Links

Thursday, October 24, 2024

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.  



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


Monday, October 21, 2024

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

Sunday, October 20, 2024

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.  

Monday, October 14, 2024

Local transport campaigns and council elections


Various campaigns have asked 2024 council candidates to commit to advocating for better public and active transport. Here's a quick summary of known campaigns, what they want and areas they're active in: 


Melbourne FOE Better Buses campaign 

Campaign seeks a radically reformed direct and frequent bus network across Melbourne's western suburbs. Also advocates for new bus routes in growth areas.  

Most active in Wyndham, Melton, Brimbank, Hobsons Bay, Maribyrnong with some candidates from other municipalities also signing up. 

See their candidate pledges here


Fix Dandy Buses 

Campaign seeks budget funding for 7 day service on all bus routes in Dandenong, with 2025 priorities being routes 802, 804 and 814. It follows from the #Fix800Bus campaign that got 7 day service on Route 800 funded in the 2024 state budget. 

Active in the City of Greater Dandenong, the campaign emailed candidates requesting support for council advocacy for better 7 day bus services. 

See news on their Facebook page


Streets People Love campaign

A broad campaign from nearly 40 local transport and environment advocacy groups to create safe and pleasant streets with good walkability and cycle access. 

Candidates from councils across Melbourne have been asked for their support. You can enter your address and the website will tell you which candidates have pledged for better streets. 



More Trains Melbourne's North 

Seeks to boost all-week train frequencies on the Craigieburn, Upfield, Mernda and Hurstbridge line to match service levels on other lines. The campaign's first priority is to cut 40 min (Sunday morning) and 30 min (evening) waits to 20 minutes. Then a phased upgrade to every 10 minutes all week, starting with the busiest lines.  

Candidates in Hume, Moonee Valley, Whittlesea and Darebin in wards served by trains have been asked (via their Facebook pages) to support improved more frequent 7 day rail services.   

Candidates who responded positively are listed by council area on the More Trains Melbourne's North Facebook page


Combined 7 day bus campaigns of Merri-bek 

Seeks 7 day service on bus routes in Merri-bek, starting with important east-west routes 503, 506 and 536. Campaign has asked candidates in Merri-bek wards served by these routes for their position on advocating the better service needed. 

News on Facebook pages for Route 503, Route 506 and Route 536.


Any more? 

Let me know in the comments and I add your campaign if it's about local transport issues. 


Other reading

Public Transport priorities for each local government area

Local council elections 2024 - background


Thursday, October 10, 2024

UN 188: How many people are near frequent public transport?


I've long maintained a set of interactive network frequency maps showing where Melbourne's frequent public transport goes. There are sets for various times of week and day and you can select layers by frequency threshold. But I have never quantified the population near frequent public transport at various times of week and day. 

But Philip Mallis has. And has presented figures and maps at last Friday's Transport Camp and earlier this week on his blog item here

I'm a big fan of this service/population based approach. More people in the industry should do it more often. And the expansion of the frequent network should be a leading KPI for the transport portfolio and the incoming DTP secretary with their pay depending on it. 

Public transport isn't just about building infrastructure as an end in itself. Instead it's more about serving people, making their lives better and connecting them to opportunity. Measuring access to frequent service is one great way to check the effectiveness (or otherwise) of investment choices.       

Below are a few of the maps presented. They show the extent how Melburnians' access to frequent public transport changes across the week and time of day. 


As you might expect, frequent service (defined as every 10 min or better) is most prevalent at peak times. It exists in all directions from Melbourne, thanks to frequent peak rail service on all the longer lines. The gaps increase further out as only a few suburban bus services run every 10 minutes or better, even in the peaks. 

M-F Peak: Overall about 50% of the population are within 800 metres of frequent service in peak times. Though note this will be an overestimate since the measurement method is based on services per hour and if there are multiple infrequent routes in an area this will count as a frequent service even though they may use different stops. Also even if (say) a route every 15 minutes and one every 20 minutes share a stop then you might still get 15 minute gaps even though 7 buses an hour means an average 9 minute headway. This effect is very pronounced in areas like Mornington, which show up on the map has having frequent service even though all routes are either every 30, 40 or 60 minutes in peaks.   

