UN 237: A new Melbourne PT frequency map

Melbourne's public transport has its share of disruptions, wildly varying service levels and (for buses) limited operating hours and indirect routes. 

But parts of the network are pretty good, with tourists awed by the size of our train and tram systems. 

Every route is equal - how Transport Victoria maps

However, although charged with network marketing, DTP through its Transport Victoria brand has a habit of allowing the good parts of the network be lumped with the bad parts. 'Use the journey planner' is their normal refrain, with no thought given to expanding would-be users' ideas of what is possible first. 

Especially for buses, which have the highest patronage growth potential of the three main modes yet low social licence (as revealed in internal Bus Plan documents tabled in parliament), fixing these perceptions requires (i) changing reality by chopping out the bad bits through bus network reform and (ii) accentuating the positive through good information and marketing. 

Auckland has done both. Its bus network is probably now the best of any similar city in Australia/NZ and, with 15 minute 7 day frequencies on its main routes, certainly beats Melbourne's. AT also understands messaging with it defining a 'frequent promise' with main routes highlighted on maps.  

DTP/Transport Victoria presents buses more or less the same, regardless of how useful or useless they are in reality. This is exacerbated by our wide variation in bus service levels. The Knox example below displays the main road 901 (every 15 min weekdays, 30 min weekends over long hours) at equal prominence to the 757 (8 trips on weekdays, none on weekends). The former is useful for many trips, the latter for only a few.  

If you're house hunting and want to know whether a bus route is useful without having to pore through hundreds of timetables, you won't get much help from DTP/Transport Victoria. They provide basic information (equal for all bus routes) on a take it or leave it basis. Unlike a more dynamic private sector company or even a government business enterprise they appear not to have much of a stake in whether people use buses or not.  

Frequent routes are more useful - some independent maps 

Fortunately there are independently-produced frequency maps for Melbourne's public transport that start where TV's local maps finish. 

There's my interactive frequent network maps here (that has just had an update with Bus 140A added). 

But today's topic is to introduce the amazing new Melbourne frequency map developed by Adam Bain. Available at ptmapmelb.com it is based on midday weekday frequencies. Switchable layers exist for 10, 15, 20 and 40-60 minute frequencies. It is inspired by similar maps for Seattle and Miami.

Just like with Melbourne, Seattle had a disconnect between what was important for passengers and information that was published by the siloed transit bureaucracy. Creating a gap filled by independent map makers and activists.  

You really need to spend some time with ptmapmelb.com. Achieving something that a hundred timetable lookups or journey planner searches will never do, it will change how you view Melbourne's PT network. You can zoom in for more detail but at no point does it become overwhelming. 

To get an idea of high and low service areas I suggest first ticking the 10 minute box and looking at the network. You'll see many (but not all) tram corridors and a few train lines. It's overwhelmingly a radial  inner suburban network with only a handful of cross-radial routes. You'll need to look carefully to see any buses. 

Ticking 15 minutes adds the rest of the tram network, some extra Metro lines in the east and quite a few buses, with the SmartBus orbitals being most prominent. But remember this is a weekday map with services on the latter (especially) collapsing on weekends. 

A substantial growth, particularly in the west and north comes when 20 minutes is selected. Apart from the outer-east this substantially completes the Metro train network, Melton and Geelong V/Line and adds many bus routes. But you will still see large populated areas without coverage. Most prominent gaps include Point Cook, Melton, large parts of Brimbank, Wollert, Epping, Thomastown, Mernda, the entire outer east, Greater Dandenong, Pakenham and Frankston. 

Adding 30 minutes brings up the Belgrave and Lilydale Metro lines as well as large parts of the bus network in the north and east. This include a lot of odd frequencies like 22 and 25 minutes around Epping and Reservoir where connections with trains are particularly poor. 

The much finer drawn 40-60 minute range includes most of the rest of the bus network including the areas listed as missing out on 20 minute service. In the west, north and outer south-east this may be due to an unwillingness to schedule buses every 30 min as they do not meet trains typically running every 20 minutes. If there is not the interest to run buses every 20 minutes then this confines large areas with (at best) a 40 minute service. As well as being good for its own sake, moving to a Metro rail network based on 10 minute core frequencies (as per the NDP) allows a wider range of connecting bus frequencies. 

The final two boxes are for limited service or FlexiRide routes. These routes are common in parts of the outer east (eg around Knox) eg 681, 682, 757, 758 and more. Although developed around 30 or more years ago these areas never got a full bus network then and still don't have one today. If an area has a lot of complex peak, limited service or FlexiRide routes it is likely to be crying out for bus network reform, as in the Reservoir and Knox examples below.  

The frequency finder

I said before that Adam's map was based on midday weekday frequencies. That's a problem because weekend frequencies in Melbourne can vary between 0.25 and 1.5 times weekday interpeak frequencies with Sunday service sometimes a fraction of Saturdays. 

Frequencies may also vary across the day between peak, interpeak and night time bands. Buses (especially) lack consistent operating hours so services may not run when you need to travel. 

However help is at hand through the companion Frequency Finder for trams and buses. 

Frequency Finder lets you find frequency by route by day of week and time of day. There's also a handy span guide and a map that changes colour (to indicate frequency) by line selected.

I deliberately selected a complex route (824) to test whether the graphic would show the more frequent Moorabbin part of the route (every 20 min) differently to the Keysborough end (every 40 min). It did.

However the frequency finder is limited to a single route and not a corridor. Thus overlaps like 250/251, 411/412 or 811/812 will not be shown as higher frequency here unlike they are on the map. 

Conclusion

This map and the accompanying frequency finder will encourage people to see the Melbourne public transport network differently with service have and have not areas really made apparent. This will make it a useful planning and advocacy tool. 

See other Useful Network items

TT 233: Route 140A joins the weekday 'Useful Network'

 

A quick welcome to new bus route 140A (Rockbank to Mt Atkinson) which joined the weekday Useful Network frequency map yesterday. Described by Transport Victoria here, hopefully they will add it to their local area map soon.

The 140A brings Mt Atkinson from having zero public transport to having better than average weekday frequency and operating hours for a Melbourne outer suburb with buses every 20 minutes across most of the day.

