TransLink: New Farm changes - information session

[Golliwog]

http://translink.com.au/news-and-updates/new-farm-changes

From Monday 6 June there will be changes to routes 193, 195, 196 and 197.

TransLink staff will be available on Tuesday 19 April to give you information and answer your questions about the upcoming changes.

Where:
New Farm Neighbourhood Centre
967 Brunswick Street, New Farm
When:
Tuesday 19 April 2011 
Time:
Staff available from 1pm until 4pm

This has me intrigued.

[somebody]

What's not to like about the 195?

I speculate that they have wussed out and given the Ivory St routing to the 196/197 rather than the appropriate 199.

Let's see if I am right.

[ButFli]

One would suspect that it is time for the 193 to be scrapped. I suspect it is both the shortest and most infrequent service in all of Brisbane - 2km end-to-end and only two round trips a day, five days a week! Does anyone know the origins of this service? I can only imagine the grandmother of a Mayor lived along the route and wanted to go to go down the shops on weekday mornings. A total waste of resources!

[#Metro]

You could probably get a taxi or bicycle / citycycle at this distance.
And then there is always home delivery.

[achiruel]

Nice how they time it so most working people can't even attend...

[somebody]

Nice how they time it so most working people can't even attend...

Not only that, but they are withholding the information about what might be changed.  I hope the 195 isn't degraded into a via Valley service.  That would suck.

[ozbob]

Media release 17 April 2011

SEQ: What's happening with the New Farm bus routes?

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for improved information to the public regarding service changes.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Translink has announced an information session for changes to the New Farm bus routes, 193, 195, 196 and 197 (1)."

"While we welcome consultation it is important that more detail be available. For example there is no information available as to the nature of the changes either on advertising material or the website, only 3 business days notice has been given of the consultation, and the consultation is occurring during business hours.  This limits informed community participation and consultation."

"We request TransLink perhaps put up details of the proposed changes on its website and include an online / postal feedback mechanism as well."

Reference:

1. http://translink.com.au/news-and-updates/new-farm-changes

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/04/sly-or-incompetent.html
Another quality TransLink community consultation?

[somebody]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/04/sly-or-incompetent.html
Another quality TransLink community consultation?

Did you see the comments in the media releases forum?

[ozbob]

Here it is ..

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

http://translink.com.au/news-and-updates/new-farm-changes

New Farm changes

From Monday 6 June, planned changes to services will make travel easier for passengers in the New Farm area by simplifying services and adding additional trips into the Valley, the city and West End.

TransLink staff will be available on Tuesday 19 April to give you information and answer your questions about the upcoming changes.
Where    New Farm Neighbourhood Centre
967 Brunswick Street, New Farm
When    Tuesday 19 April 2011
Time    Staff available from 1pm until 4pm

Planned changes

Route 193

    Will be extended to service Elystan Road, Mark Street, Mountford Road, Moray Street and Sydney Streets - residents in the Merthyr area will now have access to the James Street retail precinct.

    Will operate an additional two off-peak services in each direction.

Route 195

    Will travel dwon Elystan Road, Mark Street, Mountford Road, Moray Street and Sydney Street, providing additional peak services to the Valley and the city.

Route 196

    Will become a full time high frequency service - operating every 10 minutes during peak and every 15 minutes off-peak, seven days a week.

Route 197

    Route 197 will be replaced by additional 196 services

    Route 195 will travel down Elystan Road, Mark Street, Mountford Road, Moray Street and Sydney Street, providing peak services in to the Valley and the city.

    Residents can also access route 193 during off peak periods for travel to Merthyr Central and the James Street retail precinct.

Route map for routes 193, 195, 196 and 199



This is the first of our information sessions for the new farm changes. Please check back soon for more information.

If you would like to leave us a comment about these changes, please do so by close of business Wednesday 27 April 2011.

[#Metro]

Route 196

    Will become a full time high frequency service - operating every 10 minutes during peak and every 15 minutes off-peak, seven days a week.

I don't understand this one. It ALREADY is every 10 minutes or so in peak AND 15 minutes in the off-peak. So what exactly is the change here again? Are they BUZzing it?

Shame to see "dogs legs" still proposed for retention.

[ozbob]

BUZ  yes.

[#Metro]

BUZ  yes.

So they are actually BUZzing it or was that a "I agree they should BUZ it".

