Same government, same department, similar parts of Melbourne. Yet very different network outcomes. This is a story of how bus reform can go right - and wrong - in Melbourne's northern suburbs.
And how despite good intentions there's still big service planning quality differences in 2025.
There may be lessons for your area too, so keep reading.
About one success story and one failure story.
And how despite good intentions there's still big service planning quality differences in 2025.
There may be lessons for your area too, so keep reading.
About one success story and one failure story.
Route 390's start, rise and rise
Four years ago, if you wanted to travel from Craigieburn to Mernda by public transport you would have needed to get a train, bus and then another train. As well as the double changing there was a lot of pot luck with waiting times. That's because neither the 20 minute Craigieburn nor Mernda train frequencies harmonised with the Route 901 bus that came every 15 or 30 minutes.
The train and 901 timetables haven't substantially changed but you can now get a direct bus between Craigieburn and Mernda, saving time and transfers. And connecting the fast growing frontier suburb of Wollert in the middle.
Labor (or for that matter the coalition) didn't say much about bus or train services in the 2018 state election campaign. In a low interest rate financial environment that screamed 'borrow borrow borrow' this was the peak of 'Big Build' mania with the North-East Link and Suburban Rail Loop added to the government's already underway level crossing removal program. However local Labor members, who had an above average record at getting new bus services added, managed to get a Craigieburn to Mernda bus added to the party's 2018 re-election platform.
Route 390 born
The government was returned with an increased majority. The promised Craigieburn - Mernda bus was funded in the 2019 state budget. There would have been planning work later that year and in 2020. Tenders were called in early 2021, with the service starting in October 2021 as Route 390. The first timetable had off-peak services every 40 minutes and a peak service every 30 minutes. However morning operating starts were a little late.
Subsequent upgrades
Unlike most other bus routes, the 390 bus has got successive service upgrades in most years since. Handily timed to start before the 2022 state election, this one modestly improved peak frequency and extended operating hours.
The train and 901 timetables haven't substantially changed but you can now get a direct bus between Craigieburn and Mernda, saving time and transfers. And connecting the fast growing frontier suburb of Wollert in the middle.
Labor (or for that matter the coalition) didn't say much about bus or train services in the 2018 state election campaign. In a low interest rate financial environment that screamed 'borrow borrow borrow' this was the peak of 'Big Build' mania with the North-East Link and Suburban Rail Loop added to the government's already underway level crossing removal program. However local Labor members, who had an above average record at getting new bus services added, managed to get a Craigieburn to Mernda bus added to the party's 2018 re-election platform.
Route 390 born
The government was returned with an increased majority. The promised Craigieburn - Mernda bus was funded in the 2019 state budget. There would have been planning work later that year and in 2020. Tenders were called in early 2021, with the service starting in October 2021 as Route 390. The first timetable had off-peak services every 40 minutes and a peak service every 30 minutes. However morning operating starts were a little late.
Subsequent upgrades
Unlike most other bus routes, the 390 bus has got successive service upgrades in most years since. Handily timed to start before the 2022 state election, this one modestly improved peak frequency and extended operating hours.
The 390 was clearly on an upward trajectory with another service uplift starting on January 7 2024. Added trips again extended evening operating hours and fixed the late weekday morning starts I flagged earlier as needing attention.
2025 budget delivers for Wollert buses
2025 budget delivers for Wollert buses
After a couple of lean state budgets for buses in Melbourne's north, May 2025's brought further news for the 390 along with other routes in the Wollert area. We didn't get a lot of details then but more came later from local MPs. It was clear Wollert was getting a significantly extended bus network, with my best guess from last month here.
Of note for the 390 is that instead of local routes from Epping stopping short of it, at least three of them would be extended to cross it, creating potential interchange opportunities for those going to Craigieburn or Mernda. As route extensions these typically take longer than simple off-peak frequency boosts due to the extra buses needed. 2 years from budget funding is a historically normal lag time but the government may seek to have them running by the November 2026 state election.
What we do know is that the 390 frequency upgrades funded in the May 20, 2025 budget will commence on September 7, 2025. In other words a lead time of 3 1/2 months or 14 weeks. This is faster than most recent past bus frequency upgrades with typical lag time dropping from 12 months in 2023 and over 6 months in 2024.
What we do know is that the 390 frequency upgrades funded in the May 20, 2025 budget will commence on September 7, 2025. In other words a lead time of 3 1/2 months or 14 weeks. This is faster than most recent past bus frequency upgrades with typical lag time dropping from 12 months in 2023 and over 6 months in 2024.
What will September's timetable bring? Most notable is that the 390 will join the growing club of routes that runs every 20 minutes off peak during the day on weekdays. This is common in Craigieburn but not many other places in the north. Secondly the trend to later operating hours will continue with a midnight Monday to Saturday finish.
Like other Craigieburn routes, weekend frequency will remain at every 40 minutes. Also, like the recently upgraded Werribee routes, peak intervals remain longer than 20 minutes, presumably due to a wish to not increase peak bus requirements.