On weekends the 140A enjoys wide operating hours that also exceeds what most other new estates get. But at every 40 minutes (which matches the Melton line's limited weekend train service) it doesn't quality for inclusion on my Useful Network frequency maps for Saturday and Sunday.  

The commencement of Route 140A follows a long community campaign to bring public transport to an area that had much promised but nothing delivered in the way of shops or services (even a Westfield shopping centre was promised but they pulled out).

Providing buses was made harder by the area having an incomplete road network. Also some prospective termini (like Rockbank and Caroline Springs stations) are little more than train stations in the middle of nowhere. Until local facilities develop even simple errands that are elsewhere possible on a single bus trip need (as a minimum) at least one and possibly two changes between services, none of which are consistently frequent. I speculated on several bus route options for Mt Atkinson here. 

The 140 as designed gets Mt Atkinson people to Rockbank Station and, when extended, Tarneit Station. This will make it the first bus route that connects the Melton and Geelong lines. 

The long-awaited bus will make a big difference to Mt Atkinson's liveability. Though adding a new $2-5m bus route should be simpler and quicker than a major $200m capital works projects like a level crossing removals, institutional arrangements, funding means and plain political will often makes achieving the latter faster. 

But in Mt Atkinson's case community advocacy led to political urgency and the makeshift interim Route 140A being established. The 'A' standing for alternative route until the full 140 Rockbank - Mt Atkinson - Tarneit route can start later in the year. 

Mt Atkinson residents often refer to their suburb as an 'island' due to the lack of local retail, services and transport. They now have the 140A bus so they can leave their 'island'. But only to a point. The 140A bus itself still appears as an 'island' on the weekday Useful Network map, with no qualifying lines or routes intersecting. This is because while the Melton line is mostly every 20 minutes on weekdays it still has some much longer gaps that stop it qualifying. Hopefully this, along with a 20 min weekend frequency, can be sorted well before the long-promised Melton line electrification happens.  

As for the every 20 minutes Useful Network, what's next? At one time buses every 20 min in growth areas were almost unheard of. Now it seems to be quite normal planning practice, at least on weekdays. Funded 2025 and 2026 budgeted upgrades for trains and buses should give cause to be adding more lines to the Useful Network maps in due course. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

Councils Unite for Better Buses

 

Councils across Melbourne have united to get the State Government to add bus services and improve networks. This comes in the form of a resolution from the Municipal Association of Victoria passed by their State Council at its meeting last month. 

The motion reads: 

That the MAV calls on the Victorian Government to urgently increase recurrent and capital investment to fully implement Victoria’s Bus Plan and metropolitan and regional bus network reform, so that buses become a genuinely frequent, reliable and competitive part of the public transport system. 

This must include higher service frequencies, extended operating hours, faster and more direct routes, and seamless integration with trains, trams, walking, wheeling and cycling networks; adopting technologies that are responsive to demand; priority upgrades in population growth areas, transport-disadvantaged, peri-urban and regional communities; accessible public transport infrastructure; completion of comprehensive metropolitan and regional bus network reviews (including first/last mile corridors identified by councils); and the delivery of a public education program to maximise the return on rail investment, support housing growth, improve equity of access, and materially reduce car dependency across Victoria. 

This is a consolidation of motions from the following councils: 

Details are in MAV's May 2026 Resolutions (pdf). 

Kingston City Council noted the state's high investment in rail projects and level crossing removals but that full benefit from them required higher frequency buses to get people to stations. They also said that key bus routes (such as the orbitals) crossed up to 8 municipalities meaning that benefits from their improvement would be widespread. 

Brimbank City Council pointed out that many services remain infrequent, indirect, or poorly integrated with other modes of transport, while high-demand routes are at capacity and can leave passengers stranded. They sought increased funding for higher frequencies, longer hours and better coordination with trains. 

Merri-bek City Council called on the state to fully implement Victoria's Bus Plan, including the Bus Network Reform Implementation Approach. This would have provided a grid of frequent bus routes across Melbourne. Merri-bek also supports a public education campaign to promote bus use.  

Bass Coast Shire supported a review of regional and peri-urban bus services with a view to improving service levels and connectivity. 

Boroondara City Council also sought state support for the Bus Network Reform Implementation Approach, noting increased need due to higher housing density and to maximise the benefits of the North East Link busway. Council requested a clear response from the state on the state of bus reform in its area. 

Maribyrnong City Council supported increased investment in local bus services, especially evenings, weekends and public holiday. They favoured more direct routes that made buses a viable alternative to driving and targeting of investment towards growth areas and transport disadvantaged areas. 

Port Phillip Council advocated similar to Merri-bek in relation to Bus Plan implementation and the desirability of promoting bus usage. They also supported more accessible tram stops and a fund for active transport improvements. 

MAV is one of many council groupings active in Victoria advocating on public transport matters. The Eastern Transport Coalition for instance recently released its 2026 State Election Platform while the Metropolitan Transport Forum is planning 'town hall' forums before the election. The Northern Councils Alliance has their Connect Melbourne's North campaign with bus reform a focus. WoMEDA in the west also supports rail and bus improvements while the Eastern Region Group of Councils want a long-term transport plan. 

No doubt we'll hear more from these (and others) as we get closer to the state election. 

UN 236: Auditor General reports on bus planning

Today is exactly 5 years (or 1831 days) since Victoria's Bus Plan was released. Possibly not uncoincidentally the Victorian Auditor-General (VAGO) had a report critical of bus network planning in Victoria tabled in parliament yesterday. It makes interesting reading. 

VAGO found that the Department of Transport and Planning had an ambitious vision for buses to be a mass transit option by 2031 but that it could not be achieved given the current state of the network and slow progress. 

Audit also found some performance measures differed from customer experiences, a failure to meet many targets and poor quality data including annual bus patronage being undercounted by about 25 per cent (with wide variations). Some, such as the practicality of measuring punctuality at every stop, were contested by the department (which on this matter I'm inclined to agree with). 

