Ministerial Statement: Bus boom for Brisbane

[ozbob]

Minister for Transport
The Honourable Rachel Nolan
09/07/2010

Bus boom for Brisbane

The Bligh Government is providing Brisbane City Council with an opportunity to add 25 new buses to its fleet, Transport Minister Rachel Nolan said today.

The government's plans to rapidly expand Brisbane's high-frequency bus network will start in Brisbane's western and southern suburbs.

Ms Nolan said two routes running between Indooroopilly, the CBD and Garden City/Eight Mile Plains would become the 13th and 14th high-frequency routes in Brisbane.

"We now have the buses available and we've written to council about implementing these routes in the coming months," Ms Nolan said.

"The buses would be colour-coded, for example red and green respectively.

"Like the CityGlider, they would be pre-paid, have all-door boarding and a unique livery to be developed by the government.

"The Indooroopilly-CBD service will run express with limited stops via Coronation Drive, complementing the overcrowded route 444.

"The southern service will use the Captain Cook Bridge and stop at all South East Busway stations between Buranda and Eight Mile Plains, complementing route 111 - one of Brisbane's busiest bus routes.

"This will be yet another major bus upgrade designed to make public transport even easier for customers to use."

The two new routes will be implemented following the recently-announced 44,000 weekly seat package starting on July 26 to target some of Brisbane most overcrowded services.

"Our research has shown that it's important that our high-frequency network be clearly identifiable and customers do not need to rely on a timetable on these bus, train and ferry services," Ms Nolan said.

"The State Government also recently announced a major timetable review on the rail network, starting with the busy Ipswich and Caboolture lines."

==============================================================

"Our research has shown that it's important that our high-frequency network be clearly identifiable and customers do not need to rely on a timetable on these bus, train and ferry services," Ms Nolan said.

"The State Government also recently announced a major timetable review on the rail network, starting with the busy Ipswich and Caboolture lines."

[somebody]

Hmm.  Wierd.  No link, nothing on the Translink site, also nothing on Rachel Nolan's website.  The notion of terminating at Indro is completely stupid, although it is not clear that is the situation.  I'm also unsure about the idea of running the 111 supplement via the Captain Cook Bridge off peak.  What would the city stop location(s) be?

[O_128]

Doesn't BCC build their own buses And why not just up the frequency of other routes???

I have a great idea why not create a high frequency rail service on all our lines

[somebody]

Link here: http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=70593

[Golliwog]

Actually, I kind of like the idea of a high frequency route to Indro. If done right, instead of a dozen different routes in the CBD to that area, you could have say 2 high frequency ones, which both go to Indro, where you cna then interchange to you're specific route to which ever suburb. Don't think thats actually the plan but I think its something that could (and should) be looked at.

[O_128]

Actually, I kind of like the idea of a high frequency route to Indro. If done right, instead of a dozen different routes in the CBD to that area, you could have say 2 high frequency ones, which both go to Indro, where you cna then interchange to you're specific route to which ever suburb. Don't think thats actually the plan but I think its something that could (and should) be looked at.

Quite a good idea actually. Call it the 400 leaves every 5 min off peak and 2 min on peak?

[#Metro]

Perfectly good train line out there at Indro. Could simply be a shuttle to connect with the rail station.
Oh, that's right, we don't run an integrated network up here. Its bus vs Rail, rather than bus + rail.
No wonder the car is king.

Where are the bus priority lanes on the Captain Cook Bridge and Coronation Drive?
Useless if they get stuck in congestion.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbane mX 9th July 2010 page 1

Express buses promise

City to get new CBD services

[ozbob]

Media Release 10 July 2010

SEQ:  Express bus plans welcome, but more than one catch

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport commuters has welcomed the announcement by the Minister for Transport of two proposed bus express routes (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"We recently highlighted that frequency is the key for encouraging maximum public transport use (2). The plan for a high frequency Indooroopilly-CBD service that will run express with limited stops via Coronation Drive, and a southern high frequency service using the Captain Cook Bridge and stops at all South East Busway stations between Buranda and Eight Mile Plains are welcome.  Apart from the conditions stated by the Minister in the Statement, there are also some other considerations."

"Both of these proposed routes are using very congested roads, namely Coronation Drive and Captain Cook Bridge.  To complement these services bus priority should be provided on these roads (3).  A high frequency 'buz' stuck in traffic is not the best way forward. Adding to the road congestion is not smart!"

