UN 203: How the Metro Tunnel could aid bayside bus reform

The upgrade of the Sandringham line to every 10 minutes weekdays interpeak as will  happen when the Metro Tunnel opens could make bus reform in the area easier and cheaper. Why? More frequent trains mean greater flexibility for bus frequencies. Which means more efficient scheduling according to network role, usage, available buses and run times. 

Routes 600/922/923 are a confusing mess that has flummoxed bus users between St Kilda, Sandringham and Southland for more than 20 years. Two of those three routes have long gaps and short operating hours. And they don't go all the way all the week. The Brighton portions of the routes also parallel the train line and doesn't get much use. Their presentation is a mess on the PTV website and the high combined frequency on portions is undersold, lessening potential usage.

So there's a big argument for reform, especially if you can do it without spending much money. Which you wouldn't want to anyway as there are stronger patronage and social needs justifications for radically boosting buses in areas like Springvale and Dandenong versus the likes of Brighton or Beaumaris. 

I covered the 600/900/923 mess in detail nearly 5 years ago, presenting a simplified network featuring a Route 600 every 15 (instead of every 30) minutes as the main service through the Beaumaris area. That required some offsetting cuts, eg reducing the 825 from every 20 to every 30 minutes so it was vaguely self-funding, especially if reforms were made to the large number of lightly used north-south routes in the Brighton area that paralleled the train.  

Route 600 is not that strongly used that it needs a 15 minute interpeak service. But, as the main route in the area and to deliver a service upgrade, leaving it at every 30 minutes (like the abandoned 2015 Transdev greenfields network tried to do) was inadequate. 20 minutes is probably the 'sweet spot' but it  doesn't mesh with trains currently every 15 minutes at Sandringham. Maybe this was one of the reasons why fixing Route 600 and related routes has occupied the 'too hard' basket for a decade since? 

Can the Metro Tunnel help?

In Perth when they do a major rail project they comprehensively reform most of the buses that connect to the line being extended or altered. Examples include Airport line, Yanchep extension, Morley-Ellenbrook line, Thornlie - Cockburn line, Byford extension and more. And when they do works necessitating long rail shutdowns (like the Armadale line) they will use this as an opportunity to do bus reform, some of which is likely to endure after rail services resume. 

With minor exceptions involving a handful of routes the Victorian DTP of 2025 is less reform-capable than its Perth counterparts. And even where more routes are involved, such as associated with the recent and welcome Ballarat line weekend frequency upgrade, the job might only be half-done. For example leaving weekday bus timetables in areas like Melton untouched, sometimes with lower frequencies than on weekends.

Could a revitalised DTP do better, and thus widen the benefits of the government's considerable rail investment program? Keep reading for one of many potential examples. 

The Metro Tunnel associated rail network changes starting later this year gives such an opportunity to break a decade of inaction regarding the Route 600 and related others near the Sandringham line.

How? It's all to do with a cascading effect that even affects the previously splendidly isolated Sandringham line. 

In the south-east this starts with the lines to Dandenong being taken out of the City Loop and routed through the Metro Tunnel to Footscray and the Sunbury line. This creates an empty City Loop portal that is occupied by the reconfigured Frankston line. These services are no longer formed by Werribee/Williamstown and/or Laverton trains which will now operate to Sandringham.

Trains on the west side operate every 20 minutes each whereas the Sandringham line is every 15 minutes weekday interpeak. To ensure reliable timetabling the Sandringham line will be upgraded to a 10 minute frequency so that two out of every three interpeak weekday trains through Newport run through to Sandringham. Basically replicating what happens now with Frankston on the cross-city group. 

This ten minute frequency for Sandringham gives some extra choices with regards bus frequencies, with 10, 20 or 30 minutes all harmonising with trains.

Having a choice of bus frequencies is good because it means that there's more flexibility to pick service levels that best meet a route's network role and patronage needs while still connecting with trains. There are also scheduling efficiencies as bus layovers can be optimised to be neither too tight to be unreliable nor too slack to be wasteful for a given route length. 

Hence a Route 600 bus every 20 minutes could meet every second train off-peak. The same could happen in the peak period with a 15 minute bus frequency meeting trains every 7.5 min. On weekends a 20 minute bus frequency could meet every train at Sandringham. Overall it looks a very neat arrangement. 

Network concept

The map below shows the concept. It includes not just the 600 but other potential network changes involving north-south routes in the area.  

The 600 has the same alignment as current between Southland and Sandringham. To bring it nearer to shops on Hampton Rd I've terminated it at Hampton Station, where there is a small bus interchange.

Service would be much simplified compared because for most of the corridor the higher frequency on the 600 would replace the confusing 600/922/923 trio. However coverage of areas away from the 600 would be maintained through a new local route that I've called 608 between Southland and Mentone.   

To facilitate connectivity between those who might wish to travel north of Hampton, this network option has the existing Route 603 starting at Hampton rather than Brighton Beach. Hampton is a much stronger terminus with local shops and other buses. Also on weekdays interpeak Route 603 would operate at the same frequency as the 600, potentially permitting a consistent timed connection if planners considered this important enough. There may even be scheduled through trips for school traffic if needed (with the implications of the free under 18s travel next year an influencing factor). 

Bus routes are thinned out a bit in the Brighton area compared to now. Currently there is a large number of bus routes that run north-south, parallel to the train (which will gain increased frequency on weekdays). Usage is not particularly high. If retention of a bus on St Kilda St is considered important options here include adding a kink to Route 603 or extending Route 626 from Brighton via there to Elsternwick (which would also provide connectivity to shops at Brighton). 

Off the map but very significant is a major boost for Route 606. Currently this unevenly overlaps the 600/922/923 through the Elwood area with Route 600 at certain times not operating. This is swept away in favour of a consistent, more frequent and longer operating hours Route 606 operating every 20 minutes or so all week. All the routes mentioned are run by Kinetic except 606 and 626 which are CDC. Reform in the Elwood area might also be done in conjunction with providing a stronger western terminus for Route 630. 

To summarise the network outcome could be something like:

* 600 Hampton - Southland every 20 min 7 days with a 15 min service in weekday peaks 
* New 608 Southland - Mentone local route every 60 min to replace parts of 922 and 923
* Extend 603 to Hampton
* Upgrade 606 to every 15-20 min weekdays, every 20 min weekends with longer hours
* Potential St Kilda St coverage retained by either modified 603 or extended 626.

A potential redistribution of services could be along these lines: 

Conclusion 

The Metro Tunnel opening can provide opportunity for bus network reform in the most unlikely of places. 

Melbourne does not have as strong a record as say Perth when it comes to maximising the benefits of infrastructure builds to reform bus networks. 

However it is something we should be starting to do better.

Addressing long-standing network complexities such as on this bayside corridor could be a good start. 

Comments on this network concept are appreciated and can be left below. 

Index to Useful Network items here