Ring roads and buses - welcome to Congested Canberra 2031

A new ACT Transport strategy 'Transport for a Sustainable City 2012-2031' was released by the ACT Government yesterday. Naturally there was a strong focus on the ACTION network, and how this can be improved and attract more patronage. Some of the proposals are quite positive. It is good to see a 7 day network, hopefully this will do away with ridiculous route renumberings on the weekends which confuse even seasoned public transport users. Increased frequency is also welcome. The broad plans to improve the ACTION network are welcome. 

You can download the full document here. 

Media release here.

No commitment to light rail

Reading the entire document brings a sense of disappointment. Ultimately the new strategy squibs real commitment to public transport infrastructure. It continues to hedge bets and attempt to mollify public transport advocates by mentioning light rail in association with bus rapid transit. Light Rail as a standalone issue is not mentioned in the document until page 15 - where the abandoned and ill-supported bid to Infrastructure Australia is listed as under 'Transport Highlights 2001-2011'. That the ACT Government regards failure as a highlight in relation to public transport would be funny if it weren't so reflective of this governments approach to public transport. The spin is spun, and you and I ride the results every day. 

While the work on establishing the rapid routes is to be commended, the government is only setting itself up for long term failure in its stated public transport objectives. It continues to use these rapid transport corridors and promised results, in its push to rapidly densify Canberra - especially along the transport corridors. 

Unless a proper mass transit technology - the most logical being light rail - is built simultaneously to the now occurring densification, the resultant road congestion will further clog Canberra's road arteries. The report even states that private car ownership is still rising in percentage terms - defying its 2004 policy projections. 

The strongest 'committment' to light rail in this new policy is the following statement from p.22 

All our infrastructure feasibility studies include assessments of alternative public transport technology. For example, the City to Gungahlin transit corridor study will see the ACT Government work in partnership with the National Capital Authority and the Canberra community and business sector to create a vision for a transit- oriented corridor. Mass public transport will make the most of the development opportunities from existing land use settings and highlight the national significance of this entry to Canberra. The ACT Government will continue to explore funding opportunities for light rail and bus rapid transport with the Australian Government and private sector, and planning for light rail (or bus rapid transit designed for later conversion to light rail) is at the centre of planning for this corridor. 

In other words - the ACT Government want someone else, anybody else really except themselves, to pay for light rail.  The message is clear and consistent from the Stanhope through to the Gallagher government. Road funding is fine - public transport is secondary - make that last.  

While the 2012-2031 Transport Strategy maintains that all future planning must make provision for light rail, the real truth is that there is no financial commitment to this goal. All planning and infrastructure engineering is based on buses and recently on-road cycle paths. There has been no engineering study conducted on a light rail network in Canberra. This has consistently been asked for by ACT Light Rail. 

Infrastructure Australia guidelines required this most basic level of planning for its bids - yet the ACT Government submitted a bid without knowing what they actually needed, or how much it could cost. More has been spent on engineering plans for on-road cycle paths than light rail routes. 

Ring roads - the future of ACT transport infrastructure spending

Roads and road spending have always been a favourite photo opportunity for our local politicians. Who can forget all local ALP politicians standing in front of a scale model of the Infrastructure Australia funded Majura Parkway? Well hang on for the ride because the 2012-2031 Transport Strategy tells us that the future transport infrastructure major spending commitment in Canberra wont be public transport but -  a ring road. 

Ironically, this announcement on p.46 of the 2012 Transport Strategy is on the same page as a long dissertation on the economic detriment that road congestion causes the economy. The ACT Governments own submission on light rail to Infrastructure Australia pointed out that Light Rail would reduce congestion. The solution to road congestion is not to build more roads. Ask anyone using the GDE. 

The increasing densification along the 'transport corridors' will result not only in more road congestion, but also in increased rates as the high-rise building corridors begin to fill with residents. That this ratepayers money will build ring roads, and not public transport infrastructure is a cruel joke. light rail along these transport corridors will reduce road congestion. More roads will not. 

If the government had a serious commitment to reducing road congestion it could start by eliminating the causes of that congestion before it arises. The new Molonglo development is a prime example. This was an opportunity for the Government to show commitment to public transport by either constructing a light rail route linking Molonglo to Civic or a dedicated bus way, that could be converted to light rail at a later stage. 

By providing visible public transport prior to residents populating the new town of Molonglo, the residents would be able to choose this ahead of their private car. Instead the government has decided to go with on-road buses. The investment in public transport in Molonglo is minimal. It follows consistent public transport policy failure in Gungahlin - which despite having buses at capacity - still cant decrease the number of people using their private car for work trips. 

Show leadership by funding public transport not more roads

The ACT Government needs to show real leadership and commitment to Canberra's future transport needs and build Light Rail. It needs to begin by committing to an engineering study, then establishing a method to fund light rail construction, beginning with one route. We do not need more studies, They occur every electoral cycle. 

Bus-ness as usual: draft 'Transport for Canberra' policy released

Last week the ACT Government released its draft ‘Transport for Canberra’ policy plan and it is underwhelming.  The ACT Government is pursuing a medium to high density housing strategy, and using the ‘public transport, ‘transit route’ etc reasoning to justify it. The policy has no funding models attached to it and states several times that buses are the future for Canberra’s public transport. Where light rail is mentioned, it is scant, and promises a ‘study’. Not once is the Infrastructure Australia bid for light rail funding from only two years ago mentioned.

The draft policy plan discusses openly the aim that medium and high density housing will be built along ‘transit corridors’ which means bus routes. By encouraging medium and high density housing, without providing the proper public transport to support it, Canberra will experience all the disadvantages of high density housing, and none of the advantages.

Aiming low and redefining success

Sadly, the draft transport policy, which is meant to guide ACT transport planning until 2031, aims low. The percentage of people the ACT government predict will use public transport in 2031 is 16%. Up from what they claim is 9% right now. That’s an amazingly low target. By failing to deliver a world class mass transit system in the form of light rail, our government is content to allow Canberra to continue as a car-centric, increasingly congested city. Our nations capital deserves better.