Furthermore, DTP was criticised for not being open with Victorians on Bus Plan progress. Reporting was possibly made harder or more embarrassing by the plan's flagship network reforms being predicated on funding that the Department was unable to win from the budget process or find from internal sources.  

The Department partly accepted or accepted in principle the audit's three recommendations. And it has promised to release a map of main bus corridors through the Plan for Victoria process and use the gap between actual and desired services along them to inform its investment pipeline (that gets put to government for budget funding). 

The audit took 11 months and cost $720 000.  

Before we get onto the audit itself (about which I've made a video), here's some context. 

Background - main events in bus planning

In a nutshell, the state government released a not detailed bus plan in 2021, hired a bus reform team, commissioned consultants reports, developed a detailed Bus Network Reform Implementation Approach, proposed main road buses every 10 minutes and promised bus reform in Melbourne's north and east with public engagement before the 2022 state election. The pilot parts of the scheme were to start in 2025 with a staged plan to reform buses across the rest of Melbourne by 2031. It would have been transformative if it happened, with patronage up tens of millions (making it bigger than projects like North-East Link or Metro Tunnel in moving people). 

 

Safely re-elected, the government effectively scrapped the plan with the 2023 and 2024 state budgets bringing no joy for bus reform in the target areas. However the 2025 and 2026 state budgets saw a revival of interest in buses with piecemeal bus upgrades funded, including some in Melbourne's outer north. While the scale was smaller and the approach was different, the government still sold these uplifts as being part of the Bus Plan.  

This reframing has disappointed the Sustainable Cities Better Buses campaign which supports wholesale rather than piecemeal bus network reform in Melbourne's west. This would have delivered buses every 10 minutes along main roads similar to the grid network envisaged in the Bus Network Reform Implementation Approach. 

This non-performance and a failure to keep Victorians up to date did not get past the Auditor-General in their largely critical report.  

Bus Plan Audit - My video analysis

VAGO's data dashboard on bus service quality

In addition to the pdf report, VAGO has a data dashboard on its website. If you view it full screen you will find extra information such as interactive maps that let you search access to what they define as good quality transport by postcode and suburb.

In my view VAGO greatly overestimates the prevalence of high quality transport by avoiding having service standards on weekends (apart from the route running 7 days). As a minimum they should have used the still influential 2006 MOTC 9pm finish on weekends and not just weekdays. And preferably also had a frequency standard on weekends. SNAMUTS went through a similar exercise for its cut-off and went with every 20 min weekdays and 30 min weekends for its minimum service standard. If these were applied the number of stops considered to have high quality bus service would fall greatly. 

Another distortion that causes VAGO to overestimate the amount of high quality service (even on its loose criteria) comes from frequency averaging. Where a route is relatively frequent in the peaks but infrequent off-peak it may still have an average frequency that tips it over the 20 minute threshold despite its long midday gaps. A key example is the popular 495 in Point Cook that VAGO counts as high quality despite its 40 minute midday weekday headway. 364 in Warrandyte, 385 and 388 around Doreen, 432 in Altona North, 463 in Hillside and 476 in Keilor have similar issues.    

However VAGO also underestimate service on stops served by multiple routes because they take the easy way out of considering data by route rather than on a network basis. A more rigorous method would likely show that corridors like Belmore Rd (Routes 302/304) and much of Altona Meadows (411/412) meet their criteria for high service. VAGO's single route counting differs from customer experience which in cases like the above overwhelmingly treat the routes as a combined more frequent service (even if Transport Victoria isn't always great at describing this). 

If the auditors are going to criticise DTP on their data (which they did for patronage), then their own methods need to be above reproach too. 

What happened when

It should be noted that auditors-general are restricted in the scope of their inquiries. To quote Yes Minister they are interested in the "administration of policy" rather than the "policy of administration". Auditors also do not comment on the appropriateness of policy or political priorities, unlike what I can do here.

Neither VAGO nor myself have access to cabinet in confidence documents, though I have freedom to draw longer bows. This is important because the Bus Plan was substantially unfunded when it came out.

Anything arising from it would be subject to DTP's ability to win budget funding. Despite benefits in terms of number of trips improved or made possible being bigger than 'Big Build' projects like North-East Link or the Metro Tunnel, bus reform never had the glamour of those projects.

This may be attributable to weaknesses on the part of previous DTP bosses in being unable to make the case for funding, a government focused on major capital projects to the exclusion of service uplifts and/or political concern over the elevated risks of the trade-offs inherent in any cost-effective large-scale bus network reform. As transport minister the current premier sought to avoid controversy on network reform matters as you can see here and here.  

Important bus reform milestones in the last five years are as follows: 

June 2021: Minister Ben Carroll releases Victoria's Bus Plan. It has some good principles. But it is unfunded and has little substance, relying on a future Bus Reform Implementation Plan for detail. 

September 2022: State Government announces major bus reviews with Melbourne's North, Melbourne's North-East and Mildura as pilot areas. First round of public consultation is held. 

November 2022: State government returned at election with strong majority. 

May 2023: State Budget funds little new for buses. No sign of Bus Reform Implementation Plan or progress of bus reviews. 

September 2023: Change of premier and transport minister (to Jacinta Allan/Gabrielle Williams)

Late 2023: Cabinet meeting discusses bus reform. Appears to abandon it (not known at the time due to cabinet confidentiality).

March 2024: Trung Luu MP moves Legislative Council motion for internal documents on bus planning to be released. 

May 2024: State Budget funds little new for buses (Route 800 upgrade only with any other budget submissions from DTP rejected). 

May 2025: State Budget funds some upgrades for bus services in Melbourne's outer west and outer north but not the systemic network reform envisaged in the Bus Reform Implementation Plan. Government reframes the language of the Bus Plan, saying anything it does with buses is consistent with the Bus Plan despite the abandonment of the Bus Reform Implementation Plan.  

September 2025: Bus reform documents tabled in Legislative Council. These demonstrate the progress and then abandonment of bus network reform in the large-scale style envisaged. 

May 2026: State Budget funds further bus service uplifts ($100m over 4 years). These concentrate on improved weekend services including on some main routes. These include some routes identified in the Bus Reform Implementation Approach but frequency uplifts are typically to every 20 rather than every 10 min. 