M-F interpeak: About half a million Melburnians who had frequent service in the peaks lose it in the weekday interpeak periods. It's a bit hard to see from the maps but the big losses come from the outer parts of the rail network (notably in the outer south-east, outer east and almost all of the north and west) dropping from every 10-15 min in peaks to every 20, 30 and even sometimes 40 minutes (identifying these line sections is where my interactive network frequency maps will come in handy). Buses also fall off. Again its hard to see but it is common for buses in areas like Brimbank, Wyndham and around South Morang to fall from 20 minutes peak to 40 minutes off-peak. The 'holes' in many middle distance suburbs also increase. 

Saturday: Compared to weekday interpeak, a further 700 000 people lose access to frequent service during the day on Saturday. Generally train and tram frequencies hold up but buses do not. In the south-east you can see the areas with frequent service are much more spindly around the railway lines on Saturday versus a more filled in look on weekdays. A large part of this is attributable to orbital SmartBus routes (meant to be a premium bus service) collapsing from every 15 to every 30 minutes on weekends. As well, particularly in eastern middle suburbs, it is common for local routes every 30 minutes on weekdays to fall to hourly on weekends. In contrast other areas have a flatter 40 or 60 minute frequency pattern all week on their buses.  Very roughly one-quarter of Melburnians have frequent service on Saturdays versus one-half during weekday peaks. On Sundays it's more like one-fifth (noting that the method overestimates all proportions).  

Sunday evenings: When Sydney upgraded its train frequencies in 2017 it made a point of ensuring its 15 minute service extended to midnight or later. Melbourne has also had off-peak train frequency upgrades in the past two or three decades but they were overwhelmingly confined to daylight hours and/or a few lines (notably in the south-east). The result is that Melbourne had (and still has) zero routes that could individually be considered frequency on Saturday and especially Sunday evenings. Typical train and tram frequencies then are 30 minutes while most SmartBuses join local buses in finishing at 9pm Sundays. Thus just 5% of the population has frequent Sunday evening service and it is only because they live near sufficient infrequent routes that the analysis includes them. Saturday evening fares better, but even with the generous method used is still under 10%. 

I've summarised the above (and a couple of extra time bands) below. This shows that the proportion of Melburnians with all week frequent public transport is a small minority. This is not due to infrastructure limitations or rolling stock shortages. Instead it is directly due to a political choice in the 12 or 13 years to avoid funding all-week service, with declining service per capita on our busiest metropolitan modes.  


The Australasian city that has made the fastest progress towards spreading all week frequent service from the few to the many is Auckland. They did upgrade their train network but most of the gain is due to bus network and service reform, with Auckland now operating 40 routes with 7 day service every 15 minutes or better. 

Climate Council analysis shows that Sydney has done quite well in making sure that its lower income people have as much access to frequent service as its higher income people (on average). And Perth, hampered by high growth and sprawl, has come off a low base, building its now significant frequent train and bus network from almost nothing, thanks to a sustained program of  incremental all week train frequency increases and reforming buses far quicker than us

The Increasing Melbourne's Service Frequency paper from the Victorian Transport Action Group proposes an approach for Melbourne to replicate the success in growing its frequent network of those  abovementioned other cities. 

Thursday, October 03, 2024

UN 187: Doing it with frequency - Melbourne's path to world-class transport


Melbourne's got a great public transport infrastructure legacy. Unlike most US cities it kept substantial metropolitan and regional rail systems. And unlike most other western cities it kept a large, substantially intact, tram network. These factors give us a big advantage over other cities that need to make do with buses and/or rebuild their rail and tram systems (at great expense). 

With easy day trips possible to destinations like Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo, Traralgon and even Warrnambool, our regional trains compare well with those elsewhere, with substantial investments in both infrastructure and service in the last two decades. 

However the same balance hasn't occurred in Melbourne, with substantial infrastructure builds but declining service per capita on our busiest modes. The comparison with Sydney (which has boosted service) has been particularly stark with waits for their trains half ours at key times people travel. Even US cities with poor reputations for transit orientedness run more frequent trains than we do at night. 

