Proposed Changes: Stirling, Tuart Hill and Joondanna Service

[TP-2051]

from Transperth website

Transperth is inviting public comment on proposed changes to Routes 403 and 404 servicing Tuart Hill, Joondanna and Stirling.

As part of this review, Transperth is asking passengers to select one of the following proposals (Proposal 1A, 1B, 1C or 2A, 2B or 2C) as their preferred outcome and provide feedback to help us better service the Joondanna and Tuart Hill communities.

Representatives from Transperth will be able to discuss the proposed service changes as follows:

• Wellington St Bus Station infocentre 7/11/13 from 2:30pm-5:30pm
• Dog Swamp Shopping Centre 7/11/13 from 2pm-7pm
• Osborne Public Library 9/11/13 from 9:30am-11:30pm
• Centro Flinders 9/11/13 from 12:30pm-2:30pm

Proposal 1: Route 403 and 404 to be merged into a combined route known as the 403
- The new proposed route will have the same frequency as 403 and 404 combined.
- The new proposed route will be served in coordination with the 402 service to serve Loftus St
- The new proposed route will no longer serve streets under this option:

• Waterloo St
• Federal St
• Main St between Waterloo St and Swan St
• Swan St between Main St and York St
• York St between Swan St and Royal St
• McDonald St between Stoneham St and Edinboro St
• Edinboro St between McDonald St and Powell St
• Powell St between Edinboro St and Osborne St
• Osborne St between Powell St and Green St
• Green St between Osborne St and London St
• Green St between Stoneham St and Banksia St
• London St between Green St and Woodstock St
• Stoneham St between Powell St and Green St.

Not to mention there's a retirement village at Osbourne St, will require greater walking distances.

- The new proposed route will also extend towards Stirling Station
- Theres serveral options towards extending Stirling towards the newer estates of Princeton and San Remo option A, B or C
Option A:
- Extending to Stirling Station via Royal St,Albert St, Hamilton St, Swan St, Albert St, North Beach Dr, Access Rd, Karrinyup Drive and Cedric St
Option B:
- Extending to Stirling Station via Candella Square (middle of the estate)
Option C:
- Extending to Stirling Station via Messina Avenue (outer edge of the estate)

Proposal Two: Keeping the routes 403 and 404 with minor changes to route 404

Under this proposal, route 404 is proposed to undergo a minor route change, withdrawing services from Tuart Hill north of Royal St, although Routes 403 and 404 would be retained as two separate routes through Joondanna.

The frequency for those routes will be the same as before.
- The modified version of the 404 will no longer serve streets under this option:

• Waterloo St
• Federal St
• Main St between Waterloo St and Swan St
• Swan St between Main St and York St
• York St between Swan St and Royal St.

Extensions to 403 and Modified 404 will be extended to Stirling Train Station to connect residences at Princeton estate and San Remo.
Route 403 and Route 404 south of Royal St will be unchanged.

[TP-2051]

Maps for the routes:

Proposal 1: Proposed Combined Route 403

Proposal 2: Proposed 403 and 404

[900 series]

Agree with extending to Stirling, would be much better than the current 403 terminus in a random suburban back street (and once again similar to proposals by members of this forum...

Option A along the current 403 route looks like another milk-run though on paper route c looks more direct and also covers more ground (Karrinyup Road already has Circleroute) - am I missing any real-life flaws?

http://www.transperth.wa.gov.au/Service ... fault.aspx - and email submissions close 15th November

[Q4004]

Option B for me. Really because sometimes it takes a bit of time to get off Karrinyup Road without a set of lights where as option B the route turns off Karrinyup Road at traffic lights.

[Mr OC Benz]

It is good that maps have finally been posted. Really, I am looking at it from the perspective of catchment area and distances from other services etc. By doing the single Route 403 alignment, it provides a fairly equal catchment for the Joondanna area between Scarborough Beach Rd and Wanneroo Rd. There's no real additional resources, but perhaps the combined route is the way to go as alternative routes are within close proximity anyway.

As for Option A, it is just the reflection of keeping as close to original route as possible and the reason that the (current) terminus is there is probably because when the route was established, the neighbouring streets did not exist. Option A would put the 403 at close proximity to Main St and Circle Route bus stop and is probably not necessary. Meanwhile Option B and C are good because they travel through areas not directly/conveniently served by public transport. Not only that, but the route is relatively more straight forward and direct. While Q4004 raises a good point with Option B, I would suspect that even if there was an impact of time on the route for Option C, it would be outweighed by the benefits of a service in the area which would put many more residents within closer proximity of a bus service and also evenly distribute the catchment other nearby services such as the 402, 414, 428 and the Circle Route.