On page 22 of the draft policy they say:

“The government has committed to increasing the public transport share of all work trips to 9 per cent by 2011, 12 percent by 2016, and 16 per cent by 2026”

By focussing on ‘work trips’ this allows the policy makers to ignore the following members of our society: school children, the aged, stay at home parents using public transport during the day and others. This tricky language doesn’t fool anyone. Public transport is not just satisfying peak hour commuting, it is a social obligation.

Page 6 of the draft policy has an interesting graph. The ACT Government forecast that in 2026 there will be 277,000 jobs – and that only 80,000 of these workers will choose public and active transport.

In the draft policy plan, they also see ‘active transport’ (walking and cycling) growing to 14%. The Canberra Times reports:

Minister for the Environment Simon Corbell launched the plan yesterday at Belconnen bus interchange, saying he wanted 30 per cent of Canberra journeys to work to be taken by sustainable transport, foot, bicycle or public transport, by 2026.

In the draft policy a table supporting this aim appears on page 54:

By aiming this low, it means that in 2031, our half million residents of a compact city of high density housing will still see 70 people in every 100 driving to work. As our population is expected to rise from 330,000 in 2011, that is not less reliance on cars, that is MORE cars. Very sustainable.

Minister Corbell also redefines success, and promises less services for people in Canberra’s suburbs. It is accepted wisdom among transport planners that to increase patronage you must offer frequent, reliable and attractive public transport. What does Minister Corbell announce:

'There will be a frequency of 15 minutes or less on the rapid and frequent service corridors, new guarantees about how long people have to wait to interchange.''

The plan calls for ''coverage'' service that feeds into the ''frequent network'' and ensures every home would be within 500m of a service of at least 60-minute frequency, putting a regular bus route within a short walk of every home in Canberra.

Yes, people waiting for a bus in Amaroo to connect them to a 15 minute service will have to wait up to an hour for a local service.

Simply put – a once an hour bus service will not attract commuters to public transport.

By contrast, ACT Light Rail propose building light rail as a mass transit backbone and increasing local service frequency for buses connecting to local transport nodes (such as park and rides) to a 20 minute frequency.

The same Canberra Times article also discusses light rail:

He said that a ''business as usual approach'' to Canberra's transport mix would result in a doubling of congestion on the city's roads by 2031 and pledged to continue to study the possibility of light rail on major road corridors.

Yet another study into light rail

Yes, what Canberra needs is yet another study into light rail. This study comes less than two years after the ACT Governments submission to Infrastructure Australia asking for federal funding for light rail. The light rail bid that was at that time the leading bid. Where the Chief Ministers media release stated 'Stanhope lists light rail as ACT Priority for Commonwealth infrastructure funding'.

The only bid from that exercise that our local politicians pursued with any vigour was the bid for more road funding to build Majura parkway.

As the new study will show, light rail has several advantages over buses including higher passenger capacity per vehicle (and driver), lower cost over total life, greater passenger comfort, reduced journey times (over buses on roads), less energy per passenger kilometre and provides investment certainty along transport corridors because of infrastructure commitment. In addition, light rail improves property values, and increases rental and retail income. These factors appeal to property developers who have demonstrated globally their willingness to invest in Transit Oriented Development along light rail routes.

Bus-ness as usual

It is crystal clear from reading this draft ‘Transport for Canberra’ policy that this government sees Canberra’s transport future as cars and buses. It is ‘Bus-ness as usual’. This does not come as a surprise. By pursuing this bus-only public transport strategy, the public transport patronage figure will only rise by a small amount. If the ACT Government truly want to bring about a medium to high density ‘compact city’, they need to plan proper mass transit using light rail, and then encourage Transit Oriented Development. Not only will the proposed bus only plan fail to deliver transit oriented development, it will fail to attract increased patronage.

ACTION buses are being asked to do two things – act as a mass transit intertown service using limited capacity buses (requiring more and more of them) and serve as a local area coverage feeding the intertown services.

ACT Light Rail suggests that light rail provide the mass transit backbone, and ACTIONs fleet is retasked to provide a higher frequency local area service. This makes best use of the advantages of both transport technologies. The greater carrying capacity and higher speed of light rail, and the flexibility of buses to serve new areas and routes and pass within 500 metres of resident’s homes.

Although it may appear that light rail is dealt with casually in this new transport policy, at least it is being discussed. Compared to the 2004 Sustainable Transport Plan – which claimed buses could deliver all the benefits of light rail – this Transport Plan now discusses light rail. ACT Light Rail would like to take some credit for that, but we aren’t the only group that have been telling the ACT Government that buses, and continued reliance upon them for mass transit – wont work. It is a message that the general public has delivered, through numerous polls, and also at the Time to Talk exercise.

It was obvious at the ‘Time to talk’ public consultation sessions that the public are aware that light rail is required. That process was very focussed on planting a meme that medium and high density was OK, and that we needed to convince people to believe that. ACT Light Rail do not have a position on urban densities, but light rail will provide a true magnet for transit oriented development. This is something the government talks up, but will find that it can’t attract by relying on bus routes. 

Why light rail can deliver TOD and buses cannot

Fixed rails bring investment. This is proved time and time again especially in US based urban renewal where light rail has been introduced. The only transit oriented development that bus rapid transit brings is at the site of the actual bus stations. It does not lead to transit oriented development along the bus routes.

It is positive that the Draft report talks about light rail in several places, it shows that the ACT Government now realise the benefits that light rail can deliver - although they still talk up bus rapid transit (BRT). Take page 27, section 2.4 for example:

The 2031 network has been designed for the current bus-based fleet, but will be adaptable to and supportive of mass public transport technology like light rail, bus rapid transit, monorails or other technology. To help plan for mass public transport, we will focus on defining the Frequent Network in policy and planning so other city-building activities can respond to it.

