UN 190: How are we going with bus reform?

 

Are we making progress on bus network reform? How fast is the overall health and usability of Melbourne's bus network improving? 

Back in March, when Victoria's Bus Plan turned 1000 days I did a bus network health check to gauge where we were at. That analysis found that two-thirds of Melbourne's 349 bus route had a serious timetable or route alignment problem, with about two-fifths of those having both. 

124 residential area routes did not meet minimum service standards with regards to operating hours, with 75 of those not running 7 days. Also 166 routes had serious issues such as complexity, weak termini or inefficient overlaps. 

More than seven months have since elapsed. Today the Bus Plan turns 1229 days as you can see from the count-up below.  

link to count-up Bus Plan clock

What's been the progress in this, the start of the plan's second thousand days? To find out I checked PTV's list of bus service changes and amended the health check spreadsheet I presented last time to include them. 

Some good things did happen with bus services in the last 7 months. 

But they are so few in number that you need to go to fractions of 1% to stop rounding errors being a risk when you make pie charts like below:  

Hardly a shift. In raw numbers this translates to the following (click for better view): 

The more significant changes include: 

* Number of bus routes in Melbourne rose from 349 to 351 due to new routes 475 and 501. Both routes were judged not to have serious issues so this improved the tally there as well. 

* Number of bus routes with minimum standards service or better grew by 3 from 213 to 216. Attributable to the new route 475 and extended operating hours on the 546 and 606. This growth matches the 2008 - 2024 average of 5 routes per year gaining minimum standards. It is however 90% down on the excellent 50 routes per year achieved between 2006 and 2008. 

 

* Proportion of bus routes with minimum standards increased only marginally (63.2 to 63.7%). This is because new Route 501, with its early finish, does not meet the minimum service standard of a 7 day service until 9pm. Neither does the 612, though its new Sunday service is welcome. 

* Number of bus routes operating 7 days increased from 263 to 267 (or 0.7% to reach 78.5%). Due to new 7 day growth area routes 475 and 501 commencing plus new Sunday service starting on the established area 546 and 612 routes. The 505's large frequency upgrade (to a weekday service every 20 min) also contributed to reducing the number of routes with a significant timetable issue. 

* The number of routes with serious route alignment or legibility issues fell by one to 165, attributable to the 546 gaining a consistent city end terminus (rather than alternating between Queen Vic Markets and Melbourne University). This indicates only 1 out of the 166 routes that had significant alignment issues got reform in this period - a very slow rate of progress if sustained.  

Conclusion

The record shows things are pretty sluggish in the bus service reform world right now. That's even if you apply creative licence and broaden this to include timetable upgrades on existing routes. Refranchising and electrification, both of less direct benefit to passengers, have instead attracted more official attention, with results from the former announced last month. 

Will the bus reform pace pick up in the next few months?  

Hopes were raised for routes 603, 604 and 605 on October 20 before PTV pulled the item from its website. These would have been good reforms that would have plugged some service 'black holes' and fixed 605's notoriously short operating hours and limited Sunday timetable. However 605 is still in for some rerouting via Domain Rd in coming months.    

The Route 800 7 day timetable upgrade, slated for later this year, will be a great Christmas present for much of the south-east.   

Last year's GAIC bus funding will mean some new and extended routes. Maybe a year or two off given normal time-lines. An Eynesbury bus got funding in the 2023-24 state budget so that is a near prospect. Beyond that I'd imagine that Mt Atkinson would be a front-runner, with significant political interest and a school bus service starting first term next year.  

Earlier this week the premier foreshadowed that the next GAIC round will include transport services, with announcements next year. These additions would be implemented around 2027, give or take a year.  

Scope exists for enterprising Labor MPs to include small-scale bus service upgrade requests in their budget bids for 2025. Especially given that infrastructure has been specifically excluded.   

Overall though bus reform is a long hard slog, with the Bus Plan proving the truism that it's nothing without budget funding. Indications are that growth areas will get needed catch-up coverage as mentioned above. 

But despite its cost-effectiveness and a successful start made around Deakin University, bus network reform appears as distant prospect as ever in other established areas. For example the promised Bus Reform Implementation Plan remains elusive. There have also been no outcomes from the metropolitan north, metropolitan north-east and Mildura bus reviews announced before the 2022 state election. 