To summarise, the 390 has been a story of a new direct and increasingly frequent bus route that has averaged about one service upgrade per year. That's more than any other bus route in Melbourne, some of which have lacked upgrades for 30 years.
Implementation has been without fuss and the 390 is now a successful part of the northern metropolitan bus network. Success begets success as they say.
The upcoming Wollert route extensions and upgrades should increase 390's role further as connectivity to it becomes possible at more points and with less waiting. Hopefully after then it will see further upgrades, such as weekends going to every 20 minutes and weekday peaks going to every 15 minutes.
Like other Craigieburn routes, weekend frequency will remain at every 40 minutes. Also, like the recently upgraded Werribee routes, peak intervals remain longer than 20 minutes, presumably due to a wish to not increase peak bus requirements.
To summarise, the 390 has been a story of a new direct and increasingly frequent bus route that has averaged about one service upgrade per year. That's more than any other bus route in Melbourne, some of which have lacked upgrades for 30 years.
Implementation has been without fuss and the 390 is now a successful part of the northern metropolitan bus network. Success begets success as they say.
The upcoming Wollert route extensions and upgrades should increase 390's role further as connectivity to it becomes possible at more points and with less waiting. Hopefully after then it will see further upgrades, such as weekends going to every 20 minutes and weekday peaks going to every 15 minutes.
The planned decline of Bell Street's 513 bus
A few long-standing main road bus routes have almost iconic status. The 246 down Punt Rd, 465 on Buckley St, 788 down the peninsula and 800 along Princes Hwy are all examples. All are more direct, more frequent and busier than surrounding routes.
Network planning decisions can sometimes remove these routes. For example the 903 orbital subsumed the famous 700 down Warrigal Rd. That's not so bad if the service level is maintained. But sometimes it isn't. For example the frequent and high profile Route 600 from Sandringham lost status when about half its trips were transferred to infrequent 922 and 923 routes during an ill-advised network restructure in 2002 (that has never been reversed). Save the thought as similar is happening right now as you'll soon learn.
A few long-standing main road bus routes have almost iconic status. The 246 down Punt Rd, 465 on Buckley St, 788 down the peninsula and 800 along Princes Hwy are all examples. All are more direct, more frequent and busier than surrounding routes.
Network planning decisions can sometimes remove these routes. For example the 903 orbital subsumed the famous 700 down Warrigal Rd. That's not so bad if the service level is maintained. But sometimes it isn't. For example the frequent and high profile Route 600 from Sandringham lost status when about half its trips were transferred to infrequent 922 and 923 routes during an ill-advised network restructure in 2002 (that has never been reversed). Save the thought as similar is happening right now as you'll soon learn.
Bell Street in the north is the equivalent of Warrigal Rd in the east, with it roughly separating pre from post war suburbia. And, like Warrigal Rd it has (or had) an iconic bus route - the 513. For many decades if you were walking or driving along Bell St and saw a bus the chances were high that it would be the 513.
Route 513 history
What we now know as Route 513 dates back at least 70 years with a detailed description below. Then known as the 6A, it ran more frequently than today's 513, especially on Saturdays when a 15 minute frequency operated until 11:30pm. The route was simple, starting at Glenroy then Coburg and then straight down Bell St to Heidelberg.
While PTV sometimes lacks sufficient understanding to accurately communicate bus service changes, with underselling rife, the root cause in this case arises from the routes being made unnecessarily complex.
A close inspection of the September 7 timetables (which PTV apparently didn't do before writing its website and poster material) would reveal that the changes involve one of the routes being chopped up. That's not necessarily bad, and can sometimes be good, especially on long routes that have reliability issues or different service level needs.
The problem is that this piece of butchering is different across the week, confusing not just PTV but passengers too. Currently both routes 513 and 514 operate their full length seven days per week between Eltham and Glenroy. While Route 513 will continue to operate its full length on weekdays, these changes shorten it on weekends to operate between Eltham and Heidelberg only. The missed section includes Bell Street, hence the stop notice above.
That leaves Bell Street with just the 514 on weekends, except for two Saturday morning trips that operate as the 513. The first and shortest of those trips can be just a short 514 trip but for some reason appears in the 513 timetable. However what the stop notice neglects to mention is that the deleted 513 trips are replaced by extra 514 services, thus maintaining (but not increasing) the 40 minute weekend frequency on the busy Bell St - Glenroy section. Still the westbound bus stop timetables on Bell Street and up to Glenroy will look really strange with just two early trips shown on the Saturday 513 timetable.
The sorry mess the 513 is to become is annotated here:
Compared the the timetable this diagram highlights another complexity in that Heidelberg Station is a part-time (weekends-only) stop for the 513. Part-time bus stops are, as a rule, horrid and should be eliminated. But this network change creates a new one.
Service outcomes
Route 513 history
What we now know as Route 513 dates back at least 70 years with a detailed description below. Then known as the 6A, it ran more frequently than today's 513, especially on Saturdays when a 15 minute frequency operated until 11:30pm. The route was simple, starting at Glenroy then Coburg and then straight down Bell St to Heidelberg.