And another question, particularly to Somebody, should this become a full time route via Ivory Street???

[Golliwog]

BUZ  yes.

So they are actually BUZzing it or was that a "I agree they should BUZ it".

And another question, particularly to Somebody, should this become a full time route via Ivory Street???

From the way they say it, yes they are BUZing it. If it already has those service frequencies, perhaps its just the services time period (what time does it start/cut out?).

As for Ivory St, I don't know. I would think that if theres 2 BUZ routes that one should take Ivory St full time and the other should take not Ivory St full time. But I don't know what the patronage is like and the from where to where of each route. By that I mean where do most passenger use the route to get from/too.

Also, with BUZing it, will it continue to be all stops, and if not (which I suspect will be the case) which stops will it no longer serve?

[#Metro]

I think in the evening, early morning on weekends (not good if you work in the city on the weekend!) and indeed all weekend the 196 service is rotten apple.

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/04/sly-or-incompetent.html
Update to yesterdays post.

[dwb]

To me this looks like a great (if reasonably small) upgrade.

FINALLY the 196 will have BUZ frequency and hours of operation. This is a BIG PLUS. I used to live on the route in Highgate Hill, and services were 30-40mins apart and seemed to finish really early at night. Often services would leave the city more than 5mins early on a 45min service interval.

I assume there will be no rationalisation of stops, so perhaps it won't be branded as BUZ, although it appears to be getting same frequency and hours of operation. For example the current 196 from City to Fairfield is scheduled M-F in the evening for 557pm, 613pm, 628pm (ok, but then drops to 20mins), 648pm (then 36mins) 724pm, (then 46mins) 810pm, 855pm (41mins), 936pm, 1021pm (45mins), 1106pm (LAST SERVICE). And on Sunday the first service from Fairfield isn't until 812am (with services every 30mins) until 642pm, then dropping to 45mins, 725pm, 810pm, 855pm, 936pm (LAST SERVICE). This low service frequency was always a bigger issue at the Fairfield (ie non-New Farm) end of the route as there aren't alternatives such as the 199.

Currently there are 33 scheduled services on Saturday and 26 on Sunday (a total of 59 over the weekend). With the stated 15min frequency 630-1130pm, that should increase to 68 services each day, or 136 over the weekend - a 130% increase!

This forum is all about making public transport a real alternative for more trips, not just commuters, and this upgrade will deliver just that, legibility, reliability and increased frequency!

I left the following comment on Translink's zoomerang comment survey:

"This is excellent news and hopefully will result in better spacing of services as well as greater legibility - I used to live in Highgate Hill and found the 196/7 massively unreliable and horribly low frequency late at night and on the weekend. Thankyou for finally BUZing weekend services! It would be nice to see the proposed timetable, but again, the late night weekly and weekend services on the Fairfield end will be greatly appreciated/ where as they were always sort of available in New Farm due to other routes!"

PS (added after original post).
I do not believe the route should always travel via Ivory St as this means that New Farm residents have a longer walk to get to the valley mall or Brunswick St station.

[ozbob]

BUZ  yes.

So they are actually BUZzing it or was that a "I agree they should BUZ it".

And another question, particularly to Somebody, should this become a full time route via Ivory Street???

Yes, it is to be a BUZ

@Dwb  yes, this is good news.

[somebody]

And another question, particularly to Somebody, should this become a full time route via Ivory Street???

I think not.

In peak time most of this route has the 195 supplement to go via Ivory St.  Off peak, I think this route can connect Brunswick St to the Valley, and free the busier 199 from going that way.  The 199 corridor also could support a peak time supplementary route into the Valley, but I don't think this route could.

The GOOD:
197 is gone.
196 is to be a BUZ

The BAD:
195 to be deviated onto old 197 streets
No Ivory St routing for the 199.

Not too sure about the 193.

[dwb]

The BAD:
195 to be deviated onto old 197 streets
No Ivory St routing for the 199.

Is it really that bad that the 195 will work some old streets?

New Farm has historically had a larger proportion of older people living there than Brisbane as a whole and older people struggle to walk longer distances and are more reliant (unless they're wealthy) on PT than other users.  The rest of the peninsular has more direct higher frequency routes. (Further, although it may look bad on a map, if you caught it, lots of people get on/off the Merthyr St dogleg of the 196!).

