If you want a bus route to be upgraded it may be easier if proponents can identify some operational savings. That way DTP doesn't need to run to Treasury for recurrent funding. Although there are still small one-off set-up costs that DTP needs to find as well as its internal capacity to add to its work program.
Savings can come from either the route you're upgrading (straightening, shortening, removing any timetable 'fat' or adjusting frequencies) or another route in the area. The latter is more controversial but has bigger potential overall gains, with the Doncaster timetable reforms earlier this year being a successful example.
Route 503 profile
Let's look at Route 503 between Essendon and Brunswick East along Albion St. It is a direct east-west route intersecting with two train lines and many trams. The catchment is not posh. There is significant housing development, including 'community and social housing'.
It wasn't always thus; back in 1955 the Albion St forerunner of today's 503 ran frequently until midnight with substantial Sunday afternoon service too. Services got cut as the area de-industrialised and people moved away.
But the increased traffic and housing density make Sunday service on routes like 503 and 506 a matter that should be back on the agenda.
Usage numbers back this up. Since the 800 bus got 7 day service, the 506 (another east-west Brunswick route) took over the title as Melbourne's busiest bus route without Sunday service. The 508 has Sunday service but it's only every 40 minutes.
Route 503, at 21 boardings per hour on a Saturday, is quieter than Dandenong's 804 or the 506. But it is still in the top fifth or so of buses lacking Sunday service, beating both the 284 and 285 (which recently did gain 7 day service).
So regardless of the others, the case for 7 day service on the 503 is strong, especially if a way could be found to fund it.
The 503 is mapped below. It is about as simple as a bus route can get. Except for a curious Saturday afternoon deviation at the Essendon end.
Both numbers are a long way from being the least productive bus route in Melbourne. For that you'd need to look at the productivity for the 941 - 982 Night Network only buses.
Nearby route 951
The 951 is one of those 1am - 5am Night Network only routes. It operating between Brunswick and Glenroy with timing to connect with Upfield line trains.
Like most dedicated Night Network routes usage is apparently low. I don't have figures I can rely on but it would likely be a small fraction of daytime routes.
The social value in retaining the 951 should not be discounted. But there may well be a point where its usage is such that there is even higher social value in running a high patronage potential route like 503 seven days instead.
Potential Route 503 service improvements
An upgraded 7 day Route 503 is likely to be strongly used. There may be an 'overall good' argument in favour of its upgrade even if trips were removed on other routes like the 509 and 951.
503 is quite a short route with an end-to-end run time of about 23 to 26 minutes (based on the Saturday timetable). A single bus could efficiently provide an hourly Sunday service. That would need approximately 12 live operating hours per week to provide a minimum standards service (ie approx 8am to 9pm). That annualises to over 600 live hours per year extra. If run times are too tight to stop delays cascading potential may exist to bring in another bus from the depot for the afternoon.
Another 2 live hours per week could provide some after 7pm trips on Saturdays. Annualised that is over 100 live hours per year extra service. The lumpy Saturday timetable could be made a regular every 30 minutes during the day. This should not require more trips in the timetable than now.
It may be possible to extend weekday span by altering interpeak spacing from a variable 25-30 minutes to a flat 30 minutes. That is the same number of live bus trips, although longer driver hours would need to be rostered to accommodate the longer spread. A 30 minute service does not harmonise with trains but the current 25-30 minute service doesn't either. And there would be 'greater good' gains from a 'memory' 30 minute timetable.
To summarise around 700 live hours per year extra is required to deliver longer spans and 7 day service on the 503. Most of that is on Sunday which is notable as the cost of that is more than if those hours are on a weekday.
Funding
Where might extra hours be obtained?
Starting with quietest routes first, not running Route 951 would offset about half of that, with about 350 hours saved.
Not running 509 on a Saturday would save about 180 hours annually (or 3 live hours per Saturday).
More than that is needed to fully fund.
Not running any 509 weekday trips would save 850 hours. That should be more than enough but is likely to be controversial given the history.
A middle ground might involve keeping some 509 trips as an occasional shopper type service. Noting that since it is very close a significant proportion of Route 509 users would benefit from the upgraded 503.
Planning here would need to involve consultation with passengers with regards to how long they need on Sydney Rd or Barkly Square so that timings work for them. Given rider demographics this engagement should be done in-person on board the bus, not on-line. Such consultation would need to be sufficiently wide to include those who would benefit from a 503 upgrade.
Conclusion
A strong exists for Route 503 to operate a 7 day service and longer operating hours.
It may be possible to fund this by running fewer trips on quieter routes.
This may produce an overall good by making local buses simpler and more useful.
If the hourly Sunday service envisaged does well then consideration could be given to operating it more frequently. Though arguably the longer Route 508 in the area (currently every 40 min) has a higher claim to go to every 30 minutes first due to its high usage.
Just because we can do something doesn't necessarily mean we should. Comments on this invited below.
See other Timetable Tuesday items here
3 comments:
Having had mates living in the area in question, honest opinion, nah, not needed.
Yes, the apartment blocks you're talking about are fairly dense, this being said, there's not much demand east-west, compared to it's neighbours (504/06/08/10/13/14). But I feel there's much better options to upgrade, for a lower cost.
Swapping the Essendon end of 503 & 510 (as has been proposed many a time) would go a long way toward the upgrade.
Evening out the frequency of 503 (from 25 to 30 off-peak weekdays, and probably some Saturday trimming) would also help. Dropping some of the 10 min patches on 506 back to 15, could also be another option, if more controversial.
As for where the 951 cut should go. I feel night network on the 508 would be a much better and more pressing use, given the demand it actually has.
This would leave a gap in the Hadfield & West Coburg area, of which I'm not sure the demand would be there. If could be gotten round with a night 534 (or night 561), but even then, it's rather pointless.
The 509 definitely needs a rethink, and really should be a council operated minibus, on demand, and funded with the retirement home. Anything more than that is wasting a fair bit of money.
The 503's unusual frequent and long-hours history most likely comes from being a feeder for the 96 tram, maybe its old enemy Dysons' 508 took most of its work when the 503's (now also run by Dysons after Moonee Valley Coaches was bought out) timetable was cut to within an inch of its life, as the latter still has its frequent long-hours timetable which even operates later on Sundays than my lowly old 901 SmartBus which stops shortly after 9PM.
By long hours, you mean finishing at 7pm Monday-Saturday? Might be worth checking the 503 timetable first there Heihachi.
As for the midnight services, remembering the inner city density of Melbourne, especially until the 70's, and the amount of workers that would've likely taken the service, it's not surprising. Nothing to do with the 96.
Post a Comment