UN 123: A simpler Night Network - Can we do it?

In September 2021 Night Network got a refresh. About half the special Night Bus routes (that few understood) got replaced with 24 hour weekend service on 21 regular bus routes (list here). This delivered benefits such as an easier to understand network and extended weekend operating hours  in suburbs that long only had buses that were late to rise and early to bed. Early morning and evening passengers who are neither late night revellers nor workers were among those who gained. 

Implementation cost was low due to some trade-offs including starting some services in the suburbs rather than the CBD and reducing some frequencies (in exchange for 24 hour service without multi-hour gaps). More on the revised network here. 

Completing the job

What if we wanted to finish the job? After all there remain thirteen special bus routes that are Night Network only (all numbered 940+). These non-standard routes sometimes feature loops designed to maximise coverage. And they only operate for about 4 hours overnight, causing long gaps in areas where regular buses finish around 9pm or don't start until about 8 or 9am on weekends. 

Doing what we did for the rest of the network could eliminate these special routes and extend 24 hour weekend service to more regular bus routes. That's a major advance on the road to making Melbourne's buses simpler and more useful. 

Where are the special routes to reform? Mostly in the outer west, north and east, they're shown in black on the PTV map below. Click here for a clearer map and further information on them. 

Trade-offs and complications

While desirable, reform isn't all plain sailing. 

The first issue is coverage. Loop routes (like many Night Network buses) are good at delivering wide coverage with a small number of buses. Given there's less traffic at night buses can go faster even if the routes they're on are less direct than during the day. So operationally and financially loops might be a reasonable trade-off. 

The customer's view is different. They don't see operational considerations. But they do know that their local bus finishes at 9pm. They might or might not know about the existence of a dedicated Night Network bus. And even if they do they might not know where it runs or the station they should board to catch it (as it might be different to that used by their regular bus). Points like the latter can be significant disincentives to use.

We saw that with the pre-2021 Night Bus Network. Unlike trains and trams, all bus routes that ran were special services that didn't run at other times. Operationally efficient they were but they didn't carry many passengers. A bit like Yes Minister's perfectly efficient hospital with no patients. 

Replacing one Night Network loop route with a regular route improves simplicity and may boost patronage. Early indications on reformed routes have been encouraging. So what was done last year was a good thing to do; it just need to be extended. 

The problem with replacing special routes with a regular route is that it can cut coverage unless multiple regular routes are upgraded. While desirable that adds extra operating costs. This is especially where current operating hours are short and 10pm - 1am and 5am - 8am trips need to be added for a full 24 hour weekend service. So even if you could do a 1:1 replacement you still need to fund about 12 hours per week more service per route. It's small in the scheme of things (you could do quite a bit with a few million per year) but getting even that for service is hard due to a bias towards capital projects.   

Even if you had funding it can be difficult to decided which regular routes are best replacements for a Night Network special in some areas. The job was easy in Werribee/Tarneit because the area recently  (2015) had a wholesale bus revamp including direct routes along main roads. Whereas other areas (eg Knox and Greater Dandenong) have 30+ year backlogs in bus network reform. That gives rise to cases where no logical regular route replacements exist for Night Network routes. As high as needs might be, you might leave Night Network arrangements as they are until regular routes are suitably reformed.     

Route length is another factor. Planners often base daytime bus timetables on a speed of about 22 km/h. With that speed a single bus can efficiently provide an hourly service on a 10km long route (20 km return trip) without having to sit long at termini. At night where there's less traffic and patronage buses can go faster - maybe 30 km/h or more. 

Thus a regular bus route that is efficient during the day may not be efficient at night. Whereas dedicated Night Network bus routes will be efficient as they've been scheduled for night traffic and loading conditions. The latter is operationally efficient but if it's a complex route that no one understands then it won't be an effective service as few will use it. 

Juggling operational efficiency versus running a legible service people will use is a core problem faced by Department of Transport planners. Unless the operational case against is compelling I will normally favour the legible option. However one still needs to be aware of operational considerations to know what can be done cheaply and quickly and to accurately assess costs. 

