Public transport backlog builds in growth areas

Transcription

1 News. Evidence. Opportunities. Issue 5. September 211 Welcome to issue 5 Are we getting better at transport and land use integration? While there has been considerable progress made recently in the planning space, we are seeing an increasing lack of integration in developments on the ground. A current lack of funding means public transport is not being extended to cover most new residential estates on the fringe of Melbourne. In this issue we examine the issues and challenges of providing public transport services to the growth areas of Melbourne. The Quarry Hills area of South Morang that was mostly settled in 23 but had no public transport within 4 metres walking distance in August 211. [photo: City of Whittlesea] Public transport backlog builds in growth areas Melbourne s rapidly growing outer suburbs are creating a significant backlog of required extensions to the public transport network. BusVic estimates that 43% of lots developed between 24 and 29 are beyond the reach of the current public transport network that is: 4 metres from a bus or tram route or 8 metres from a train station. In some cases, entire suburbs are beyond the reach of public transport. Our analysis compared the public transport network as at July 211 with data from the Department of Planning and Community Development showing recent urban development areas on the fringe of Melbourne. The maps on page 2 illustrate the current backlog on the fringe of Melbourne. The orange and red residential areas do not have public transport within walking distance (orange being areas developed between 24 and 29, and red being areas forecast to be developed in 21 and 211). We estimate that around 34, lots developed between 24 and 29 are still without public transport within walking distance, and another 21, lots are expected to be developed over 21 and 211. At an average occupancy of 3 per household, this represents over 16, new residents waiting for the government to provide them with basic local public transport. Suburbs with significant areas beyond the reach of public transport include: Botanic Ridge (Cranbourne South) Burnside Heights Caroline Springs Cranbourne Cranbourne East Deer Park Doreen Epping North Keysborough Langwarrin Point Cook South Morang Tarneit Truganina Many cities in regional Victoria are also experiencing strong population growth on the outer fringes, and face similar public transport coverage issues to Melbourne. In particular Bacchus Marsh, Warragul and Drouin currently require bus network expansions to keep up with urban growth. [continued on page 2] This issue also has an in-depth analysis of the proposed heavy railway line to Doncaster, the subject of a new planning study. We take a look at the evidence of travel demand, the population catchment, likely train service levels, and the impact on existing public transport users. We also highlight outstanding patronage growth on existing bus services in this corridor. Another hot topic is the new Public Transport Development Authority, promised by the current state government. We take a look at some of the critical issues to ensuring this reform is a success. Melburnians love their trams that serve the city very well. So much so, that public transport advocates frequently propose extensions of the tram network in Melbourne s middle and outer suburbs. While this sounds like an attractive proposition, the economics tell a different story. We compare buses and trams, and find that buses can deliver the same level of service, but much more cost-effectively. We hope you find this issue of BusSolutions informative and interesting, and as always, we welcome your feedback. BusVic 211 BusVic 29

2 Developed urban areas beyond walking distance of public transport services Northern Melbourne Public transport walking catchment July 211 Broad hectare development without public transport Broad hectare development (forecast) without public transport Established residential areas without public transport Metro rail Western Melbourne Southern-Eastern Melbourne [continued from page 1] Rapid population growth Recent data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that population growth has accelerated in the designated growth areas on Melbourne s fringe, with almost 46, new residents in financial year That is almost 9 new residents every week. 5 Population increase per year in Melbourne s growth areas (Wyndham, Melton, Hume, Whittlesea, Casey and Cardinia) (Source: ABS) Thousands (Source: VISTA 27-8) Other modes 9 Car Average household cars per 1 residents aged 18 to 74 (Source: VISTA 27-8) Car ownership rates are also highest in the outer suburbs, with 92 cars for every 1 people aged between 18 and 74, as shown in the chart below The chart below-middle shows that median distance travelled by car is much higher for residents in the outer suburbs of Melbourne. This is despite there being little difference in the median total distance travelled (by any transport mode) between inner and outer Melbourne. Median daily travel distance per person (km) BusSolutions_2 While housing costs might be lower on the fringe of Melbourne, our analysis of Victorian Integrated Survey of Transport and Activity (VISTA) data shows residents in the outer suburbs are more reliant on cars to get around, and are often on lower incomes, making them especially vulnerable to rising fuel prices Residents on the fringe most vulnerable Year ending June 3 Inner city Inner Middle Outer Inner city Inner Middle Outer