Its clear from reading the entire document that buses are the ONLY mode this government are planning on. By mentioning monorails it really cheapens the credibility of the document. The authors would be well aware that there are no monorail systems anywhere in the world, or even any in planning, that are used as mass transit public transport systems.

Where is the vision?

Overall it is disappointing that the report, while very densely stocked with positive goals and aspirational objectives, lacks a clear vision (focussing solely on the public transport aspect).  Active transport is a great thing to encourage but there are several problems with it. In winter cycling rates plummet, and by closing local schools and centralising super schools, the opportunity for children to walk or ride to school declines, and the requirement for parents to drop kids off to school, and then drive to work increases.

The increased residential density in the Inner north is also leading to a rising rate in ‘active transport’ i.e. – walking, not through any ACT Government policy, but because it is putting homes closer to peoples workplaces.

Just as this years Infrastructure Plan didn’t really have any single vision for public transport, this plan is the same. Piecemeal bus priority lanes added to roads which surge with traffic from new developments in Molonglo will continue for the life of this plan. A suspicious person could think that this is really more road spending hidden as bus transit way spending – although there are no funding figures associated with the report at all.

What the plan also fails to understand is that for a true shift to public transport there needs to be a modal shift. Buses will not provide the shift. The graph on P.62 of the draft policy would have us believe that there will be 16% of people using PT in 2026! That’s an amazingly low target. Why is it low? Because the ACT Government knows that by continuing to rely on buses, PT patronage will not grow. 

How can the ACT Government increase public transport patronage and grow our city in a sustainable way?

If the ACT Government provided a proper public transport system using a mass transit technology like light rail as its backbone, the percentage of workers or other residents would rise above 20%. It would then continue to rise as transit oriented development grew along the light rail routes, feeding more commuters into the system and establishing public transport use as an ingrained value. By providing a viable alternative to the private car, many families could shift from being two car families to single car families – saving an estimated $10,000 a year (NRMA figure). Active transport would also grow as people are able to more easily take bicycles on light rail vehicles, and will be more open to walking.

No money for public transport infrastructure

The draft policy plan also fails to commit to any real public transport infrastructure funding. After a sell off of buses in 2006, the government has been rebuilding the bus fleet and building piecemeal bus lanes on existing road – these bus lanes are referred to by this government as ‘transit ways’. 

In a 'Bus News' article , the Minister was quoted as saying:

“The policy provides options that support growth of the ACT economy by creating a safer, more efficient and more sustainable transport system, with ring road options for cars and freight, and public transport corridors for people,” he says.

"The ACT Government has already invested more than $1 billion in the transport system in the past 10 years, with over $120m committed in the 2010-11 and 2011-12 Budgets to roll out Transport for Canberra projects.”

Sadly this money is not going to build an initial light rail route in the ACT, or even bus rapid transit. It is the normal ongoing spending associated with the ACTION fleet, and incremental bus lanes. And of course more roads.

Conclusions from the draft policy

Although the draft ‘Transport for Canberra’ policy plan is underwhelming in its vision and aims, it does contain some positive aspects. Light rail is at last discussed positively in a strategic policy plan coming out of the ACT bureaucracy. The ACT also desperately needs a clear plan for its existing bus network.

One should not dismiss the tremendous amount of progress that has been made in recent years – especially with the introduction of the Red and Blue Rapid and Expresso bus services. These are good examples of smart transport planning. It is hoped that they lead to an increase over the longer term of bus patronage.

“IF” the public transport trip percentage hits 16% that would be the best argument for light rail – as ACTIONs fleet will be bursting at the seams. It is already at capacity on some routes. Buses out of Gungahlin in 2011 are so crowded during peaks that they have to drive past commuters waiting at stops.

“If “the 16% target were achieved, this would mean that the ACTION fleet would have to double. That is twice the amount of drivers and twice the amount of buses, mainly to serve the peaks. It is more logical to build light rail – and use the increased passenger carrying capacity and decreased staffing, that would bring. The highest cost of public transport (after infrastructure provision) is ongoing staffing.

So to sum up:

Positives:

• Report actually discusses light rail as an alternative to bus rapid transit
• Has a plan to expand the bus network (although I’m doubtful it will actually increase patronage)

Negatives:

• Heavy on motherhood statements
• Light on empirical data to allow us to reach our own conclusions
• Yet another ‘light rail study’
• Sets low goals.
• No clear vision.
• No plan to provide a proper mass transit system (even BRT)
• No mention of funding (doubling the number of buses and bus drivers wont be cheap).
• ACT Government see Canberra’s transport future as cars and buses.
• Guarantees a continuing car culture.
• Will see more road congestion.

ACT Light Rail will be putting in a submission on the draft ‘Transport for Canberra’ policy plan. We welcome your feedback. Our submission will be lodged before the November 11 date, so any input must be received at least a week prior to that closing date. 

Speeding is not always the reason for a crash

This weekend was not a happy one for the friends and family of a Canberra motorcyclist. He is dead, following an accident on Tharwa Road in rural Canberra.

Canberra Times photo of Police at the scene of the Tharwa Road accident

From the Canberra Times report (my bolding):

"Before 3.30pm, the Evatt man was riding south, when he swerved around a plastic road barrier that closed off the section of Tharwa Road south of the Lanyon Homestead.


The motorcycle then ploughed through a wire fence behind the road barrier, and the man was flung about 4m from his bike.


Emergency services arrived at the scene shortly after, and paramedics attempted to resuscitate and stabilise the man, but he was soon pronounced dead.


Police believe that the motorcyclist was speeding, and said there was adequate signage warning of the road closure."

So the sequence of events leading to this event are:

• He was traveling along Lanyon Road, 
• He rode around a 'road closed' sign,
• He rode around plastic barriers across the road,
• He collided with the fence across the closed off part of the road, 
• He was ejected from his motorcycle and died as a result of the injuries sustained upon impact. 

