Executive Summary: A new transport plan for Fishermans Bend proposes some good ideas. Genuine transformation requires large investment in public transport to overcome the area's poor accessibility and low business confidence that is hampering development. Otherwise it may be better to channel activity into areas that already have superior transport access.
The
Fishermans Bend Integrated Transport Plan was quietly released last Friday on the Grand Final eve public holiday. Taking the (probably fair) view that people are only interested in actions and not plans, there was no government media release as it features no major project announcements.
Background and transport accessibilityFishermans Bend is a large slab of underutilised land quite near but poorly connected by public transport to surrounding areas such as Melbourne CBD, Docklands, the inner west and the inner south. I've written about it
here and
here.
Melbourne University bought land to build a campus there as the centre of what the government hoped would be the
Fishermans Bend Innovation Precinct. But a month ago the university announced it had
paused work on the Fishermans Bend campus.
Another statement said that "The University remains committed to the precinct" but pointedly added that "this decision will allow it to better align with the timing of
key government and industry investments necessary to develop the Fishermans Bend precinct."
In other words the university wants others to invest first.
That's understandable because Fishermans Bend is currently a dog of a place to get to from most directions by public transport. With few direct links to surrounding areas travel there involves a backtrack and/or a transfer, as seen below.
The only good link to Fishermans Bend is from a single direction - Southern Cross Station. But even this will become less useful later this year when the busy Sunbury, Pakenham and Cranbourne lines move to using the Metro Tunnel. This will necessitate an extra transfer to reach Fishermans Bend on an already indirect trip.
To be fair, public transport access to Fishermans Bend used to be worse. The
2021 SNAMUTS map showed Fishermans Bend as being the only sizeable land parcel near the CBD with public transport access below its minimum standards. Indeed Fishermans Bend doesn't even feature as a node.
Since that map got done the government greatly improved services on bus routes 235, 237 and 606. These get good usage, though there remain issues with traffic delays during peak times.
A victim of geometryThe other problem Fishermans Bend has is network geometry. While it has direct freeway access from west, north and south, public transport access is not as developed, with frequent buses from one direction only.
Not only that but all bus routes are dead ends, terminating rather than passing through Fishermans Bend. That makes Fishermans Bend a cul de sac, peninsula or dead end. Access from most directions requires backtracking and/or forced transfers. To
quote Jarrett Walker:
If I could put one sentence about transit in the mind of every developer, every land use planner, indeed anyone who makes a decision about where to locate anything, the sentence would be this: Be on the Way!
I don't know if Melbourne University read this but their decision to suspend their Fishermans Bend project is certainly compatible with it. Especially since their existing campus will go from being (largely) a peninsula at the end of several tram routes to being on the way when Parkville station on the Metro Tunnel opens. And if them or some other developer wanted a new site then locations like Arden, North Melbourne, Footscray or even Sunshine offer good on the way accessibility from multiple directions.
What about a tram?
Would a tram fix things? Not if the network geometry remains bad.
The 2021 SNAMUTS map below shows relative access to people and jobs from each node. Largely due to being connected to other nodes via higher speed transit, locations near inner area train station are the most accessible. CBD area tram junctions are next most accessible. Connectivity falls off at stub ends of tram routes, such as Waterfront City and Port Melbourne, where it is 8 to 10%, due to these being not on the way to anywhere. And even this is an overestimate if you were to count people and jobs between nodal catchments.
Waterfront City has, like Fishermans Bend wants, a tram. It is closer to the CBD. However, as noted above, it is not on the way to anywhere. It has significant housing but this is insufficient for The District shopping centre to be a commercial success.
Also with a tram (that tramsitioned from a train in the 1980s) is Port Melbourne's Beacon Cove development. This has significant dense housing. It offers a convenient waterfront lifestyle for residents with a nearby retail heart on Bay St and one of Melbourne's best bus services (Route 234). A non-central coastal location and stub public transport routes hampers accessibility. But this is less of an issue as Port Melbourne does not aspire to be anything other than homes, a beach, a cruise ship terminal and a shopping strip suitable for resident and visitor needs.
A tram to Fishermans Bend might improve connectivity somewhat. But this would only be from one direction and have a similar dead-end geometry as the Waterfront City, Victoria Harbour and Beacon Cove trams. While often talked up, a tram on its own is unlikely to be the stimulus that will get Melbourne University and other developers sharpening their pencils.
The other options include bus, train and water transport. Together these could connect Fishermans Bend more directly to more of its surrounding areas. What should happen when? This is what this plan fleshes out, with a summary presented next.
The plan
There are 40 pages, starting with introductions from ministers Shing and Williams. Fishermans Bend is described as Australia's largest urban renewal project with a land area over double that of the CBD. It is proposed that by 2050, Fishermans Bend will be home to 80,000 residents, with 80,000 workers and 20,000 tertiary students travelling to and from it.
Both ministers cite very high mode share targets for active and public transport given the area's current disconnection from surrounds. These targets are 80 per cent generally with 90 per cent for students.
