The Centenary BUZ thread

[#Metro]

I've taken a trip on the 450 tonight to get an on-the-ground perspective of PT in this area and ideas for BUZ.

The main issues are:

- Weekend services die off quickly after 6ish
- The current routings are awful and are a massive time-waste, particularly when you have a car and can just jump straight on to the motorway and travel 100 km/hour whereas the buses go on a time-wasting safari in the suburbs.

These threads are useful background
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4461.msg34548#msg34548
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4448.0

Vision:

For this area I think most routes should be chopped back to terminate at Indooroopilly in the Off-peak. This expels air from the system and the shorter route means higher frequency. Pax can transfer at Indoooroopilly to BUZ 444 and Centenary BUZ at Mt Ommaney.

Mt Ommaney is good as an interchange point.

[#Metro]

After tonight's trip, (and the awfully long time spent winding around and around  the backstreets) I've decided that
the TransLink steam iron really needs to go through this area full blast. A lot of these routes are a waste of time and take far too long.

Here is how I see this area being served. There is a single Core Frequent Network route which does the line haul task
and this is the Centenary BUZ which operates directly from the CBD. Two feeder services work in tandem with the Core Frequent Network routes (BUZ and Darra Rail) to connect the interchange point (Mt Ommaney Shops) to Darra station and Indooroopilly.

These feeder services will operate at BUZ service frequency (15 minutes all day) and span of hours feeding Indooroopilly Shops <--- Mt Ommaney ---> Darra Station and will be funded by not driving these buses all the way into the CBD. This saves money by pooling passengers into the Centenary BUZ and also not wasting $$$ driving air parcels to the CBD. During peak hour when demand exceeds supply, and the buses fill up, these buses can operate as rockets/express and simply extend into the CBD.

Whatever that local loop bus is that feeds Darra station would be abolished.

Centenary BUZ:
This route is the core route and is assigned line haul task.

Sumners Road
Dandenong Road
Mt Ommaney
Endeavour Street
Yallambe Road
Centenary Hwy
continues to CBD via Indooroopilly

Feeder 1
Sumners Road
Horizon Drive
Dandenong Road
Mt Ommaney Shops (interchange point) [TERMINUS]
Centenary Hwy TO CITY [EXPRESS/PEAK HOUR ONLY]

Feeder 2
Darra Station

OPTION A - Dandenong Road
OPTION B - Centenary Hwy

THEN

Mt Ommaney Shops
Arrabri Ave
Burrendah Road
Centenary Hwy
Indooroopilly Shops (interchange point) [TERMINUS]
TO CITY [EXPRESS/PEAK HOUR ONLY]

I'd put a map up but my bandwidth is quite slow today, so that will have to wait.

[#Metro]

Integrated services give greater travel options and more cost-effective public transport coverage. Direct services can be provided to major centres when there is enough demand to justify the service. However, it is not possible to cater for every trip from any origin to any destination with direct services. The cost could not be justified and the demand for travel would be too low.

Under TransLink, there will be more feeder and local services to key stations where passengers can transfer to get to their final destination. This can be done at a significantly lower cost than a direct service and allow TransLink to deliver services that would not be viable otherwise. However, a key challenge for TransLink will be striking the right balance between maximising the opportunity and minimising the need for passengers to transfer.

-- TransLink policy and strategy
http://tdsa.org.au/Translink_Policy_and_Strategy.pdf

[somebody]

I'd be comfortable with:
Full time 454/453 - 450 only for extras Fri/Sat
453, 425, 430, 435 no longer running Indro-city
444 in QSBS
half hourly 454/460 with 15 minute frequency between them
chop the city-Indro bit off the 88
7-8 minute frequency city-Indro between the 444, 454, 460 until 11pm Mon-Sat and until 6pm Sun.  After 6pm Sun, 454 & 460 can just run to Indro, meeting the 444.

Should be pretty close to cost neutral, and would be a service upgrade for most users.