According to ABS stats sourced from Brisbane Community Profiles (http://profile.id.com.au/Default.aspx?id=327), in 2006, New Farm, compared to Brisbane:
- still had proportionally more older people in the top age brackets than Brisbane despite a decrease, and despite a huge increase from '01-'06 in yuppies
- still had lower car ownership 18% no cars (vs 10%), (roughly the same with 1 car) but lower for 2 or more cars.
- still had higher rates of bus usership than Brisbane at 14.3% vs 7.6% of work trips by bus,
- had higher walk rate to work than Brisbane at 14.4% vs 4.1%
- still had lower drive to work rate than Brisbane, 40.1% vs 54.2%

[somebody]

I think it is bad.  Aged people don't tend to travel in peak hour, so I can't see that reducing the negatives of re-routing the 195 away from Oxlade Dr with the 196.

[#Metro]

Is it really that bad that the 195 will work some old streets?

New Farm has historically had a larger proportion of older people living there than Brisbane as a whole and older people struggle to walk longer distances and are more reliant (unless they're wealthy) on PT than other users.  The rest of the peninsular has more direct higher frequency routes. (Further, although it may look bad on a map, if you caught it, lots of people get on/off the Merthyr St dogleg of the 196!).

According to ABS stats sourced from Brisbane Community Profiles (http://profile.id.com.au/Default.aspx?id=327), in 2006, New Farm, compared to Brisbane:
- still had proportionally more older people in the top age brackets than Brisbane despite a decrease, and despite a huge increase from '01-'06 in yuppies
- still had lower car ownership 18% no cars (vs 10%), (roughly the same with 1 car) but lower for 2 or more cars.
- still had higher rates of bus usership than Brisbane at 14.3% vs 7.6% of work trips by bus,
- had higher walk rate to work than Brisbane at 14.4% vs 4.1%
- still had lower drive to work rate than Brisbane, 40.1% vs 54.2%

Well the fact that there are lots of aged people in new farm is not necessarily a reason to run dog legs. It may be an argument to retain closer stop spacing though. Services should be fast, frequent and direct unless there is a very good reason not to do this. I'm not convinced that dogs legs should be retained. Even more people might  use the service if it were more simple and direct. There is a way to provide "welfare style" services without forcing every single bus and every single person to endure torturous routing everytime- FLEXILINK, Council Cabs etc. Dual function the bus stops- they can be flexilink/council cab pickup points. Overseas in places like the US and Canada, this kind of service is a big thing. We don't seem to have that here.

There are aged care facilities on moray street (218 Moray Street, 193 Moray Street, perhaps some others). Sending the bus straight down Moray St and along Oxalade to terminate at the ferry would cover this section. I don't agree with the current "Maze" which has the bus exit brunswick street, travel a few blocks and then go back on to brunswick street and then off it again. I think it is an utter waste of time and possibly does this for no other reason than "the tram did that in 1969". There must be better reasons than that for routing!

Hallelujah for BUZzing the 196 and dumping the 197!

That's one bus that can be crossed off the Core Frequent Network "to BUZ" list. I hope a BUZ 100 (and altered to be serving Moorooka) and a BUZ 450 are not far away! A few bus routes (198, 104) should also be fed to the scrapper.

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5290.0
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5173.0

[#Metro]

Strange idea but why not sew together 195 and 192?

[dwb]

Well the fact that there are lots of aged people in new farm is not necessarily a reason to run dog legs. It may be an argument to retain closer stop spacing though. Services should be fast, frequent and direct unless there is a very good reason not to do this. I'm not convinced that dogs legs should be retained. Even more people might  use the service if it were more simple and direct. There is a way to provide "welfare style" services without forcing every single bus and every single person to endure torturous routing everytime- FLEXILINK, Council Cabs etc. Dual function the bus stops- they can be flexilink/council cab pickup points. Overseas in places like the US and Canada, this kind of service is a big thing. We don't seem to have that here.

Ok well how about that is just where the customers live and this is the end of the route!? Let me assure you if someone wants to go there they will wait 2mins and get the 199!

I mean geez, this is not at all like the 301! The passengers in New Farm peninsular aren't going to the New Farm park ferry terminal, nor to Powerhouse, most of them are going/coming from their homes and their homes are not on Brunswick St, but Merthyr Shopping Centre is. One option could be to miss Merthyr centre, but the streets don't run through that well. Another option would be to run a loop with both Moray and James Sts... but then you'd miss the BUZ simplicity.