Getting 7 day service funded on existing routes does however seem more alive, with examples like the 612, 766 and 800 raising hopes for more. Assuming 5 established area routes get 7 day upgrades each year (FixDandyBuses is backing 802, 804 & 814 for the 2025 budget), all 74 residential area bus routes currently without Sunday service will have it by 2039. 

Your views on whether you think this will happen before or after all tram stops are made accessible are appreciated and can be left in the comments below.  

See other Building Melbourne's Useful Network items here

UN 189: Better PT to our 25 housing activity centres

Yesterday premier Jacinta Allan announced 25 precincts, mostly around train stations, that would be zoned for increased housing density including apartments.

I discussed this here. 

Overall I thought the locations were about as good as you could get for access to frequent public transport. For example 24 of the 25 housing activity centres were on train lines that ran every 15 minutes or better on weekdays, with the 25th near a frequent tram. Furthermore, 9 listed locations have a 10 minute 7 day service.

The media release mentioning train frequencies (although I'd have preferred off-peak to peak) was also good, drawing a link between development and service levels that was previously less articulated. 

Having said that there was still room for improvement. With housing abundance must come transport service abundance. Housing activity centres need to be near 7 day frequent transport, day and night. Otherwise residents will be stuck in traffic, have high transport costs and be hardly less car dependent than those in less dense areas. 

Despite our large train and tram networks, all week frequent transport is scarce in Melbourne, being accessible to under 5% of the population, as shown on these frequency maps by Philip Mallis. And such frequent transport access needs to be available not just by train to the city but by tram or bus between suburbs for a truly versatile and connected network.  

Just as I discussed cost-effective network needs for six proposed social housing priority areas in 2020 and ten housing priority areas in 2023, here's my top service priorities for the 25 centres listed yesterday. 


Sandringham line

North Brighton, Middle Brighton, Hampton, Sandringham

* Boost Sunday am rail frequency from 40 to 20 min on the Sandringham line
* Implement 10 min 7 day rail frequency upgrade as proposed in 2016 Metro Tunnel Business Case
* Bay Rd SmartBus from Sandringham to Southland and beyond (either straightened and upgraded Route 828 to Dandenong/Berwick or as part of extended Route 733 SRL SmartBus to Box Hill)
* Upgrade Route 703 SmartBus from Brighton to full SmartBus standards including service until midnight, more frequent weekend trips and a 10 minute off-peak frequency. 
* Extend Route 824 from Moorabbin to Brighton via South Rd with higher frequency to replace current  infrequent and complex 811/812 routes 
* Reform complex 600/922/923 routes, with simpler and more frequent services
* Potentially extend 64 tram to Middle Brighton

Frankston line

Toorak, Hawksburn, Armadale, Malvern 

* Boost Frankston line frequency to operate every 10 min or better between at least 7am and 10pm 7 days
* Stop all Dandenong line trains at Malvern to provide a direct Metro Tunnel connection and relieve stress on Caulfield as an interchange point
* Tram network reform and shorter/more legible interchanges at stations to make north-south travel easier
* 7 day tram frequency boosts for routes 3, 5, 6, 16, 64 & 72 with maximum 6 - 10 min waits off-peak during the day and every 10-15 min at night and Sunday mornings 
* Extend Route 604 north to Victoria Gardens via Burnley to provide a new north-south connection 
* Bus 605 upgrade with improved operating hours and weekend frequency
* Consider extending 5 tram to Darling station and 6 tram to Glen Iris station for better network connectivity
* Major upgrade for Caulfield station to facilitate accessibility and interchange between services

Pakenham/Cranbourne line

Carnegie, Murrumbeena, Hughesdale, Oakleigh 

* Ensure Metro Tunnel trains operate every 5 min or better all day between 7am and 10pm between at least West Footscray and Westall 7 days
* Boost buses on Routes 900 and 903 to operate every 10 min or better 7 days with Sunday evening serviced added and 24 hour weekend service
* Major bus reform and service uplifts including: (a) Route 767 frequency boost and rerouting via East Boundary and Chesterville Rds with maximum 15-20 min waits over longer hours, (b) Route 623 upgraded to run every 15 - 20 minutes 7 days with operation via more of Neerim Rd (replacing 624) and Caulfield Station, (c) New north-south route from Caulfield to La Trobe University involving consolidated and more frequent routes 548 and 624 every 10-20 min or better. 
* New bus rapid transit on Princes Hwy between Caulfield, Chadstone, Monash and Rowville incorporating network reforms to Route 900 and other routes in the Oakleigh area. 
* 7 day tram frequency boosts for route 67 with maximum 6 - 10 min waits off-peak during the day and every 10-15 min at night and Sunday mornings.
* Consider extending 67 tram to Carnegie station for better network connectivity
* Major upgrade for Caulfield station to facilitate accessibility and interchange between services