[Mr X]

What's wrong with the 444 serving KGSBS?

[somebody]

What's wrong with the 444 serving KGSBS?

Haven't I banged on enough about that?

How are you going to get the 8 minute frequency leaving the CBD then? Or at least without compromising the potential to improve the headway for Kelvin Grove Rd.

[#Metro]

How is that relevant to Centenary BUZ?

I think most of the 4xx routes should be cut and turned into feeders, except for peak hour when they can continue to the CBD.

[Mr X]

Agreed. Terminate them at Indooroopilly!

[Someone fix up the transfer facilities there, too. I don't want to go on a hike just to change services!]

[david]

Now that we have P88 serving the actual bus interchange, there is NO NEED for empty parcels of air to be running all the way to the City. I would start by terminating the 435 and 460 there. The 435 already terminates at Indooroopilly on the weekends, so it would be more palatable for those commuters using that route. As for the 460, I'm liking the idea of slowly killing off that route.

Once a Centenary BUZ becomes a reality, the 425 should be killed off and replaced with a full-time 427/428 (maybe even a BUZ) and the 430 truncated to Indooroopilly. The 430 and 432 could be timetabled to provide 15 minute frequencies.

I suspect that Indooroopilly Bus Interchange will require an expansion if we are to terminate so many routes there.

As for the all-stoppers, the 433 and 445 can stay. I have no qualms about them.

[somebody]

Now that we have P88 serving the actual bus interchange, there is NO NEED for empty parcels of air to be running all the way to the City. I would start by terminating the 435 and 460 there. The 435 already terminates at Indooroopilly on the weekends, so it would be more palatable for those commuters using that route. As for the 460, I'm liking the idea of slowly killing off that route.

Once a Centenary BUZ becomes a reality, the 425 should be killed off and replaced with a full-time 427/428 (maybe even a BUZ) and the 430 truncated to Indooroopilly. The 430 and 432 could be timetabled to provide 15 minute frequencies.

I suspect that Indooroopilly Bus Interchange will require an expansion if we are to terminate so many routes there.

As for the all-stoppers, the 433 and 445 can stay. I have no qualms about them.

425 goes further than the 427/428.  You'd have to extend those routes for that to work.

Killing the P88 makes more sense than truncating the other routes though.  And solve the problem with the 4xx expresses being under utilised outbound.

[david]

425 goes further than the 427/428.  You'd have to extend those routes for that to work.

Killing the P88 makes more sense than truncating the other routes though.  And solve the problem with the 4xx expresses being under utilised outbound.

Yes, I should've been more clear to state that the 427/428 should be extended to cover the 425. Actually, now that I think about it, maybe the 427 should just replace the 425 and leave the 428 as is.

And what's wrong with P88?

[somebody]

425 goes further than the 427/428.  You'd have to extend those routes for that to work.

Killing the P88 makes more sense than truncating the other routes though.  And solve the problem with the 4xx expresses being under utilised outbound.

Yes, I should've been more clear to state that the 427/428 should be extended to cover the 425. Actually, now that I think about it, maybe the 427 should just replace the 425 and leave the 428 as is.

And what's wrong with P88?

It makes little sense to have one route run from the city to Indooroopilly, and another to start from Indooroopilly on the outbound.

[david]

I understand your point Simon, but what if we could provide higher frequencies by terminating routes at Indooroopilly instead of continuing them into the City for a one-seat journey? The frequency at Indooroopilly Interchange would be suffice to allow this to occur in a staged roll-out (ie 435 and 460 go first, then implement Centenary BUZ, then truncate 425 and 430.

P88, 444 and Centenary BUZ would provide services every 5 minutes from Indoooroopilly (if timed correctly). That's pretty high frequency to me.

[somebody]

It isn't too hard to coordinate the routes to provide single seat journeys rather than inflict a transfer for no reason.  It is also operationally more expensive to have the Indooroopilly truncation.