3 Integration lacking between transport and land use development Despite rapid population growth on the fringe of Melbourne, there are currently no funds budgeted to expand Melbourne s bus network into new estates. Indeed, current studies on extensions to Melbourne s rail network focus entirely on established areas in Melbourne. 211 Melway map showing development in Cranbourne East. The new estate in the east of this map will not be connected to Cranbourne until Linsell Boulevard is fully constructed in late 212 [Map courtesy of Ausway Publishing] Isolated developments and missing roads New residents see public transport as a priority Providing public transport to growth areas is more difficult where adjacent areas do not develop in sequence, and where connecting roads between estates have not yet been built. Surveys of new residents in growth areas are increasingly rating proximity to public transport as an important consideration. The Oliver Hume Company surveyed 11,53 new households between 24 and 21 from a broad range of estates in Casey, Whittlesea, Melton and Wyndham. While there are obvious challenges in trying to control the sequencing of land development across multiple developers, councils can influence outcomes through permit conditions and through Developer Contribution Plans that provide funding to permit connector roads to be built earlier rather than later, thus allowing bus services into these estates sooner. Developer Contributions flow directly through to the purchase price of new homes as they are a cost of development. Currently governments are under pressure to better justify the infrastructure required to be funded by developers contribution payments, in an attempt to reduce housing costs on the fringe of Melbourne. Inappropriately cutting contributions increases the risk that estates will be developed that cannot be serviced by public transport until many years after residents move in, making residents almost entirely car dependent and highly vulnerable to rising petrol prices. Stated importance of proximity to public transport, of new home buyers in outer Melbourne (Source: Oliver Hume) 1 Not Very Important Important Automotive Fuel Price (real) Very Important While significant steps have been made in integrating transport and land use plans, integration is very much lacking between the development of land on Melbourne s fringe and the development of Melbourne s public transport network to cover these new areas. Many tens of thousands of new residents will settle on the fringes of Melbourne, and most of them are now unlikely to have any public transport within walking distance of their homes for many years The Growth Area Infrastructure Charge provides some funding that can be put towards the first few years of bus services in new urban areas. However we expect the amount raised will fall well short of what is required to provide basic bus services to all growth areas, and ongoing recurrent funding from government will ultimately be required for such services to become permanent The chart above shows the number of households that rated proximity to public transport as important or very important jumped from 69% in 24 to 95% in 28, following fuel price rises. There has been a very slight decrease in public transport proximity importance in 29 and 21, suggesting some people are more optimistic about the future affordability of fuel, following a short term decline in fuel prices. To reduce risks of future social exclusion, it is vital that outer urban residents have good access to services and jobs. With a shift in employment from manufacturing to the knowledge economy, new jobs are increasingly likely to be concentrated in the inner city, where public transport is the most efficient mode of access. Without local public transport services, new residents will find it harder to reach jobs in the growing knowledge sectors, and to access local services. We look to the State Government to make funds available to redress the growing backlog, as well as ensure future new suburbs are serviced by public transport. BusSolutions_3 For example, the Cascades on Clyde estate in Cranbourne East is currently disconnected from central Cranbourne (including the train station) because a 5 metre stretch of Linsell Boulevard will not be constructed until late 212 (refer map above. If a bus route was introduced to this estate now, it would be highly indirect and would need to travel a long distance through unpopulated areas. Furthermore, the route would only have a major passenger attractor at one end further reducing its efficiency and the utility provided. Following the release of the Victorian Transport Plan in 28, some funding was made available in the 291 Budget to expand bus services in Melbourne in both 29-1 and There have been no subsequent increases in funding for regular public transport services in either the or State Budgets.