The route became the 513 in 1971 when Melbourne buses were overhauled to a three digit system. The alignment was unchanged with the map below showing how simple it then was.
513 becomes complex (mid 1970s)
When development spreads there is sometimes a temptation to extend a bus route. This is what happened to the 513 in an eastward direction. A problem here is that the catchment to the east has lower population density and patronage potential compared to the existing busy catchment along Bell St. It was also dispersed, going out in several corridors from an existing terminus. Such corridors may already have buses, like you can see with the 519 and 520 at the far right of the above map.
For possibly understandable reasons the old routes 519 from Eltham via Lower Plenty and the 520 from Eltham via Greensborough were merged with the 513 at Heidelberg sometime in the mid 1970s. This gave those passengers a one seat ride to destinations on Bell Street. You can see this on the 1978 network map.
However merging added confusion for those taking the 513 eastward. This is because although all trips went to Eltham, some trips went there via Greensborough and others went via Lower Plenty. Thus a simple and legible route with high patronage potential via Bell Street became complicated. Unlike (mostly radial) routes that share a common corridor and fan out to different destinations you couldn't just look at the buses destination and be sure you were on the right one.
The Glenroy - Bell St - Rosanna portion of the 513 ran every 15 minutes peaks and 20 minutes interpeak. The eastern portions gained half that service, partly reflecting its low patronage potential, at least for the Lower Plenty section. When minimum service standards came in the 513 had half frequency on weekends - that is every 40 minutes on the Bell St section and every 80 minutes on the eastern legs. The latter did not meet the 60 minute minimum service standards then being rolled out but that was quietly ignored especially as sections were overlapped by other routes.
The 1970s alignment with its complicated alternating Greensborough / Lower Plenty routing stayed intact for over 40 years. Some background is in my 2019 write-up here.
However change was soon to happen. Would it simplify the 513 or sow the seeds for something worse in the future? I'll answer that after covering the forces driving (or blocking) bus network reform at the time.
Bus planning battles
Ben Carroll was an ambitious rising minister who gained the public transport portfolio in 2020 in the ministerial reshuffle following the Adem Somyurek affair. Management through the pandemic dominated state government activities including in transport. When normality returned he was keen to pursue a reform agenda in public transport services - something that had been side-lined under previous ministers Jacinta Allan (whose love was infrastructure builds) and the then inexperienced Melissa Horne.
However not all under him were paddling in the same direction.
Simplifying complex but high patronage potential main road bus routes like the 513 were prime aims for various Infrastructure Victoria papers on buses as well as Victoria's Bus Plan from 2021. For a while it looked as if something big was going to happen with an implementation plan promised and a bus reform team set up in the Department. I generally like this approach provided it is done in manageable clusters similar to past Useful Network items.
When development spreads there is sometimes a temptation to extend a bus route. This is what happened to the 513 in an eastward direction. A problem here is that the catchment to the east has lower population density and patronage potential compared to the existing busy catchment along Bell St. It was also dispersed, going out in several corridors from an existing terminus. Such corridors may already have buses, like you can see with the 519 and 520 at the far right of the above map.
For possibly understandable reasons the old routes 519 from Eltham via Lower Plenty and the 520 from Eltham via Greensborough were merged with the 513 at Heidelberg sometime in the mid 1970s. This gave those passengers a one seat ride to destinations on Bell Street. You can see this on the 1978 network map.
However merging added confusion for those taking the 513 eastward. This is because although all trips went to Eltham, some trips went there via Greensborough and others went via Lower Plenty. Thus a simple and legible route with high patronage potential via Bell Street became complicated. Unlike (mostly radial) routes that share a common corridor and fan out to different destinations you couldn't just look at the buses destination and be sure you were on the right one.
The Glenroy - Bell St - Rosanna portion of the 513 ran every 15 minutes peaks and 20 minutes interpeak. The eastern portions gained half that service, partly reflecting its low patronage potential, at least for the Lower Plenty section. When minimum service standards came in the 513 had half frequency on weekends - that is every 40 minutes on the Bell St section and every 80 minutes on the eastern legs. The latter did not meet the 60 minute minimum service standards then being rolled out but that was quietly ignored especially as sections were overlapped by other routes.
The 1970s alignment with its complicated alternating Greensborough / Lower Plenty routing stayed intact for over 40 years. Some background is in my 2019 write-up here.
However change was soon to happen. Would it simplify the 513 or sow the seeds for something worse in the future? I'll answer that after covering the forces driving (or blocking) bus network reform at the time.
Bus planning battles
Ben Carroll was an ambitious rising minister who gained the public transport portfolio in 2020 in the ministerial reshuffle following the Adem Somyurek affair. Management through the pandemic dominated state government activities including in transport. When normality returned he was keen to pursue a reform agenda in public transport services - something that had been side-lined under previous ministers Jacinta Allan (whose love was infrastructure builds) and the then inexperienced Melissa Horne.