[#Metro]

It isn't too hard to coordinate the routes to provide single seat journeys rather than inflict a transfer for no reason.  It is also operationally more expensive to have the Indooroopilly truncation.

It isn't clear how this is the case. I would suggest that the frequency of the feeders needs to be such that at least 10 minutes is cut off waiting time (i.e. a 30 minute route goes down to 15 or 10 minutes) to be a candidate for FUZification. (F = feeder)

I would agree with David that the P88 should be retained, 444 BUZ and Centenary BUZ could be retained to provide 5 minute standard basic frequencies to form the Core Frequent Network out there. During peak hour when the buses fill up with pax, feeder services can be extended to run all the way into the CBD as express and rockets. I have no problem with that, and indeed this is how it works in Canberra on a weekday/weekend cycle.

However, during the off-peak, there is a lot of air being carried to the CBD. Air can be squeezed out from the system at Indooroopilly interchange. If demand grows, more P88/444/Centenary BUZ services can be put on (who knows, you might get everything running at every 10 minutes all day on that line).

[somebody]

It isn't too hard to coordinate the routes to provide single seat journeys rather than inflict a transfer for no reason.  It is also operationally more expensive to have the Indooroopilly truncation.

It isn't clear how this is the case. I would suggest that the frequency of the feeders needs to be such that at least 10 minutes is cut off waiting time (i.e. a 30 minute route goes down to 15 or 10 minutes) to be a candidate for FUZification. (F = feeder)

I would agree with David that the P88 should be retained, 444 BUZ and Centenary BUZ could be retained to provide 5 minute standard basic frequencies to form the Core Frequent Network out there. During peak hour when the buses fill up with pax, feeder services can be extended to run all the way into the CBD as express and rockets. I have no problem with that, and indeed this is how it works in Canberra on a weekday/weekend cycle.

However, during the off-peak, there is a lot of air being carried to the CBD. Air can be squeezed out from the system at Indooroopilly interchange. If demand grows, more P88/444/Centenary BUZ services can be put on (who knows, you might get everything running at every 10 minutes all day on that line).

It is entirely clear.

[david]

Perhaps your next campaign TT should be the "Core Feeder Network"  

[#Metro]

I'm still not sure how Simon thinks FUZ is more expensive to run.

Perhaps your next campaign TT should be the "Core Feeder Network"  Cheesy

LOL. Nothing should happen until we get the Centenary BUZ- the basics- right.

Feeder networks, are by definition, non-core. (sorry!)

Agree that 435/460 et al. should be abolished. The network would become much simpler actually because those all day buses and rockets could be amalgamated into a single feeder service that extends into the CBD in peak hour.

[somebody]

I'm still not sure how Simon thinks FUZ is more expensive to run.

If you have combined 88/Indooroopilly truncation then both routes need to run dead around the block, have some recovery time, run dead back to Indooroopilly interchange and pick up the passengers.  What a waste!

What I think of keeping the 88 running, combined with Indooroopilly truncation of the other expresses isn't printable!

[Mr X]

Could you have some feeder buses which arrive at Indooroopilly and then change routes to form an I/B P88?

[#Metro]

What I think of keeping the 88 running, combined with Indooroopilly truncation of the other expresses isn't printable

"NOT IN SERVICE"

[SurfRail]

It isn't too hard to coordinate the routes to provide single seat journeys rather than inflict a transfer for no reason.  It is also operationally more expensive to have the Indooroopilly truncation.

I tend to agree that it is pointless without the elephant in the room, which is of course interchanging with rail.

[#Metro]

If you have combined 88/Indooroopilly truncation then both routes need to run dead around the block, have some recovery time, run dead back to Indooroopilly interchange and pick up the passengers.  What a waste!

I don't think it is as evil/wasteful as running all the way to the CBD with air parcels.

What I think of keeping the 88 running, combined with Indooroopilly truncation of the other expresses isn't printable!

I actually think P88 has a lot of pax on it nowadays and is a useful service. Let it be.