Maybe its massive transit infrastructure inheritance made Melbourne complacent; less endowed cities like Auckland and Perth had to be smarter at working what they have harder. Brisbane, in contrast, provides a data point in the other direction, demonstrating how to run an extensive and expensive network that benefits fewer people than it should

With better 'bones' than most other cities, Melbourne's public transport needs just one main thing for it to really shine. Yet, it is far less spoken about than specific high profile projects like Airport Rail and the Suburban Rail Loop.    

Thus it was great to see an article this week in Australasian Bus and Coach discussing the potential for increased frequency to turn its service from underwhelming to world class. The item covered themes familiar to most readers here but which may be new to others. 


VTAG's paper notes that many timetables, especially for buses, reflect historical patterns such as old shop trading hours. More recently, reports from Melbourne CBD indicate increased evening activity. However metropolitan train timetables have been basically static, with many lines dropping back to half-hourly service after about 7 or 8 pm. And despite sometimes carrying standing loads, our main bus routes are often less frequent than trains or trams, especially on weekends. 

Within modes there is sometimes a mismatch between usage (or usage potential) and service levels provided. Thus sparsely populated Yarrambat gets a SmartBus every 15 minutes, while dense Highpoint, Tarneit and Brunswick have none. Sparsely populated Research, with its two buses per hour (even on Sundays), wins the bus lottery while residential Dandenong North and Campbellfield do not with most routes not even operating 7 days despite their higher social needs.   

The state government is aware of this with prominent mention in 2021's Victoria's Bus Plan. On Tuesday I demonstrated similar for rail, with high patronage but safe seated areas in Melbourne's north and west having double the waits for trains outside peak periods compared to well served lines like Frankston. Some welcome service reform has happened but the will and capacity to implement appears limited, even relative to smaller cities such as Perth

Fixing a multi-decade backlog takes time, not least with sourcing recurrent funding, driver recruitment and then driver training. This is why VTAG recommends a staged process starting with popular routes that can be boosted by working the existing fleet harder. That has the effect of benefiting the most people soonest and lessening the risk of services being added but just carrying 'fresh air'. 

Increasing Melbourne's service frequency suggests some priorities areas for all week bus frequency improvements. These include: Point Cook-Werribee-Tarneit, Springvale-Dandenong, Footscray-Sunshine and around Craigieburn. Most bus routes in these typically diverse areas have high boardings per hour productivity despite often dropping to every 40 minutes midday and weekends (as common in Wyndham) and/or not running 7 days (as common in Greater Dandenong). 

All week frequency is also essential given increased travel on weekends, much of which includes people getting to jobs. Priorities for better frequencies are especially high around major shopping centres like Highpoint, Northland, Box Hill and Chadstone. Some recent progress has been made but potential still exists for our key routes (including busier portions of our orbital SmartBuses) to continue their 15 minute weekday frequencies on weekends rather than drop to every 30 or even 40 minutes as now. This would provide a much more legible and saleable network that can be depended on every day.


Starting by shortening the longest waits is particularly cost-effective as not very many extra service kilometres need adding to cut maximum waits, especially for trains. As an example going from 40 minutes to 30 minute frequencies requires just one extra return trip per two hours improved. When the 40 minute service is only at a few times (eg Sunday mornings) then the number of extra weekly trips needed to cut maximum waits is very small indeed. 

Evening boosts from 30 to 20 minutes are also economical, in this case involving one extra return trip per hour of improved frequency. Boosts would lessen or eliminate Melbourne's severe evening service 'cliff' where service collapses to minimal (for trains) or nothing (for many buses) in the 7-9pm range. By running its trains every 15 minutes or better until midnight, boosting tram services and having generally more frequent service on its main bus routes, Sydney has surged ahead of us here. A worthwhile start can be made with 1 to 3% extra trains scheduled per week, as explained here and here, with a sustained program providing further gains.  