4 Is a railway to Doncaster viable? Responding to popular support, the new state government has promised to begin planning a new heavy rail line to Doncaster in Melbourne s eastern suburbs. But is such a train line likely to be viable? We ve taken a look at available evidence, and found that: A Doncaster rail line currently lacks significant patronage attractors required for high capacity heavy rail. The new track would probably serve only one significant activity centre (Doncaster Hill) and there are no specialised off-peak patronage generators such as hospitals or tertiary education campuses. The residential and employment populations within walking distance of proposed station locations are very small by Melbourne standards (although the catchment at Doncaster Hill is expected to grow). Patronage on existing Eastern Freeway bus services between Manningham and the Melbourne CBD has grown by over 6% in the last six years, proving that bus services can attract strong patronage growth. Public transport s share of journeys to work in the inner city of Melbourne has probably risen considerably. This would limit the ability of heavy rail to attract significant further patronage growth. Conversion of bus services to heavy rail would introduce transfer penalties for existing users that would likely cancel out any travel time savings, whilst also introducing inconvenience and the risk of missed connections in the event of delays. A rail service to Doncaster is likely to be around half as frequent as existing bus services in peak periods, given projected demand. The following table compares heavy rail to upgraded bus services between the city and Doncaster, as proposed by the East West Link Needs Assessment 28 final report: Heavy Rail Bus Travel time - Doncaster Hill to city mins mins Peak frequency 15-2 mins 3 5 mins 1 Weekday patronage in ,5 2, Capital cost 1 $1,7-2,m $23-28m Manningham west population within walking catchment of stop/stations 2 (percentage in brackets) 8,14 within 8m walk (9%) Sources: 1 East West Link Needs Assessment final report, Investing in Transport, 28 2 BusVic analysis of 26 census data 3 BusVic estimates (refer text) 57, within 4m walk (48%) BusSolutions_4 Where do the people of Doncaster travel to? According to the 26 census, around 22% of journeys to work from the urbanised western half of the City of Manningham were to the City of Melbourne or the northern part of the City of Yarra (8183 trips in total). Of the trips to the Melbourne CBD, 53% were by public transport, which was well below the figures of 68-73% for neighbouring Banyule and Whitehorse (both of which are a similar distance to the CBD). However, with around 5% growth in Eastern Freeway bus patronage since the 26 census, we expect public transport s share to now be significantly higher. Another useful source of transport data is the VISTA household travel survey (27-8). When looking at all trips throughout the week to or from western Manningham, around half of all trips were self-contained in the area, and only 5% of trips were to or from the City of Melbourne or northern part of the City of Yarra. This 5% includes the heavier peak commuter demand, so a Doncaster rail line would meet the needs of an even smaller percentage of existing off-peak passenger travel demand in the Manningham area. Does Doncaster have sufficient population and employment density? Quite simply, public transport is provided to meet the needs of a population. The number of people in the catchment of a public transport service will have a big impact on patronage. Low population density does not mean that fast and frequent public transport cannot be effective, as has been evidenced by the success of cross-town SmartBus services in the middle and outer suburbs of Melbourne. However, large capacity modes of public transport such as heavy rail do need a larger population catchment to ensure good utilisation of services. Manningham West has a relatively low average population density compared to the rest of Melbourne, with 2-3 persons per hectare being the most common residential density. A significant area of Templestowe has very large block sizes, with less than 1 people per hectare. Developments at the Doncaster Hill Principal Activity Centre will increase population and employment density at one of the proposed rail station sites. However, this would likely be the only significant activity centre along a new heavy train line in Manningham. A commonly suggested route for a train line between Manningham and the CBD is along the Eastern Freeway corridor. There are no significant activity centres between Doncaster Hill and Abbotsford along this route; indeed much of the land along the route is green space and not well suited to high density development. There are also a limited number of residents within walking distance of proposed stations along the route. To illustrate the population catchment challenge, the chart on the following page shows the combined residential and employment population within 8 metres of new Doncaster railway stations proposed by the Public Transport Users Association (PTUA), compared with stations along the Epping and Frankston train lines. The data is taken from the 26 census. While the resident and employment population catchments of proposed station locations in Manningham are around the same as existing stations a similar distance from the city, the inner section of the line lacks any significant