June 2026: Minister Gabrielle Williams uses social media to ask Victorians for their ideas on improved bus services. 

June 2026: Auditor-General's report on Victoria's Bus Plan tabled in Parliament.  

Audit approach and outcomes

VAGO's report on Bus Plan execution by DTP has not surprisingly been critical of the department.

However there are aspects of the audit that I'd have preferred were different. For instance VAGO's lax definition of high quality service reflects more on the geographic and class biases of white collar public servants than actual bus user needs (who need more weekend service as the government itself is starting to recognise). Their sample of routes to audit for coordination wasn't ideal. It was silly to use 2021 as a baseline for punctuality, notwithstanding the footnote. I'm inclined to agree with DTP on punctuality performance measures but if VAGO were serious they'd be probing progress on bus priority and run time revisions to address the causes of lateness. More on this in the video above.   

The map of strategic bus corridors that DTP says it will publish under Plan Melbourne will be  welcome. And the department using it to assess gaps between aspirational and current service to produce a pipeline of service improvements along major corridors is super-important. 

Some of these will require funding for new service kilometres while others need a willingness to tackle inefficient overlaps to form more frequent routes from existing resources. A strategic corridor bus network map should help DTP focus on this harder than it might have in the past (with the result of us being some local buses still running at 11pm but while busier routes on key corridors are still less frequent at night and/or with early finishes). 

As learned from the ill-fated North, North-Eastern and Mildura bus reviews, the critical point to success is political will, preferably on a larger scale than the good but still limited uplifts this year's state budget enabled. 

See other Useful Network items

TT 232: South-east Metro Tunnel bus recoordination and Mornington Peninsula network changes

Bus Recoordination in the south-east

The third (and I believe) final tranche of bus timetable recoordination to reflect the February 1 2026 Metro Tunnel and related train timetables will come into effect on Sunday July 5. 

The previous stage, recoordinating bus routes in Melbourne's north and west, happened in April, with details in the Projects section of the Transport Victoria website here. 

Recoordinations are typically minor tweaks of a few minutes to optimise connections (and sometimes bus running times) but a few lucky routes (like 467 and 503 in April) can get more trips to match bus with train frequencies. This is important because Melbourne's north (especially) still has many bus routes that run every 22-30 minutes in areas where trains are normally every 20 minutes, with resultant haphazard connections.  

As foreshadowed in the item on the April 2026 bus recoordination, more time changes were to come, but this time for buses feeding the Pakenham, Cranbourne and Frankston lines. These start on Sunday July 5, with a list of the 31 routes involved here. (627, 701,705, 708, 709, 760, 767, 770, 771, 772, 773, 774, 775, 776, 778, 779, 780, 782, 783, 788, 811, 812, 824, 825, 828, 832, 833, 857, 858, 863 & 887 for those interested) 

As far as I can tell the changes are small except for Route 833 between Carrum and Frankston. This route (written as 883 in the heading but corrected yesterday) will have its Saturday frequency boosted from every 60 to every 40 minutes.

This gets particularly strong use between Frankston and Carrum Downs so the upgrade will be welcomed. It does however mean that there will be uneven intervals between buses at locations such as along McLeod Rd, Patterson Lakes as the 708 that overlaps it will remain hourly on weekends. The same applies in areas where the (also hourly on weekends) 832 is an option for travel to Frankston.

As you can see from the print just above, this recoordination item is in the News (not the Projects) section of the TV website (unlike the April recoordination announcement). I prefer this but consistency that breeds repeated behaviour and thus reader familiarity and trust would have been nice.    

Also the south-east item lists Mornington Peninsula routes 781, 784 and 785. It needn't have as there is no elaboration of changes affecting them with the drop-down route list not including them. Instead that's the job of a separate website item, discussed below.  

Mornington Peninsula bus network reform

Also starting on July 5 are reformed routes on the Mornington Peninsula. Most notable features include: 

* A new cross-peninsula Route 886 between Mornington and Hastings, operating hourly all week

This will enable travel between both sides of the peninsula without the need to backtrack to Frankston. While Transport Victoria don't really promote buses for day trips or tourism, the 886 will make it easy to visit attractions across the peninsula such as Mornington and Tyabb's antique markets in a single day trip. 

* Deletion of Route 786 between Rye and St Andrews Beach due to low patronage

Removes all public transport network coverage from St Andrews on the Bass Strait side of the peninsula. 786 is the quietest regular bus route on the network with under 2 passenger boardings per service hour recorded in 2022. This is similar to that recorded on the old Route 687 to Chum Creek  before it got deleted as part of Healesville's bus reform a few years ago. Its service hours are being reused on other Mornington Peninsula bus routes.    

* Rerouting of bus routes 784 and 785 in the Mornington area

Reduces overlaps between routes and speed travel to Frankston from Mornington East. However this is at the cost of making buses more complex in central Mornington, something TV should be explaining better (more on this later).  

* Longer operating hours on bus routes 781, 784 and 785 

Extra trips so buses run from approximately 6am to 10 or 11pm across the week. Wider operating hours including later night trips has been a welcome and widespread trend of this and other recent bus network upgrades. However their application has been uneven; Melbourne's highest-usage routes such as the 900, 901, 902 and 903 SmartBuses now finish earlier on Sundays (around 9pm) than many local routes.  
Passenger communication

The Transport Victoria news item doesn't explain these network changes very well. There are links to  pdf timetables that show individual route maps but nothing for the network as a whole. That's important as some peoples' nearest bus route will change or they may need to wait at a different stop to reach their destination.

PTV and Transport Victoria communication has always been heavily text based. This limits the inclusiveness of their messaging, especially for people whose first language is not English or are visual thinkers. This bias cannot be put down to a lack of internal resources; DTP already makes maps for consultation purposes but forgets they exist a year or two later when they could help explain a reformed network.   

DTP has so many layers of management that they are forced to spend disproportionate time in meetings (it's a mathematical fact - work it out on paper - meetings rise exponentially with executive numbers). If results are any guide, this distracts bosses from actual productive work such as looking at outcomes (such as community benefits), processes (like knowledge management that  maximises value from work already done) and outputs (such as its website) to drive improvements. 