I think with feederisation, some of those hourly routes could go to half-hourly (save 30 minutes waiting! unbelieveable!) and some 30 minute routes
could go to 15 minutes, at minimal cost.

[#Metro]

I tend to agree that it is pointless without the elephant in the room, which is of course interchanging with rail.

I don't think its entirely pointless, we can simplify the network greatly and get higher frequency in the suburbs.
Would be nice to have rail in the mix but until Indooroopilly Rail interchange is sorted, not going to happen anytime soon.

Despite that, CFN improvements to bus aren't, and shouldn't be, contingent on rail interchange at Indooroopilly Rail.

[somebody]

I actually think P88 has a lot of pax on it nowadays and is a useful service. Let it be.

Err no.  West of Roma St I don't think it has ever had a standee.

I tend to agree that it is pointless without the elephant in the room, which is of course interchanging with rail.

If you use the figure TT claimed was the one TTC used: 10 minute penalty for a transfer, then interchanging with rail at Indooroopilly doesn't make any sense whatsoever from a service improvement perspective.  With the possible exception of peak hour.

Could you have some feeder buses which arrive at Indooroopilly and then change routes to form an I/B P88?

That would make some sense, but you are making the evilness of the 88 constantly being driven TOO SLOWLY even worse as presumably the timetable would have to have regular waits at Indooroopilly.

I don't think it is as evil/wasteful as running all the way to the CBD with air parcels.

No reason to have either.

[#Metro]

If you use the figure TT claimed was the one TTC used: 10 minute penalty for a transfer, then interchanging with rail at Indooroopilly doesn't make any sense whatsoever from a service improvement perspective.  With the possible exception of peak hour.

It depends. There is an alternative way to interpret that number:

- A trip must save at least 10 minutes on the alternative to be worthwhile to interchange
(so during peak hour, if there is a lot of congestion, interchange with Indooroopilly may be worthwhile, in addition to serving the indooroopilly bus station).

- The waiting time must be cut by at least 10 minutes by interchange to make sense. (So if we can get 435 to terminate and indro and double the frequency of that from the savings of not running air parcels to the CBD, we can take an hourly route down to half hourly, that saves 30 minutes waiting and since 30 minutes >>> 10 minutes, this route is ripe for feederisation).

- There may be other reasons (i.e. network connectivity) as to why you might interchange at Indooroopilly rail- to provide an access point to Ipswich and Richlands, for example. Not everyone is going to the CBD (cf. P88, 29, 77 and the GCL as precedents).

The second thing is that 10 minute penalty is a catch all number. If services are running very frequently or-co-ordinated, a lower number (the actual time it takes) could be used. The TTC subway trains run every 5 minutes all day and it probably takes 5 minutes to walk through the station, wait a bit, get a ticket and through queues, so that's where that 10 minutes number has come from.

[david]

I actually think P88 has a lot of pax on it nowadays and is a useful service. Let it be.

Err no.  West of Roma St I don't think it has ever had a standee.

I blame Translink for this. I'm sure you've looked at the timetable and would notice that a lot of the time, P88 comes 1 minute after the 444 at KGSBS. What good is that going to do? If anything, the P88 should be running a few minutes ahead of the 444 to relieve the 444 from passengers travelling exclusively from the City to Indooroopilly and vice versa.

Back on topic to the Centenary BUZ, I have spent a few days looking at your proposal TT. Any BUZ in the Centenary Suburbs will be tough to create a like-for-like service, unless the original routes are retained. Otherwise the community will be up in arms. I'm worried that the proposal misses out key areas of Middle Park and Westlake. I do realise that your feeder takes care of those areas TT, but wouldn't it be easier to kill two birds with one stone and add a few minutes to the run to at least run the route through Riverhills Road and Horizon Drive.
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4448.msg34397#msg34397

Also, in regards to your Feeder 2, perhaps something such as this proposal that I created (disregard the blue line):

[somebody]

I actually think P88 has a lot of pax on it nowadays and is a useful service. Let it be.