5 Residents and jobs within 8 metres of train stations on the Epping, Frankston and proposed East Doncaster railway lines (Source: ABS Census 26). Royal Talbot Yarra Flats Bulleen Lower Templestowe Doncaster Shopping Wakiau East Doncaster Rushall Merri Northcote Croxton Thornbury Bell Preston Regent Reservoir Ruthven Keon Park Thomastown Lalor Epping Glenhuntly Ormond Mckinnon Bentleigh Patterson Moorabbin Highett Cheltenham Mentone Parkdale Mordialloc Aspendale Edithvale Chelsea Bonbeach Carrum Seaford Kananook Frankston East Doncaster Line Epping Line Frankston Line catchment (the PTUA proposed stations are highly unlikely to be economically viable). A rail line to East Doncaster would be relatively short. The total patronage would likely be significantly less than most other train lines in Melbourne, and thus would probably only warrant a low frequency service and/or three-car train operation. In fact, the 26 catchment around a Doncaster Hill station, which would be expected to be the main station, is less than the average catchment of stations on the relatively low patronage Upfield line. According the Department of Planning and Community Development, Manningham s population is forecast to grow by just.5-.6% per annum until 226. Therefore these travel volumes from Manningham are unlikely to increase significantly. How would people get access to a Doncaster railway? If a line was built to Doncaster Hill with stations at Bulleen and Lower Templestowe, then on 26 census figures, only 9% of the population of Manningham west would be within 8 metres of a station. If a line was built to East Doncaster (as proposed by the PTUA) then 19% of the population would be within 8 metres of a station. Obviously the population in Doncaster Hill is increasing with development, and building a rail line would encourage further population growth around station sites. But how would existing residents of Manningham beyond walking distance access the train line? The following table outlines the challenges with different access modes to train stations: Walk Access mode Car park and ride Car kiss and ride (drop off at station) Bicycle Bus Challenges Limited residential and employment density around most stations. Little suitable land is available so expensive multi-storey car parks might be required. All day commuter parking would also be inconsistent with the active land use objectives of Doncaster Hill. Kiss and ride can create congestion at stations, particularly with low frequency services. Short term parking space would be required for cars - taking limited available land serving a relatively small number of passengers. Car trips purely for the purpose of dropping someone at a train station are twice as long as the productive travel of the passenger, creating additional car traffic with a high environmental footprint Cycling to stations is a space efficient access mode, both in terms of road and parking space required. However, the hilly topology of Manningham will be a challenge to many prospective cyclists. A rail line would be heavily dependent on a feeder bus network. Time, convenience and risk-based transfer penalties would be introduced on existing single bus journeys to the city. More on this below. Would heavy rail be faster than current bus services? The East West Link Needs Assessment study found that heavy rail trips between Doncaster Hill and Melbourne Central would take 25 to 3 minutes, whereas a bus rapid transit solution would take 25 to 35 minutes. On these figures, there is perhaps a small reduction in travelling time using heavy rail between Doncaster Hill and Melbourne Central. SmartBus route 97 services are currently timetabled to take 39 minutes in peak periods. We are hopeful that proposed improved bus priority along Hoddle Street and Victoria Parade can reduce this travel time. However, as previously discussed, most train users would need to arrive at the station by bus. And this will introduce a transfer into the journeys of most existing public transport commuters travelling from Manningham to the city. The introduction of a transfer has a number of impacts on travellers: Additional journey time allowing for alighting one vehicle, walking, waiting and then boarding another vehicle; The general inconvenience of having to transfer, rather than complete the trip on one vehicle; and The risk of missed connections if rail or bus services are delayed for any reason. With a likely low frequency train service, the implications of a missed connection would be significant. Collectively these are known as transfer penalties in the literature. Evidence suggests passengers perceive time spent transferring as double in-vehicle time, with an added fixed transfer penalty to reflect the inconvenience and risk. While good design can help reduce these penalties, it is impossible to eliminate them. The best practice bus-train interchanges on the Joondalup line in Perth were found to have a fixed transfer penalty of 6 minutes (on top of walking and waiting time). If similar quality bus-train interchanges were implemented on a Doncaster line, a 5 minute scheduled transfer would have a total transfer penalty equivalent to 16 minutes of in-vehicle time. The 5 minute transfer time alone would probably cancel out any travel time saving of rail, but the total transfer penalty would make the bus + train combination less attractive than the current single bus trip offering. For people with impaired mobility, the impact would be even greater. The introduction of transfer penalties for a significant proportion of existing journeys BusSolutions_5

