Options for Better PT
A suite of posts by Urbanist blogger Alan Davies highlight several issues around transport infrastructure in Melbourne, and how we can learn from other cities, such as Auckland.
A recent post explores Auckland's new draft transport plan, which proposes regular interval services, new services focused around buses and a whole heap of connecting services linking commuters to different routes, thereby greatly increasing PT options.
I was also impressed to hear that this plan is likely to be implemented by 2016!
|Auckland's proposed Frequent Service Network (2016)|
"The key concern, though, is they’d cost many billions of dollars and take many years – probably decades – to complete... Moreover, they’d also add many fewer kilometres to the network than the kind of approach envisaged for Auckland"
So, when you compare the huge cost of massive infrastructure projects like new underground services, side by side with cheaper options relying on buses (particularly bus rapid transit) and increasing networks between services, it makes you wonder not only which is more effective, but also, which one is more likely to be implemented?
I'm not saying that I wouldn't love a metro - this info just raises a few extra options. These posts consider things like better networks between existing routes, more use of road infrastructure for bus rapid transit, and more frequent services on existing routes to make PT a better option for more Melbournians. What do you think our PT priorities should be?