[laptop15]

^^ C for me too, means more people are within the '500m of a public transport stop' that TP is after.

[TP-2051]

^^ you got to be joking , the elderly can't walk that far!!! surveyed lots of them in that area they could only walk 200 metres and thats it!. I'm sorry got to disagree with the combined route. Theres a retirement village within Osbourne Street and Heavy traffic along Green St!! and i'm pretty sure the elderly will struggle to get across that street... I have to stick with proposal two! and option B, it will benefit passengers along the estate and hopefully some train connections!

[laptop15]

Does it look like I'm joking?

[TP-2051]

^^ Yes!!

[laptop15]

Osborne street is extremely close to the new route and if its still to far away a couple of diverting services wont hurt, there is no justification for a whole route, and when will people need to cross Green street? they can either walk east to the 403 or south to the 402/400 and besides they have to cross it anyway one way or the other to get off or get on.... I fail to see the problem?

[Mr OC Benz]

The people from the retirement village probably only make up a small proportion of users on the service anyway. Many other routes and deviations have been trialled in the past, with consideration about nearby retirement villages and having an easy access to services, but these never seem to be fulfilled and end up being canned or severely restricted anyway.

I was inclined to think that running both routes was good, but this was before i was able to put it to picture on provided maps. I can compare it to the 341/342 which I use quite frequently, but the catchment of potential passengers is much more difficult to achieve with just one route. In Joondanna, no matter which option is chosen, the majority of people will be within close distance to either the 403, or the Wanneroo Rd or Scarborough Beach Rd services. If it turns out that it'll be further to walk to the new 403 than the alternatives, then boohoo, I can think of many areas where people don't even get this privilege of choice!

[Bus Suggestions]

Sorry to post on a 4-year old thread but does anybody here have a copy of the service maps that came along with this?
Thanks to any body who can send them to me

[busdriver12]

Sorry to post on a 4-year old thread but does anybody here have a copy of the service maps that came along with this?
Thanks to any body who can send them to me

Below are links to maps of the two proposals put out at the time:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/bbi1piwyxtf2x ... b.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/y1pnfni350qko ... b.pdf?dl=0

Dropbox has recently changed the way you can share files, so let me know if these links do not work

[Bus Suggestions]

Thank you! And don't worry they work!

[theenglishguy]

Surprised they kept the 404 really. It runs so infrequently that it's not really useful to anyone.

Have to say, that's my biggest criticism of buses in Perth - too many routes that run too infrequently. My thoughts are that if it doesn't run on a Sunday, then it's not worth running on a weekday either. Instead just focus on the core routes and make them as useful as possible to people living nearby.

Maybe one day I'll post a list of routes that I'd like to see gone - could probably cut 1/3 of routes without causing too many issues.

[Merc1107]

Have to say, that's my biggest criticism of buses in Perth - too many routes that run too infrequently. My thoughts are that if it doesn't run on a Sunday, then it's not worth running on a weekday either. Instead just focus on the core routes and make them as useful as possible to people living nearby.

I noticed that about at least a couple of the routes in the Mandurah area are hourly off-peak, bi-hourly Saturdays and no Sunday service. Whilst Mandurah has grown massively in the ten years the railway has been open, it certainly begs the question of whether that many people really use public transport in the area.
I'd disagree that services that don't run on Sundays should be axed altogether, it simply seems that some areas have a population that use public transport for peak-period travel, and outside of that, cars reign supreme.

I've seen some of the timetabling for the "after hours" routing of yesteryear, where several routes, already very long, meandering and indirect were combined to reduce route kilometres. Doing that today wouldn't give much incentive to using public transport. Hourly service is better than nothing, but for people who need or want to go somewhere yesterday, it is simply too inconvenient to use the bus network. If people could actually go out and about with the buses, without lengthy waits, I think patronage off-peak would be better (but by how much?)

In another thread recently, discussion has revolved around Sunday frequency, with it being notable that overall patronage is far lower than any other day. Even so - is this because people know the network is relatively unusable (outside high-frequency buses and rail), or because their travels take them to rural areas?

