tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18909424.post5483984735684140757..comments2024-03-24T23:01:11.766+11:00Comments on Melbourne on Transit: Peter Parkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413976934040474125noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18909424.post-5496667668783948982011-12-20T20:50:08.885+11:002011-12-20T20:50:08.885+11:00LS: The lower frequency but harmonised bus network...LS: The lower frequency but harmonised bus network (effectively the Transperth model) is probably the second-best option. And the only cost-effective option in a low density area. <br /><br />While it's cheaper to run than a high frequency service it oddly requires a lot more planning effort with regards to route length, frequency and timed connections. <br /><br />Especially where the train is a regional type frequency (eg RFR lines and even Pakenham, Cranbourne, Belgrave, Lilydale). <br /><br />It also requires a Perth level of train punctuality and procedures to enforce connectivity (at least in peak direction flows, most notably train to bus in the pm peak). <br /><br />I think the calculation method outlined successfully provides an assessment system that identifies 'gold standard' service levels, especially through its emphasis on random arrival. <br /><br />Yet it also sufficiently seperates a middle level of service (ie a Perth-style timed transfer system with reasonable train reliability) from a low level of service (ie no harmonisation and low frequencies).Peter Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13413976934040474125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18909424.post-64219767461906019382011-12-19T23:26:38.912+11:002011-12-19T23:26:38.912+11:00I think that ultimately the key consideration of y...I think that ultimately the key consideration of your post is the tendency for interchange to be poorly coordinated due to inconsistent frequencies and pedestrian hostile interchange. To use a local example, the connection between train and 566 at Watsonia station is mostly appalling (20 minute train, 24 minute bus). It can take me almost as long to get from home to Watsonia station (5 min walk + av. 12 min wait + 3 min bus ride + 4-5 min walk - used to be better but the traffic lights have been made pedestrian unfriendly = 25 min) as it does to get from Watsonia to the city on the train(33 mins Watsonia to Flinders St), compared to a 4 minute drive from home to station car park (+1 min walk to the platform).<br /><br />If the bus was harmonised to connect with the train (eg every 20 minutes with 6 minutes connection time), this would reduce.<br /><br />However, even without interchange public transport can shoot itself in the foot. I have investigated the options in travelling to a new job in the new year, from Bundoora to Doncaster. I can choose between a 20-30 minute drive, or the Metlink journey planner offer of an hour single seat journey on the 902 high frequency (for Melbourne) Smartbus. Whilst I am slightly tempted as I can work on the bus where I can't by driving, 40-50% journey time by car is almost enough to convince me to buy a second car for work journeys. Clearly there are other answers to saving time related to reducing bus journey times through better priority, vigorously promoting prepurchasing and so on even before better frequencies and interchange...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18909424.post-48180322085585785822011-12-19T09:35:17.152+11:002011-12-19T09:35:17.152+11:00Of course, it also depends on what the role of the...Of course, it also depends on what the role of the bus network is. A bus network designed as a rail feeder service could still be of a lower frequency, but harmonised to train headways and running on a 'pulse' timetable to ensure connections to and from train services. This would work well at both metropolitan outer termini (e.g. Cranbourne, Pakenham, Frankston) as well as the regional cities such as Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo with their baseline hourly headways. <br /><br />But if the bus network serves other purposes such bus-bus or bus-tram transfers or serve activity centres away from railway stations, other measures will have to suffice such as increased service frequencies, straighter, more direct routes and longer stop spacing to improve travel times. Rail feeder buses would all benefit from these as well.Loose Shunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07051892420367907816noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18909424.post-63500157790206033352011-12-13T23:44:28.736+11:002011-12-13T23:44:28.736+11:00@Ikalnk completely agree that where frequency can&...@Ikalnk completely agree that where frequency can't be high a clockface pattern is the next best thing. <br /><br />Especially if (i) it harmonises with other routes and (ii) the most common local trips in the area can be made without transferring. <br /><br />Trying to do the latter with network design has problems because it makes routes less direct, but if it's done with urban design (eg locating jobs and shopping around railway stations/bus interchages) then it works.<br /><br />Hence the inherent transport network superiority of centralised Sunbury, Werribee, Pakenham, Lilydale, Belgrave over fragmented Lalor, Melton, Craigieburn (proposed town centre) and Cranbourne.Peter Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13413976934040474125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18909424.post-26753871145960040552011-12-13T16:57:36.903+11:002011-12-13T16:57:36.903+11:00Well thought posts.
I agree that passengers should...Well thought posts.<br />I agree that passengers should be able to leave without consulting a timetable, but I disagree that frequencies should always be so high that they can assume a short wait. Which is where clock-face timetables come into play. <br /><br />Setting timetables to repeat every 10,15,20,30 or in some rare cases 60 minutes mean that people can simply remember "oh the bus arrives 2 minutes past the quarter hour".IkaInkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13150352213759835701noreply@blogger.com