Err no.  West of Roma St I don't think it has ever had a standee.

I blame Translink for this. I'm sure you've looked at the timetable and would notice that a lot of the time, P88 comes 1 minute after the 444 at KGSBS. What good is that going to do? If anything, the P88 should be running a few minutes ahead of the 444 to relieve the 444 from passengers travelling exclusively from the City to Indooroopilly and vice versa.

This only occurs when the 444 & P88 are running at different frequencies around the peak and in the PM peak.  I'm actually not sure why anyone would use either in the PM peak O/B.  Better to use a train and avoid the traffic congestion.  It's also more frequent.

[#Metro]

Back on topic to the Centenary BUZ, I have spent a few days looking at your proposal TT. Any BUZ in the Centenary Suburbs will be tough to create a like-for-like service, unless the original routes are retained. Otherwise the community will be up in arms. I'm worried that the proposal misses out key areas of Middle Park and Westlake. I do realise that your feeder takes care of those areas TT, but wouldn't it be easier to kill two birds with one stone and add a few minutes to the run to at least run the route through Riverhills Road and Horizon Drive.
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4448.msg34397#msg34397

The service is pretty awful as it is. I hope any consultation makes it clear the trade-off between frequency and interchange.
I'm not sure- its worth putting it out there though. When I went on it, that area was just a waste of time. You could either send the Centenary BUZ down Horizon Drive and Sumners Road, and make a feeder along sumners and up Dandenong Rd.

Which is better? No idea. Everyone gets 15 minutes though whether by feeder or by BUZ.

[#Metro]

As for the all-stoppers, the 433 and 445 can stay. I have no qualms about them.

Had a look at the timetable for these. I reckon these can be chopped off and terminated at Indooroopilly as well.
These are half hourly / hourly routes. Once chopped off they can probably double the frequencies at minimal cost, to get these services running
every 15 minutes during the day and half hourly during the evening.

And exactly how many different buses are needed to service Fig Tree Pocket? Seems like there are a whole heap of different routes which is pretty amazing when you
consider that it has 1 main road entrance to the suburb!

[somebody]

As for the all-stoppers, the 433 and 445 can stay. I have no qualms about them.

Had a look at the timetable for these. I reckon these can be chopped off and terminated at Indooroopilly as well.
These are half hourly / hourly routes. Once chopped off they can probably double the frequencies at minimal cost, to get these services running
every 15 minutes during the day and half hourly during the evening.

And exactly how many different buses are needed to service Fig Tree Pocket? Seems like there are a whole heap of different routes which is pretty amazing when you
consider that it has 1 main road entrance to the suburb!

Oh yeah!?  Well what will serve the blue stops between Toowong and Indro.

[david]

The 433 and 445 need to stay. They are important as people may need the all-stopper service. If we were to get rid of services like that, then I could think of 20 routes in the Southern Brisbane region that I would love to wipe off the map.

As for Fig Tree Pocket, there are a surprising number of tourists who use the 430/445 service to get to Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary.

Talking of which, the 45x services also provide a service to the Fig Tree Pocket stop along the Centenary Highway. There is a little carpark that exists near the inbound stop. I've seen a fair few people using it. Funny that.

[#Metro]

Oh yeah!?  Well what will serve the blue stops between Toowong and Indro.

Hahah. While I would like to say RIP THEM OUT! It seems that Brisbane is determined to have a 2 tier slow service (viz 192 vs CityGlider).

Only one of the routes should be retained for that all stopper purpose. Canberra has one such route- the number 3, which is the "catch all rubbish route"
which does the "dirty coverage work" stops everywhere, winds everywhere and usually has 1 person on board at any time and the other 68 seats are air.

I would propose as frequent rubbish route between Indooroopilly and the CBD. Let's call it R88 (R for Rubbish), it can stop all stops between wherever it starts and the CBD.
BUT most things else- cut it back.

Personally I think this two stops system is rather archaic and would be better to have even stops with one service serving them spaced 500 - 700 m apart.