Tragic. I feel very sad for the family and friends of this man.

On the ABC television news last night I watched the report of the accident, and then the Australian Federal Policeman interviewed by the media who attended the accident. The ABC News presenter, goes on to say  that police believe speeding was a factor in the accident. This is also reported in the Canberra Times.

This jump to immediately isolate speed as the cause is a knee jerk response. Its the sort of response given to the media without thought, intended to scare all drivers into driving slower. Does this mean I should travel at 60 km/h on the 80 km/h sections of the Parkway from now on ? I'm not sure.

I am not the coroner, but the information publicly available indicates that the accident was caused by careless driving and inattention. Speed may have been a factor, but not the major, primary or most relevant factor.

One factor which needs to be assessed is the proximity of the 'road closed' signage to the fence across the road, and the location of the signage. Was it easily visible or on a blind corner ? The following stills are from the ABC news report.

 Plastic barriers on corner

 The gate that the deceased rider collided with

Looking back from the gate are, you can see the corner.

The speed limit on that road is 80 100 km/h. If the motorcycle was traveling at the posted limit, and collided with the fence across the road, then the motorcyclist would still have been flung through the air and landed on the ground sustaining injuries.

The same result would have occurred at 60 km/h. I am not a physics expert, but I suspect there may be a speed at which one could ride a motorcycle head on into a fence and NOT be thrown from it, but I suspect its pretty low, perhaps lower than 20 km/h.

To often, speed is blamed as a cause of an accident, when it is merely one of a range of factors responsible - the primary factor being poor decision making by the rider/driver, or inadequate road engineering. I will try and keep track of this case, and see what the coroner concludes.

Update: Google Street View of the accident location.
Update 2: The speed limit is 100 km/h on Tharwa Rd
Update 3: The ABC News report is available online.

Greens election policy on Queanbeyan/ACT public transport

Greens campaign ad on a Deanes bus

The NSW State election is in full swing, and the seat of Monaro is a close one. The Greens and their candidate for the NSW parliament, Paul Cockram, have announced an interesting transport  related policy that isn't about a road, funding for a road, a toll road, a rail system that will never be funded etc. Its a  simple achievable policy that can be implemented in a cost effective way relatively quickly.  Its about using public transport. The reason I'm talking about it on my Canberra related transport blog is threefold:

• Monaros proximity to Canberra
• the amount of workers that commute from Queanbeyan to Canberra everyday
• cross border transport issues and the lack of focus on public transport

Queanbeyan transport issues, and especially public transport issues are of concern to Canberra residents. Why ? Take a look at these figures.

In 2006 there were 11,500 Queanbeyan residents working in the ACT. Assuming that 90% of these people drove their own car to work, thats 9000 cars, and that is not including residents from Bungendore. The statistics also indicate that the population in Queanbeyan is expected to grow another 20,000 residents by 2031. So factor in another 12,000 cars (based on 60% working in the ACT) for a total of 21,000 cars crossing the border every working day, once in the morning and once in the afternoon. These cars also park for 8 hours somewhere, making ACT land unproductive as it must carry these cars while they sit idle.

The Greens are also aware of these numbers and have released an interesting policy for the campaign. It is aimed at:  

• increasing the number of people catching the bus from Queanbeyan to Canberra, 
• decreasing private car use
• easing road congestion 
• utilising the Bungendore to Canberra rail service

Like many public transport related matters, its not something that hasn't been thought of or looked at in the past. The 2009 'Sustainable Transport review' showed Queanbeyan as part of the ACT transport  network - for the first time in history. This was good policy and planning, but it seems that it hasn't progressed much further than those maps. The 'Canberra Transport Plan' due in the first quarter of 2010 is now one year late.

Also, in 2009 the ACT and NSW Government signed an agreement on cross-border transport and public transport issues. This agreement theoretically could allow Deanes and ACTION to operate revenue services on both sides of the border, which is something they do not do now (caveat: Deanes do run some services into ACT, but they are fairly limited). 

As a result of this agreement a joint task force was formed 12 months ago (The Eastern Regional Transport Taskforce) to look at ways to improve transport   between Queanbeyan and Canberra. Looking at the media releases from the meeting held here and here, it's clear that the focus is firmly on roads, and not on public transport. In one year there have been no improvements in cross border bus services from ACTION or Deanes.  

Greens MLA Amanda Bresnan and Greens NSW Candidate Paul Cockram riding the bus while feeding the media

With the issue obviously ripe for pressure to be applied, Amanda Bresnan, Greens MLA in the ACT,  appeared with Mr Cockram on WIN News on 7 March 2011 to announce this new Greens policy. She also pointed out that there had been little action from the Eastern Regional Transport task force on public transport issues and that there needed to be some action taken which included:

• a bus lane along Canberra Avenue
• more frequent buses
• better interaction between Deanes and Action

The ACT Greens long term view is that a light rail system in Canberra is the best way forward. Getting more people onto buses now, is a good short term solution, but that a long term solution is a light rail network. By building and operating rapid and direct transit routes, people become used to that style of public transport and these routes can be changed to light rail in the future. Its practical public transport policy, with a short term and long term solution.   

The WIN report did not cover the 'rail from Bungendore to Kingston' aspect of the Greens policy, but I guess the media stunt was held on a bus, so naturally that would be the focus. 

The Greens policy is difficult to locate. It is not on the Federal, ACT or NSW Greens websites, but can be found here on their Monaro campaign website. It is in the PDF of their newspaper insert. 

As well as the specifics, there is this broader aim:

Will this policy win them the seat ? Unlikely, but its a good policy that should be adopted by the party that forms government post March 26 2011. Then again, with NSW Labor on the nose, the Greens may very well pick the seat up. It is also a policy that the ACT Greens should pick up and work towards in their co-government power sharing role in the ACT Assembly. 