However not all under him were paddling in the same direction.
Simplifying complex but high patronage potential main road bus routes like the 513 were prime aims for various Infrastructure Victoria papers on buses as well as Victoria's Bus Plan from 2021. For a while it looked as if something big was going to happen with an implementation plan promised and a bus reform team set up in the Department. I generally like this approach provided it is done in manageable clusters similar to past Useful Network items.
But others had different visions for buses. They wanted fixed routes to be replaced with flexible routes summoned through an app. The idea of a bus on demand (with the impression gained that this was on your terms, not theirs) proved alluring, especially to those who hadn't researched the history and past poor records of similar schemes. I am not sympathetic to this approach as it is neither economical, efficient nor helps as many people as fixed route reform could.
Another view, favoured by some in academia, was that flexible routes (which are inherently low productivity) could produce savings that could enable more frequent main routes operating on a sparse grid for an overall greater good. Again I am wary, especially in densely populated or high social needs areas where even neighbourhood fixed routes are more productive than any flexible route can be.
The department at the time did not have a secretary good (or allowed to be good) at gardening; that is one ruthless enough to kill the weeds so that the desired productive crop could flourish. That may have led to the following:
Three failures in six months
The above intellectual currents gave traction to divergent ideas for buses in 2022, which also happened to be a state election year. Those directly relevant to the future of Route 513 included:
* The May 2022 state budget that funded a FlexiRide route for Greensborough with significant public consultation and analysis work documented here.
* The decision to split the 513 into two Glenroy to Eltham routes commencing on 3 July 2022.
* The September 2022 announcement that there would be large bus network reviews across Melbourne's north and north-east.
None of the three can be considered successes when measured against Bus Plan objectives of creating a simpler, more direct and more useful bus network, although the network reviews had potential to be. Here's what happened to each:
The Greensborough FlexiRide proposal was abandoned, but not before years of indecision. Significant development work and consultation was wasted to arrive at an outcome that could reasonably have been foreseen. As a result people in the area have gone without public transport improvements that could have been implemented two years ago.
The bus network reviews for the north and north-east appear dead. The timing of their announcement and the lack of funding in the 2023 and 2024 state budgets make them look like a pre-election ruse. As they involved multiple complex networks totalling at least 100 routes the government may have bitten off more than they could chew. Smaller more focused reviews involving one or two high-patronage/high benefit routes and maybe three or four local services may have had a greater chance of success, especially if several could be done at once in different parts of Melbourne.
Then there's the 513 split of July 2022. That was basically a route numbering change so that the via Greensborough variant of Route 513 got renumbered as 514. Arguably it aided legibility but it also added complexity for the majority of passengers who only use the route's busiest portion between Heidelberg and Glenroy. This is because instead of one route every 20 minutes there are now two route numbers, each every 40 minutes on weekdays, to look up. That adds space on signage and means there are more stop timetables to look up on the website and at stops. The reduced service also erodes the profile of the long-standing Route 513 as the Bell St bus without sound rationale.
The clutter of excessive routes is particularly extreme just west of Coburg with the problem getting worse over time. For instance the 1971 map had just a single route (the 513) operating along Bell Street there. Unlike in the south-east the 903 orbital SmartBus was layered over existing routes including the 513. A bit later the 561 was extended west to Pascoe Vale, without reforms to existing routes.
Then in 2022, contrary to the simplification ethos of the Bus Plan and reports from people like IV, the 513 was diluted with frequency halved to accommodate the new 514, making the network even more complex with an even more confusing array of low frequency routes. The result is that, especially on the weekends, buses come at uneven intervals with no route better than every 30 minutes with 40 minutes more typical. In contrast, a genuinely reformed network would likely reduce the number of routes to maybe one or two but with each running every 10-15 minutes over wide operating hours all week.
Even if you weren't going to do the above more radical reform immediately, was the 2022 513 / 514 split a step that would make it easier? Unfortunately it wasn't. Indeed it was arguably counterproductive due to the extra route number on Bell Street and a bad choice on which eastern section became the 514 and which remained as 513.
What would optimised service frequency look like?
Another view, favoured by some in academia, was that flexible routes (which are inherently low productivity) could produce savings that could enable more frequent main routes operating on a sparse grid for an overall greater good. Again I am wary, especially in densely populated or high social needs areas where even neighbourhood fixed routes are more productive than any flexible route can be.
The department at the time did not have a secretary good (or allowed to be good) at gardening; that is one ruthless enough to kill the weeds so that the desired productive crop could flourish. That may have led to the following:
Three failures in six months
The above intellectual currents gave traction to divergent ideas for buses in 2022, which also happened to be a state election year. Those directly relevant to the future of Route 513 included:
* The May 2022 state budget that funded a FlexiRide route for Greensborough with significant public consultation and analysis work documented here.
* The decision to split the 513 into two Glenroy to Eltham routes commencing on 3 July 2022.