[#Metro]

The 433 and 445 need to stay. They are important as people may need the all-stopper service. If we were to get rid of services like that, then I could think of 20 routes in the Southern Brisbane region that I would love to wipe off the map.

So which 20 routes are these, exactly? 

[AnonymouslyBad]

Oh yeah!?  Well what will serve the blue stops between Toowong and Indro.

Hahah. While I would like to say RIP THEM OUT! It seems that Brisbane is determined to have a 2 tier slow service (viz 192 vs CityGlider).

Only one of the routes should be retained for that all stopper purpose. Canberra has one such route- the number 3, which is the "catch all rubbish route"
which does the "dirty coverage work" stops everywhere, winds everywhere and usually has 1 person on board at any time and the other 68 seats are air.

I would propose as frequent rubbish route between Indooroopilly and the CBD. Let's call it R88 (R for Rubbish), it can stop all stops between wherever it starts and the CBD.
BUT most things else- cut it back.

Hahaha.

The all stoppers do have to stay because Translink has a mandate to ensure everyone has a bus service in easy walking distance (i.e. 400m). Doesn't matter if it's an hourly air parcel service, it has to run.

Neither the 433 or 445 really would be in the catchment of a Centenary BUZ, though - at least not any of the ideas I'm thinking of? So they can stay. I wouldn't bother terminating those at Indro just for the sake of it.

I agree a major overhaul is needed south of the river, I had the pleasure(?) of catching a 450 for the first time a few weeks ago and it's an awful service. Unfortunately that area is quite large, and almost none of it very friendly to public transport so there's probably no way to change things up without annoying some people. I'd like to just say run the BUZ to Mt Ommaney and then terminate at Darra, but I can't see this being popular - it'd have to run through the suburbs, but any reasonably direct route is still going to miss huge chunks of the area. I'd agree with running to Riverhills, or perhaps there'd be value in a loop (as much as I hate them generally) to service Westlake and Middle Park, then express after Mt Ommaney. But either way the rest will get dumped with feeders and this will make some people unhappy. Can't do much about that.

I actually think P88 has a lot of pax on it nowadays and is a useful service. Let it be.

Err no.  West of Roma St I don't think it has ever had a standee.

It has. In the AM peak it can have a number of standees until at least Milton or Auchenflower.
Not sure how relevant this is though. There are worse routes to pick on. I have some issues with the P88 (I'd prefer a true cross-town route, even if that means peak only), but the fact is it's not going anywhere now so whatever.

[#Metro]

The all stoppers do have to stay because Translink has a mandate to ensure everyone has a bus service in easy walking distance (i.e. 400m). Doesn't matter if it's an hourly air parcel service, it has to run.

I have my own bone to pick with this "everyone must be near PT" blanket rules. Coverage services should be capped to a certain proportion of the network (say 25% max). As it stands most of the bus network consists of either rockets or infrequent services that nobody would walk to even though they could walk to it (because the service is ROTTEN APPLE!!!).

A 400 meter walking distance implies an 800 meter spacing... so I still don't agree with TL that the spacing has to be that close (200m on many routes).

[bus stop]<----------400m---------->x<----------400m---------->[bus stop]

[#Metro]

Proposal - Centenary BUZ
CORE FREQUENT NETWORK

Philosophy: One core route, single interchange point, fed by frequent feeder services;
During peak hour feeder services extend to the CBD as rockets as required by demand.

Three routes

Red- CENTENARY BUZ [15 minutes off peak, 10 minutes peak] , High frequency, decent speed.
Light Blue- feeder service [15 minutes off peak, 10 minutes peak] operating from Riverhills to Mt Ommaney (extends as a rocket to the CBD in peak hour via motorway)
Dark Blue- [15 minutes off peak, 10 minutes peak]feeder service operating from Indooroopilly interchange to Mt Ommaney and Darra station (extends as a rocket to the CBD in peak hour via motorway).