Glen Waverley line

Tooronga, Gardiner, Darling 

* Upgrade Glen Waverley line to run every 10 min or better 7 days between at least 7am and 10pm 
* Frequent north-south bus link from Caulfield - La Trobe University via Tooronga Rd (incorporating existing 624 and 548) operating every 15-20 min over long hours
* New Burke Rd bus from Camberwell to Caulfield operating every 15-20 min over long hours to fill existing 'missing link'
* Extension of Route 734 bus from Glen Iris to Caulfield to provide a stronger terminus and boost to every 20 min or better 7 days
* Extend operating hours on 612 bus to at least 9pm and boost weekend frequency to 30 min
* 7 day tram frequency boosts for routes 5, 6 and 72 with maximum 6 - 10 min waits off-peak during the day and every 10-15 min at night and Sunday mornings.
* Potentially extend 5 tram to Darling station and 6 tram to Glen Iris station for better network connectivity

Belgrave/Lilydale line

Hawthorn, Glenferrie, Auburn, Blackburn, Nunawading, Mitcham 

* Upgrade Ringwood train frequency to every 10 min or better between at least 5am and midnight 7 days and simplify peak stopping patterns with new greenfield timetable
* Introduce new frequent Chandler Hwy bus from Hawthorn/Glenferrie area to Northland/LaTrobe University via a reformed and extended Route 567 operating every 15-20 min 7 days
* Upgrade Route 703 SmartBus from Blackburn to full SmartBus standards including service until midnight, more frequent weekend trips and a 10 minute off-peak frequency. 
* Upgrade service on Route 902 SmartBus between Nunawading and Springvale South, including 7.5 min peak frequency, 10-15 min evening and weekend frequency and Sunday evening service until midnight. 
* Upgrade service on Route 907 SmartBus to Mitcham, including 10 min maximum waits 7 days until 9pm and evening service every 15-20 min. 
* Wider bus network reform in Blackburn/Nunawading area, including a simple and frequent Box Hill - Ringwood bus along Canterbury Rd and a more direct Route 273. 
* 7 day tram frequency boosts for routes 16, 48, 70, 75 and 109 with maximum 6 - 10 min waits off-peak during the day and every 10-15 min at night and Sunday mornings.

Sunbury line

Middle Footscray, West Footscray, Tottenham 

* Ensure Metro Tunnel trains operate every 5 min or better all day between 7am and 10pm between at least West Footscray and Westall 7 days
* Boost frequency on routes 216 and 220 buses to every 10 min weekdays and 15 min weekends, with longer operating hours (eg earlier weekend starts) and potential other network reform in area 
* New Ashley St bus route between Highpoint and Yarraville via Tottenham station operating every 15-20 min over long hours
* Upgrade bus route 411 to SmartBus standard with longer hours and frequent 7 day service (in conjunction with bus network simplification in Altona North area) 
* Upgrade bus route 414 to operate 7 days with longer hours
* Consider bus network reform in West Footscray area including a direct bus to Highpoint
* Major upgrade for walkability, visibility and safety around Tottenham station and underpass

Toorak Village

* 7 day tram frequency boosts for route 58 with maximum 6 - 10 min waits off-peak during the day and every 10-15 min at night and Sunday mornings.
* Extend Route 604 north to Victoria Gardens via Burnley to provide a new north-south connection 
* Bus 605 upgrade with improved operating hours and weekend frequency

That's it from me. Additions welcome in the comments below. 

See more Building Melbourne's Useful Network items here

More housing in more places?

Yesterday premier Jacinta Allan said that she'll soon have more to say about planning for more housing in established, well-serviced suburban areas. Or, in her terms, "in the community you love, near the things you need". And it would be close to transport and jobs, giving people an option to live nearer family. 

That's an issue because older people snaffled homes in many of the choice suburbs years ago (when they were cheaper relative to incomes) and are tending to remain in place. That leaves only limited choices, often only a CBD area apartment or a less accessible outer suburb, for younger people just starting out and those on average incomes or less, including the key workers needed to keep Melbourne going. 