Night Network bus upgrades 

Some Night Network routes are easier to replace with regular routes than others. Those easiest to reform can be reasonably replaced with just one regular route without losing too much coverage. And its length should permit reasonable operational efficiency. In contrast harder to reform routes may require changes to the regular bus network so can't be done as quickly. I'll list them in order of night route number, with potential upgraded regular routes identified.   

941 >> upgraded / rerouted 419

The northern two-thirds of this route is quite similar to Route 419. The main difference is that Route 941 starts at Sunshine whereas the 419 starts at St Albans. 

The area around Sunshine got bus reform in 2014 with the Brimbank network. However Route 903 wasn't touched. Sunshine is being considered a major jobs centre and transport hub with airport rail to depart from there. And sooner than that so will Metro tunnel services allowing fast access to Melbourne University, hospitals and the St Kilda Rd corridor. Looking slightly wider a case exists for Route 903 to operate via Highpoint instead of overlapping much of the 465 in Essendon. 

All this raises the potential for reform of the regular bus network. If 903 is rerouted from Buckley St then there will need to be another route to replace it on McIntyre Rd in Sunshine North. That route could be the 419 run south to Sunshine, especially if its run to St Albans could be replaced by an extended Route 406. As discussed here there are many advantages in this including less network duplication, a Highpoint SmartBus, upgraded Braybrook services and a direct connection to Sunshine from Keilor Downs.

With a Route 419 now similar to the 941 alignment, scope exists to make it, like the mirror image 420 on the other side of Sunshine, a Night Network route. Because 419's route length is similar to its 941 anagram, the operating cost should be minimal. That is unless (as should happen) extra trips are added to make 419 a 24 hour weekend route. 

943 >> upgraded 460 (and others)

The first half of Route 941 is like most of the 460 from Watergardens Station. The second half of Route 941 is like the western half of Route 456. Melton needs its Night Network feeder bus to come from the Sunbury line as its unelectrified V/Line service does not operate Night Network. 

Potential may exist to remove Route 941 if adding complication to the 460 is considered acceptable (ie Night Network trips not serving Caroline Springs Station and operating to Melton as per 941 during Night Network times only). Ideally extra trips would run between Watergardens and at least Caroline Springs to deliver the latter area with a 24 hour weekend service on Route 460. 

I don't see the above as being more than a stop gap measure. Ultimately all of 460 should be a Night Network route with no special deviations or extensions. The corridor between Deanside and Melton is rapidly growing and needs its own routes, especially given they have no Night Network Metro trains. These solutions may involve a  new Night Network (and preferably also regular) route along Taylors Rd from Keilor Plains/St Albans and potentially also an upgraded Route 456 from Sunshine. 

Bus coverage in these parts is difficult to provide as many subdivisions are well off a limited access freeway rather than grouped around stations or even an old-style highway. Also I would not recommend changes for Melton township until its town bus network is reformed and the Night Network route can be planned in harmony.

947 >> upgraded 411 

Most of Night Network special route 947 parallels the existing Route 411 from Footscray to Altona North. Then it runs east to Newport direct via Mason St. A simplified service could instead operate as Route 411 to replace the 947 (and part of 949 - see later). There would be some coverage loss in the central part of Mason St however Werribee trains at Newport station would likely provide a faster connection than changing to the bus at Footscray.  

Adding Night Network services to Route 411 would tie in well with a boost to its daytime service, including as a frequent SmartBus to replace the 903 on Millers Rd and better serve a more locally popular destination. Buses in the Altona North area haven't been reformed for years and are more complex than they need to be with a mixture of overserviced/underperforming routes and underserviced/well performing bus routes. More detail on that here.  

949 >> upgraded 411, 494, 495

949 is a complex and indirect loop route that runs from Williams Landing Station via Point Cook and Altona Meadows. Adding Route 411 to Night Network would make the latter coverage unnecessary. Thus the route could be tightened to focus on the Point Cook area only. 

A potential could be counterclockwise loop leaving Point Cook as Route 495 then returning via Route 494. There would be no dwell time at the southern terminus so Route 494 passengers would ride through it on the way home. The pattern would be similar to that which already operates between 10pm and midnight on Friday and Saturday evening, making usage easier than the current Night Network special route. 