Just like with anything the better you make something the more people will use it. Including well-targeted frequency upgrades on public transport. That has benefits including addressing cost of living (public transport is cheaper than driving but a reasonably convenient service needs to exist), widening housing choices (as more homes are near the frequent network), easing traffic congestion (by providing driving alternatives) and maximising returns from the government's investments in infrastructure including level crossing removals and rebuilt stations.   

Another theme is promotion and information. As it stands passengers have little information about buses at train stations. Bus to bus interchanges often require walking around a large interchange to find the one you need with signage at only one or two points. There is also scope for more network maps on the network. Also those that are produced, such as the somewhat hard to find local area maps on the PTV website, insufficiently differentiate between frequent (and thus useful) and part-time routes. 

That's a quick summary of the Victorian Transport Action Group's Increasing Melbourne's Service Frequency paper. I've only scratched the surface so I suggest reading it here (pdf 38 pages). You can also follow the Victorian Transport Action Group on Facebook here


See more Building Melbourne's Useful Network items here


Tuesday, October 01, 2024

TT 193: Busy but service-starved: Which train lines?


To what extent do Melbourne rail service levels reflect line usage? What is the geography of rail service versus usage? Who is well served and who gets short-changed? And what are the implications for service upgrade priorities, especially with the Metro Tunnel opening next year and a state election the year after?  

These are some of the questions I'll try to answer today. 

Station boarding data graphs posted by user AB014A on the Reddit r/MelbourneTrains group have made the job easier. The source Victorian government data is published here for those who want to do their own analysis. 

Boardings by line

The simplest graph shows passenger boardings by line. Numbers exclude central area stations served by multiple lines. But there has been some apportionment of numbers by suburban stations served by multiple lines. The original graph and discussion appear on this Reddit thread


Very roughly the longer the line the more the stations and the more the boardings. 

Be aware of branched lines, especially where the split is so far out that most stations are on two lines (and at most times of day get double the service frequency). The two 'giants' in this regard are Pakenham/Cranbourne (about 20 million boardings) and Belgrave/Lilydale (17 million boardings including the minor Alamein branch).

Mernda/Hurstbridge are different in that most of their stations are beyond the Clifton Hill 'fork'. At around 16 million their combined usage is similar to Belgrave/Lilydale. 

Service frequency can matter too, with lines like Sandringham and Glen Waverley carrying substantially more than comparably long Upfield. In short, the better you make service the more people use it. But what's striking is how well some lines do despite having frequency handicaps. For instance Werribee, Craigieburn, Mernda and Sunbury are about 88% Frankston line's usage despite having twice the waits off-peak. Even assuming a conservatively low service-patronage elasticity, you can reasonably predict that boosting each from 20 to 10 minutes off-peak will increase usage enough for all four to overtake the Frankston line (ie pushing that down from 2nd to 6th in ranking).       

Wondered about the colours? These correspond to the network's five main line groups. Eg light blue is Caulfield group, green is cross-city, orange is northern, red is Clifton Hill, blue is Burnley and purple is V/Line. Sandringham, on its own, is pink. Some will change when the Metro Tunnel opens next year.   

The coarseness of this data limits what conclusions you can draw from it. And some may be incorrect if you haven't considered factors like shared line sections, service levels and the number of stations. For instance Wyndham Vale's V/Line service doesn't look much but the few stations it has punch above their weight, especially after its generally lower frequency is considered. Also most lines serve inner, middle and outer Melbourne, with greatly varying demographics along their segments.   

Boardings by line segment

User AB014A went on to split the above data into line segments, with the graph and discussion in another Reddit thread. With this you can see which segments had the most entries at their stations, and thus identify busier and quieter portions of each line. 

Some commenters didn't like the way the data was segmented. However I like it because each segment has pretty much the same service levels at all stations in it. That allowed me to annotate the graph with off-peak service levels above each column, as below (click for clearer view). 


The numbers are maximum waits between trains in minutes for various times of the week. These are explained in the highlighted frequency key. I've used Saturday evening frequencies but on most lines  this applies for other nights as well.   

Colour coding is used for several purposes. Line group is identified just as it was in the first graph, ie you can quickly identify all northern group line segments by looking for the orange. My additions shade particularly high or low frequencies. Look for green and yellow for 10 - 15 minute frequencies and grey for 40-60 minute gaps. That way you can see at a glance which segments get particularly high or low service. 