[dwb]

Further, those streets will be losing their current 197 services, so routing the 195 there is probably a move to apease those customers who are in fact predominantly peak customers going to the city at either the beginning or end of the route. Oxlade St doesn't lose any service because the 196 frequency is being bumped up. From my perspective this makes a lot of sense!

[somebody]

Further, those streets will be losing their current 197 services, so routing the 195 there is probably a move to apease those customers who are in fact predominantly peak customers going to the city at either the beginning or end of the route. Oxlade St doesn't lose any service because the 196 frequency is being bumped up. From my perspective this makes a lot of sense!

Yes, but Oxlade Dr is losing its previously good peak service to allow for this.  You can't have buses up every street.  I would imagine that Oxlade Dr people will need to walk to the new 195, unless they would interchange at Merthyr/Brunswick.

[dwb]

Further, those streets will be losing their current 197 services, so routing the 195 there is probably a move to apease those customers who are in fact predominantly peak customers going to the city at either the beginning or end of the route. Oxlade St doesn't lose any service because the 196 frequency is being bumped up. From my perspective this makes a lot of sense!

Yes, but Oxlade Dr is losing its previously good peak service to allow for this.  You can't have buses up every street.  I would imagine that Oxlade Dr people will need to walk to the new 195, unless they would interchange at Merthyr/Brunswick.

Not really, Oxlade only loses those few previous 195 expresses but it gains a whole lot extra 196s (ie the services that were previously 197s on the minor streets). Given that the 195 and 196 go to the same place, the only difference then is that the 195 goes "express" and doesn't service Fortitude Valley. The timetabled arrival in Adelaide St currently only differs by 1-2mins in duration due to this "express" running.

[#Metro]

Ok well how about that is just where the customers live and this is the end of the route!? Let me assure you if someone wants to go there they will wait 2mins and get the 199!

I mean geez, this is not at all like the 301! The passengers in New Farm peninsular aren't going to the New Farm park ferry terminal, nor to Powerhouse, most of them are going/coming from their homes and their homes are not on Brunswick St, but Merthyr Shopping Centre is. One option could be to miss Merthyr centre, but the streets don't run through that well. Another option would be to run a loop with both Moray and James Sts... but then you'd miss the BUZ simplicity.

If people want welfare routing, they should get a dedicated welfare service that is specifically for that purpose- FLEXILINK
, not force every single passenger on every single service to endure welfare routing.

This means that people who want a service to their front door because they can't walk or are elderly or whatever reason get their PT service direct to their front door.
It frees up the main bus service to get on with the job of providing fast service for patronage purposes. Flexilink replacing the route 193 would be much more appropriate to
do welfare runs because it does not have a fixed route and can be at your house within 2 hours (or less I would expect as it is so close to the city).

[somebody]

Yes, but Oxlade Dr is losing its previously good peak service to allow for this.  You can't have buses up every street.  I would imagine that Oxlade Dr people will need to walk to the new 195, unless they would interchange at Merthyr/Brunswick.

Not really, Oxlade only loses those few previous 195 expresses but it gains a whole lot extra 196s (ie the services that were previously 197s on the minor streets). Given that the 195 and 196 go to the same place, the only difference then is that the 195 goes "express" and doesn't service Fortitude Valley. The timetabled arrival in Adelaide St currently only differs by 1-2mins in duration due to this "express" running.

Timetable shows about a 5 minute difference in the PM.  I would really question whether the reality is this small degree of difference.  Only way it could be is if the Ivory St tunnel is ridiculously congested, which brings us back to bus lanes.

[ButFli]

Yes, but Oxlade Dr is losing its previously good peak service to allow for this.  You can't have buses up every street.  I would imagine that Oxlade Dr people will need to walk to the new 195, unless they would interchange at Merthyr/Brunswick.

Not really, Oxlade only loses those few previous 195 expresses but it gains a whole lot extra 196s (ie the services that were previously 197s on the minor streets). Given that the 195 and 196 go to the same place, the only difference then is that the 195 goes "express" and doesn't service Fortitude Valley. The timetabled arrival in Adelaide St currently only differs by 1-2mins in duration due to this "express" running.

