• Welcome to RAIL - Back On Track Forum.
 

104/105/107/108 Revamp

Started by somebody, March 27, 2011, 18:26:45 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

somebody

March 27, 2011, 18:26:45 PM
104 is the Corinda-PA Hospital route.
105 is the City-Indro via Yeronga West route
107/108 are the routes the 105 splits into during peak.

I used the 105 to get from Yeronga to Indro on the weekend.  I was confused as I was expecting to be taken straight to Indro after going via Yeronga TAFE.  This did not occur, as I was taken around via Yeronga West first.  I thought I was south of this loop.  If I am confused by buses, there is something wrong.

I think there needs to be a full time 107, and one other route, which would be Alice St-Annerley Rd-...-Park Rd-School Rd (assuming this is negotiable by buses)-King Arthur Tce-Graceville Ave-Graceville Station-Indro shops.

Question: Is the Chelmer St bridge high enough for buses?

I wonder what sort of frequency these routes would support?  I'd like half hourly each to get a 15 minute service on the part as far as Yeronga, but perhaps this isn't justifiable at all times.

Obviously that makes the 196/197 dead running past the Green Bridge, so why not make those routes go over it and abolish that part of the 192?

I think I have a solution.

#Metro

#1
March 27, 2011, 18:40:22 PM Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 18:41:53 PM by tramtrain
Oh, I made a thread about this I think before.

Hahahaha you caught route 105! The time-wasting tour of Yeronga.

I agree with 107. Maybe send that straight to Fairfield Station. It practically points at the station when it comes off Ashby street
Route 108 could be removed (it only has 2 services per day) and folded into route 105. This would cover Annerly Road

Route 197 could be folded into 196 (why do we need 2 bus routes that are practically the same except at the very end?).

This new 196 could be extended into a hairpin in Yeronga using Hyde and Kadumba Streets, terminating at Yeronga Station.
People on Hyde Road would catch the 196 to the City, people on 196 on Kadumba Street would catch the train at Yeronga Station to get to the CBD.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#2
March 27, 2011, 19:03:27 PM
Umm, if you agree about the full time 107, then what do you mean by saying that we should extend the 196?  And is the Indro-Yeerongpilly to be broken?

#Metro

#3
March 27, 2011, 20:06:56 PM
Sorry, I think you'd be right on this one. No need to extend 196/7 if 107 will become an all day service. My bad.

Indro-Yeerongpilly would not be broken. 108 services would become 105 services, but the 105 would not divert into Yeronga. One way loops are pretty awful.
So jump on in the city, bus goes down Annerly Road, Fairfield Road, through tennyson, graceville ave, oxley road to Indooroopilly bus interchange. It may need to divert via Stimpson and Ashby if you want to keep serving the Corso.

107 all day service to the train station, provided they could put in a turnaround/bus bays at that station.
I think the section on cansdale st or whatever that is, is a waste of time- there are no houses on that street from google maps.
It would be simpler to send 107 up Kingsley and then Hyde road.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

#Metro

#4
March 27, 2011, 20:16:50 PM
Two bus routes may be needed to cover Yeronga- one for hyde and one for kadumba I am thinking. But that might be pricey.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#5
March 27, 2011, 21:11:17 PM
No feeder bus this close to the city please.  And how then are you going to serve Annerley Rd?  Don't?  Annerley Rd is a major enough road that there should be an all stops bus on it.

#Metro

#6
March 27, 2011, 23:09:48 PM
This is exactly why we do not have frequent service and we have to pump massive subsidies into the rail system just so we can get mediocre service. There is no problem getting a bus to pull into Wooloongabba station, but to get a bus to pull into a train station at the same distance, its "no no no".

Annerly Road would be served by the improved 105 service (no Yeronga Loop), as well as the existing Annerly Road routes (11X etc).
Not using the train station for 107 would mean a peak hour only service as you can't justify the cost of running the bus the entire length into the CBD in the off-peak. Instead of forced interchange, you would have forced all-day low frequency for the entire day except for peak hour.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#7
March 28, 2011, 03:15:15 AM
Actually, some decent points there.  I did forget about the 112/114/116 services.  I still think such a route is near enough to the CBD to run through though.

somebody

#8
April 02, 2011, 18:57:09 PM
Quote from: tramtrain on March 27, 2011, 20:16:50 PM
Two bus routes may be needed to cover Yeronga- one for hyde and one for kadumba I am thinking. But that might be pricey.
Missed this point originally.  I would disagree with that one.  A full time 107 would provide an adequate coverage.  The 105 does run in peak for this reason.  The current system is confusing with the 105/107 taking different routes through Yeronga West.