"The plan for the Indooroopilly-CBD service further highlights the appalling planning decision NOT to incorporate a bus exchange as part of the recent Indooroopilly Railway station upgrade.  Indooroopilly has a quadruple railway track to the CBD and increased rail frequency would avoid the mess on the roads, particularly in the absence of any serious moves for better bus priority on the roads."

"The planned express buses are good news, but as a community we must maximise the use of already existing infrastructure.  South-east Queensland needs a dramatic improvement in rail frequency both peak and off peak. Buses also need to be given proper priority on the roads."


1. http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=70593

2. SEQ:  Frequency: The silver bullet to world class public transport for Brisbane http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4059.msg29421#msg29421

3. SEQ: Bus priority needed - more bus lanes and traffic light priority http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4045.0

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org

[#Metro]

"The planned express buses are good news, but as a community we must maximise the use of already existing infrastructure.  South-east Queensland needs a dramatic improvement in rail frequency both peak and off peak. Buses also need to be given proper priority on the roads."

OR they could feed and terminate at Railway stations which already have absolute priority all the way, no interaction with traffic whatsoever, high speed and high capacity which is running empty during off-peak periods at an astronomical cost to Queensland and at stone-age frequencies. Rail should be the backbone, it has everything set out for it, why isn't it the backbone of the transport system?

The failure of network planning (terminate + transfer) and co-ordination (making sure the bus gets there 5 min before the train) is unbelievable, there is huge waste in the system. It's a massive cost to buy buy buy more buses and at the same time run empty trains in the off peak.

Scandalous!

[somebody]

Actually, I kind of like the idea of a high frequency route to Indro. If done right, instead of a dozen different routes in the CBD to that area, you could have say 2 high frequency ones, which both go to Indro, where you cna then interchange to you're specific route to which ever suburb. Don't think thats actually the plan but I think its something that could (and should) be looked at.

Quite a good idea actually. Call it the 400 leaves every 5 min off peak and 2 min on peak?

I disagree.  This was tried during the construction of the Go Between Bridge.  The only advantage to what you are suggesting is possibly greater reliability.  This is outweighed by inflicting the inconvenience of a transfer on pax.  It also reduces the efficiency of the service in the sense of increasing the dwell time at Indro.

All that was ever required to Indro was a common city stop location for the 425/430/450/453/454/460 and the 444 with a timetable giving no worse than an 8 minute frequency.

[Golliwog]

I don't see tranfers as all that inconvenient. And I don't see having slightly longer dwell times at Indro as a problem either especialy if you're having a service at something like 1 every 5 minutes or less. And I think the improvements in reliability would far outweigh any inconvenience.

[#Metro]

All that was ever required to Indro was a common city stop location for the 425/430/450/453/454/460 and the 444 with a timetable giving no worse than an 8 minute frequency.

There is no need for a 400 bus. There is already a railway line that goes all the way to Indooroopilly with trains every 15 minutes.
NONE of the buses shown in bold should be running into the city. None of them. 444 and 412 might be an exception, as they are high frequency and people do need pickup along Coronation Drive. The transfer facilities at Toowong are world-last. Worst transfer ever.

Explanation: See here http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4074.msg29620

We need a rail boom not another bus boom. This solution will only make piles of cash unnecessarily go "boom".
More buses seem to be the universal solution. Its not the right solution unfortunately.

[david]

I agree with TT. With the 412 now a "BUZ" there is no need for another high-frequency route along Coro Drive. All we need is the timetable planners at Translink to re-organise the 425/430/435/444/450/453/454/460 so that they don't all arrive at Indooroopilly at the same time (this is what currently happens at Indooroopilly - If you don't believe me, spend some time there and you'll see 5 buses come at once and then a 15 minute wait for the next 5 buses).

Once they've re-timetabled the above services, put the planned "extra" buses onto feeder routes into train stations.

[somebody]

I agree with TT. With the 412 now a "BUZ" there is no need for another high-frequency route along Coro Drive. All we need is the timetable planners at Translink to re-organise the 425/430/435/444/450/453/454/460 so that they don't all arrive at Indooroopilly at the same time (this is what currently happens at Indooroopilly - If you don't believe me, spend some time there and you'll see 5 buses come at once and then a 15 minute wait for the next 5 buses).

