Outer suburbs 'missing out' on services

Edith · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 9:20 am

Ref: http://www.theage.com.au/national/outer-suburbs-missing-out-on-services-20081012-4z65.html

Metro Transit · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:55 pm

Yeah, that would be about right.

So much more needs to be done to entice people to leave the car at home. It will be a very long time before Melbourne will be one of those cities that you can live in and not need a car.

Metro.

Metro Transit - For King and Country

Minister for Cultural and Ethnic Affairs, Minister for the Arts.

"Outstanding Contributor of the Month - September"

Natronomonas · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:07 pm

cameron_stewart · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:21 pm

I've been thinking about this point for a while. The argument doesn't really make sense. People buy out in the outer suburbs (mainly because housing is cheaper) knowing full well there is not as good public transport out there as in the inner suburbs...they then make a song an dance about the lack of public transport...or expect the government to pay to "fix" the problem. As an inner Melbourne resident, I find this perplexing.

Natronomonas · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:58 pm

All too common - everyone wants a windfall. Unfortunately, even those who bought expecting PT (and probably paid extra for it, although that money probably went to the developer, not provision of PT) in places like Sth Morang or Aurora still didn't get it, which shows just how little the govt is interested in expanding the network.

cameron_stewart · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:07 pm

Good point.

Heihachi_73 · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 10:03 pm

I only wish that was true about middle/outer suburban houses being cheap (as in not just cheaper than the inner city). There is barely anything below 300 a week where I am, unless it's a shed (1 room bedsitter). I gather to have a family home (3br or more) in the 'city' you would have to pay anything up to and probably over 1000pw? Laughing

You cannot run from your own bunghole.

Ballast_Plough · Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:22 pm

Natronomonas · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:59 am

Radial is still where the action is at; at least in terms of a concentrated destination. Some locales are getting there - a few major suburban centres - but in order for a cross-suburban service to work well, we need urban planning to work with the DoT. Somewhat chicken/egg too, if a decent cross-suburban PT service is installed, people/business may move to it, reinforcing demand (as seen with EastLink and the like, of course - making it look a successful investment, until you realise the traffic is just as bad as before and you can't widen a road forever).

Edith · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:19 am

We need to re-set the Australian Dream of a big house, full of stuff, in a leafy country environment, with a freeway to take you to a big shopping centre or work, and a car with lots of grunt to drive around in (sorry one for each of you). People will have trouble affording this soon and the environment cannot afford it either.

If we add another million people to Melbourne by 2020 (Brumby's Dream), then where do they go ? How much more water do we need, how many new power stations, how many new suburbs and how will people get around ? If we cannot do it for the current population, what hope do we have for 2020 ?

How do we shoe-horn people into the existing suburbs , where there is better provision of services (and get the existing population to accept this), or is it how do we convince them that their 'dream' is unrealistic ?

Dreams are not something to wait for
They are something to work for

mjja · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:13 pm

I live in the middle suburbs. Public transport around here stops at 9pm (apart from trains which are 1.5km from home, a long walk which I've had to do many a time and oft) but apart from that it's fairly good. At least it runs every half hour. I can't imagine how people would cope in the outer suburbs - maybe that's why everyone has to learn to drive the moment they turn 17 and three quarters.

Bus services, while less popular than trains and trams, are in reality going to be the solution. Luckily, they're fairly easy to organize - the roads are already there, the modifications needed are minor (compared with what would be needed for a rail or tram service) and the DoT doesn't have to do anything about them after the contract is awarded.

That removes a lot of the excuses for bad service. Yes, rail infrastructure takes time to upgrade. Yes, it takes two years for new trams to arrive. But buses can be upgraded fairly readily - bus companies order fairly regularly and they can increase services just by delaying the withdrawl of older buses. It doesn't always work like that but the bus company usually manages to source some buses when there's a contract on offer.

So it comes down to the question: is our government really ready to pay for a good public transport service? There's evidence that they are - but there's also evidence that the willingness is limited.

Talk to your local MPs. Give them the impression that public transport is going to be one of the major factors you will vote on. Make it clear that you want real money spent on providing a real service.

Happy Gunzelling and remember, "Go by rail!"

Michael Angelico
President, Smart Passengers Inc
(My opinions are my own unless specifically stated.)

Somebody in the WWW · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:17 pm

mjja · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:29 pm

No. Unless they're seriously worried about their greenness. Personally, I don't mind arranging my life around a bus timetable. I can't think of many other people like that though.

But some of the services in Casey/Cardinia are a lot worse! And unlike "my" routes they duck in and out of all sorts of residential streets so it takes you ages just to get to the nearest station, and on-time running is shot to pieces.

I'm not saying we need a Malvern area service all over the city - but there's a lot of scope for meaningful improvements before we can say that our public transport system is a real alternative to car travel.

Happy Gunzelling and remember, "Go by rail!"

Michael Angelico
President, Smart Passengers Inc
(My opinions are my own unless specifically stated.)

alstom_888m · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:45 pm

As a car user, I'm demanding 20 minute service, no more that 400m walk.

I'm sure I'm not alone in those demands. Mjja, you speak as if you don't have a car, I have to ask, is this soley because you like PT, or for cost reasons?

What I'd be interested in is a poll to ask every member here; do you catch public transport, and if so, is it only because you like trains/trams/buses whatever?

What needs to happen is that public transport needs to be cheaper than car, and take no longer than a car trip to the same destination. A train has the ability to do this, but you have to get to the station first.

While in Melbourne, I am based about a kilometer away from the 59 tram. Too far on a reasonably warm or a ridicously cold day. I ride that to Essendon, and catch the train from there. Another option is to park-and-ride from Strathmore. From there it's 20 minutes to the city. $6.50 for a Zone 1 daily, cheaper than a car park. Happy.

The problem lies when you don't live on top of a service, the very concept that park-and-ride can work is where you go wrong. I could park-and-ride, but in practise I'd go by tram/train the whole way, or drive the whole way. I don't want to leave my car in the 'burbs.

No one else will either.

Reliable, Economical, Safe, By Rail.

jjd76au · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:00 pm