#Metro

#9
April 02, 2011, 19:50:48 PM
I don't think 105 should loop into Yeronga. It should stick to the main road.
It is a complete waste of time for through-passengers to be taken on a safari-like tour of Yeronga backstreets.

An all day (simplified) 107 would cover this area very nicely. Even a half hourly bus connecting to trains on the Beenleigh line would be an improvement.
I know you might not be convinced for connecting the 107 to the train station at Yeronga and or Fairfield, but I'll put the idea out there anyway.

If they do send 107 directly to the CBD, I hope they forget about running along Cansdale Street - nobody lives there from the google map, and make the service much faster by going ex Hyde Road.
That small milk run along Ashby/Simpson st could probably be taken over by 105- nothing is ever perfect. I can't imagine that a lot of people use it from that area anyway.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#10
April 02, 2011, 20:05:11 PM
It would be of assistance if you didn't keep referring to your proposed routes by current route numbers.  When you say "105", I think you mean something more like the 108.

Cansdale St is needed for positioning purposes.  If you don't believe me, propose an alternative.  Remember, you want to serve Fairfield Gardens.

The more interesting question is: what about the service to the east side of the train line?

#Metro

#11
April 02, 2011, 20:20:10 PM
QuoteIt would be of assistance if you didn't keep referring to your proposed routes by current route numbers.  When you say "105", I think you mean something more like the 108.

Cansdale St is needed for positioning purposes.  If you don't believe me, propose an alternative.  Remember, you want to serve Fairfield Gardens.

The more interesting question is: what about the service to the east side of the train line?

Is the route with a slight alteration the same bus route? I think it would be. i105 perhaps (i for 'improved').  :)

Positioning? Ok, I will have a try at this one.

improved 107- follow current route up to Kingsley Parade, Turn right into Hyde Road. (I am looking in Google maps and it looks possible, even at street level; If this fails, use the road next over, Eversly)
Get out of Hyde Road, up Fairfield Road, right turn into Ashby Street, terminate at Fairfield Station (They will have to build a bus turnaround, but they're doing this in West End, so not a biggie I would think). 196/197 could also be extended to terminate on the railway side of that shopping centre they have there.

improved 105 follow current route, turn left into Ashby Street, do the little loop they have via Turner, Stimpson etc, go to CBD via Annerly Road. I don't propose to cut the 105 into a feeder as I see that as covering the arterial road and a more direct trip into the CBD than the 196/197 (Which goes via West End first).
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

#Metro

#12
April 02, 2011, 20:28:52 PM
QuoteThe more interesting question is: what about the service to the east side of the train line?

The problem is the train line. It cuts the suburb up just like a freeway.
I don't mean to sound like the RACQ department of road-mania heare, but the roads look very poor and slow for running proper service.
They should have built proper bridges and overpasses when the train line went in, but that was decades and decades ago.
If you have a bad road system, you can only run bad routes, unless you spend money to correct them.

You could send the bus East up Venner Road for a cross town, but I think the shopping Centre and train station are drawcards here. You'd miss them if you did that.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#13
April 03, 2011, 02:01:38 AM
I believe my suggestion is superior.

somebody

#14
April 14, 2011, 07:26:06 AM

somebody

#15
April 14, 2011, 07:44:15 AM Last Edit: April 14, 2011, 08:13:46 AM by somebody
The new route + 107 + 112 + 116 could co-ordinate to give a 15 minute frequency on Annerley Rd.  In fact, higher frequency could operate on the 107 in particular.

Also, one of the real problems with the 104+105 system is that the frequency is divided.  By re-routing into Graceville station, it isn't much out of the way for anyone.  Currently there are 22 inbound and 20 outbound weekday trips on the 104.  I expect these trips carry a lot of air.  A revamp could make them useful.

#Metro

#16
April 14, 2011, 08:45:37 AM
I like it. I like it a lot.
Once nitpick- why wingarra st. Why not just go to the roundabout?
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#17
April 14, 2011, 08:50:26 AM
Quote from: tramtrain on April 14, 2011, 08:45:37 AM
I like it. I like it a lot.
Once nitpick- why wingarra st. Why not just go to the roundabout?
No reason other than that's the existing system.