This could be one of the higher priority simplifications, although it needs to be done in conjunction with the Route 411 upgrade to retain Altona Meadows coverage.

951 >> ?

Route starts from Brunswick Station then heads north, paralleling the 58 tram. It keeps going north paralleling the Route 527 bus. It runs to Glenroy station via a path similar but not identical to the 534 bus. 

A very minor simplification may be possible if it follows the 534's path. More detailed review should be done at the same time as a Hadfield area local bus network review. The latter is needed as routes have hardly changed in years and service levels on routes like the 536 lag the area's demographics and usage pattern. 

953 >> upgraded 541

Night Network route 953 is roughly like regular route 541. Both start at Broadmeadows and run north of Craigieburn. Route 541 is slightly less direct but has more residential area coverage away from train stations. Thus overnight trips 541 could completely replace 953 with no changes required to other routes. 

Route 953 is done with one bus. The timetabled Broadmeadows-Craigieburn time for Route 541 is 41 minutes (last Sunday night trip). Key to the feasibility of this reform is whether an hourly return trip can be done with one bus. Ways to allow this include running inbound trips via an express route (as done with Route 357 and 386) and/or not going the full route (as done with 788). 

This is a low income / high bus using catchment that would benefit from extended operating hours so a 541 upgrade is considered high priority.  

959 >> -

Much of this route parallels the Route 59 tram (which is not one of the six Night Network tram routes). From Airport West it follows the 902 SmartBus to Broadmeadows It is probably best kept as is unless the tram is upgraded. 

965 >> upgraded 683 & 685

Forming a big loop from Lilydale, the 965 is an unusual Night Network route. It's rare for an area to be so sparsely populated yet have Night Network service. If you were designing Night Network from the ground up other, more densely populated areas might get coverage before you'd consider a route here.

If you were going to do something it would be a 'bare bones' replacement, possibly parts of 683 and 685 operating to a two hour frequency. Like the 788, the 683 is a long route. It might just run between Lilydale station and Woori Yallock before turning back to form the next trip. 

Reform here could be in conjunction with the proposed revamped Healesville network which will simplify and add trips to Route 685. Some areas (including around Mt Evelyn) would lose coverage but they are relatively low population density and don't have particularly favourable demographics for buses. 

967 >> upgraded / rerouted 664 & 690?

967 starts at Glen Waverley Station, goes north to the 75 tram terminus, heads east through Knox and does a large clockwise loop, going as far north as Croydon. There is no single bus route that it approximates though it overlaps parts of several. The existence of 967 does however mean that a section of busy Scoresby Rd has more service at 2am on a Saturday or Sunday than at any other time. 

Like the Altona North and Glenroy areas, the City of Knox has a complex bus network with new routes laid over old routes. A revision of the local Night Network should ideally happen in concert with a reappraisal of regular routes. Two key regular network reforms could include: 

(i) Rerouting of 664 to operate via Scoresby Rd instead of Stud Rd. 

(ii) Extension of Route 690 from Boronia to Knox City (replacing portion of 753).

Both are relatively low cost and were discussed here. 

The thing about both of these reformed routes is that they would become approximations of the north-eastern part of Route 967. Thus they could supplant it. The main trade-off is some coverage loss, particularly near parts of Burwood Hwy. If a concern, that could be filled by running part of Route 732 as a Night Network route, possibly starting at the Vermont South tram terminus. 

978 / 979 >> ?

These routes serve a large area between Clayton and Dandenong. The area has excellent demographics for bus ridership but service doesn't reflect this. The regular bus network features many overlapping routes with few comprehensive network reviews being done. Almost all, except for some widely spaced SmartBuses, are only every 40 - 60 minutes, often with limited operating hours. 

No regular route is sufficiently like the Night Network 978 or 979 to adequately take their place. Highest priority is to review the regular network and consider which of the new reformed and simplified routes should take the place of 978 and 979 with 24 hour weekend service. 

Of all the areas in Melbourne, Greater Dandenong should be one of the highest priorities for local bus network reform on patronage and social equity grounds. The most recent attempt, involving the 813, has been a step forward but very half-hearted with many unreformed overlapping, infrequent and duplicative routes remaining. 