Talking to the Tuggeranong Community Council about Light Rail

On March 1st I was the guest speaker at the Tuggeranong Community Councils monthly meeting. The topic I spoke on was 'Is Canberras Light Rail Still On Track?'. I ran through the benefits of light rail for the ACT and the Capital region, then talked about the current state of light rail in ACT policy and how it can be progressed. 

Title slide from my talk to the Tuggeranong Community Council

After my talk, I fielded questions from the crowd, including local Legislative Assembly member Steve Dozspot from the ACT Liberal Party. Amanda Bresnan from the Greens was also at the meeting. The crowd was quite diverse and asked well informed questions. 

Darryl Johnson, President of the Tuggeranong Community Council had emailed me a few light rail route proposals and I was happy to include them in my presentation, I dont have a personal preference for light rail routes, but it certainly helps people understand how light rail would operate when you can show people a map. 

Darryl Johnson, TCC President, Light Rail route proposal

The TCC will be placing my slides online, and I will link to them when that occurs.

If you would like  me to speak to your organisation about light rail, please email me at dchaas67 at gmail dot com

Roads and Roundabouts - the Canberra dilemma

Anyone who drives their car to work in the morning in Canberra will experience the ridiculous traffic jams that in the last four or five years have become longer and more infuriating. While road congestion in Canberra is not on the scale of Sydney or Melbourne problems, that's not really a good comparison to make. Both of those cities grew explosively and radiated out in a pre-urban planning era. Canberra is the planned city. Canberra also has the advantage of inheriting a road system that was built with a certain level of traffic factored in, and sadly our elected self governments at the local level have failed us in providing new transport solutions - both private and public - since this inheritance was passed to us.  

Although there have been significant pieces of road infrastructure constructed, such as the Monaro Highway extensions, the Gungahlin Drive Extension and the Glenloch Interchange - it would be difficult to claim that these projects were completed on time, on budget or that they have solved road congestion problems. For the cost of the Gungahlin Drive Extension a dual line light rail route could have been built from Civic to Gungahlin Town Centre.  

Recent expansion in Gungahlin has seen the new suburb of Crace constructed since mid 2009 near the Barton Highway. Access to Crace is via the single lane Gundaroo Drive and a roundabout. Gundaroo Drive has been notoriously overstretched for several years now, and Crace has simply added to that. While there are other exit points, most direct traffic to Civic is coming from the Gundaroo Drive roundabout exit/entrance. 

This is leading to major frustrations in Gungahlin commuters. Roundabouts are built to serve a certain volume of cars performing a certain percentage of turns. When the flow of traffic exceeds a certain volume in any direction, the roundabout and its advantages - fail. Instead of being an advantageous tool to assist traffic flow, it becomes a bottleneck. 

Compounding this problem is the fact that traffic flowing from Gungahlin into Civic continues to grow, and as the population in new Gungahlin suburbs grows - this will only increase. Some good work has been done upgrading Flemington Drive to dual lanes most of the way in both directions, but you really have to ask why was the dual lane access constructed in 2011 not 2001?

Canberra was designed for a level of car ownership which has now been surpassed. Developers unconcerned with the transport needs of the people who buy into their developments have ensured that our new suburbs have roads too small to even accommodate parking the one car per person that the inadequate public transport infrastructure forces people to adopt. This leads to parking on nature strips. Another effect is that some roads and roundabouts in Gungahlin are too small for Action buses to navigate. 

The madness of building entirely new suburbs serving tens of thousands of new residents without the public transport infrastructure in place (or indeed the road infrastructure) continues unquestioned by our elected representatives, hungry for the money that land sales and stamp duty pours into the treasury coffers, but blind to the other end of the financial equation, where they must pick up the bill for inadequate infrastructure. This failure to plan and build appropriate transport infrastructure  is irresponsible, but also a hallmark of all local governments since self government. It needs to change. 

There are solutions to these transport problems

Long running transport failures such as Gungahlin, with its endless road and public transport access issues, show that before the first residents move in there must be appropriate public transport - beyond a bus sign on a pole - and appropriate dual lane access via roads into and out of new areas. The growth in cycling would indicate that grade separated cycling paths should also be built. Usually organisations learn from business failures in the past, it seems that governments aren't the same. 

Several years ago ACT Light Rail made  a submission on the planning proposals for the new Molonglo suburbs and noted that the ACT Governments own research showed that public and private transport access to the new areas would be inadequate at all stages for at least the first fifteen years that Molonglo would be undergoing construction and populating. Simply unacceptable! Yet this will not stop people buying homes there and moving in, then experiencing transport problems and blaming the government. It is a repeat of Gungahlin in every respect. The Canberra Transport Plan (long overdue) is meant to address these issues for existing Canberra transport issues, one hopes that the strategies extend to future proofing planning proposals to include appropriate transport infrastructure. 

To tackle road congestion, the ACT Government need to increase patronage on public transport. To properly achieve this the ACT Government needs to build a backbone for mass transit public transport that will allow regular commuters to travel in comfort, efficiently and reliably on time, from where they live to where they work (or go to school). Appropriately scaled Park and Ride centres would allow people to commute in a timely fashion. 

Ideally grade separated light rail with integrated bus services for local areas would best serve the public transport needs of Canberra. Despite some positive moves recently, such as the creation of Transport for Canberra putting policy and timetabling responsibilities back in govt hands, other actions such as the fact that the Canberra Transport Plan - which was scheduled for release in first quarter of 2010 and is now a year late - need to be addressed. 

Think local act local

We need to take some responsibility at an individual level. Instead of whining about all the other cars on the roads, when you are sitting in your car alone contributing to the situation, why dont you see if anyone else in your workplace is willing to carpool ? Or you could take the bus, or cycle. 

If road congestion and poor public transport issues concern you, I suggest you lobby the ACT Transport Minister and Roads ACT directly. Whinging on the RiotACT and angry letters to the Canberra Times are venting measures, but writing to the people with their hands on the levers of power may prove more useful (or not). 