Golliwog

#18
April 14, 2011, 10:13:20 AM
I don't know much about these routes so I'm not going to say much, other than that I would favor staying on Coonan St or turning into Stamford Rd (pretty sure there's a bus only right turn there) and avoiding Station Rd as the traffic on it getting onto Moggill Rd is pretty bad at times. That said, I don't know about the traffic on the other two street either.
There is no silver bullet... but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

somebody

#19
April 14, 2011, 10:32:31 AM

#Metro

#20
April 14, 2011, 10:51:41 AM
Sorry to raise more gripes on what is a very good idea.

1. We should get the iron out and remove Wingarra Street. Reduces 2 turns down to 1 turn and keeps the bus on a main road. This helps legibility.
2. King Arthur Tce and Tennis Centre is heavily loaded up with traffic calming, bottlenecks and slow sections. This would be extremely slow and torturous route. I think the routes are good but the traffic calming should either be removed or something done to allow the bus to avoid this car trap.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

#21
April 14, 2011, 10:55:45 AM
Quote from: tramtrain on April 14, 2011, 10:51:41 AM
Sorry to raise more gripes on what is a very good idea.

1. We should get the iron out and remove Wingarra Street. Reduces 2 turns down to 1 turn and keeps the bus on a main road. This helps legibility.
2. King Arthur Tce and Tennis Centre is heavily loaded up with traffic calming, bottlenecks and slow sections. This would be extremely slow and torturous route. I think the routes are good but the traffic calming should either be removed or something done to allow the bus to avoid this car trap.
Ideally, yes.  Removing Wingarra St moves bus stops which is a lot of paperwork for not much benefit.  That would actually reduce 3 turns to one.

#Metro

#22
April 14, 2011, 11:25:00 AM
Well if TL is filling out the paperwork (are there even stops on this street?) why do we care?
If they are going to do a re-routing, why not do a proper job first time around of it and remove historical dog-legs whose purpose has been long forgotten.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

#Metro

#23
April 14, 2011, 11:27:06 AM
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

#Metro

#25
April 14, 2011, 12:36:19 PM
Quote
I propose replacement of the 104, 105 and 108.  Basically, serve Indooroopilly shops, Graceville station, Yeerongpilly station, Yeronga TAFE, Annerley Rd.
The 105 would also be replaced by a full time 107 route.  Here's a map of the replacement of the 104 and 108:

I like this idea. What's the route of your proposed 107?

Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

mufreight

#26
April 14, 2011, 17:52:01 PM
So with this rerouting what happens to the bus connection between the western rail line at Corinda and PA Hospital, an esential link for many.

Golliwog

#27
April 14, 2011, 18:09:37 PM Last Edit: April 14, 2011, 18:23:22 PM by Golliwog
Quote from: mufreight on April 14, 2011, 17:52:01 PM
So with this rerouting what happens to the bus connection between the western rail line at Corinda and PA Hospital, an esential link for many.

None of these routes linked Corinda and the PA Hospital to begin with. Thats is route 104.

EDIT: My bad, missed 104 in the title and hadn't been keeping up with the discussion too much.

Well if the trains are no longer going to be running Corinda via Tennyson, then theres no need to keep the bus link and Corinda, so it could be shifted down the road to Sherwood. Though that still leaves the PA Hospital end unlinked.
There is no silver bullet... but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

#Metro

#28
April 14, 2011, 18:12:23 PM
It would be a 700m-1km walk to the PA Hospital.

Remember SB wants this to replace the 104...
Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

Golliwog

#29
April 14, 2011, 18:25:51 PM
If its servicing Annerley Rd, how far is it from Boggo Rd busway station? A couple of 100m tops I think. While a transfer isn't the most ideal, if this is running at a decent frequency then its not really an issue.
There is no silver bullet... but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

somebody

#30
April 14, 2011, 19:15:07 PM
Quote from: mufreight on April 14, 2011, 17:52:01 PM
So with this rerouting what happens to the bus connection between the western rail line at Corinda and PA Hospital, an esential link for many.
Indeed a limitation.

Google Earth shows that the walk from Annerley Rd/Fairfield Rd to Ipswich Rd along Cornwall St is 679m.  A bit of an ask for a frail aged person, but probably ok for others.  The other end of Hospital you could walk 243m to Boggo Rd busway station.  You can't expect a direct bus from everywhere to everywhere.

mufreight

#31
April 14, 2011, 20:18:08 PM
Quote from: Golliwog on April 14, 2011, 18:25:51 PM
If its servicing Annerley Rd, how far is it from Boggo Rd busway station? A couple of 100m tops I think. While a transfer isn't the most ideal, if this is running at a decent frequency then its not really an issue.