Once they've re-timetabled the above services, put the planned "extra" buses onto feeder routes into train stations.

You say you agree with TT, but then support my arguments.  I would say 2-3 buses arriving at once rather than 5.  And no need to go to Indro, just look it up on the journey planner.

There is no need for a 400 bus. There is already a railway line that goes all the way to Indooroopilly with trains every 15 minutes.
NONE of the buses shown in bold should be running into the city. None of them. 444 and 412 might be an exception, as they are high frequency and people do need pickup along Coronation Drive. The transfer facilities at Toowong are world-last. Worst transfer ever.

Explanation: See here http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4074.msg29620

We need a rail boom not another bus boom. More buses seem to be the universal solution. Its not the right solution unfortunately.

The train is only every 15 minutes until 7pm Mon-Fri, and not always in the counter-peak.  This is not very useful to me as I am at work for most of these times.  The buses do have far superior frequency and stop locations at both ends for the majority of commutes.  Truncating at Indro I could only support if there was a baseline frequency on the trains of at least 6tph but preferably 8tph, with a minimum frequency of 4tph and also some full time express patterns from Ipswich/Rosewood.

Toowong isn't that bad.  It's fine from the station to St Lucia, and from the 402 to the station.

I don't see tranfers as all that inconvenient. And I don't see having slightly longer dwell times at Indro as a problem either especialy if you're having a service at something like 1 every 5 minutes or less. And I think the improvements in reliability would far outweigh any inconvenience.

The majority would disagree about transfers being inconvenient.  And adding to the travel time by waiting even 2.5 minutes on average is a disincentive to use PT with no advantages, unless you you are talking about transfer to rail like TT was.  And the buses aren't likely to be coming every 5 minutes anyway.

All in all, positively stupid changes from TL here.  With the 8 Mile Plains route, it should have been the 555 which was re-routed over the Captain Cook Bridge and the 111 increased in frequency.  I guess that could get a bit of a backlash.

[stephenk]

The new "CityGlider" style services have one big flaw that I'm surprised no one had picked up on. They seem to terminate in the City. Surely there would be benefit in extending these high frequency services across the CBD (as per BCC's paper a few years ago) to destinations such as RBWH and the redeveloped Northshore Hamilton.

[#Metro]

The train is only every 15 minutes until 7pm Mon-Fri, and not always in the counter-peak.  This is not very useful to me as I am at work for most of these times.  The buses do have far superior frequency and stop locations at both ends for the majority of commutes.  Truncating at Indro I could only support if there was a baseline frequency on the trains of at least 6tph but preferably 8tph, with a minimum frequency of 4tph and also some full time express patterns from Ipswich/Rosewood.

Put more trains on. Train frequency is not going to increase unless people are on seats, and those people come from the buses.
By pooling the people onto trains, both the train and bus network can be improved. Less buses than now would also be needed to do the job.
Do this across the whole Ipswich line, and the effect will be huge.

The reason why frequency is low is because patronage is low.
Why is patronage low? Because buses are not feeding the train network.
So you get a situation where you need to run both buses and trains which compete against each other.
Its very expensive to have two separate networks carrying half the passengers each, when you could have one integrated network carrying all the passengers.

[longboi]

The new "CityGlider" style services have one big flaw that I'm surprised no one had picked up on. They seem to terminate in the City. Surely there would be benefit in extending these high frequency services across the CBD (as per BCC's paper a few years ago) to destinations such as RBWH and the redeveloped Northshore Hamilton.

For sure...

Indooroopilly-Hamilton via Valley: This would travel along Coro, Adelaide, Wickham, Breakfast Creek, KSD

8MP-Stafford via RBWH: This route would exit the REX onto Queens Wharf Rd and then into the QSBS and on to Stafford via RBWH. It would essentially be an upgrade of the Stafford leg of the 375; the Bardon leg would become a new route and stay at current frequency levels.

[AnonymouslyBad]

I agree that this proposal (assuming it's just for all-new services with no other changes) is a bit of a mixed bag.

The busway is very well used, and having a full-time Captain Cook Bridge service isn't a bad idea, but whether we really need a fifth high-frequency route is debatable. Unless it swallows up the 160 or something, which would be fair enough.