Central Mornington stops

What about central Mornington? You could argue that it is generously served with 5 buses per hour to Frankston on weekdays and not much less than that on weekends. However it is a key destination and people need to know where to catch their bus from given that (a) service is spread over four mostly hourly routes and (b) the altered routes change things. 

The complexity of buses in central Mornington was considered a problem about 20 years ago. This led to central Mornington bus stops being simplified about 12 to 15 years ago following state government funding in 2011 (background here, here and here).

That meant that you could get all local routes (781, 784, 785) towards Frankston from the one stop, even if the buses had to deviate a little. All three routes were relatively direct to Frankston so you would typically board the first bus that came along. Ideally scheduling would permit as close as possible to a 20 minute combined maximum wait given that each of these routes runs hourly. 

Quicker travel via the 788 from the Bays Hospital stop was possible but until improvements a few years ago (every 40 to every 30 min on weekdays, 80 to 40 min weekends) its frequency meant that unless you timed it well the wait time often exceeded (or felt like it exceeded) what you'd save by taking the faster 788.

The map below shows the main stops in central Mornington as they currently stand.  

As noted before Transport Victoria prefers text over maps. They resist drawing new maps and won't necessarily even reuse ones they previously made.

To fill this gap I made one for what I think will happen in Central Mornington, the busiest stops on the network outside of Frankston. Undoing the 2011 consolidation, travel from there to Frankston will be less legible with three rather than two stops. Rather than just rock up at the stop on the north side of Barkly St as you probably would today, this setup gives a bit of a nudge to check times and possibly walk a block to catch the faster route 788. 

This is the new network's main trade-off, noting that 784's new alignment delivers substantial travel time savings for Mornington East (which previously had no fast option to Frankston). Also people need to be made aware that the new 886 to Hastings will depart from the Bays Hospital, not the previously main stops in Barkly St. 

This needs a bit of explaining so that people get the right stop. Noting that these are well used stops and the area has a senior population skew, with a higher than average proportion of less mobile passengers. Hopefully DTP/Transport Victoria will come to appreciate this with graphical descriptions of the new central Mornington bus stop arrangements provided both online and at the site.  

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

UN 235: PTUA's plan for Geelong and Bellarine buses

Today I'm showcasing another vision for improved bus services, this time for Geelong, Bellarine Peninsula and Bannockburn from the Public Transport Users Association Geelong Branch. 

It is in response to the bus review DTP is conducting for the area, following funding in a recent state budget. They asked for public input back in April and PTUA responded with a detailed submission. 

My personal view is that Geelong is one of the places that least needs a wholesale bus network review. Geelong itself got a major network review in 2015 with routes dramatically straightened and (mostly) upgraded to every 20 minutes off-peak on weekdays. That compares well with routes in metropolitan Melbourne and meshes with trains that run every 20 minutes. 

If you want to look at places most in need of an overhauled bus network look at Wodonga, Shepparton and Mildura. Infrastructure Victoria recommended revamped bus networks in these places and more. The government actually started a review for Mildura (when it had an independent MP) but failed to carry through after it was safely returned in the 2022 state election. 

Having said that the Geelong area still needs some bus service improvements. Despite generally better weekday frequencies than Melbourne suburbs operating spans are shorter, especially on weekends. Late starts, early finishes and low frequencies stymie travel to places like Queenscliff, especially on weekends when intending visitor numbers are highest. And growing Bannockburn needs much more than its current sparse service. 

The PTUA submission tackles all these by recommending higher frequencies and longer hours. It also supports bus priority, improved bus shelters and the retention of the Moorabool Street bus interchange in the Geelong CBD. The latter is a hot topic locally; some retailers want the bus interchange moved due to antisocial behaviour and the sorts of people they say it attracts. A trial of a Night Network type service on the main bus routes is also advocated. 

Geelong's train service used to be hourly. It has been every 20 minutes seven days per week since 2024 following successive service upgrades. Line usage has surged, largely due to urban growth in Tarneit and Wyndham Vale with more to come when the new Tarneit West station opens in a few months.

However its peak timetable remains with excessively complex stopping patterns. Also a short-sighted decision was made to retain 40 minute weekday interpeak frequencies for Waurn Ponds despite a 20 minute service now operating on weekends. These oddities undermine the potential role of rail to operate as a spine for fast local travel for some within-Geelong trips. 

The key decision taken when planning Geelong's bus network is its base frequency. As noted before this is commonly 20 minutes on weekdays for local bus routes. It's on weekends when gaps widen. Even Geelong's busiest route (Route 1) has a (slightly uneven) 30 minute headway on weekends. This is actually similar to some Melbourne SmartBuses but was instituted when Geelong weekend trains were every 60 minutes. Buses were not significantly upgraded when weekend trains went to 40 and then 20 minutes. 

If you are not going to have buses running at turn-up-and-go frequencies and you value connectivity with trains then the other option is a timed transfer network where there is a family of frequencies that evenly mesh with train services. For example if trains are every 15 minutes then buses might be every 15 minutes for main routes, every 30 minutes for middle importance routes and every 60 minutes for local or semi-rural routes. 

In Geelong's case the pulse is set by a 20 minute train headway to South Geelong. The menu of acceptable frequencies for buses then becomes 20, 40 and 60 minutes (though 40 won't mesh with 60 for even bus to bus connections). A 20 minute interval with most routes (ie matching train frequencies) is basically what the planners in 2015 went with for weekday services. In contrast the 2014 Brimbank and 2015 Wyndham networks planned at a similar time went with a harmonised hierarchy with main routes every 20 minutes and local routes every 40 minutes. Melbourne uses 40 minute frequencies more than anywhere else in Australia. Its advantage is that it's better than 60 minutes but is not a memorable clockface headway. 