Why the Nightrider service is not a failure

When is public transport not public transport? In the accepted sense, the public transport network in the ACT is currently the ACTION bus network, augmented by a Taxi service and a few Deane’s Bus services carrying people from Queanbeyan into the ACT and back, but not really servicing routes in the ACT. There is also a bus that carries passengers to and from the Airport from Civic, and of course the various Coach services that carry people to and from Sydney and occasionally – the nearby towns of Yass and Goulburn.

There is also a service operating at night over summer called Nightrider. It’s a service using buses, and it carries a few passengers, but it is more of a public safety service than a public transport service. As such, it needs to be assessed in that way. Recently this service has been criticized by the media, critics and even the services own sponsor - the Chief Minister. 

Today I want to first look at the need and justification for the Nightrider service, and then look at the way in which it needs to be assessed as a public service, then on how to improve patronage of the service so that it can achieve the aims of a public safety program.

Public policy justification and implementation

When putting strategies in place to tackle a public policy issue, the question has to be asked ‘What is the outcome we are seeking’. Public policy can be arrived at in several ways

• the Ministers direction, 
• an implementation of legislation, 
• a knee-jerk reaction to an imagined problem
• a genuine solution to a genuine problem. 

Behind the scenes in thousands of federal, state and local level public service offices around the country, implementation of policy or ‘service delivery’ is carried out fairly efficiently because ‘policy’ trickles down from Government to the people in the relevant Department who are familiar with the issues and can develop a policy implementation program (also known as the solution) and then implement it (the service delivery part). This largely goes unheralded, and taken for granted. 

Occasionally service delivery can be impaired when a Department Head or other public servant is subjected to pressure from politicians to deliver a service before the appropriate framework to manage it is in place.  Politicians know full well that any new program requires:

• funding, 
• staff to be recruited, 
• procedures to be established and put in place, 
• buy in from stakeholders 

And of course – the actual implementation when all of the above has been setup.

Service delivery costs money, taxpayer’s money. When service is delivered quietly and efficiently, everyone usually just accepts the fact that the council has repainted the seats at the park, fixed the pothole or rounded up the stray dogs. 

When unreasonable and illogical reasons for and benefits to be accrued, are predicted from service delivery - the public pays attention and asks questions. Usually along the lines of ‘how much are you spending and on what – why don’t you spend that money your wasting on x and paint the seats in the park, mend the potholes or round up stray dogs?’. 

When it works, no one notices. When politicians promise the unpromiseable, or overegg the benefits, or fund only one part of a program and not another then the entire exercise can be imperilled, and poor results for the public will occur, with the inevitable spin from the pro and anti forces.

And so we come to the Nightrider service.

Every year in Canberra a foreseeable public health problem arises when drunken festive season revellers in Civic fight with each other or drive home drunk. There are multiple reasons for this 

• violence caused by excessive alcohol
• people drink and drive
• no buses after midnight
• too few taxis to ferry inebriated patrons from Civic to suburbia.

What is the public policy issue?

• Safety
• preventing violence in Civic
• reducing drink driving
• preventing road trauma

 What is the outcome being sought? 

• removing drunks from Civic in volume
• getting drunken people home without them driving themselves
• defusing possible sources of violence such as congested taxi queues
• keeping people safe.

The costs to the community and taxpayer, arising from the damage to people and property from excessive alcohol consumption, violence and road trauma are high, and ongoing. Is this a new problem, which only manifested itself in 2010/2011 with a ‘trial of a Nightrider bus service run to see how it pans out? 

No. This problem of excessive revelling and drink driving is perennial. How has the ACT dealt with it? Lets jump on the Internet wayback machine and look at a 2006 press release from then Transport Minister John Hargreaves:

 NIGHTRIDER - THE BEST CATCH AFTER 1:00AM

Released 21/11/2006

Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, John Hargreaves, today announced the start of ACTION’s Nightrider Service.

“With the warmer evenings and festive season now upon us, ACTION’s Nightrider service provides a convenient and easy way for you to get home, “said Mr Hargreaves.

“The ACTION Nightrider provides partygoers and late night entertainment enthusiasts a reliable service to get them home safely. The Nightrider service aims to make getting home after a night out safer in Canberra. The community needs a safe alternative to get home and ACTION’s Nightrider service provides this alternative.

“The Nightrider commences on Friday December 1 and operates every Friday and Saturday night until Saturday 23 December and runs again on New Years Eve. Seven Nightrider routes departing from the City Bus Interchange will take passengers home starting from approximately 1.00am to 4.45am.

“Services drop passengers within walking distance of their Canberra homes within the suburbs listed on the timetable. The cost of the services is only a $5.00 cash fare,” said Mr Hargreaves.

The key themes to be plucked from this release are:

• convenient and easy way to get home.
• get home safely
• safe alternative to get home

These are good public safety reasons to support and fund such a service.

Looking at google results a bit more closely, it seems that the same press release seems to be recycled every year with minor changes depending upon the actual date the service is to begin and whoever is the Transport Minister at the time, so lets not dissect each one, and just look at a non-Governmental (but still a policy stakeholder) view on the requirement to run a Nightrider service.

In 2008 the same scheme again ran over the festive season, and one of the sponsors, The NRMA, issued a press release on why they were providing funding for the service:

MEDIA STATEMENT                                                                        11 December 2008

GRANT ASSISTS PROMOTION OF NIGHTRIDER SERVICE

A grant of $15,000 by the NRMA – ACT Road Safety Trust to ACTION will assist in the promotion of the popular Nightrider bus service, which commences on Friday 12 December 2008.  The service will operate over eight designated routes from the Civic Bus Interchange between the hours of 1.00am and 4.45am for the next two weekends leading up to Christmas as well as operating on New Year’s Eve.

“The Trust is delighted to be again contributing to this program, which traditionally operates in the lead up to the festive season,” Trustee Ms Kerry Fitzgerald said.  “Alcohol continues to be a key contributor to road trauma and the Nightrider service offers a safe alternative for getting home after a night out. 