As others have noted, the Indooroopilly route shouldn't be necessary - just catch the train. Wouldn't Chermside have been a better candidate?

I like the idea of implementing more "CityGlider-style" services, but this model is what all BUZ/high frequency routes should be moving towards, rather than introducing whole new routes that just duplicate the ones we already have.

[beauyboy]

So we are going the way of Sydney  with colour coded buses.

First up what is wrong with just keeping with the BUZ branding. It has worked so far! If it ain't broke don't fix it i say.

Second why the hell is two existing BUZ routes, getting HFS when other routes are crying out for there turn in inplementing BUZ statis to there route.

Third what was so hard about putting a P infront of the route number instead of having to go this colour coded thing. The fact is the general public do not keep as informed as we do about the system. Colour coding the things will add to the confussion the general public has about the system. eg people thinking we have "BUS TICKETS". This colour coding will also make these buses fixed to just that route making tying up fleet flexability.

Fourth why do we need more Pre-paid when the entire system is going Pre-paid in just 6 months.

Donald

[#Metro]

First up what is wrong with just keeping with the BUZ branding. It has worked so far! If it ain't broke don't fix it i say.

I agree. Its just that there is a little turf war. See BUZ brand is a trademark of the Brisbane City Council. So no sharing here. HFP sounds like some kind of disease. TransLink MAX (Metro Area eXpress) sounds better.

Second why the hell is two existing BUZ routes, getting HFS when other routes are crying out for there turn in inplementing BUZ statis to there route.

Who knows? Maybe they are using psychic octopuses? Route 100 and 300 or similar would be a far better route. I'm starting to think maybe that buy out of BT by the state gov might have been a good idea after all.

Third what was so hard about putting a P infront of the route number instead of having to go this colour coded thing. The fact is the general public do not keep as informed as we do about the system. Colour coding the things will add to the confussion the general public has about the system. eg people thinking we have "BUS TICKETS". This colour coding will also make these buses fixed to just that route making tying up fleet flexability.

This is true. But if it is bright green, you'll remember that at the voting booth. (Sad but true).

Fourth why do we need more Pre-paid when the entire system is going Pre-paid in just 6 months.

Same reasons as the route choice I would think.

[stephenk]

As others have noted, the Indooroopilly route shouldn't be necessary - just catch the train. Wouldn't Chermside have been a better candidate?

I'd agree there, the 333 is often heavily loaded both in and off-peak.

[#Metro]

Maybe a HFP rail feeder bus? Nundah station is about 4km from Chermside shopping centre.
It takes 15 minutes to get to Nundah from Central. How much time would it take for a bus to travel 4km? 5 minutes?

So the time would be 20 minutes to do this.
To catch 333 takes about half an hour. And endless stopping at bus stops.

[stephenk]

Maybe a HFP rail feeder bus? Nundah station is about 4km from Chermside shopping centre.
It takes 15 minutes to get to Nundah from Central. How much time would it take for a bus to travel 4km? 5 minutes?

So the time would be 20 minutes to do this.
To catch 333 takes about half an hour. And endless stopping at bus stops.

You seem to have factored in an interchange time of 0 minutes, forgotten about the existence of traffic lights between Chermside and Nundah, and also forgotten that some people may want to board/alight along the 333 route between Chermside and the CBD (most notably RBWH and QUT).

Try again!

[#Metro]

You seem to have factored in an interchange time of 0 minutes, forgotten about the existence of traffic lights between Chermside and Nundah, and also forgotten that some people may want to board/alight along the 333 route between Chermside and the CBD (most notably RBWH and QUT).

Try again!

Its only an online transport discussion forum.
And I'm only just putting an example of a feeder service. I could have used your minibuses to train stations idea.
Or your automated guided transit mini-metro to Toowong rail station and transfer idea.

There's nothing wrong with feeder services to rail stations, is there? Nothing wrong with that.
Places all over the world do this. Bus Route 402 does this. Timed transfers would keep time at the station down.
I'm only giving an example.

Thanks for reminding me that traffic lights exist.

While some people might be going to RBWH, most just want to get to the City. After all, that's where most people get off and on in Brisbane, don't they?

I am entitled to question why a multi-million (maybe billion) dollar northern busway out to Chermside is being constructed when there is a perfectly good (underutilised) rail station 4km down the road. I am entitled to ask why buses are not feeding rail stations all over SEQ and why there appears to be wasteful competition between the bus and rail networks when there should be proper integration. After all, my taxes and rates are being spent on this. And soon to be added to that are the funds from state asset privatisation.