6 [Continued from page 5] Buses on the Eastern Freeway bypass traffic congestion using the emergency stopping lane. After six years of progressive service upgrades, patronage has grown by over 6%. to the Melbourne CBD is likely to be one of the biggest barriers to establishing a viable business case for a heavy rail line to Doncaster. Would heavy rail to Doncaster be more frequent? Frequency is one of the most important attributes of public transport services in attracting patronage. Conversion from bus to heavy rail will significantly reduce service frequencies and increase waiting times for almost all existing passengers, which will also erode any travel time savings. Current peak period timetables have around 45 buses per hour between Manningham and the city, which is the equivalent capacity to around 2¼ six-car trains. Allowing for patronage growth, at best, three to four trains per hour might be operated in peak periods around half the frequency of most existing SmartBus routes in the corridor. Given low existing demand for off-peak travel, it would be difficult to justify more than three 3-car trains per hour in the off-peak. Such low frequencies contrast with 15 buses per hour between Doncaster Park and Ride and the city in peak periods, and 8 buses per hour in the inter-peak. Would heavy rail to Doncaster increase patronage? The 28 final report of the East West Link Needs Assessment study found that in 221, heavy rail would carry around 24,5 people per weekday, compared to 2, on DART bus services. They found that only 2,5 of these additional trips would be new public transport users, translating into a 2% increase in public transport mode share. BusSolutions_6 While it is not clear how these calculations were performed, the higher attractiveness of heavy rail offset by the impact of transfer penalties, means conversion to heavy rail would probably do little to increase public transport use. The cost of heavy rail to Doncaster Hill was estimated at $1.7-2 billion (in 28 dollars). By comparison, a lump sum of $2 billion could put around 2 additional full time buses on the road for every year into the future, providing a very considerable and much needed boost to bus service levels in Melbourne and regional Victoria. How is Manningham s bus solution performing? Over the last five years, there have been progressive upgrades to bus services between Manningham and the city, most recently with the upgrading of four routes to SmartBus service levels in October 21. These routes provide services every 7-1 minutes in peak periods, and every 15 minutes during most of the rest of the day on weekdays. to reach the city. The growth in Eastern Freeway bus patronage is likely to represent the diversion of some of these trips, helping to relieve pressure on the rail network. Based on 26 census data, around 48% of Manningham residents are within 4 metres of a bus stop on one of these four SmartBus routes. When considering other Eastern Freeway bus services, the majority of residents in Manningham have a direct one seat public transport service to the city. How can bus services be improved? The investment in increased service frequency and capacity has paid off. Ticketing data suggests that patronage on routes connecting the city and Manningham grew by over 6% between 25 and March 211, as shown in the following chart (note that ticket validations generally represent around 9% of passenger boardings, for various reasons): Average school week ticket validations on Eastern Freeway bus services between Manningham 8 and the Melbourne CBD (Source: DOT, BusVic analysis) Further service level improvements that could be made relatively quickly and cheaply, include later Sunday evening services and increased peak period frequency to increase capacity Reductions in bus travel times and increased reliability could be achieved through greater bus priority, with initiatives such as: implementing proposed bus lanes along Victoria Parade and Hoddle Street between the CBD and Eastern Freeway; using freeway on-ramp traffic signals to create gaps in traffic to allow buses to cross on-ramps more easily while travelling in emergency stopping lanes; and providing short green left-arrow phases at traffic signals in busy areas, to clear left turning traffic in front of buses using bus lanes. Left turning traffic waiting for pedestrians to cross is a major source of delay in the CBD (Feb-Jul) According to the 26 census, 32% of Manningham public transport commuters used the Ringwood or Hurstbridge lines In conclusion, all the evidence suggests that the economic viability of building a railway line to Doncaster is likely to be low for some time to come, primarily due to weak existing (latent) demand and the inconvenience of forcing commuters to transfer from bus to train. Current patronage growth is proving buses can attract strong patronage growth, and further improvements to the bus services could be made at a much lower cost than building heavy rail. A heavy rail line is only likely to be viable if there was very considerable densification in land use around train station sites.