“It is easy to underestimate how much alcohol you have had and many people mistakenly believe they are fit to drive home.  However, it takes time for your liver to process alcohol and a cup of coffee will not hasten the process.

“People uncertain as to whether they are still under the legal alcohol limit to drive now have an inexpensive and secure alternative means of transport home.  The service is timely with ACT police reporting an alarming upward trend in the number of drink driving offences.

“This is the sixteenth year of operation of the Nightrider service, which is testimony to its popularity and success.  In 2007, the service carried some 2,000 passengers home safely – an increase over the previous year.

“The service is being promoted via print and radio as well as on the ACTION website.  Timetables and posters will be distributed to late night venues as well as being available from bus interchanges and Canberra Connect Shopfronts.

“The Trust is pleased to be working in partnership with ACTION, FM104.7, the Chronicle, ACT Policing, AdCorp and the Australian Hotels Association to promote Nightrider.  This is a great example of the community working together in the interests of road safety,” Ms Fitzgerald said.

The Trust’s funding source is the $2 Road Safety Contribution raised in association with ACT motor vehicle registration fees and matched by NRMA Insurance.

The key themes plucked from this release are:

• Alcohol continues to be a key contributor to road trauma
• offers a safe alternative for getting home after a night out.
• many people mistakenly believe they are fit to drive home
• inexpensive and secure alternative means of transport home
• In 2007 the service carried 2,000 passengers home safely
• road safety

These are sound and supportable reasons for the NRMA to contribute to a program aimed at preventing road trauma, and supporting public safety. 

Lets now look at 2010, with the same public policy issues regarding safety and violence in Civic still resonating with the public. It is early December 2010 and as surely as hot cross buns will be found in the shops on Jan 2^nd 2011, early December will see a press release issued regarding how to get people out of Civic and back to suburbia, following their Xmas/New Year celebrations and after the ACTION network closes down before midnight. The 2010 version of the press release announcing this traditional service, sees a new strategy - a ‘trial’ of an extended Nightrider service running not just over the Xmas/new Year period, but over several weeks. This service will run into February.

Trial of extended Nightrider service starts this weekend

Released 02/12/2010

A three-month trial of a Nightrider bus service commences tomorrow night (Friday), Chief Minister and Minister for Transport Jon Stanhope announced today.

Deanes Transit Group will run the service every Friday and Saturday night throughout summer, as well as providing additional services on New Year's Eve.

"The three-month Nightrider trial is part of the reform of the Liquor Act, which recently received a significant overhaul to include several new laws designed to improve public safety by tackling the anti-social and violent behaviour associated with excessive alcohol consumption," Mr Stanhope said.

"In addition, the rates of drink driving in the ACT suggest that we constantly need to remind people to plan their night out, and if they intend to drink, work out how they are going to get home in advance. The Nightrider bus service is designed to help get people home safely after a night out in Civic."

Departing from the City interchange, eight Nightrider routes will take passengers home every 90 minutes between 1am and 4.45am. Fares will cost a flat fee of $10 and will drop passengers within a reasonable walking distance to most Canberra homes.

A Manuka/Kingston to Civic loop will also be trialled to operate every half hour between 12.30am and 4am for a flat fee of $5 to link revellers to the buses departing the city and get people home.

Those connecting to another bus in Civic will only have to pay $10 in total if they keep their Manuka/Kingston ticket, however, it is important they know the time of their City bus departure and plan enough time to connect.

Deanes Transit Group supported ACTION last year to provide the service given the disruption that late night services can have on driver requirements regarding their scheduling. This year the service is being operated by Deanes Transit Group following a competitive tender process.

Mr Stanhope said that a variety of security measures will be implemented for the trial, including a security guard on each and CCTV.

The trial will be evaluated next year to determine its success and possible extension in future years.

The message over summer is to be able to have a fun night out in Civic it is important to plan your travel. For more information on bus routes and times visit www.transport.act.gov.au

The key themes plucked from this release are:

• improve public safety by tackling the anti-social and violent behaviour associated with excessive alcohol consumption
• the rates of drink driving in the ACT
• if they intend to drink, work out how they are going to get home
• Nightrider bus service is designed to help get people home safely after a night out
• get people home
• security measures will be implemented for the trial
• security guard on each(presumably the word bus was left out of the press release at this point)
• plan your travel

Prima facie, this is an excellent piece of service delivery planning, and satisfies the public policy objective which – if you recall  - is all about:

• Safety
• preventing violence in Civic
• reducing drink driving
• preventing road trauma.

Indeed, this expansion of the traditional Xmas/New Year service is a result of new legislation, sponsored by the Greens, aimed at reforming the Liquor Act and decreasing alcohol related violence and alcohol related road trauma. 

Setting up a public service program for removal of funding

The annual Nightrider service had been operating over the New Year period, OK it started a little later this year compared to earlier ‘trials’ of the annual service to take our drunken citizens back to their town centres, but it was running and was set to run over the first few months of the year.

So imagine my surprise when the most recent press release concerning this piece of service delivery regales us with the following:

Slow take up of Nightrider service

Released 11/01/2011

A total of 936 people have used the Nightrider service during its first month of operation, Chief Minister and Minister for Transport Jon Stanhope announced today.

"The main Nightrider service provides eight routes into the suburbs from Civic, with 24 service runs at a total cost of $10,700 per night," Mr Stanhope said. "A disappointing total of 197 people used this service in its first three weekends at what worked out to be an average cost of $326 per customer.

"The Civic/Manuka/Kingston loop provides eight service runs at a total cost of $870 per night. Sixty-one used this loop service in its first three weekends at an average cost of $86 per customer.

"While nobody could ever put a price on potentially saving someone's life, it is clear that the service is being under-utilised and the Government will need to review how it operates in the future.