I'm entitled to my view, and I think feeder buses and proper integration are the way to go.

[#Metro]

PS, for another example:

There is a perfectly good rail station called the Exhibition, sits disused for most days of the year. Directly opposite RBWH, 300m walk.
It's a perfectly good rail line.

I'm sure it would have cost less than the cool $777 million (for the Northern Busway which goes to suburbs like Lutwyche and Windsor, which also have perfectly good rail stations) to make this operational, even with track amplification. The resulting competition will only steal passengers from rail, and may be a convenient excuse to see your Ferny Grove line have more peak hour service cuts. After all, the planners may think "if people are on the bus now and not the train, with less demand there might not be a reason to have so many services on that line".

All I'm saying is, let's cut wasteful bus vs rail competition, and make good use of what we already have.
We're called Rail Back on Track for a good reason.

[somebody]

Fourth why do we need more Pre-paid when the entire system is going Pre-paid in just 6 months.

I suspect this may have been an ambit claim.  Only dailies/weeklies are going.  It makes sense to keep cash fares to allow tourists and occasional users to use the service relatively easily.

The new "CityGlider" style services have one big flaw that I'm surprised no one had picked up on. They seem to terminate in the City. Surely there would be benefit in extending these high frequency services across the CBD (as per BCC's paper a few years ago) to destinations such as RBWH and the redeveloped Northshore Hamilton.

I would not support such a thing for full time services.  Routes need to be kept as short as possible for reliability reasons.  Reasonable exceptions are the very short through routes like the 199 and CityGlider.  Extending the 222 (for example) to QUT KG or RB&WH though may be worthwhile.

[stephenk]

You seem to have factored in an interchange time of 0 minutes, forgotten about the existence of traffic lights between Chermside and Nundah, and also forgotten that some people may want to board/alight along the 333 route between Chermside and the CBD (most notably RBWH and QUT).

Try again!

Its only an online transport discussion forum.
And I'm only just putting an example of a feeder service. I could have used your minibuses to train stations idea.
Or your automated guided transit mini-metro to Toowong rail station and transfer idea.

There's nothing wrong with feeder services to rail stations, is there? Nothing wrong with that.
Places all over the world do this. Bus Route 402 does this. Timed transfers would keep time at the station down.
I'm only giving an example.

Thanks for reminding me that traffic lights exist.

While some people might be going to RBWH, most just want to get to the City. After all, that's where most people get off and on in Brisbane, don't they?

I am entitled to question why a multi-million (maybe billion) dollar northern busway out to Chermside is being constructed when there is a perfectly good (underutilised) rail station 4km down the road. I am entitled to ask why buses are not feeding rail stations all over SEQ and why there appears to be wasteful competition between the bus and rail networks when there should be proper integration. After all, my taxes and rates are being spent on this. And soon to be added to that are the funds from state asset privatisation.

I'm entitled to my view, and I think feeder buses and proper integration are the way to go.

You are entitled to your own opinions. But, if you make unjustified, outlandish, and false claims (as per your above Chermside to Nundah rail feeder bus idea) then you have to expect to be criticised!

I'm all for feeder bus services, but not as a replacement for much needed busways. The two will have their own markets and can co-exist.

PS, for another example:

There is a perfectly good rail station called the Exhibition, sits disused for most days of the year. Directly opposite RBWH, 300m walk.
It's a perfectly good rail line.

I'm sure it would have cost less than the cool $777 million (for the Northern Busway which goes to suburbs like Lutwyche and Windsor, which also have perfectly good rail stations) to make this operational, even with track amplification. The resulting competition will only steal passengers from rail, and may be a convenient excuse to see your Ferny Grove line have more peak hour service cuts. After all, the planners may think "if people are on the bus now and not the train, with less demand there might not be a reason to have so many services on that line".

All I'm saying is, let's cut wasteful bus vs rail competition, and make good use of what we already have.
We're called Rail Back on Track for a good reason.

Here we go again. 