Timetable shows about a 5 minute difference in the PM.  I would really question whether the reality is this small degree of difference.  Only way it could be is if the Ivory St tunnel is ridiculously congested, which brings us back to bus lanes.

I can confirm anecdotally that the difference in time is far more significant in reality, especially in the afternoon. An Ivory St routing saves 10 to 15 minutes over the Wickham St-Warner St-Ann St dog-leg in evening peak. It is very rare for the Ivory St tunnel to be congested although no unheard of (this evening being an example).

[dwb]

If people want welfare routing, they should get a dedicated welfare service that is specifically for that purpose- FLEXILINK, not force every single passenger on every single service to endure welfare routing.

This means that people who want a service to their front door because they can't walk or are elderly or whatever reason get their PT service direct to their front door.

It frees up the main bus service to get on with the job of providing fast service for patronage purposes. Flexilink replacing the route 193 would be much more appropriate to do welfare runs because it does not have a fixed route and can be at your house within 2 hours (or less I would expect as it is so close to the city).

Yes, but Oxlade Dr is losing its previously good peak service to allow for this.  You can't have buses up every street.  I would imagine that Oxlade Dr people will need to walk to the new 195, unless they would interchange at Merthyr/Brunswick.

Not really, Oxlade only loses those few previous 195 expresses but it gains a whole lot extra 196s (ie the services that were previously 197s on the minor streets). Given that the 195 and 196 go to the same place, the only difference then is that the 195 goes "express" and doesn't service Fortitude Valley. The timetabled arrival in Adelaide St currently only differs by 1-2mins in duration due to this "express" running.

Timetable shows about a 5 minute difference in the PM.  I would really question whether the reality is this small degree of difference.  Only way it could be is if the Ivory St tunnel is ridiculously congested, which brings us back to bus lanes.

Of course this isn't unexpected (ie BT using an unrealistic timetable) but I don't believe it really changes anything in my post, it only adds credence to your desire to route 196 via the tunnel (to provide the direct express function), which doesn't particularly bother me, its probably a good idea. If the 196 goes via the tunnel, then the 195 can also go via the tunnel, or can be changed to Wickham/Ann Sts (but it would probably lose its 'express' and become a 'shuttle' in that case).

What I'm really trying to say is that there are currently 22x 197 services from Merthyr to Fairfield via City that use Mark, Mountford, Moray and Sydney Sts (12 morn, 10 arvo, with 7 between 630-930am) and 19 services (6 morn, 13 arvo) from Fairfield to New Farm via City.

Does this group really propose taking away these proximate services from New Farm residents and expect everyone to be happy? Oxlade St might be "direct" but it is also right next to the river meaning its catchment is reduced on the southern side. It seems to me that Translink is offering a pretty good compromise here, that the 196 is BUZ, and that the previous 197 services are to be half replaced by 195 services (ie there are currently only half as many 195 services as there are 197 and the TL announcement says nothing about increasing their frequency).

The 193 services local trips for the peninsular. Currently it only does it twice a day to and from the shops. This will be boosted to four times a day to and from the shops during off peak hours. Has anyone actually routinely used this route? It could be heavily used by local aged/other people! And yet you're suggesting getting rid of it and turning it into a Flexitaxi.... how many weeks after this forum shafted TL on changing bus routes to Flexilink! Either presumably they're scared to do the same thing again or their patronage data here shows the route is well utilised by those oldies and would (again) cause a political stink if it were removed? Or perhaps BT doesn't want it removed and TL is just going along for the ride. Either way, its hardly a huge waste of resources and it is probably delivering quite an important local service.

[#Metro]

What I'm really trying to say is that there are currently 22x 197 services from Merthyr to Fairfield via City that use Mark, Mountford, Moray and Sydney Sts (12 morn, 10 arvo, with 7 between 630-930am) and 19 services (6 morn, 13 arvo) from Fairfield to New Farm via City.

Does this group really propose taking away these proximate services from New Farm residents and expect everyone to be happy? Oxlade St might be "direct" but it is also right next to the river meaning its catchment is reduced on the southern side. It seems to me that Translink is offering a pretty good compromise here, that the 196 is BUZ, and that the previous 197 services are to be half replaced by 195 services (ie there are currently only half as many 195 services as there are 197 and the TL announcement says nothing about increasing their frequency).