* The September 2022 announcement that there would be large bus network reviews across Melbourne's north and north-east.
None of the three can be considered successes when measured against Bus Plan objectives of creating a simpler, more direct and more useful bus network, although the network reviews had potential to be. Here's what happened to each:
The Greensborough FlexiRide proposal was abandoned, but not before years of indecision. Significant development work and consultation was wasted to arrive at an outcome that could reasonably have been foreseen. As a result people in the area have gone without public transport improvements that could have been implemented two years ago.
The bus network reviews for the north and north-east appear dead. The timing of their announcement and the lack of funding in the 2023 and 2024 state budgets make them look like a pre-election ruse. As they involved multiple complex networks totalling at least 100 routes the government may have bitten off more than they could chew. Smaller more focused reviews involving one or two high-patronage/high benefit routes and maybe three or four local services may have had a greater chance of success, especially if several could be done at once in different parts of Melbourne.
Then there's the 513 split of July 2022. That was basically a route numbering change so that the via Greensborough variant of Route 513 got renumbered as 514. Arguably it aided legibility but it also added complexity for the majority of passengers who only use the route's busiest portion between Heidelberg and Glenroy. This is because instead of one route every 20 minutes there are now two route numbers, each every 40 minutes on weekdays, to look up. That adds space on signage and means there are more stop timetables to look up on the website and at stops. The reduced service also erodes the profile of the long-standing Route 513 as the Bell St bus without sound rationale.
The clutter of excessive routes is particularly extreme just west of Coburg with the problem getting worse over time. For instance the 1971 map had just a single route (the 513) operating along Bell Street there. Unlike in the south-east the 903 orbital SmartBus was layered over existing routes including the 513. A bit later the 561 was extended west to Pascoe Vale, without reforms to existing routes.
Then in 2022, contrary to the simplification ethos of the Bus Plan and reports from people like IV, the 513 was diluted with frequency halved to accommodate the new 514, making the network even more complex with an even more confusing array of low frequency routes. The result is that, especially on the weekends, buses come at uneven intervals with no route better than every 30 minutes with 40 minutes more typical. In contrast, a genuinely reformed network would likely reduce the number of routes to maybe one or two but with each running every 10-15 minutes over wide operating hours all week.
Even if you weren't going to do the above more radical reform immediately, was the 2022 513 / 514 split a step that would make it easier? Unfortunately it wasn't. Indeed it was arguably counterproductive due to the extra route number on Bell Street and a bad choice on which eastern section became the 514 and which remained as 513.
What would optimised service frequency look like?
As was understood in the 1970s (even though the solution chosen then to have two eastern legs of the 513 as the same route number was not elegant) it was fair for the Glenroy and Bell St sections to run more frequently than the quieter eastern portions. This is due to reasons including population density, demographics, usage and overlaps from other routes.
Assisted by the stop usage map from Philip Mallis, I compiled a service and needs analysis for the 513 and 514 corridor between Glenroy and Eltham (click image below for a better view).
September 2025 513 / 514 / 517 changes
Assisted by the stop usage map from Philip Mallis, I compiled a service and needs analysis for the 513 and 514 corridor between Glenroy and Eltham (click image below for a better view).
The result is that you run the Glenroy to Heidelberg portion as frequently as you can afford while each section east of Heidelberg gets a minimum standard type service (but not more) that is well coordinated with trains.
In more detail, the St Georges Rd - Oriel Rd section of Bell St (especially) deserves higher frequency as 513/514 is the unique route in the area. But the eastern section of the routes has many overlaps including the 513 between Viewbank and Eltham and the 514 between Greensborough and Eltham. The latter is particularly notable as the route it overlaps with is the much more frequent 902 SmartBus. While 513/514 also overlaps with other routes in the Coburg area the difference is the eastern sections have much lower boardings per bus stop so the eastern overlaps have less justification to exist.
Existing 513/514 service levels are sort of consistent with that. The busier section (where both routes overlap) runs every 15 min peak, 20 min interpeak and 40 min weekends. Each of the quieter eastern portions has twice those gaps.
Key issues are the low weekend frequency on all sections of the route. Every 40 minutes is inadequate for a main road bus corridor. And the 80 minute frequencies on the quieter sections do not meet minimum service standards. Hold those thoughts as we look at what's planned to start next month.
Existing 513/514 service levels are sort of consistent with that. The busier section (where both routes overlap) runs every 15 min peak, 20 min interpeak and 40 min weekends. Each of the quieter eastern portions has twice those gaps.
Key issues are the low weekend frequency on all sections of the route. Every 40 minutes is inadequate for a main road bus corridor. And the 80 minute frequencies on the quieter sections do not meet minimum service standards. Hold those thoughts as we look at what's planned to start next month.
September 2025 513 / 514 / 517 changes
Emerging from the ruins of Greensborough's ill-advised and now aborted FlexiRide was the will and funding to upgrade bus routes 513, 514 and 517 instead. In theory that's a good idea as I said at the time.