Exhibition is not a perfectly good rail station. It can only realistically be used for services currently terminating at Roma Street. Running regular loop, or ballon loop services will reduce network capacity and reliability. Approx $20m would need to be spent for it to be used full time,  and the station will be completely rebuilt in 6(ish) years time anyway for CRR. It is also considerably less convenient than the RBWH busway station which is immediately adjacent to the hospital complex. Don't forget that many RBWH patients are elderly or have mobility issues - I'm sure they would prefer a 70m covered walkway than a 400m walk beside and across a busy road.

To argue against the need for the Northern Busway is somewhat laughable, and yet again you are making statements that can only attract criticism. Can you please tell me where Lutwyche rail station is, as per your quote? Can you also explain how passengers travelling to Lutwyche,  Kedron, and Chermide would take passengers away from the Ferny Grove Line? Can you also explain how rail would serve QUT KG? What about other services that would join the busway such as the 37x? Given the Government's reluctance in building PT infrastructure, do you really think they would be building the Northern Busway if it wasn't justified?

[somebody]

Given the Government's reluctance in building PT infrastructure, do you really think they would be building the Northern Busway if it wasn't justified?

What reluctance to build PT infrastructure??  They are reluctant to run any services on the new and existing infrastructure.

EDIT: They are also reluctant to get value for their money on the PT infrastructure.

[#Metro]

I'm all for feeder bus services, but not as a replacement for much needed busways. The two will have their own markets and can co-exist.

I disagree that they have their own markets. There are only 2 main markets: The car market, and the public transport market.
$20 million is far cheaper than $777 million is, perhaps that money could have been better spent on access improvements.

Please look at a translink map if you want to know where the locations for Lutwyche and Winsor Rail station are. I doubt this is a genuine question as you know quite well where these stations are on the Ferny Grove line.

I'm not alone in my questioning of the busway system. Dr Paul Mees of RMIT in Melbourne is also a critic, and on the same grounds as mine.
You do not build two seperate transport networks at twice the cost to carry half the passengers each. These multi-millions being spent on the busway (which has less capacity than rail) are multi-millions that are not being spent on rail services. There is competition for both passengers and capital funding.

These multi-millions may have been better spent on improving poor rail frequency and patronage. It might have been far far cheaper to do so.
It's easy to get carried away with expensive, brand shiny new technologies and projects. But I think the basics are being forgotten about.
Perth has managed to pull off a public transport revolution using boring old technologies and good planning.

[#Metro]

Given the Government's reluctance in building PT infrastructure, do you really think they would be building the Northern Busway if it wasn't justified?

Do you think projects like the Clem 7 and Airport link wouldn't be built if they were not justified? Just because the Government said so, doesn't make necessarily sound projects.

Governments make mistakes all the time, like the T-card, Myki, Sydney Metro and others would add Rail privatisation to that list.
Some of these costs are truly astronomical.
Almost 500 million for just over 1km of Busway at Buranda. I'm all for good public transport, but just becuase it is big and expensive does not necissarily mean that it is a good thing.

500 million and 777 million = $1.2 billion, imagine if that had been used on rail systems, more trains and feeder bus services.

They are reluctant to run any services on the new and existing infrastructure.

I'm not surprised!

[ozbob]

An excellent outcome of CRR will be a reasonable rail frequency to the new Exhibition station!  This will suit many commuting to and from Herston, despite the short walk. Others will continue to use the bus.

[somebody]

An excellent outcome of CRR will be a reasonable rail frequency to the new Exhibition station!  This will suit many commuting to and from Herston, despite the short walk. Others will continue to use the bus.

If only the Gold Coast trains run through this tunnel on openning then that point won't amount to much at all, unless they are attached to something other than the current airport line pairing.

They are reluctant to run any services on the new and existing infrastructure.

I'm not surprised!

I am.  Why is OK to spend millions and billions on expanding infrastructure, but it isn't OK to expand services??  It's positively stupid.

Point of order: There is no Lutwyche station.

[#Metro]

Point of order taken. There are three rail stations around Lutwyche, which are Windsor (1.5 km), Wooloowin (960 meters) and Albion (1km).* All well within a reasonable feeder bus catchment. The Nth busway would add another (bus) station at this location. Lutwyche (the suburb, for clarity!) itself is a very very small suburb.

I am.  Why is OK to spend millions and billions on expanding infrastructure, but it isn't OK to expand services??  It's positively stupid.

Point of order: There is no Lutwyche station.