981 / 982 >> 828, 841, 888, 893?

A difficult area to reform. Night bus services comprise two routes between Dandenong and Cranbourne. Night Network route 982 is most like regular route 893 with the main exception being the former's coverage of Endeavour Hills. Route 981 is similar to Route 828 between Dandenong and Fountain Gate and other local routes south and east of there. Due to rapid population growth and suburban expansion more than two routes would be needed to retain reasonable coverage. 

Possible candidates for regular routes to be upgraded to Night Network include the following: 

* 893 - replacing 982 (may also desirable to operate a Dandenong - Endeavour Hills route 24 hr, possibly forming 841 listed later)

* 828 / 888 (Dandenong - Berwick as 828, then forms 888 at Berwick as through trip) - replacing 981   

* 841 (Fountain Gate - Cranbourne portion only) - replacing 981 

Route 893 and 828 are already main routes with a 20 minute interpeak weekday frequency. 888 and 841 are also main road routes but currently run at lower frequencies. 841 is quite direct but has areas with poor walking catchment to stops. Similar applies in parts of Endeavour Hills. 

A long overdue local bus network review may have scope to simplify local routes and create a main route hierarchy such as exists in Werribee/Tarneit where higher tier main road routes (eg 150, 180, 190) operate 24 hours on weekends as part of Night Network. Doing similar in Casey would make Night Network reform easier in this area.

Trains and trams too?

Not all after midnight services are part of Night Network. In about 2007 the operating hours of trains and trams were extended by an hour on Friday and Saturday nights. Thus instead of finishing around midnight services kept running until about 1am or later. These services were added on all Metro train lines (except Stony Point) and all tram lines. 

Night Network, introduced 2016, took a different tack. All train lines got Night Network services but only six tram routes did. 

There is a degree of confusion regarding public holidays. A Saturday timetable operates on public holidays except Good Friday and Christmas Day (where a Sunday timetable operates). Well it's not quite a Saturday timetable. It's a Saturday timetable without the after midnight trips added in 2007. Also Night Network does not operate unless the public holiday is on a Friday or Saturday (as Night Network ignores public holidays). 

There may be scope to tidy up these arrangements, with timetables identifying both sets of added services that don't run on non-Fri/non-Sat public holidays as 'Night Network'. This however introduces a differentiation for trams - with 6 routes having the full Night Network timetable, ie 24 hour weekend service. 

On the buses there's an added complication in that some bus routes that normally finish around 9 - 9:30pm have extra trips that operate on Friday and Saturday nights only. The latter do not operate on public holidays on most affected routes (eg 495) but there are exceptions like Route 460 where the holiday Saturday timetable is identical to the regular Saturday timetable. The result is that a public holiday like Labour Day has later trips running than it would if if it was a normal Monday - Thursday weekday. This contributes to the complexity of catching buses in Melbourne due to differing public holiday arrangements including the lack of universally applied timetable patterns. Ideally such routes (which tend to be amongst the most important in their areas) would have service until midnight on all days of the week with Night Network cutting in after midnight on many of these routes. 

Conclusion

Completing Night Network simplification by having more regular routes operate Night Network (instead of special routes) would be a worthy aim for bus service reform. This is because even if frequency is only hourly, having a 24 hour weekend service on more familiar routes is a major selling point on a network.  In many areas this would eliminate 3 or 4 hour gaps in service as currently exists between when the regular bus routes stop around 9pm and special Night Network buses start around 1am. 

Night Network services are generally quieter than services during the day. So you wouldn't spend a lot of money on this. But like fixing public holiday confusion and scrapping the last few remaining reduced Summer timetables, it's the sort of thing that a few million of dollars could pretty much solve. It also makes buses simpler and more saleable, especially if accompanied with local area network reforms and upgrades.   

As you can see from this run through some reforms are easier than others. In the harder cases local area network reform is needed to provide networks with high priority routes that you'd run 24 hours on weekends. Suggestions have been given where this applies. 

What are your thoughts? Are there other Night Network reforms not discussed here you'd like to see? Or maybe some here would be inefficient or cause excessive coverage gaps? Comments are invited and can be left below. 

Read other Useful Network items here