Observations

1. The busy and well-served inner to middle east. The first five columns show segments that combine higher usage with higher service. These segments include all stations from the City to Dandenong and most to Ringwood. In these better served segments you can expect trains every 10-15 minutes during the day all week. At most stations peak waits are much shorter while evening and Sunday morning waits are longer. 

2. The busy but underserved north and west. If you're just scanning colours the first thing that jumps out is that patch of four adjacent orange columns. And if you follow to the frequencies you'll see they all have gaps of up to 40 minutes. 

We're talking about the Sunbury and Craigieburn lines here. Or more specifically Middle Footscray - Watergardens, Kensington - Essendon and Broadmeadows - Craigieburn. 

Passengers in these segments use trains a lot, but unlike their eastern suburbs counterparts, don't get the  same frequent service. This is most notable interpeak weekdays (20 versus 10-15 min), weekends (20 versus 10 minutes) and Sunday mornings (40 versus 30 min). 

The Sunbury line will become part of the Metro Tunnel. Moving their trains out of the northern group City Loop portal will (in theory) allow higher peak Craigieburn line frequency. However not even broad service specifications have yet been made available so it's just guesswork as to whether these lines get the frequent all day service they need in the post Metro Tunnel timetables.    

3. The Wyndham patronage powerhouse. Those prominent orange bars might have caused you to skip the two even busier segments around Werribee/Tarneit. 

The Deer Park - Wyndham Vale portion of the Geelong line is extremely productive. And, more than other lines, 40 minute gaps on it are common including at times when Metro lines enjoy 20 and sometimes even 10 minute frequencies. Labor promised an upgrade to 20 minute frequencies before the last election. This won't come a moment too soon given its high passenger numbers. Ultimately, given the area's massive growth, that also probably justifies a full two tier service including all week 10 minute frequencies to Wyndham Vale.  

Metro's Werribee line is also a strong performer west from Laverton. The very welcome 2021 train timetable cut maximum waits from 40 to 20 minutes, with particular gains at night and on Sunday mornings. Continued suburban growth justifies further improvements, starting with broadening shoulder peaks and moving to a 10 minute all week service, such as already enjoyed by its cross-city partner out to Frankston. 

4. Quiet but frequent. Let's ignore the line colours and just look at which segments get 10-15 minute service. The quieter segments that nevertheless have good frequencies are all in the east or south (but not south-east). 

Most notable is the Alamein line, which enjoys a 15 minute off-peak service. East Camberwell - Union and Heyington - Darling, areas home to some of Melbourne's choicest real estate, were in about the bottom third. However both segments were en-route to busier sections, such as Box Hill - Ringwood and East Malvern - Glen Waverley.    

The first graph had the Frankston line as having the second highest number of boardings. It's a long line with many closely-spaced stations. Its inner section is busy (aided by Dandenong train express patterns) but usage falls away from the CBD. The Mentone - Frankston portion is its quietest segment, though Frankston station itself is busy. Its high 7 day frequency should induce more patronage than it has. Possible reasons why it hasn't include (i) weak catchment (including the bay), (ii) poor reliability due to frequent bus replacements and (iii) a new competing parallel freeway that is more attractive than often limited feeder buses.   

5. Battle of the branches. Which of the branches beyond Dandenong and Ringwood do better? The answers might surprise.  

For Dandenong the Cranbourne branch got about 50% more passengers than Pakenham. Even though Pakenham has some significant destinations like Berwick and Fountain Gate near (but not on) its corridor. Both are urban growth areas where most development has been away from stations. Some areas like Clyde got extra or extended buses. But Officer and Pakenham generally have not. Cranbourne generally has better buses than Pakenham with some routes (eg 897) operating every 20 minutes 7 days. I don't want to read too much in to numbers here as factors like frequent bus replacements (as have occurred on the Pakenham line) can depress patronage.  