The reason why I'm not surprised is that when you spend billions and billions on infrastructure in such wasteful ways, you exhaust the pile of cash to the point that you have no money left over to actually run services on them! (or you rip the money out of rail, may also explain Ferny Grove line cuts or the glacial rate at which rail improvements are trickling through...)

All we are hearing is bus bus bus bus bus... did the government manage to deliver all the rail seats that it promised, or did it bus-titute them?

* distances are straight line, measured in Google Maps

[stephenk]

An excellent outcome of CRR will be a reasonable rail frequency to the new Exhibition station!  This will suit many commuting to and from Herston, despite the short walk. Others will continue to use the bus.

If only the Gold Coast trains run through this tunnel on openning then that point won't amount to much at all, unless they are attached to something other than the current airport line pairing.

The ICRCS shows Gold Coast from the South, and Airport, Shorncliffe, and Doomben from the North using the new tunnel. Shorncliffe, and Doomben services would terminate in the CBD. I think this is a bad idea, I would prefer for them to reverse at Park Rd. Thus Park Rd (with it's UQ connections), Gabba, and Gardens Point would get 8tph rather than 4tph. This line pairings may be changed before the project is finalised.

I'm pretty convinced that there will not be a rail service reduction to South Bank after CRR. There would be political uproar from stakeholders of South Bank businesses and institutions.

Point of order taken.

Isn't the edit post function useful!

[O_128]

why not put a second entrance on the cleveland line and let shorncliffe continue to cleveland? or will cleveland be connected to ferny grove?

[somebody]

why not put a second entrance on the cleveland line and let shorncliffe continue to cleveland? or will cleveland be connected to ferny grove?

The latter option would be far cheaper.

[Golliwog]

why not put a second entrance on the cleveland line and let shorncliffe continue to cleveland? or will cleveland be connected to ferny grove?

The latter option would be far cheaper.

And already occurs half the time, at least in terms of where trains from Ferny Grove end up terminating. Not so sure about where they come from though.

[somebody]

I'm pretty convinced that there will not be a rail service reduction to South Bank after CRR. There would be political uproar from stakeholders of South Bank businesses and institutions.

I hope you are wrong.  There is also the issue with needing to close Dutton Park station if Beenleigh line trains use the CRR, which would add to the uproar.  I think that South Bank businesses need a life if they think that the train line is more useful than the bus in their part of town.  I suppose at present, on weekends there is only the 111 providing a single seat bus trip between South Bank station and Roma St while there are the Shorncliffe, Beenleigh, Airport and Cleveland lines all providing a train link, but that's only important if heading towards Ipswich, and it still can be easily done with a double change.  A connection on Adelaide St for Central is every bit as useful if heading to a northern line (yes, I know I'm ignoring that the only northern line not serving South Bank is Caboolture/Nambour).  One of the problems with this is that the destination displays don't tell you if the bus will be using Adelaide St or Elizabeth St, I guess.

Still, I remain convinced that Shorncliffe, Doomben and the Airport need to lose their single seat run to South Bank.

[stephenk]

I'm pretty convinced that there will not be a rail service reduction to South Bank after CRR. There would be political uproar from stakeholders of South Bank businesses and institutions.

I hope you are wrong.  There is also the issue with needing to close Dutton Park station if Beenleigh line trains use the CRR, which would add to the uproar.  I think that South Bank businesses need a life if they think that the train line is more useful than the bus in their part of town.  I suppose at present, on weekends there is only the 111 providing a single seat bus trip between South Bank station and Roma St while there are the Shorncliffe, Beenleigh, Airport and Cleveland lines all providing a train link, but that's only important if heading towards Ipswich, and it still can be easily done with a double change.  A connection on Adelaide St for Central is every bit as useful if heading to a northern line (yes, I know I'm ignoring that the only northern line not serving South Bank is Caboolture/Nambour).  One of the problems with this is that the destination displays don't tell you if the bus will be using Adelaide St or Elizabeth St, I guess.

Still, I remain convinced that Shorncliffe, Doomben and the Airport need to lose their single seat run to South Bank.

Seriously, I can assure you that there is no way the off-peak service frequency via South Bank is going to be reduced!

By 2016 there will be 2 major hospitals, a university, convention centre, businesses, residential developments ,and a busy cultural and entertainment precinct - no one in their right mind will reduce the rail service to South Bank.