There is no need for any other rocket services. If people on the red route want a rocket, then they catch the bus to Mt Ommaney and change to a rocket. None of this 'shadowing' business with a bazillion routes and variations in stopping patterns.

Mount Ommaney Shopping Centre becomes the main focal point for interchange.
As alternatives, the Dark blue route could be sent to Darra station via the Motorway or as per
Simon's proposal.

[AnonymouslyBad]

Looks alright to me! My only question is, what about Seventeen Mile Rocks? Or is that already serviced by another route I'm not thinking of. I think it's a bit of a black hole currently.
Maybe the light blue feeder could extend to cover this, somehow. Or just a separate Mt Ommaney-SMR-Darra feeder.
...what a crappy area!

The all stoppers do have to stay because Translink has a mandate to ensure everyone has a bus service in easy walking distance (i.e. 400m). Doesn't matter if it's an hourly air parcel service, it has to run.

I have my own bone to pick with this "everyone must be near PT" blanket rules. Coverage services should be capped to a certain proportion of the network (say 25% max). As it stands most of the bus network consists of either rockets or infrequent services that nobody would walk to even though they could walk to it (because the service is ROTTEN APPLE!!!).

A 400 meter walking distance implies an 800 meter spacing... so I still don't agree with TL that the spacing has to be that close (200m on many routes).

[bus stop]<----------400m---------->x<----------400m---------->[bus stop]

It implies an 800 metre spacing if everyone is walking from the same road the buses are on. On the other end of the scale, if you're in cul-de-sac hell you could use up 300m just walking to the road that buses can (or ever would) service.

If we're talking grid patterns then stop spacing is a relatively straightforward science, but Brisbane's road network unfortunately isn't that simple. 400m seems to be the general rule for all-stops spacing, but with lots of exceptions depending on the area. Sometimes, they are too close together and I agree that there's too many milk runs generally, but I wouldn't suggest ripping out every second stop either.

IIRC Translink's benchmark is that 90% of urban dwellers should have a bus within 400m, or a train within 800m. Curiously, people can apparently walk further when it's to the train station, but apart from that anomaly this benchmark seems reasonable. It's important to make a distinction between the core/express/frequent network, where efficiency is key, and the coverage services which are run in the public interest. Not everyone has the capacity to walk to the train station, express stop, etc., and a milk run every hour is better than no service at all. There's a reason Translink, and not Max Profit Bus Co., calls the shots

[#Metro]

Looks alright to me! My only question is, what about Seventeen Mile Rocks? Or is that already serviced by another route I'm not thinking of. I think it's a bit of a black hole currently.
Maybe the light blue feeder could extend to cover this, somehow. Or just a separate Mt Ommaney-SMR-Darra feeder.
...what a crappy area! Cheesy

Seventeen Mile Rocks is on the wrong side of the freeway and routes there are not shown.

IIRC Translink's benchmark is that 90% of urban dwellers should have a bus within 400m, or a train within 800m. Curiously, people can apparently walk further when it's to the train station, but apart from that anomaly this benchmark seems reasonable.

I think the benchmark should be altered. Plenty of people walk to a busway stop for instance. People also walk further to faster and frequent services. So the benchmark should be a) mode neutralised, b) based on studies / confirmed for Brisbane conditions and c) changed to take into account the type and frequency of service on offer.

It is arguable that wider stop spacing is OK for urban areas (i.e. CityGlider has stops 800m and patronage went from effectively nothing to very high). True that TL is not Max Profit Co, though when I caught the 450 I thought I was going on TransLink Urban House Safari and Property Expedition Ltd or Brisbane Suburban Mansion Tours Ltd rather than decent, frequent PT service.

Interesting though- places like Melbourne/Canberra I don't remember seeing an all stops and express service on the same route. Sometimes I think it is a waste (i.e 402 vs 412).

[Set in train]

But when will the BUZ begin to Centenary suburbs? Needs to begin at same time of the morning as the 111 or 222 to leave around 5am for early transfers due to the distance out of town.