The branches east of Ringwood are about evenly matched with regards to both service frequency and patronage. Both also get more numbers than Alamein even though Alamein gets twice the weekday off-peak frequency. This matches what I saw in 2020 when I concluded that there was a 'greater good' gain of boosting weekday Belgrave and Lilydale frequencies to 20 minutes even if it meant that Alamein got a decrease from 15 to 20 minutes.  

6. Average performing lines with below average service. Here there's a mismatch between patronage and service but perhaps not quite as much as those in 2 or 3 above. I'd put most of the Mernda line in this category due to its low off-peak frequencies.

Also while the Sandringham line has above average service at most times, its 40 minute Sunday morning service lets it down. This is a case where adding just a few trains per week can half maximum waits and provide a more legible and dependable all week service (especially given its already good evening frequency). 

7. Poorly performing segments with high patronage potential. Some lines have a lot of stations in areas that have the density and demographics to support higher usage. These are often inner ring suburbs that also have trams.

In these parts public transport is abundant when looking at the map but each mode has problems that stop it from reaching maximum patronage potential as part of a connected network. For example trams are frequent but slow, trains are faster but infrequent while buses join the radial lines but have short operating hours. Boosting train frequencies would provide a frequent/fast option that would free up sometimes crowded trams for feeder and local trips. 

Examples of infrequent rail segments with patronage potential include Rushall - Bell on the Mernda line, Macaulay - Coburg on the Upfield line and, perhaps to a lesser extent, Westgarth - Eaglemont on the Hurstbridge line. Rushall - Bell would support usage of the Mernda line, which along with Werribee, has the highest claim to go to a 10 minute all week service after the busy Craigieburn line and the very cheap to upgrade Ringwood line. 

Interestingly the Kensington - Essendon portion of the Craigieburn line has equally low service but is already a good patronage performer. Essendon station's very high patronage (aided by some good tram and bus feeders) plus the high density around Moonee Ponds would explain all or most of this.  

Why are service levels as they are? 

The above has taught us that there are some busy lines that have high service while other busy lines have low service relative to usage. Other lines are better served relative to their patronage. And there can be significant variations across the week, with even the busiest lines not necessarily having the most frequent service at certain times. 

Here are four elements that I think have been decisive:  

1. The past. Go back about 50 or 60 years. Manufacturing was much bigger, especially in the west and north (including suburbs that would later gentrify). Such jobs were often local and suburban. Whereas middle class white collar workers favoured the east along lines to destinations like Ringwood and Glen Waverley. These have had more frequent service deeper into the suburbs than  other lines. And it was true that the Burnley group was the busiest of Melbourne's then four operational groups until about the mid-2000s when that got overtaken by the Caulfield group. So if you look at the 1975 Working Timetable it was only Burnley group lines that had a basic 15 minute off-peak weekday frequency (with 20 minutes being more common elsewhere). 

2. Advocacy/policy entrepreneurship. Despite the general doom and gloom there was a concerted campaign around 1991 to improve the frequency of the Sandringham line from every 20 to every 15 minutes. Advocates demonstrated that an upgrade was cheap and could even recoup what it cost in fares. This got implemented and was apparently successful. Except for Sunday mornings the Sandringham line continues to enjoy above average day and night frequency today.    

3. Who is in government. There are exceptions but the general pattern is that political parties will add service in areas most politically important to them. In a traditional two party system with many safe seats they will often neglect their 'base' voters or those they think will never vote for them. 

Despite its record of closing regional lines and sacking workers, the Kennett Coalition government also introduced some significant metropolitan rail frequency upgrades during its time. The 1996 off-peak boosts were confined to seats that were politically important to it in Melbourne's south and east. That saw Frankston and Dandenong trains improve from every 20 to every 15 minutes interpeak. 1999 saw a big upgrade in metropolitan Sunday train and tram services, but this time across the network.     

Subsequent Coalition governments boosted south and eastern metropolitan train frequencies further, including Ringwood, Dandenong and Frankston getting 10 minute weekend services. Around this time Dandenong and Frankston got 10 minute interpeak weekday services too. 

Labor governments have different priorities. They can point to significant records of extending rail electrification and (more recently) building the Metro Tunnel and removing level crossings. 