Maximising service to the many

I have been particularly interested in the relationship between housing and public transport access. 

It has been repeatedly shown and mapped that Melbourne has done poorly at bringing people, jobs and high-quality (ie frequent 7 day) public transport together despite (unusually) retaining both its legacy train and tram networks. Doubly so for people on low incomes, where Melbourne ties with Brisbane for the wooden spoon of the large Australian capitals. For evidence, see reports and maps prepared by (1) Climate Council, (2) Philip Mallis and (3) my own interactive network frequency maps. 

To fix this we need to
(a) bring frequent all-week public transport nearer more people and jobs, or
(b) bring more people and jobs near all-week frequent public transport 

Doing both at once would speed progress. Especially since all-week frequent public transport is extraordinarily scarce in Melbourne, with under 5% of Melburnians having it. This is because the current government has built transport infrastructure but done much less with service, with metropolitan public transport service per capita actually falling on our busiest modes. 

Transport near the people

This sidelining of service has left Melbourne with 30 to 40 minute gaps on much of our rail, bus and even tram networks at times many are still travelling, while Sydney is powering ahead with more 15, 10 or even 5 minute frequencies across more areas. There's also implications for transit-convenient development since outside the CBD and surrounds almost no suburban site (not even a big one like Box Hill) features true all week frequent service on even one line. 

 

Fixing this requires working our existing lazy train, tram and bus assets harder all week to form a Future Frequent Network, with the Victorian Transport Action Group proposing a staged program to implement this. 

People near the transport

The other element is clustering jobs and housing around the transit infrastructure and service. A bit like the 20-year old Melbourne 2030 plan but with more emphasis on housing affordability this time around. 

Higher density needs all week frequent public transport in multiple directions so that redeveloped precincts are as accessible as they can be and that space-inefficient car use becomes an option rather than a necessity. I discussed cost-effective network needs for six proposed social housing priority areas in 2020 and ten housing priority areas in 2023. 

Could there be more established areas earmarked for denser housing? At least as far as planning goes the answer is yes, and I'll get on to today's announcement from the premier later. First a bit about current activity centre planning. 

Material on specific and already announced activity centres is on the VPA's website.  There's also activity centre policy guidance on planning.vic.gov.au . 

When the government puts planning and transport matters out for public consultation they will often use the engage.vic.gov.au site. Like they did for the housing activity centres. 

Submissions for the Activity Centres Program closed on September 29, 2024. It's after then but they will often leave some information up. That's worth reading this to understand how they select the housing precincts. 

As explained on the current Engage Activity Centres Program page, it's a three step process. The first step is used to determine a 'density index' for each centre which is like an overarching target. The next two steps are more to do with the internal structure of each centre (what they call 'precinct typologies'). For broad network planning we are only interested in Step One. 

Probably of greatest interest are the factors considered when determining density. There is a matrix comprising two main factors: These are (a) access to jobs and (b) access to fixed route public transport (ie trains or trams). Precincts near a lot of both get earmarked for high density, as does anywhere within 2.5km of the CBD, provided it has at least one tram line. 

The matrix is reproduced below (click for improved clarity):

 

Mapping to density is mostly on a 1 to 10 scale with a dense major activity centre rating off the scale. It is tempting to surmise that the 1 to 10 rating is roughly the number of building storeys but this is not stated. 

What aspects of public transport aren't considered? Service frequency is one. Being on an infrequent train line rates higher (up to 6) than the highest scenario for buses (4). You can justify this on the basis of trains' superior capacity, speed and isolation from traffic delays. However a single tram route (5) ranks higher than multiple frequent bus routes (4). Although there's only a handful of the latter corridors in Melbourne so this is relatively unimportant. 

This work confirms the low status in which the Principal Public Transport Network (PPTN) is held as a planning tool. This is possibly wise as I think the existing PPTN has problems with what is in and what is out.

However I do think that our densest centres need fast and frequent transport in multiple directions, not just one. A factor considering this would be good. Failure to consider this may result in excessive density being built in near-CBD but mostly inaccessible precincts like Fishermans Bend and parts of Docklands. A look at SNAMUTS maps shows how much accessibility falls on the CBD fringes with somewhere like Waterfront City having terrible connectivity despite having a tram route due to bad geometry (which is expensive to overcome).