Services must be direct, fast and run along legible roads. No compromise from me here. I don't expect everyone to be happy, but I do expect that changes will result in an increase in mobility, legibility and simplicity. I had to go to a function in new farm last week and I had to endure time wasting welfare routing, that saw us lumped with a really long walk to Merthyr Bowls Club because it wasn't legible or simple and we didn't have a map at the time. Other guests for the function took the car and got there 15-20 minutes before we did. Unbelievable! It was the first bus that pulled up in the City and we caught it and thought it would go reasonably close to the river. It didn't. Public Transport should be intuitive.

[#Metro]

The 193 services local trips for the peninsular. Currently it only does it twice a day to and from the shops. This will be boosted to four times a day to and from the shops during off peak hours. Has anyone actually routinely used this route? It could be heavily used by local aged/other people! And yet you're suggesting getting rid of it and turning it into a Flexitaxi.... how many weeks after this forum shafted TL on changing bus routes to Flexilink! Either presumably they're scared to do the same thing again or their patronage data here shows the route is well utilised by those oldies and would (again) cause a political stink if it were removed? Or perhaps BT doesn't want it removed and TL is just going along for the ride. Either way, its hardly a huge waste of resources and it is probably delivering quite an important local service.

Disagree. "delivering quite an important service" says nothing about whether the current service could be replaced by something even more relevant to this demographic's needs. How many people per day are being carried by the 193- it is such a short route. A flexi taxi can pull up to your front door- a bus you have to walk to the bus stop, which might have a 400m catchment area for able bodied people, but if you are say 90 with arthritis I would think the catchment area would be much reduced indeed- say maybe 100m or 200m?. If the bus is heavily used (and I doubt it, such routes generally are not heavily patronized in my experience and also the route is very short and low frequency). This is the problem with fixed route services performing this welfare function- they are fixed route! You have to walk to street X and then wait. There are only 4 services per day!

With FlexiLink, you could cover the entire New Farm Peninsula, not just people living within 100-200 m of the fixed bus route, and you could minimise their walking to what, the distance between their front door and their driveway (20 m?). And you could have far more services than just four per day (maybe at any off peak hour), and far less waiting too. A maxi taxi can take up to 10 people.

I think the bus stops for 193 should be retained but rebranded as FlexiLink collection points so that there is a physical presence and legibility of the service within the suburbs. This is no different to the TransLink bus stop style signs that have been popping up around Brisbane which have "Taxi" written on them. Indeed every bus stop within the zone should be a de facto FlexiLink pick up point for legibility.

What people need is TRANSPORT not some specific type of vehicle- does it actually matter whether it is Bus or Taxi that turns up? There are far more better uses for buses than running services that are likely to have low patronage- like more services for high patronage routes. By exchanging the 193 bus for the 193 FlexiLink (maybe we should number them) we can

* Cover the entire New Farm peninsula, not just people who live within walking distance of the route due to flexible routing
* Offer more of an on demand service, accessible for more hours of the day than just 4 services
* Door to door direct trip which minimises walking distance
* Spare non-users of the service loss of time due to welfare routing - other buses in the area can focus on maximising patronage (sounds awfully familiar to the Yeronga 105 case as well).

I think this is a fair deal.

I think every bus stop within New Farm should have a sign attached. "193 FlexiLink operates in this area" and a phone number on it.
We need to get away from being emotionally attached to vehicles (light rail, bus) and get away from symbols of good public transport and start looking at actual good public transport- service characteristics (frequency, when can I catch it, how do I access it, how late does it run) and mobility.

A Flexilink service would offer a far higher level of mobility for this demographic than a fixed route, infrequent and limited area bus service. These type of flexible "paratransit" services are very common in America and Canada, but almost unheard of over here.

[#Metro]

Exhibit #1: MTA New York Paratransit service

AAR provides transportation for people with disabilities who are unable to use public bus or subway service for some or all of their trips. It offers shared ride, door-to-door paratransit service. AAR operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. When you call 877-337-2017 and reserve your trip to a location in Nassau or Westchester counties, the reservationist will inform you if the location is within the three-quarter mile service area. New York City Transit (NYC Transit) administers AAR; private carriers under contract to NYC Transit provide service. Feeder Service is provided for some customers.  For more information, visit http://www.mta.info/nyc/paratran/onthemove.htm#3

http://www.mta.info/nyct/paratran/guide.htm

These services feed to places where you can connect to high frequency services.

