,898 Share of Public Transport Ridership 100.0% 50.0% 50.0% Share of Employment 100.0% 9.9% 90.1% Public Transport Share/Employment Share 1.00 5.03 0.56 Intermodal Factor 16.7% 20.2% 13.2% CBD Definition: Inner Perth place of work