The PTUA submission addresses the headway harmonisation problem by ignoring it. Their proposed bus network is based on service every 15 minutes for urban Geelong and Lara routes and every 30 minutes for peripheral routes. Opting for this produces a memory timetable good for local trips but sacrifices even connectivity with trains, especially in cases where buses every 30 minutes meet trains every 40 minutes (or less worse every 20 minutes). It is possibly true that outside main commuting times travel within a city is more significant than trips involving a train connection. However longer tourist type trips where people are travelling to locations like the Bellarine Peninsula may have a significant rail connection component. But PTUA's headway choice does avoid horrid 40 minute bus intervals for outlying areas which might have been its main reasoning. 

The submission correctly (in my view) says the structure of network is strong. Thus it does not suggest major overhauls for the core of the network. But it does for some outlying areas with maps provided. 

Anyway that's my summary. Have a read and let me know in the comments what you think. 

See other Useful Network items

TT 231: The secret Sunday train PTV doesn't advertise

 

As noted here, the much-promoted "Big Switch" February 1 Metro train timetables were a huge boost for the Sunbury line, some handy uplifts for Cranbourne and Pakenham but pretty small affairs elsewhere.

This is because bigger initiatives are planned for later, with the minister describing the February 1 changes as only the beginning. These will include off-peak improvements for Sandringham, Craigieburn and Upfield and peak improvements for Werribee, 

However February 1 did treat the Frankston line to an extra outbound Sunday morning trip, departing Flinders Street at 7:39am and arriving Frankston at 8:43am. 

Its timing couldn't have been better so kudos to the Master Timetable schedulers. It perfectly plugs a 60 minute gap in the previous timetable that existed until the 9:12am arrival at Frankston. 

And whether by luck or design it cuts connection waits for the Mornington Peninsula's most important bus routes (including some first trips for the day) by 30 minutes. Without this train people travelling from the city direction would be unable to efficiently arrive at most Peninsula destinations much before late morning. 

Despite its network benefits this extra service has flown under the radar. Even though it's a perfect example of how adding a few services per week at important times (for tiny cost) can transform passenger experiences and the network's usefulness.  

The trip's low profile is not just due to the usual DTP/TV/PTV prosaic communication style and lack of marketing flair. Weakness in data management is also a factor. That's because the trip can be missing from what should be trusted resources like the PTV app, Transport Victoria website and Metro online timetables. Without departure time posters at stations (which were removed and not replaced for February 1) people might see the hour gap between trains and avoid travel or drive instead.

Without information one could call the 7:39am Sunday trip from Flinders Street to Frankston a 'secret' train, known only to a lucky few who either saw it or were browsing certain sources that showed it. 

Enjoy this video of my experiences planning and making a trip involving it last Sunday. 

Watch and subscribe to Melbourne on Transit YouTube here

Note: There are other trains that run but are not in the public timetable. These 'non-PSR' trains are normally on weekdays. They can be cancelled without penalty. But this service is too useful for network connectivity to be considered a non-PSR. 

UPDATE: A commenter on the above video says that the train mentioned is also not listed in the printed timetable. The plot thickens! 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

UN 234: Climate Action Merri-bek's transport ideas for Fawkner

Fawkner is geometrically a terrible suburb to plan public and active transport for.

Fawkner can claim two stations on the Upfield line. But this skirts the suburb's western edge, is severed from most homes by busy Sydney Rd and lacks a station at the suburb's nearest large shopping centre at Campbellfield. When the timetable is running perfectly peak trains run every 16 minutes. However reliability is fragile as even small delays can result in trains starting or terminating at Batman due to the single track section north of Gowrie (as happened this morning, in fact).

Fawkner is the sort of suburb that could see housing density intensification and gentrification. Both could mean more CBD workers who are more likely to commute by public transport. Gentrification also brings social capital which is associated with higher engagement in the political process, residents demanding more, seats becoming less taken for granted and eventually winning funding for upgraded services including better transport.   

Fawkner is somewhat of an island. Cemeteries limit road access to the west while Merri Creek blocks it to the east. This makes any east-west travel from most parts of Fawkner an ordeal. Which is is exacerbated by Reservoir's bus network being an unreformed mess with complex routes like the 553 and dead end routes like 558. And to the west the 536 has a weak terminus at Gowrie Station rather than extending into or nearer Fawkner, even if just to Campbellfield Plaza. North-south travel is via the busy and walking-hostile Sydney Rd or the unreliable Upfield line. 

Fawkner's existing bus network includes the hourly weekday-only 531 down Sydney Rd from Coburg North to Upfield (both weak termini) and the snaky 530 from Coburg to Campbellfield (both strong termini but very indirect). 

Given these limitations what should be done about improving transport to and within Fawkner? 

I could say more on this but today I won't. 

Instead I'll invite you to read these priorities for better active and public transport for Fawkner prepared by Climate Action Merri-bek.  

Note: We have since seen the state budget which included upgrades for bus services including higher weekend frequency for the 561 mentioned above. This will have large direct benefits for a broad strip across the north including Reservoir, Coburg and Pascoe Vale. 

See other Useful Network items

TT 230: Maximum waits for Australian trams compared

Yesterday Daniel Bowen cited statistics that showed that Australia's busiest tram lines were no longer in Melbourne. Indeed three of the top four top performers were new systems in Sydney and the Gold Coast. See Daniel's item for some possible reasons for this. 

Benefits of frequent all week service

The ideal for any major public transport line is that you should be able to turn up at any reasonable time (that I will define as 6am to midnight 7 days) and expect a service to arrive within a short time without checking a timetable. The February 2026 timetable introduced this concept for the central section of the Metro Tunnel between Dandenong and West Footscray. The 22 stations in this section enjoy a timetabled maximum wait of 10 minutes or less for 130 hours of the week. 

This 'always there' frequent service encourages a completely different attitude towards public transport by transforming the user experience. This includes including it being useful for trips more diverse than the weekday peak period city commute (which has long been declining as a proportion of all trips). 

On a broader level a frequent network can shape investment and personal decisions like where people choose to live and how many cars households own (which further grows patronage). Much more than in cities like Perth, Melbourne has a significant inner suburban demographic that would be favourably disposed to not driving if public transport was reasonably frequent over wide hours. For such a group maximum waits (even at 11pm) are likely to have an out-sized influence on their decisions. And maximum waits are relatively cheap to reduce, especially if they need only a few hours extra per week of one or two extra trips per hour to cut. 