As Jarrett Walker says, 'be on the way'. You really can't (or shouldn't) built much at Fishermans Bend without Metro 2 to the west. A stub tram route won't do much more than the current frequent Route 235 bus. If you don't want to build Metro 2 yet then defer Fishermans Bend in favour of 'on the way' precincts like Arden, Footscray, Sunshine and Caulfield which will be on Metro 1.   

What would an activity centre density allocation look like in practice using the PT infrastructure/jobs matrix set out? The currently available Engage link shows it for the first announced centres.   
    

Broadmeadows, Epping, Ringwood and Frankston ranks as Metropolitan Activity Centres, so are earmarked for the highest densities. All are rail-based centres. However the first two (Craigieburn and Mernda lines) lack frequent trains outside peak hours. Ringwood and Frankston do have 7 day frequent train service during most daylight hours, with weekend mornings being the main exception. However, as with even the best served public transport in Melbourne, evening service drops to every 20 - 30 minutes. This lags Sydney and is not consistent with Metropolitan Activity Centres growing as food, arts and entertainment hubs, especially when bus services from the surrounds are also considered.  

The next tier down, scoring 6 or 7 (storeys?) is occupied by Preston (High St), Camberwell Junction and Moorabbin. All are at least somewhat near to rail with Camberwell also being a tram hub. The abovementioned service frequency issues apply for these centres as well. 

Finally there is a lower cluster (scoring between 3 and 4) for North Essendon, Niddrie-Keilor Road and Chadstone. The first two have trams while Chadstone (scoring 4) has buses only. While the 4 score might reflect existing activity and the large number of bus routes, it's a case of quantity over quality; not a single bus route in Chadstone runs much after 9pm Sunday nor has gaps of less than 30 minutes on weekends. Doncaster, which has much better bus services, oddly is not in this first crop of centres. 

Today's announcement

This morning the premier announced (via Facebook) that they were 'helping build more homes' close to 50 train stations and tram stops in Melbourne.  

The Age today said that 50 areas were being rezoned to allow higher densities.

25 centres, mostly in the east and south-east, were named today. By line these are: 

Sandringham: North Brighton, Middle Brighton, Hampton, Sandringham
Frankston: Toorak, Hawksburn, Armadale, Malvern
Pakenham/Cranbourne: Carnegie, Murrumbeena, Hughesdale, Oakleigh
Glen Waverley: Tooronga, Gardiner, Darling
Belgrave/Lilydale: Hawthorn, Glenferrie, Auburn, Blackburn, Nunawading, Mitcham
Sunbury: Middle Footscray, West Footscray, Tottenham
Route 58 tram: Toorak Village

If you prefer maps to lists, The Age published the Rail Corridor Activity Centres map here.

Overall there is a skew towards inner and south-eastern suburbs, ie those with some of Melbourne's highest property prices, access to jobs and best public transport connectivity. The first 25 also appears to be a subset of the Major Activity Centre list. Part of a long-term plan up to 2051.

All locations are near a weekday off-peak service every 15 minutes or better (either existing or likely post Metro Tunnel). Furthermore, 9 listed locations have a 10 minute 7 day service. That could double provided Metro Tunnel delivers the goods re frequency on (a) Sunbury line, (b) Sandringham/cross-city line and there is (c) a revised greenfields Belgrave/Lilydale timetable implemented shortly afterwards. 

In short the location choices are about as good as possible when it comes to locating near frequent rail transport. Explicitly linking land use with service frequency, as stated in the premier and minister's media release, is excellent. Hopefully there will be more attention to cross-suburban transport, notably bus operating hours and frequencies to make car-free living both possible and convenient at many of these locations. 

The article says the government has promised to consult councils and residents on height limits. This August 30 2024 archived version of the Activity Centre Density Allocation map may give some indication on recent thinking regarding potential relative development intensity at some centres.

As a caution, it's worth noting that a government plan for zoning density doesn't automatically make new homes appear. It also has to be an economic proposition for developers to build and buyers (or tenants) to move in to. The relatively subdued prices of established homes in Melbourne at the moment might make some think twice about developing. Factors like interest rates, economic sentiment, taxation policy, immigration and more are also important in shaping what gets built where.    

We'll know where the remaining 25 activity centres will be later this year according to the article.