Wollongong Rt. 55 Commenced Service & Split into 55A/C

[tonyp]

'Accessible' does NOT just mean 'usable by wheelchairs'.

Almost nobody gets it do they?

[Linto63]

Accessible' does NOT just mean 'usable by wheelchairs'.

Of course it doesn't, accessible is far more embracing than just those in wheelchairs, but there are the least mobile. Much like I used the term 'less abled' rather than 'disabled' as this likewise is more encompassing,

[tonyp]

Of course, most people would guess that this didn't just come up overnight, but it epitomises this government's negativity and small-mindedness about public transport that the main concern might be "people getting a free ride", rather than focussing on the broader benefits in the whole context of the state's planning. This sets NSW markedly apart from other states and territories and highlights its lack of genuine long-term strategies.

Even if the "free ride" and wanting to spread the load over more routes is a genuine concern, then they would have been working away for at least the past year renewing the fleets of the Wollongong operators with two-door buses in readiness for the change. The fact that they haven't indicates that they're not actually serious about this.

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... e-says-mp/

Govt never liked the Gong Shuttle, says MP

Glen Humphries

Wollongong MP Paul Scully reckons the NSW government has long been opposed to the Gong Shuttle.

Mr Scully said there were rumours as far back as 2011 the government was looking to introduce fares but only now has it found “the courage” to do it.

There were signs of the government’s plan months ago.

During a budget estimates hearing on September 1, a question was lodged with Transport Minister Andrew Constance asking if the government was planning a fare for the Gong Shuttle.

In a 145-word response Mr Constance never directly answered that question – which made Mr Scully think a fare was on the cards.

“At it’s heart this government has never liked this idea [of a free shuttle],” Mr Scully said.

“They don’t accept, I don’t think, that this has actually been of benefit to the city. They see it as somehow someone is getting a free ride.”

Transport for NSW did not respond to the Mercury’s questions about how long the fare was planned.

[Swift]

Just another example showing that the government in this state are all about deceiving it's constituents rather than making a difference and serving them.

[Tonymercury]

Accessible' does NOT just mean 'usable by wheelchairs'.

Of course it doesn't, accessible is far more embracing than just those in wheelchairs, but there are the least mobile. Much like I used the term 'less abled' rather than 'disabled' as this likewise is more encompassing,

So why did you only connect my use of 'accessible' to wheelchair lifts?

[tonyp]

"Mobility-impaired" is the generic term. "Accessibility" is about enabling the mobility-impaired to move about with most independence, least restriction and least need for artificial aids upon which they might be dependent.

[tonyp]

Shock-horror, government fails to honour promise. Probably hardly worth reporting, but if we just reported kept promises there'd be nothing to write about:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... tle/?cs=12

Edit - also:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... fare-plan/

In fairness, Gareth has sent my representations on to the Minister on his own initiative. This includes extensive reference to similar services in other states.

[moa999]

"We will continue to operate the [s]free[/s] shuttle bus in the Wollongong city centre"

Over 90% the same. No problem. /s

[tonyp]

Shock-horror, politician displays small-mindedness, while simultaneously performing (not) his brief as local Parliamentary Secretary to represent the interests of the Illawarra:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... rd/?cs=300

Take care of the petty point-scoring and the responsible management of the state and its cities will sort itself out.

Edit:

Also this:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... on/?cs=300

and this:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... ng/?cs=300

[tonyp]

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... g-shuttle/

On casual observation over the past few days, most buses running the service are in TfNSW colours and without the branding wrap. They are all equipped with Opal readers and simply have the destination display "55A/C City Loop". Considering the importance of the branding for visitors to the city, it seems an overenthusiastically early effort by TfNSW to get its groundwork laid in preparation for what it apparently sees as the inevitable interment of the service.

Great transport policy in NSW. Take the most successful bus service in the state, force the reduction of patronage as much as you can and then, as presumably the ultimate intention, cancel it for lack of patronage. That's why I nickname it "Transport against New South Wales."

I've persuaded Gareth Ward to write to Wollongong Council and UOW to open discussion about the option of joint funding of the service. I also suggested to him that it was a double standard to call people "entitled" for expecting to ride free on a highly effective $3.5 million p.a. bus service that reduces traffic congestion, yet not call them entitled for expecting a free drive on the $600 million Albion Park M1 bypass that will increase traffic congestion through induced demand. The consistent thing to do is that if they want a fare on the Gong Shuttle, then there should be a toll on the motorway.

Edit, just in:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... le/?cs=304

The wrap may be coming off the buses but it's going up everywhere else.

Edit:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... ed/?cs=304

[Tonymercury]

Great transport policy in NSW. Take the most successful bus service in the state, force the reduction of patronage as much as you can and then, as presumably the ultimate intention, cancel it for lack of patronage.

Just another demonstration that nothing has really changed for decades.

[Swift]

Shock-horror, politician displays small-mindedness,

Less shock than horror here.

[tonyp]

Great transport policy in NSW. Take the most successful bus service in the state, force the reduction of patronage as much as you can and then, as presumably the ultimate intention, cancel it for lack of patronage.

Just another demonstration that nothing has really changed for decades.

A policy developed and refined on the trams, then left set on "Auto" ever since. STA its most successful practitioner - absolute genius being able to stop patronage growing at all for decades in the face of constant population growth. Railways not so successful, overwhelmed by immigration. Wollongong heretics busted rejecting the automobile.

More:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... ou/?cs=300

Demonstration in city centre this afternoon.