The majority of those using the 104 to access the hospital are the aged and infirm so the removal of a convenient service (except for the fact that it is currently timetabled to connect with rail services coming from the city rather than those from the west) to the hospital has a considerable effect   :thsdo   :pr   :thsdo

somebody

#32
April 14, 2011, 20:35:53 PM
Quote from: mufreight on April 14, 2011, 20:18:08 PM
Quote from: Golliwog on April 14, 2011, 18:25:51 PM
If its servicing Annerley Rd, how far is it from Boggo Rd busway station? A couple of 100m tops I think. While a transfer isn't the most ideal, if this is running at a decent frequency then its not really an issue.

The majority of those using the 104 to access the hospital are the aged and infirm so the removal of a convenient service (except for the fact that it is currently timetabled to connect with rail services coming from the city rather than those from the west) to the hospital has a considerable effect   :thsdo   :pr   :thsdo
Would you agree that wouldn't justify the current level of service?  I guess an alternative would be to have this service use Ipswich Rd.  It's a bit of a milk run there though.

I'm not convinced that via Tennyson justifies two services.

somebody

#33
April 15, 2011, 05:53:21 AM
Thinking some more about this one, if you are going to a hospital from the west, why wouldn't you stay on the train to Auchenflower and go to the Wesley Hospital?  There may be a few specialties at PAH, but I think the target market is diminishing substantially.

ozbob

#34
April 15, 2011, 06:29:32 AM
Quote from: somebody on April 15, 2011, 05:53:21 AM
Thinking some more about this one, if you are going to a hospital from the west, why wouldn't you stay on the train to Auchenflower and go to the Wesley Hospital?  There may be a few specialties at PAH, but I think the target market is diminishing substantially.

Wesley is a private hospital, PA is a public hospital.  Health policy dictates that the majority need to access PA.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

somebody

#35
April 15, 2011, 06:42:21 AM
Quote from: ozbob on April 15, 2011, 06:29:32 AM
Wesley is a private hospital, PA is a public hospital.  Health policy dictates that the majority need to access PA.
Is that right?  I had assumed public.  I don't go to hospitals much.

Hmm, there may then be a need to provide this link.  There is a small hospital (John Oxley) at Wacol, but it isn't convenient to PT either.

Does PAH really cover such a large area?  Wow.  Ipswich public is a long way away and also much smaller.

somebody

#36
April 15, 2011, 06:48:12 AM
The other issue would be the couple of services/day which do doglegs into Corinda Community Health Centre & Corinda High.  These would need to be provided by an alternate service.

Golliwog

#37
April 15, 2011, 06:50:07 AM
Well to keep as much of the route as possible, you could head down the busway entrance at the intersection of Annerley Rd, then use the exit just before PA Hospital station and drop passengers underneath the busway there before continuing down Ipswich Rd. Though I think you did say that was a bit of a hike.

Hmmm true. What about the 106 for those dog legs to the health center and high school?
There is no silver bullet... but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

ozbob

#38
April 15, 2011, 06:52:19 AM
The John Oxley Memorial Hospital is a psychiatric hospital, it is not a general access public hospital. PA is the major public hospital, Ipswich is a smaller public hospital and  less capability than PA.  Yes, Wesley is a private hospital.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Ozbob's Gallery Forum   Facebook  X   Mastodon  BlueSky

somebody

#39
April 15, 2011, 07:00:05 AM
Quote from: Golliwog on April 15, 2011, 06:50:07 AM
Well to keep as much of the route as possible, you could head down the busway entrance at the intersection of Annerley Rd, then use the exit just before PA Hospital station and drop passengers underneath the busway there before continuing down Ipswich Rd. Though I think you did say that was a bit of a hike.

Hmmm true. What about the 106 for those dog legs to the health center and high school?
106?  I think you mean 104.  Just provide a local route with a few trips/day.

Going via the Busway at PAH would be less direct than just using Ipswich Rd, and also likely less convenient for pax.  It would mean you only have one stop rather than a number of stops along Cornwall St & Ipswich Rd.  The advantage would be that it would get you out of Ipswich Rd traffic.  Maybe use the new O'Keefe St portal in the Boggo Rd busway heading away from the CBD.  Don't know why the 100/110/115 don't do so.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions
🡱 🡳