[somebody]

In addition to what TT has said, it is only about 600m between Brunswick St and Oxlade Dr on the 197's deviation.  That is within the 400m walking distance standard from the centre to either end.

Not sure about the 193 either.  I expect this is pork barrelling.  But perhaps not, you never know.

[ozbob]

Just another aspect that is important IMHO.  Having participated in the FlexiLink CRG process at Ipswich, and spoken with many impacted on and experienced the FlexiLink options one of the factors greatly misunderstood was that the users wanted the certainty of timetables, legible bus routes. The FlexiLink is just too difficult for many, the booking aspect and the failure to be timely was a real problem.  193 is clearly servicing a need and that is that.  I doubt very much the Government and TL want a repeat of Ipswich.  Goodna is also a casualty of FlexiLink.  There is growing disquiet there.  There was an absence of feedback in the same way as there was in Ipswich, there are a number of reasons for this, but it sort of beggars belief that the major thoroughfare Queen St in Goodna just has closed bus stops along it.  People are feeling it.

[#Metro]

I think flexilink would be valuable, and it has been operating elsewhere in the state and the city for some time now. Paratransit services operate overseas quite successfully. If I were to replace a door-to-door service on demand that went anywhere within the suburb with a service that operates 4 times a day that services a limited area and has low frequency, that would be a down-grade.

People are scared of change;
New Farm is an inner city location and I think that there should be no problem getting a taxi out there.

Certain low frequency?
Certain long walk?

Adding flexilink to bus stops would fix the legibility problem. A proper booking system and booking though TL's phone number 13 12 30 would be better. FlexiLink still has to find its feet, but we just can't be using 65 seat buses on low patronage, high-air carrying routes when we could be filling up these buses with people on higher frequency/patronage routes.

If there is a need for a welfare service-- it should be specialised for that. I am not happy that almost every bus route in Brisbane has dog legs attached to it for this purpose. Split the functions into a two-tier system-patronage/coverage.

[ozbob]

A long term resident of Goodna, and somewhat representative of others made the comment last evening that 23 years ago they bad a better public transport options than they have today.  Rather sad indictment, considering the considerable increase in population as well.   The problem with Ipswich, and lesser extent Goodna is that the routes they have removed (and in some cases replaced with Flexi-Link options) were actually reasonably well supported, were important transport communication services for those who used them.  I can point to many routes in BCC area with less patronage, but I take a wider view that community need for those with no other options is important.  FlexiLink cannot and should not be the standard IMHO.  We can have our views but go and ride around on the buses in these areas, you soon see why FlexiLink flopped.  I will be working towards restoring some semblance of decent public transport options out at Goodna in the future.  Personally, I find it unacceptable how the folk there have been treated and I will doing something about it.

[#Metro]

I think it is one thing to replace all routes in an area with flexilink
I think it is quite another to use flexilink to fill a niche demand in an area such as new farm.

I am against adding dog legs to everyone's commute and tying up 65 seat buses that could be better used on other parts of the network when there are other options available.
A two tier system (dedicated patronage and dedicated welfare services) would be much better IMHO. It would leave everybody better off.
I do not believe that good PT must mean that services can only be operated by Buses.

I will go and ride 193 sometime. And I will count how many people use it.

Many elderly people use taxis precisely for the reasons of being on demand, direct trip etc.

I just cannot believe that people are happy with a service that runs only at 9:25 am and 10:55 am and think that is good PT and serves such a limited area.
FlexiLink in this area would be an order of magnitude superior to something like this ^^^

[Gazza]

I've never unnderstood doglegging, when you dogleg it brings the bus closer to some people, but it means it avoids others, so it's a no win to me  :conf

Teatrain is right about welfare services.

As far as I'm concerned, there should only be 3 types of bus services.

1 ) Direct, high frequency mass transit type services, that may feed into other routes as necessary.

2 ) welfare services, these can be less direct and frequent, smaller vehicles, and whatever meets the needs of users. Paratransit can work, just don't copy flexilink.

3 ) Rail/island ferry etc feeders...Ideally these will be mostly taken care of by the type one services mentioned above ( Because they'll be in a sort of grid that will intersect rail lines) but on the outer parts of the network where frequency is lower the bus frequency would be dictated by the rail frequency.

In my world, half hourly buses wouldn't exist...