7 Bus boost to Monash University A new high frequency shuttle bus service is proving a winner with staff and students commuting to Monash University s Clayton campus. The upgrade also provides a much needed boost to capacity to cope with growing patronage. Route 61 operates alongside existing routes 63 and 9 to provide around 26 buses per hour between Huntingdale and Monash through most of the day (during university semester). That s capacity for over 1,1 seated passengers per hour. In the past, overcrowding has been a significant issue at the start of each university year, with many first time students switching to car travel. With a significant boost to public transport capacity and frequency, public transport is now well placed to retain many more first year students in 212. This in turn should reduce car parking pressures on campus, allowing more room for green space and teaching facilities. The increased capacity also eases overcrowding on existing routes 63 and 9, providing a faster and more comfortable travel experience for those travelling beyond Huntingdale station or the university campus. The high frequency also means passengers never have to wait long for a bus, even if their train is late. And if one bus is full, the next bus will never be far away. The 61 is a pre-paid service, which makes loading buses quicker, and myki customers are able to board the bus from the rear door. High frequency bus services are also provided to Monash Clayton campus from Clayton station (8 buses per hour) and Oakleigh station (8 buses an hour). Other successful university bus services Buses provide critical transport connections to many other university campuses, particularly those not situated on the rail network. According the Melbourne household travel survey data (VISTA 27), a quarter of trips to tertiary institutions were over 9kms in length, and at least 56% of full time tertiary students live at home with their parents. As many students cannot easily afford to own and operate a car, this places high demand on public transport. [Continued on page 8] BusSolutions_7 Launched in July 211 as a 12 month trial, new bus route 61 runs express between Huntingdale Station and Monash University during university semester. A four minute frequency operates from 7am to 7pm, with a 12 minute evening service operating until around 9:3pm

8 BusSolutions_8 [Continued from page 7] Other recent upgrades to bus services to universities include: In October 21, bus route 67 was upgraded to run every 15 minutes on weekdays, and was extended from Lilydale station to Swinburne University s Lilydale campus, providing a significant increase in frequency and capacity to the campus. In October 21, peak period shuttle services were introduced on route 91 between Dandenong station and Chisholm TAFE Dandenong campus. In 21, the capacity of bus services between Box Hill station and Deakin University Burwood campus more than doubled, between 7am and 7pm during university semester. In 28, bus route 41 was introduced between North Melbourne station and the Parkville precinct (including Melbourne University). This service operates every 3 minutes in peak periods and has removed thousands of commuters from the city loop rail network each day. In 28, bus route 561 between Reservoir station, Latrobe University and MacLeod station was upgraded in frequency and span of hours, and patronage increased by around 8% between 27 and 21. The route has since been extended west to Coburg, providing a stronger cross-town link in the northern suburbs. Also in 28, route 551 between Heidelberg station and La Trobe University was upgraded to operate every 15 minutes in peak periods, and patronage has increased by around 3% between 27 and 21 as a result. However not all university and TAFE campuses have high frequency public transport. For example, Monash University s Peninsula Campus can only be reached from Frankston station by 2-3 buses per hour and 8-1 trains per day. There has been no action on recommendations to upgrades to bus services to this campus since the Bus Service Review was completed in 29. Victoria s new Public Transport Development Authority The new State Government has announced a new Public Transport Development Authority (PTDA) will be established as part of shake-up of transport administration in Victoria. This represents a rare opportunity to significantly reform transport governance and management, and BusVic believes it is critical that the new structure is well designed. A new structure can overcome confusion and inefficiency resulting from a myriad of different agencies, and drive stronger integration across the transport portfolio. BusVic commissioned Professor John Stanley from the University of Sydney to research best practice models of similar authorities in other jurisdictions, and make recommendations for Victoria. Some of the key recommendations of his report include: An independent board for the PTDA, including an independent chair, two local government representatives, two state government representatives, two community representatives and three persons with high level public transport understanding (rail and bus related) That the new organisation structure has a strong focus on better integration of transport, both with other portfolios such as land use planning and between transport modes. That the Department of Transport retains strategic planning and policy functions, while the new PTDA is focussed on planning and delivering services and infrastructure (similar to VicRoads). The establishment of a small independent expert group to advise the Minister on strategic/policy matters in transport. The full report can be downloaded from BusVic s website Send us your feedback We want to hear from you about what you think of BusSolutions. Please send your feedback to: BusSolutions@busvic.asn.au. About BusVic Bus Association Victoria Inc (BusVic) is the industry representative body for Victoria s accredited route, school, tour and charter and non-accredited (registered) bus and coach operators. We represent the best interests of members in a variety of ways, most importantly in respect of their relationship with Government and its Agencies, including contract negotiation and legislative and regulatory compliance. We also deliver a suite of products and services to the industry that add value to member operators businesses. We advocate the cost effectiveness and demand responsive capability of buses and how this capability benefits social inclusion, public health, energy conservation, oil reliance and urban congestion. Key personnel: Chris Lowe (Executive Director), Keith Foote (Director Member Services), Peter Kavanagh (Legal Manager), Craig Spurr (Tourism Industry Development Manager). Back issues of BusSolutions are now available on the BusVic website Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the Victorian Department of Transport, the Oliver Hume Real Estate Company, the City of Whittlesea, Adjunct Professor John Stanley and Professor Graham Currie for their assistance with data, information and feedback that helped make this issue of BusSolutions possible. We would also like to acknowledge WaiveStar Group for design, print and distribution of BusSolutions.