Back then I didn't have the details apart from an assumption that planning would be vaguely sensible. That is most resources would go to where they would be most beneficial, even if there were still political and minimum service standards imperatives to improve all sections of the routes. And that complex variations would be avoided given that network simplification is a core Bus Plan aim.
Back then I didn't have the details apart from an assumption that planning would be vaguely sensible. That is most resources would go to where they would be most beneficial, even if there were still political and minimum service standards imperatives to improve all sections of the routes. And that complex variations would be avoided given that network simplification is a core Bus Plan aim.
The 517 was indeed sensibly planned with the improvement to an even 20 minute weekday headway that harmonises with trains likely to be successful. Especially in its high needs Northland to Rosanna segment and to some extent parts of Greensborough. So I'll mainly discuss the 513/514 changes which are so complex that not even PTV understands them.
When first published on August 15, 2025 (and still uncorrected 11 days later on August 26 when last checked) the Transport Victoria website item has both omissions and errors for the 513 and 514 as below.
When first published on August 15, 2025 (and still uncorrected 11 days later on August 26 when last checked) the Transport Victoria website item has both omissions and errors for the 513 and 514 as below.
The above claims more weekday service than actually runs on each route while failing to mention the weekend frequency boost at the Eltham end of both routes.
Meanwhile PTV posters at stops on Bell Street are whipping up false fears that they're taking half your weekend buses away by failing to mention the 514 service increases (photo below 22/8/2025).
While PTV sometimes lacks sufficient understanding to accurately communicate bus service changes, with underselling rife, the root cause in this case arises from the routes being made unnecessarily complex.
A close inspection of the September 7 timetables (which PTV apparently didn't do before writing its website and poster material) would reveal that the changes involve one of the routes being chopped up. That's not necessarily bad, and can sometimes be good, especially on long routes that have reliability issues or different service level needs.
The problem is that this piece of butchering is different across the week, confusing not just PTV but passengers too. Currently both routes 513 and 514 operate their full length seven days per week between Eltham and Glenroy. While Route 513 will continue to operate its full length on weekdays, these changes shorten it on weekends to operate between Eltham and Heidelberg only. The missed section includes Bell Street, hence the stop notice above.
That leaves Bell Street with just the 514 on weekends, except for two Saturday morning trips that operate as the 513. The first and shortest of those trips can be just a short 514 trip but for some reason appears in the 513 timetable. However what the stop notice neglects to mention is that the deleted 513 trips are replaced by extra 514 services, thus maintaining (but not increasing) the 40 minute weekend frequency on the busy Bell St - Glenroy section. Still the westbound bus stop timetables on Bell Street and up to Glenroy will look really strange with just two early trips shown on the Saturday 513 timetable.
The sorry mess the 513 is to become is annotated here:
Essentially this change reverts to the sort of crazy weekday / weekend variations that we mostly but not entirely ditched about 15-20 years ago. Its introduction on a new timetable is inconsistent with Victoria's Bus Plan that sought simpler, not more complex, bus routes.
PTV/TV are rarely inclined to explain things with maps or diagrams. Notwithstanding ministerial statements like "The time for Bus is Now", communicating bus service changes appear a low organisational priority. Maybe it's just as well as such a diagram might look like this embarrassment:
Compared the the timetable this diagram highlights another complexity in that Heidelberg Station is a part-time (weekends-only) stop for the 513. Part-time bus stops are, as a rule, horrid and should be eliminated. But this network change creates a new one.
Service outcomes
What is the rationale for this extra complexity? Who benefits?
It's all about the weekends; the weekday pattern doesn't change with both routes continuing all the way.
On weekends everyone along 513 or 514 gets a 40 minute frequency. That's an improvement for those on the Lower Plenty and Greensborough portions that currently get a 40 min weekday / 80 min weekend frequency.
Whereas those on the busier section between Heidelberg and Glenroy retain their existing 40 minute weekend frequency but with trips operated by the 514. In other words the 513 becomes essentially a Monday - Friday only route on this section.
Continuing the weekday pattern where both routes run their full length to Glenroy would have given Bell St the 20 minute weekend service it justifies. However the government was apparently too skint to afford this, nor was willing to find trade-offs elsewhere, so gave us this bodge job instead.
The failure to tackle route reform or timetable trade-offs means that some less populated or patronised areas continue to get more buses than a major section of busy Bell Street. Indeed these changes increase service disparities. For example parts of Lower Plenty get up to triple the service with three routes (including the upgraded section of the 513) providing 4.5 buses per hour in sections. And then there is Route 580 in Eltham that gets a Saturday service every 30 minutes (not meeting trains) versus much busier Bell Street which retains its 40 minute intervals.
It's all about the weekends; the weekday pattern doesn't change with both routes continuing all the way.
On weekends everyone along 513 or 514 gets a 40 minute frequency. That's an improvement for those on the Lower Plenty and Greensborough portions that currently get a 40 min weekday / 80 min weekend frequency.