A planning approach is defined. There is significant stress on parking policy and behaviour change programs. Levels of services are shown as driving infrastructure investments. This is a different order to the prevailing 'build infrastructure first' tendency, with no or limited attention to service aspects.
There are three horizons in transport network development. These roughly coincide with bus and active transport, trams and, finally heavy underground rail. There are also road and rail freight improvements envisaged to support the Port of Melbourne.
Horizon One
Described as immediate priorities, this is largely about active transport and bus improvements.
Active transport improvements include two new bridges for active transport over the West Gate Freeway which currently presents a major barrier to north-south movement. The currently peak-only punt service across to Spotswood will be improved with higher capacity. Existing tram routes in the Montague area will also be enhanced in line with this being the earliest area of development.
Buses are intended to get significant attention. There will be 'improved reliability and user experience' for the bus to Southern Cross, though the term 'bus lane' does not appear once in the report. But the plan's authors clearly understand the need for connectivity to surrounding areas with a heavy expectation on buses to provide this.
This will be enabled by a new direct bus route to Anzac Station as well as a restored bus link to the western suburbs via the West Gate Bridge. The reason I say restored is that up to 2014
some Route 232 trips from Altona North stopped at Fishermans Bend before all trips were made to run direct to the CBD. The western terminus of the West Gate bridge connection is not clear - potential candidates include the isolated and unpopular Altona North Park & Ride, Newport station and/or Altona Gate Shopping centre via a
reformed local network that I proposed here. Speed, frequency and reliability will determine their success of these new connections, noting that existing routes such as 232, 235, 237 are often held up by traffic.
The plan has maps showing corridors but detail is lacking on where exactly the new bus routes would go. Below is a guess with new routes (dotted lines) overlapping the existing network (solid lines). It is also possible that some existing routes like 234 and 236 would be extended to the innovation precinct.
The plan hopes that these upgrades would help drive employment to 20 000 jobs. Without explicit mention of exclusive bus lanes on all major approaches (including over the West Gate), I suspect that mode share will likely remain heavily driving-based as end-to-end trip times involving public transport won't be that fast. However the state government has improved bus services faster in Fishermans Bend than in most other suburbs, so there appears genuine will to complete at least Horizon One improvements.
Horizon Two
A major theme is two new tram lines on Plummer and Turner Street. These will go via the Montague precinct and then via the Spencer St bridge. This is to support the growth of jobs along Turner St and housing on Plummer St.
Routing via the Spencer St bridge replaces earlier ideas for a new tram bridge further west. Having a tram via a new bridge would have provided improved
on the way connectivity from Docklands. However it was
opposed by some including owners of boats at the marina and involves significant cost. Infrastructure Victoria plans
strongly supported a Fishermans Bend tram connection by 2026.
The Plummer and Turner St trams will add capacity and coverage but are both stub lines with the geometrical limitations discussed above. The use of an existing (rather than a new and more western) bridge means that the Collins St tram remains a dead end stub too. Public transport networks that force backtracking by avoiding direct connection opportunities and
on the way principles risk not being as popular as hoped given that driving will be more, rather than less direct, than taking the tram.
Active transport from Fishermans Bend to surrounds would however become more direct than now with new bridges north to Moonee Ponds Creek and Docklands. The Docklands connection would be along the same alignment proposed for trams. That risks causing
friction with boat owners who in other areas are an
influential lobby due to state
Labor's keenness to appeal to blue collar aspirations and differentiate itself from its Greens competitors. However if built such a bridge should make cycling faster and more direct than tram travel between Docklands and Fishermans Bend.
Employment areas don't necessarily have high rates of self-containment regarding where workers live. Especially for higher paid skilled jobs such as somewhere called an 'innovation precinct' would seek to attract.
Improved buses, a couple of trams from one direction and active transport connections won't by themselves be enough to attract mode shares that rival the CBD with its vastly better centrality and transport access. We know this because you don't need work very far from a train station for its
public transport mode share to collapse. This is where we call in the TBMs for ...
Horizon Three
The centrepiece of this is an east-west metro rail tunnel. This will serve stations at Docklands (near Southern Cross), Sandridge and Fishermans Bend. Trains will go under the Yarra, presumably towards Newport or Spotswood and the Werribee line.
It is this, much more than anything else discussed before, that will make Fishermans Bend a genuinely on the way place with good connectivity in several (though not all) directions.
Conclusion
This plan presents some worthwhile transport initiatives for Fishermans Bend. It also has ambitious job numbers and mode share targets. Especially for an area plagued with poor transport network geometry and
low business and developer confidence, exacerbated by no date targets.
These problems won't fix themselves.
A key question for the state government is how much it wants a dense and vibrant Fishermans Bend to succeed. If it is a lot it must lead by building Metro 2, preferably a version with wider network benefits, especially for Melbourne's west.
On the other hand if it doesn't regard Fishermans Bend as important then maybe it should say so, seeking instead to redirect investment, jobs and people to areas with good
on the way rail access.
An index to all Useful Networks is here