Labor has only won office when it has won major regional city seats so regional rail has been a major priority since the 1999 Bracks victory. Improvements here have included both infrastructure (including line reopenings) and service levels (especially weekday). 

However Labor has rarely added service on the metropolitan rail network, especially in established areas historically regarded as safe such as Broadmeadows, Coburg and Preston. Because the Liberals improved service in 'their' areas when in office but Labor didn't do likewise (and has governed for so long) the long term trend is towards an inequality in which some lines (like Frankston) have double the all-week frequency of others (like Craigieburn) despite similar patronage levels. It remains to be seen whether the timetables associated with the Metro Tunnel will buck this trend or not.

4. Crowding. If crowding gets extreme (to the point of trains being crush-loaded) or reliability suffers then that can force reformed timetables, operating patterns and service levels, particularly during peak times. 

However the Melbourne record is that the lag time can be as long as 8 years. As an example, metropolitan rail reliability was good in the first three years of franchising then fell off a cliff in 2004 in line with rising patronage. This should have forced some action but the prevailing ideology was to blame the franchisee (in this case Connex) with the hope that the public would too. Performance continued to decline with train disruptions frequently making headlines from 2007. After overcoming a driver shortage the government slotted in a few extra peak trips in twice-yearly changes but the slide continued. They dumped Connex for Metro and it still continued. The service changes became more radical, including new simpler 'greenfield' timetables with more consistent service and more separated operations. Reliability rebounded markedly after about 2012 and the service improvements on some lines, notably in the south-east, extended to off-peak times.     

To summarise, the timetables we have now most reflect (a) past travel patterns, (b) inertia as the default state and (c) politics. Other criteria, such as patronage or social needs, are less important but can force upgrades when crowding affects swinging voter commuters or unreliability makes the headlines. 

Concepts influential in other cities, such as a network-wide service standard or a culture of incremental service improvement (such as we saw a little of in January 2021), are weak on Melbourne's metropolitan rail network. As an example all other Australian capital cities (with some minor exceptions) have a 15/30 min 'pulse' on their train network, whereas Melbourne can have frequencies of 10, 15, 20, 30, 40 and 60 minutes at various times, making connections between lines haphazard. 

Whether it's the stable branding, advertising or information, in a city like Perth you get the sense that there is a strong, competent and multimodal 'network owner' able to pursue at least steady service improvements, we don't get quite the same vibes that our anonymously-led and continuously re or debranding DTP/PTV are moving the network forward at the same rate.   

Priorities for improvements

There's no one correct answer or order for improvement. But benefiting the most number of passengers for the lowest cost would be a major factor. 

If one wants a simple network without nasty surprises (like 40 or 60 minute gaps in broad daylight) then you start by cutting the longest waits on the busiest lines. These include Sunday mornings on the Metro network and weekend services on regional lines at least to Melton and Wyndham Vale. 

Such an incremental approach might also see the widespread 30 minute evening headways cut to 20 minutes until say 9 or 10 pm with further pushing back in later years. This staged approach involves only a small percentage rise in service kilometres each year so is easier to manage with regards to driver recruitment and training etc. 

Getting to all week 10 minute frequencies on all lines needs more service investment. This would probably need to be in phases over say 2 to 3 years. A start could be made by broadening the shoulders on high patronage potential lines like Craigieburn, Werribee and Mernda. 

Sections of some lines aren't as strong patronage performers as those listed. But if an upgrade is cheap and benefits a lot of stations (eg Ringwood 10 min interpeak, Sandringham Sunday mornings) then it would be a high priority. 

When patronage was growing rapidly about 15 years ago there were typically two timetable changes a year. That's a good approach as you can't do big upgrades overnight. It's good to do what you can when you can to bring the benefits of service forward. As opposed to doing nothing for many years and trying to tie service improvements to big infrastructure projects (that, contrary to some impressions conveyed) are not a pre-requisite for all-week service improvements.

Such a program could be linked to supporting bus coordination, as PTV commenced doing in its early years. A routine like this would make service upgrades more similar to (say) level crossing removals in that there are established processes rather than something so rare that it requires the 'wheel to be reinvented' each time or inefficient peaks and troughs in work-flow. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here