Everyone will have different views as to what comprises 'turn up and go'. Factors like the length of the trip, if a connection to another route is involved, willingness to walk and the availability of alternatives are all important. But, with one big city exception, there is, based on what currently operates, general agreement on what the maximum wait should be for light rail routes in Australian cities. 

Do you know what it is?

To help I've reproduced the tram route patronage graph with maximum waits annotated.

The above excludes suburban rail and BRT systems. But if you counted them you would find that most Sydney lines have 15 minute maximum waits from first to last. As do the inner sections of three rail corridors in Perth and Brisbane's BUZ bus corridors. 

Melbourne stands out as the exception in all this. Its midday tram frequencies are comparable to the other lines. But after dark and (especially) on Sundays they collapse to 30 minutes, even on its busiest tram lines. Whereas, just like is done for their trains, Sydney has a maximum wait of half that or 15 minutes. The same is true for the Gold Coast and Canberra.

While I've marked Newcastle harshly (as their 30 minute gaps are at the extremities of the day) if anything I've been generous to Melbourne because many of their trams start after 6am on Sundays, particularly in the outbound direction (although six routes run 24 hours under Night Network). Also Melbourne has more lines than other cities with a more frequent service available on some inner area overlaps. 

Reasons for Melbourne's long maximum waits

Sundays are one key reason for Melbourne's longer maximum waits than other cities. Take those away and maximum waits drop to 20 minutes (the standard service for most routes on Monday to Saturday evenings). That's Adelaide type maximum waits. 

The 30 minute Sunday morning gaps reflect a history of opposition to Sunday service by the Protestant-dominated Tramways in the first third of last century. In the face of public pressure and a leadership change limited Sunday morning service based on 30 minute headways commenced in 1936 as a six month trial. Those same 30 minute headways have stuck for 90 years on most routes. 

Sunday evenings, that other important time where most Melbourne trams run only every 30 minutes, have a different history. The churches were much more concerned about preserving the Sunday morning Sabbath than Sunday evenings. Sunday evening trams in Melbourne used to run as frequently as Sydney's, Gold Coast's and Canberra's do now but unreversed 1950s and 1960s service cuts ended that.

Melbourne's timetables have remained time capsules for decades due to historically low political interest in upgrading service levels for many years. Especially the type of service levels that could have been upgraded within existing infrastructure and fleet constraints. 

Recent action to cut maximum waits

There have been no significant tram service cuts for a long time. There have even been some minor frequency improvements (most notably Friday and Saturday nights) on some routes. But these have not been enough to reverse the long-term (and continuing) per capita reduction in tram service levels.

The trend for Metro rail services has been more encouraging. For the first time in a while we're seeing concerted action to cut maximum waits to 20 minutes. This includes a start made to cut 30 and 40 minute maximum waits to 20 minutes for Pakenham, Cranbourne and Sunbury in the February 2026 Metro Tunnel timetable.

This will be followed by the implementation of similar for Craigieburn and Upfield (funded in the 2025 state budget). And then the 2026 budgeted upgrades including weekends on the Clifton Hill group and weeknights for the Burnley group. 

By 2027 Melbourne's despised 40 minute gaps should be eliminated on all but the outer Hurstbridge line on the Metro network and weekends on the Melton line for V/Line. The main outstanding matters then become 30 minute maximum waits for the Clifton Hill group on weeknights, the Burnley group on weekend evenings and Sunday mornings and Belgrave / Lilydale for midday weekdays. 

Trams and major bus routes could do with the same too! 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here

UN 233: Six steps for better public transport to the new Footscray Hospital

Summary: Despite having a tram and several bus routes nearby, public transport access to the new Footscray Hospital is slower, less direct and less frequent than it should be. While the hospital has been under construction for years no opportunity was taken to revamp surrounding buses in time for its opening. This item proposes several cost-effective measures that could improve public transport access to the hospital for both visitors and staff. 

A new study, published in the June 2026 Journal of Transport and Health, finds significant geographical inequality across Melbourne in terms of public transport access to hospitals. This was found to affect health outcomes. Outer suburbs typically fared worse due to inferior public transport longer distances to the main teaching hospitals. 

Existing transport to Footscray Hospital

I examined public transport services to hospitals (including the then Footscray Hospital) back in 2022. The previous year I looked at PT services in the wider Maribyrnong area. Both glances indicated a network less capable than is possible despite the concentration of population and major destinations in the area. 

Hospital moved and opened (18 February 2026)

Since then the hospital has moved eastward with the yellow star on the map below showing the new site. It's nearer to Footscray station but still beyond its pedshed for many, making 'last mile' transport important to reach it.  

The TV map shows tram and bus routes in the area. The last significant network change was back in 2008 when Route 409 was extended from Footscray to Highpoint to serve Edgewater Estate.  

Trams improving (and more to come)

While tram service levels in Melbourne are typically the slowest changing of any mode, the historically infrequent Route 82 tram has almost caught up to other routes. Weekday interpeak improved from every 20 to every 15 minutes came a few years ago. Some evening frequency boosts came later. More is in store for the 82 including G class trams and accessible stops on Droop Street. The 82 tram operates a somewhat indirect route between Footscray and Moonee Ponds, going quite near Highpoint.

Bus stops scattered across Footscray 

On paper bus service to the hospital area is amazing, especially from Footscray Station. Combined service from there is around 12 buses per hour Monday to Saturday, dropping to a still high (for Melbourne) 7 buses per hour during the day on Sundays. 

In practice few benefits of this high on-paper frequency are realised. One reason is because service is scattered across multiple uncoordinated routes that depart from various locations in Footscray. Some of the most frequent buses like 223 and 472 depart from stops furthest from the station. An attempt by Augustus Brown to document where buses leave from at Footscray is here. 

No one route is consistently frequent all week

While combined frequencies are high, no one route is consistently direct and frequent across the week. Service levels are largely a function of historical legacy, including whether a bus route once ran as a tram (as 223 did). This explains why non-Tramways Board private bus routes 406 and 472 finish earlier and have longer Sunday waits than the 223.