Whereas those on the busier section between Heidelberg and Glenroy retain their existing 40 minute weekend frequency but with trips operated by the 514. In other words the 513 becomes essentially a Monday - Friday only route on this section.
Continuing the weekday pattern where both routes run their full length to Glenroy would have given Bell St the 20 minute weekend service it justifies. However the government was apparently too skint to afford this, nor was willing to find trade-offs elsewhere, so gave us this bodge job instead.
The failure to tackle route reform or timetable trade-offs means that some less populated or patronised areas continue to get more buses than a major section of busy Bell Street. Indeed these changes increase service disparities. For example parts of Lower Plenty get up to triple the service with three routes (including the upgraded section of the 513) providing 4.5 buses per hour in sections. And then there is Route 580 in Eltham that gets a Saturday service every 30 minutes (not meeting trains) versus much busier Bell Street which retains its 40 minute intervals.
To summarise, next month's 513 / 514 changes appear yet another case of sensible bus network planning and reform in Melbourne's established northern suburbs being pushed out into the never-never.
They misdirect service to areas where it is less needed while neglecting precincts that need it more.
They are also too complex for PTV to understand, as evidenced by multiple communication errors.
And by introducing the same sort of weekday/weekend service variations that we were cleaning up 15 to 20 years ago they represent a step back, not a step forward, in bus service planning.
I would rarely say this, but the 513/514 changes are possibly better dropped than done in their current form. To misquote Sir Rod Eddington, "Doing nothing isnot an option".
And by introducing the same sort of weekday/weekend service variations that we were cleaning up 15 to 20 years ago they represent a step back, not a step forward, in bus service planning.
I would rarely say this, but the 513/514 changes are possibly better dropped than done in their current form. To misquote Sir Rod Eddington, "Doing nothing is
There is not even a 'no funds available' defence as a large north-east wedge, including Templestowe, Greensborough and Eltham, has a concentration of poorly used or duplicative bus routes whose reappraisal could have funded genuine bus network simplification and reform.
That such opportunities were not taken arguably represent the first failure of the new ZEB franchises. The merging of quiet Panorama routes into the Dysons network should have permitted an easier shuffling of resources from low to high patronage routes similar to the successful 2021 and 2025 timetable adjustments on the Manningham Transdev/Kinetic network.
That such opportunities were not taken arguably represent the first failure of the new ZEB franchises. The merging of quiet Panorama routes into the Dysons network should have permitted an easier shuffling of resources from low to high patronage routes similar to the successful 2021 and 2025 timetable adjustments on the Manningham Transdev/Kinetic network.
That they didn't also reflects the fact that just because a revised franchise or a consolidated operator may theoretically facilitate network reform does not necessarily make it happen. The stagnation of ex Reservoir Bus Company routes despite being taken over by a larger operator demonstrates that the low will to simplify bus services in this part of Melbourne has existed for many years.
Future options
What could alternatives that avoided complexity and focused service upgrades where most needed look like?
A potential basic alternative
A basic alternative could involve retaining 513 and 514's full length 7 day service but boosting each to every 60 minutes on weekends. Everyone along the route would gain. Bell St and Glenroy would get a lift from 40 to 30 minutes while the eastern segments would go from every 80 to 60 minutes, thus meeting minimum service standards. This is shown below.
A potential basic alternative
A basic alternative could involve retaining 513 and 514's full length 7 day service but boosting each to every 60 minutes on weekends. Everyone along the route would gain. Bell St and Glenroy would get a lift from 40 to 30 minutes while the eastern segments would go from every 80 to 60 minutes, thus meeting minimum service standards. This is shown below.
What's wrong with it? Very little. The catchment population benefiting from a frequency uplift is vastly more than under the current arrangement. Plus they are likely to have a higher propensity to use buses so there is likely a fare revenue and patronage benefit. Retaining all week consistency would have made communication easier too as it would just be a routine timetable change.
The main criticism is that Bell Street's 30 minute frequency is not harmonised with trains every 20 minutes, unlike the current (and proposed) 40 minute frequency. However in practice, as long as you are increasing frequency and it's going to a more legible clockface number (like 30 minutes is) then I would argue there is an overall greater good. This is particularly in cases where:
(i) a bus route serves stations on many train lines so that a harmonised frequency does not necessarily mean good connections at all stations (some might be consistently bad!)
(ii) the bus route intersects many tram routes that due to their high frequencies just need the bus to be as frequent as possible
(iii) the bus route may intersect other bus routes that don't necessarily operate at train harmonised frequencies but people may wish to change to them (eg the 903 SmartBus every 30 minutes)
(iv) The route has a lot of popular destinations along it so most passengers aren't changing to a train at all
All these apply very strongly to the 513/514 corridor along Bell St. The best outcome would obviously be weekend buses every 20 minutes such as operate on main routes in other parts of Melbourne and on 513/514 during the week. However, failing that, a 30 minute frequency on Bell St far beats the current 40 minute service.
In addition the 60 minute headway on the eastern section provides a memory clockface timetable operating to a minimum standard generally considered appropriate for a local route. It's also better than the current 80 minute service. Having said that there may be opportunities to deliver higher frequencies in conjunction with later network reform.