"While take-up was higher on New Year's Eve with 678 customers (at an average cost of $24 for the route services and $21 for the loop service), the first three weekends only saw a combined 59 customers, 94 customers and 105 customers respectively using the service over the Friday and Saturday night."

The contract for the three-month trial is has been awarded to the Deanes Tranasit Group and is worth more than $270,000. Revenue in the first month totalled $8,860.

Mr Stanhope said the three-month Nightrider trial is part of the reform of the Liquor Act, which recently received a significant overhaul to include several new laws designed to improve public safety. The Government agreed to trial the service for an extended period of three months.

"I urge people who are planning a night out and who intend to drink to make use of the Nightrider service which will get them home safely for a small flat fee. If people choose not to use it, though, the Government can simply not afford to subsidise it over such a long period of time."

A full evaluation of the trial, including final analysis of the figures, will be undertaken at the end of summer. Nightrider has been advertised on both print and radio, in bars and clubs and online, including a targeted campaign on Facebook. For more information on bus routes and times visit http://www.transport.act.gov.au/.

The key themes plucked from this release are:

• 936 people have used the Nightrider service during its first month of operation
• total cost of $10,700 per night
• disappointing total of 197 people
• average cost of $326 per customer
• nobody could ever put a price on potentially saving someone's life
• New Year's Eve with 678 customers (at an average cost of $24 for the route services and $21 for the loop service),
• contract for the three-month trial … more than $270,000.
• Revenue in the first month totalled $8,860
• three-month Nightrider trial is part of the reform of the Liquor Act
• several new laws designed to improve public safety
• will get them home safely for a small flat fee.
• Government can simply not afford to subsidise it
• final analysis of the figures, will be undertaken at the end of summer.

Now this is curious. There are now multiple references to cost, revenue, contracts, passenger averages, subsidies, analysis etc – with the word safety used only twice, and a glib reference to not putting a price on saving lives. This is clearly the first part of a strategy to not run this service in the future.

This focus on cost obfuscates the reason for the Nightrider service. The critics of this trial are missing the point, and I am not confident that the terms of reference for any ‘analysis’ of the three-month trial will take these factors into account – and its really quite simple - Is the $10,000 a night too great a cost to mitigate the safety issues that the trial is designed to address?  How many drunks are not getting involved in brawls or driving themselves home drunk – with the horrible ‘long tail’ medical, social and financial implications those decisions create for the entire community.

How to improve the Nightrider service

It is clear that there is confusion in the Chief Ministers office as to whether the Nightrider service is a public transport or a public safety issue. I’d suggest this is a decision that needs to be taken on the public safety merits, not the public transport merits.

Now, even if we are assessing Nightrider on public safety and health merits, patronage is still low and could be increased. If the passenger numbers are not reaching the levels that were forecast, or ‘hoped’ for then that is a separate issue which needs to be addressed. The reasons for the lack of use of this service are typically, hidden in the press release of 11 Jan 2011. They are: 

• 90 minute timetabling on some services
• Ten dollar fares
• No advertising
• No easy way to find the Nightrider timetables

Removing impediments to success

I would suggest that the main problems leading to lack of patronage of the Nightrider service can be addressed, and fairly quickly. 

90 minutes timetable. Drunks or even regular sober people are unlikely to wait 90 minutes for a bus back to Woden. They will either go back to the pub, seek another form of transport home or wait, becoming increasingly drunker and frustrated - with the inevitable trouble that frustration will lead to.

Decrease the wait between bus services to 30 minute services on all Nightrider routes. 

Ten dollar fares – three people will pool their money and three people will catch a cab. After they have waited for an hour in a taxi queue, with becoming increasingly drunker and frustrated - with the inevitable trouble that frustration will lead to. Why they have set the amount for the fare at ten dollars I have no idea. It’s a jump of five dollars from the previous year! Is there a formula for arriving at this number? I agree a service should not be free, but ten dollars seems high.

Drop the fare back to the previous fare of five dollars.

No advertising. Admittedly I’m not the target market here, but a bit of advertising for this service would help. The press releases and website claim that people need to plan their trip to town, and back. This is hard to do when you are unaware of the Nightrider services existence. 

Advertise the Nightrider service where young people will see it – an ad on the RiotACT website, in BMA, on Facebook, on coasters in the pubs themselves.

No easy way to find the timetable. If I want to catch a bus in Canberra where do I go to find a timetable? The ACTION website. Yet when you look at Action there is no mention of Nightrider – why? Because it’s a service operated by Deane's from Queanbeyan. Not even a pointer to the Deanes website from their routes and timetables page. Unacceptable. Now fortunately there is a mention of the Nightrider service on Deanes website – it is a link to Transport for Canberra’s website where a PDF of the Nightrider service timetable pops up.  This is the best timetable for this service. If you are savvy enough and aware of the existence of Transport for Canberra as an ACT Government body, and actually go to their webpage, you will find a link to a confusingly obtuse timetable page. It is there, but not easy to interpret.

Make it easier to find the Nightrider service timetable. 

Nightriders future

In conclusion, one has to ask the ACT Government is this program a public transport program, or a public safety program? If it is the latter then it needs to be judged on metrics from ACT Policing. Have there been

• fewer fights
• less injuries
• less drink driving offences  

Delivering our young people home safely is a program that needs to be supported, but it needs to be implemented in a properly researched, competently delivered way. At present the service meets neither the needs of a public safety or public transport program. Sadly, based on the 11/01/2011 press release from the Chief Minister, I suspect this service will be judged on revenue and cost instead.

I suggest that Transport for Canberra look at how this service can be delivered more competently instead of delivered expediently, and then plan on how to deliver it in the 2011/2012 season. Instead of announcing and planning occurring in October 2011, perhaps we can look at a framework that can be delivered every year with contracts, advertising, planning and timetabling set in place, with only the minor details adjusted every year. This service is an important public safety program, which should be budgeted for each year and planned in accordance with sound service delivery principles, not driven by press releases focussing on costs.