More recent changes, while beneficial, have added complexity due to limited scope. For example 406 is the only route in the area that runs 24 hours on weekends yet remains with a 9pm finish on other nights. 406's 40 minute Sunday frequency also does not match its role as a major connector to the busy Highpoint Shopping Centre and compares poorly with its 20 minute Saturday frequency.  Meanwhile the 404, a direct route between two strong termini is infrequent, has short operating hours and doesn't run Sundays. 

Connections between trains and buses/trams are basically random. This is because Metro trains (every 10 minutes) and V/Line trains (every 20 minutes) do not harmonise with trams and buses that commonly run every 15 minutes.  

Sunbury line rail frequencies basically doubled when the Metro Tunnel timetable started. The Metro Tunnel was accompanied by reformed buses at its new stations of Arden, Parkville and Anzac. But established stations on lines feeding the Metro Tunnel got, at best, minor timetable tweaks. That includes Footscray despite it being one of the network's busiest stations, having a legacy bus network unreformed for years and strong needs existing. The new hospital has also apparently been an insufficient impetus for a bus network rethink.   

Indirect routes and weak termini are common 

Bus routes that are indirect or duplicate other routes cost service kilometres that could otherwise be put towards making them faster and/or more frequent.

Changing circumstances that could have triggered network reform (by making it easier to justify) are routinely ignored. The result is that bus routes remain ossified for decades after their original purpose has ceased while the community forgoes service upgrades that are both necessary and affordable.  

Two Footscray area examples are below. 

Route 223 operates unusually frequently and late into the night. Its routing south of Footscray has remained even as trains on nearby lines became amongst the best served in Melbourne with 10 minute 7 day service (firstly to Newport about 10-15 years ago, then to Watergardens earlier this year). Meanwhile the partly overlapping 472 bus, which runs to more destinations and has a bigger catchment, has continued with 40-60 minute gaps on Sunday and short operating hours. 223's alignment and service pattern reflects it being an old tram route dating from an era where trains were less frequent than now. 

Route 406 is an even more egregious example, especially if you wanted to travel directly between Victoria University and Highpoint via a route that isn't every 40 min (eg the 409). It appears to have got its indirectness from going past student housing that closed in 2001. The housing is no longer there but no one got around to removing 406's kink, despite reform possibilities existing when Route 409 was extended in 2008. Still it's never too late and opportunities exist when Route 408 gets its upgrade (as funded in this month's State Budget).

Also notable about Route 406 is its weak northern terminus. By it terminating in residential Keilor East rather than a major destination this reduces the number of people who have a one-seat trip to Footscray Hospital. 

Not mapped above is Route 472. As well as the less convenient (for the station) stop location in Footscray, it suffers from a weak terminus in Williamstown (away from the main street) and a limited Sunday timetable (including a late start and low/uneven frequencies). 

To summarise, tram network planning has responded to the transport needs around Footscray Hospital whereas bus network planning (which is supposed to be more flexible) has not. This is demonstrated by the complex legacy networks and timetables that reflect past travel patterns and operational arrangements.

The latter remains an issue today as bus network refranchising has not simplified operations with three companies (Kinetic, CDC and Transit Systems) running routes in the area. However this should not be a reason for inaction given the success of multi-operator routes on major corridors such as the 900 between Caulfield and Rowville.   

Six steps for improvement

Short term 

* Boost 406 bus to run every 20 min 7 days with later evening finish Sunday to Thursday.

* Boost 472 Sunday frequency to every 20 min with longer operating hours all week. 

* Boost 404 bus to operate 7 days with longer operating hours and a 20 min all week frequency. 

Medium Term

* Boost Route 82 tram frequency to every 10 min daytime, no worse than 20 min at night. This would harmonise with train service levels on all lines into Footscray, providing a more robust feeder. 

* Consolidate routes 223 and 406 into a premium service megabus operating every 10 min or better 7 days to provide a simple and direct connection between Footscray, Victoria University, Footscray Hospital, Highpoint and Milleara Shopping Centre. Likely done in conjunction with Route 409 adjustments to maintain coverage. As a coverage style route the 409 also has the most flexibility to bring closest to the Footscray Hospital precinct for those unable to walk to other routes. 

* Reform Route 220 into a premium service megabus operating every 10 min or better 7 days to provide a simple connection between Sunshine, Victoria University (two campuses), Footscray Hospital, Footscray, Docklands and the CBD. Done in conjunction with adjustments to Routes 216, 410 and potentially a new north-south route connecting densely populated Maribyrnong with trains at the due to be rebuilt Tottenham station via Ashley St.  Local and state government agencies have suggested a trackless tram or light rail along this corridor. 

These measures would provide simpler and better connected service with main routes harmonising with trains every 10 minutes across the week. High service levels reflect density of destinations and likely housing development. They would be introduced in conjunction with improved passenger information at major interchanges such as Footscray and Highpoint to guide passengers. 

Note: Above is current TV local network map (dated Feb 2026). But it still shows the old Footscray Hospital location!

Wider train, tram and bus network improvements

The following would boost all week public transport access across Melbourne's west with Footscray Hospital being just one destination to benefit: 

* Extend Sunbury line 10 minute service from West Footscray to Watergardens first to last train (current timetable has 20 minute gaps at night and early weekend mornings). 

* Boost Melton line weekend train frequency from 40 to 20 minutes with earlier morning starts.

* Increase Werribee line off-peak service from 20 to 10 minutes all week. Reinstate station at Paisley. 

* Improved bus connectivity in the Highpoint area by rerouting the 903 orbital via Highpoint and Braybrook (replacing 468 and part of 408) in conjunction with extending the 406 from Keilor East to Sunshine and Route 465 hours and frequency upgrades. 

* Investigate potential and benefits for tram routing reform in the Highpoint area involving 82 and 57. 

Conclusion 

Much of the public transport network around Footscray and Footscray Hospital has not changed for years despite potential triggers such as the Metro Tunnel, rail service boosts, increased Sunday shopping, land use changes and the new Footscray Hospital itself.

A simpler, more modern and more frequent network concept to cater for current and emerging needs is presented above. Comments are welcome and can be left below. 

See other Useful Network items