The above higher benefit concept would require more service kilometres than what is being implemented. However this uplift may be fundable through offsetting adjustments to timetables on low productivity routes such as 578/579, 580 and 582, possibly in that order.
A potential enhanced alternative
The main criticism is that Bell Street's 30 minute frequency is not harmonised with trains every 20 minutes, unlike the current (and proposed) 40 minute frequency. However in practice, as long as you are increasing frequency and it's going to a more legible clockface number (like 30 minutes is) then I would argue there is an overall greater good. This is particularly in cases where:
(i) a bus route serves stations on many train lines so that a harmonised frequency does not necessarily mean good connections at all stations (some might be consistently bad!)
(ii) the bus route intersects many tram routes that due to their high frequencies just need the bus to be as frequent as possible
(iii) the bus route may intersect other bus routes that don't necessarily operate at train harmonised frequencies but people may wish to change to them (eg the 903 SmartBus every 30 minutes)
(iv) The route has a lot of popular destinations along it so most passengers aren't changing to a train at all
All these apply very strongly to the 513/514 corridor along Bell St. The best outcome would obviously be weekend buses every 20 minutes such as operate on main routes in other parts of Melbourne and on 513/514 during the week. However, failing that, a 30 minute frequency on Bell St far beats the current 40 minute service.
In addition the 60 minute headway on the eastern section provides a memory clockface timetable operating to a minimum standard generally considered appropriate for a local route. It's also better than the current 80 minute service. Having said that there may be opportunities to deliver higher frequencies in conjunction with later network reform.
The above higher benefit concept would require more service kilometres than what is being implemented. However this uplift may be fundable through offsetting adjustments to timetables on low productivity routes such as 578/579, 580 and 582, possibly in that order.
A potential enhanced alternative
If ambition, including a 20 minute weekend service on Bell Street, is higher then some broader thinking may be necessary to maximise cost-effectiveness and improve network simplicity.
The concept below has a single Glenroy to Greensborough route operating every 20 minutes (preferably 7 days). I've called this the 513 given the strong historical connection between Bell Street and this iconic route number.
Funding, especially if a 20 minute weekend service is provided, may require network reforms over and above those flagged above. Possibilities might include:
* Replacement of Route 514 between Greensborough and Eltham with a slightly realigned 902 (which is far more frequent than the 513/514 ever was) to reduce duplication and provide savings
* A dedicated Heidelberg - Lower Plenty - Eltham route every 40 to 60 minutes that due to its separateness can be more optimally timed to meet trains. There may also be adjustments to other routes (eg 293, 582 & 901) with a view to reducing overlaps and extending coverage to unserved corridors eg Bolton St.
* Shortening of 517 to operate between Northland and Greensborough with the lower patronised St Helena portion served by a new route (labelled 519) carefully timed to meet trains at Greensborough. It may be possible to plan an arrangement where, at least on weekdays, 517 through-routes via Greensborough to form 518 and 519, with both the latter operating every 40 minutes off-peak.
* Potential rethinking of usage and service levels on other quieter routes such as 381 and 385 subject to this delivering significant 'greater good' benefits.
513 Bell St SmartBus operating frequently 7 days
Scope may exist for the enhanced network above to have an even more frequent 513 (say every 10 - 15 minutes 7 days) operating between Glenroy and Heidelberg as per the 1971 alignment. This would even better align service levels with the high usage potential Bell St bus.
A route review in the Coburg area could identify network overlaps whose reduction could enable more frequent and evenly spaced Bell Street bus services that meet Bus Plan aims even more than previous options here.
Various options exist for retained Heidelberg - Greensborough coverage with a separate local style route timed to meet trains. Potential may exist for this to extend to St Helena to replace the existing 517. Speaking of which, the Northland - Greensborough portion has potential for a higher weekend frequency as indicated on the map above.
The three options above vary in their features. The basic example is simpler to implement and spreads benefits everywhere. Whereas the later two concepts spread benefits to more people and provide increasingly high legibility. But any of the three would be a step towards reversing the indecision, atrophy and failure that has dogged bus network reform in this part of Melbourne's north over many years.
Summary
This has been a look at how one bus route can be introduced, become a success and get further service upgrades. Admittedly the 390 is a direct bus route in an outer housing growth area. Suburbs like Wollert are not unlike Werribee which saw a large anti-government swing in the by-election earlier this year. Thus the 390 (and soon other buses in Wollert) have enjoyed significant political support and thus service funding.
Conversely we have seen a huge amount of deck chair shuffling that has led to nothing but atrophy on the major bus route along northern Melbourne's most famous east-west road. Whether it's been an ill-advised dalliance with time-wasters like flexible route buses, an over-ambitious but unfunded bus review or successive downgrading of an iconic bus route, all roads taken have so far led to failure or confusion. However this is fixable with some potential concepts outlined and resources available for the taking.
No comments:
Post a Comment