[Mr OC Benz]

Surprised they kept the 404 really. It runs so infrequently that it's not really useful to anyone.

Considering that when the proposal was implemented, they realigned the 403 as planned, but retained the 404 as is (albeit with less trips), my suspicion was it was just to succumb to a minority. The 403 realignment means that at anytime, they could withdraw the 404 without issues associated with catchment areas or having to modify any of the routes in the area again.

I'd really be interested to see if the trips it operates Monday to Saturday actually carry many people on the unique sections (which are very close walking distance to the 403 anyway). Or maybe they just haven't reviewed the routes in the area since. It hasn't happened yet, but to avoid backlash, they could slowly reduce the number of trips (in much the same way as the 375 and 379 have virtually disappeared), although I'd imagine it'd be more exciting to watch paint dry than wait for this to happen!

On the topic of infrequent (or non 7-day) routes, I think there are more examples of routes which should run on a Sunday, but currently don't (funding I guess), than there is those which aren't worth running or could be consolidated (I.e. This scenario).

And while on the 403, check out the last bus departure on a Sunday - 5:45pm! Compared with 11:28pm on weekdays and 10:08pm on Saturdays. Basically gives the impression that on a Sunday, unless you're going retail shopping in the city, just take the car! There's a lot of new apartments being proposed and built along Loftus St, so I really hope they boost the operating hours on Sundays if new residents are to have any chance of adopting better travel habits.

[circleroute]

There's been a history of new subdivisions strongly opposing buses travelling through their flash new estates. Anyone remember the opposition, petitions and blocking of buses when the 428 route was via the Roselea estate? The PTA gave in to the complainers and changed the route - not taking into account that there were residents of the estate (retirees, school kids, car-less etc) who used the service and wanted it retained. A similar scenario could occur should the option via Princeton be changed with more services through that new estate (in my very humble opinion)


Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

[Bus Suggestions]

Surprised they kept the 404 really. It runs so infrequently that it's not really useful to anyone.

Really? Ask someone who lives along the route north of Royal St first! (i.e. Me)

[Mr OC Benz]

How about to non-enthusiast passengers?

[Bus Suggestions]

It may not seem too interesting to them, but to others it is an important route that cannot be lost. However, I still think having it terminate behind an IGA, secluded in a small back road isn't the best place to terminate a service. Perhaps it could extend somewhere else in the future.

[theenglishguy]

It may not seem too interesting to them, but to others it is an important route that cannot be lost. However, I still think having it terminate behind an IGA, secluded in a small back road isn't the best place to terminate a service. Perhaps it could extend somewhere else in the future.

Why is it important? It runs very infrequently (9 trips into the city, 7 trip out on weekdays and 7 trips each way on Saturdays) and the hours of operation are useless for anyone who isn't on a pension (and sorry, but our inner city public transport network should cater for more than just the elderly). Even someone working 9-5pm isn't going to bother using it because of how infrequent it is.

Here are the departure times during the peak:

From Waterloo/Royal into the city (AM): 6:36am, 6:56am, 7:15am, 7:45am and 9:15am
From the city to Waterloo/Royal (PM): 3:50pm, 5:15pm and 5:45pm

The gaps between trips are way too long and alternative routes provide a significantly better level of service. Anyone living on the 404 route is going to walk 200m to either the 403 (runs every 10 mins in peak) or the 970 (runs every 5 mins in peak). It isn't too much to ask people to walk 5 mins to their nearest bus stop - that's what people in the rest of Perth do every day!

Very few people would miss the 404 if it disappeared - the PTA have already set the stage, all they need to do now is give the it the final chop (and hopefully soon!)

[sylar]

I live in the Osborne Park residential area (north of hutton & royal streets) which is serviced by the 402 (main st), 403 (royal / hutton st's) and 404 (royal / main st's). Mon to Fri I use the 402T in the mornings to get into the city and in the afternoons I use either the 402F or 403F to get home again. A few times late last year for shits n giggles I gave the 404 a go in peak and off peak and agree that this route is a waste and not needed due to poor patronage, a lot of duplication with the 403 and the weird last leg of the route and terminus in Tuart Hill. The distance for Tuart Hill residents to walk to main st for the 402 or royal st for the 403 is minimal and this is the same for the residents north and south of green street.

I would like to see the 404 abolished with the resources reallocated to the 402 and 403 instead.