[Tonymercury]

Railways not so successful, overwhelmed by immigration.

And in days long past, August 1986, I overheard a conversation among native Poms on the Outer Circle platform at Baker Street -

'In Sydney you can still buy decent houses 20 minutes by train from the city for 40,000 quid!'

If only!

[Swift]

Makes you question why we continue with the populate or perish mantra like it's still the 1950s. I think we have long reached saturation point but the pc brigade don't want immigration programmes stopped.

[tonyp]

Rally today, about 500 people I believe. I got to Crown St too late to see it.

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... sults-fly/

The buses were very busy, even at Sunday 20 minute headways. The one I caught back was full to standees. They remind me very much of the Perth CBD CATs in their busyness. If the Gong shuttle carries 3.5 million a year and the four Perth CBD CAT routes carry 8.5 million ppa at last count, the Gong Shuttle obviously more than holds its own with any one of the Perth CAT routes. If it's also the busiest bus route in NSW, TfNSW must have been gagging at the (imagined) foregone fares. Now I understand why the drivers count the passengers, so that TfNSW can count the (imagined) money it's losing. Their motto should be "we know the price of everything and the value of nothing".

Of course, when they try to recover the costs, the extra costs incurred on roads and parking when cars flood back into the city centre will be disregarded.

[burrumbus]

Agreed Tony.The $3.5 million spent on the Gong Shuttle is actually extremely cheap compared to the extra costs not considered as you outline.Also the social and enviromental benefits of having many less cars in the CBD.As usual with TFNSW a very short sighted decision.

[Swift]

I think it is mainly an ideological driven decision from the top. They fiercely believe in user pays principle and this Labor initiative is a bugbear they have been itching to remove any way that can.

[tonyp]

I think it is mainly an ideological driven decision from the top. They fiercely believe in user pays principle and this Labor initiative is a bugbear they have been itching to remove any way that can.

Yet ironically, the biggest free city-centre operations in Australia - Perth and Melbourne - were kicked off by Liberal governments: Kennet in Victoria and Richard Court in WA, two real arch-capitalists if ever there were. Presumably they knew what everybody with any sense knows, that congestion undermines the economic efficiency of a city.

More ideological heresy:

https://www.nswbusinesschamber.com.au/M ... e?topic=32

[Swift]

It seems they just can't resist an instant shaving of $3 million in an area that would never vote them in anyway and to hell with the immense and sustained damage it will cause, and how petty it will make them look. Yet these same posers keep talking up their vision for Sydney in 40 years. Can you imagine Tom Lewis thinking of where we would be in 2015 in 1975??
This is why I never would vote for a Liberal state government in NSW. They cause too much damage when they obtain power, with their selfish selective short sighted attitude to running (ruining) the state.

[tonyp]

Just as I thought. The service is full to capacity for up to half of its weekday hours and for some of the weekend. So instead of either inserting more buses to close the headways, increasing capacity of each bus by loading each bus more effectively, or even replacing the fleet with articulated buses, TaNSW's solution is to cap off and discourage demand. I told ya:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... questions/

More:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... ee/?cs=300

[tonyp]

Response from WCC and UOW to Gareth Ward's letter - both make valid points:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... ee/?cs=300

This is an interesting test case for this sort of service and it will be interesting to see what comes out of it. There's no lack of precedent around Australia for the various funding options. It's a matter of everybody lifting their sights enough to seriously start looking at it.

The one thing certain and non-negotiable is that it must remain fare-free, or it won't work. The numpties who run around yelling "user-pays" have absolutely no idea of the reasons for this type of service, how it works and why it works.

It's also a remarkable "coming of age" for bus services in Australia because of the extraordinary public support for a bus service. This is something hardly seen anywhere, let alone Australia. It's a refutation of those who think that people prefer rail to bus and supports my long-held view that people are attracted to the transport that best suits their needs, regardless of mode. Rail does have a positive attraction for sure, but it's far from black and white and is very situation-specific.

[tonyp]

Liberals close ranks:

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... on/?cs=300

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... ney/?cs=12

Continuously lost in the debate is that the reason for having fare-free central area circulators is that this is what it takes to drag people out of their cars - particularly in Australia and particularly in regional Australia. It saves central areas from being overrun by traffic, road expansion and loss of valuable land to parking infrastructure. Congestion costs money and impacts the efficient economic functioning of a city.

It's expected that many of the general public would be ignorant of these urban planning issues, but government and its planning and transport agencies should be well aware of them and work to address them anyway. This will yet again be another decision that puts NSW public transport behind the rest of Australia.

[burrumbus]

Completely agreed Tony with your last 2 posts.Every service and situation is different and different services work and fail for different reasons.That is why,in my view that each area and service needs a different response to meet that area's needs.That's one of the errors in much of Australian transport planning and operations.The one style of operation fits all situations doesn't work.
We've got a service in the Gong Shuttle that in a regional city that has been amazingly successful.That success is based on its routing,frequency and the free service.As Tony points out the cost in congestion,wasted CBD land in parking areas is ,in the long term far more expensive than the $3.5 million it costs to run the Gong Shuttle.As Swift said silly right wing ideology seems to have driven this decision.
And as Tony pointed out it does proove the punters will use buses,or any mode,when the right service is operated.Something the boffins at TFNSW should learn to appreciate and plan for.

[tonyp]

The irony is that silly right-wing ideologues kicked off free transit in WA and Victoria. Every sensible business person knows that congestion in cities has an economic cost. Even Gladys understood that once but she's either been nobbled or corrupted by power since.