Article: New CityGlider to link stadiums with entertainment precincts

[Fares_Fair]

From The Satellite click here!

Bus routes neglected


http://media2.apnonline.com.au/img/media/images/2013/02/25/9-1723109-is210213bus1_fct1024x630x26_t460.jpg

Gavin Seipelt is wanting improved bus frequency and routes from the Centenary suburbs/ Photo: Inga Williams / The Satellite

Bus routes neglected
26th Feb 2013 9:45 AM

CENTENARY residents have questioned the introduction of Brisbane City Council's $9 million Maroon CityGlider, saying the money could be better spent improving services in their own backyard.

Seventeen Mile Rocks resident Gavin Seipelt said frequency of bus services in the Centenary suburbs needed imporvement.

He said residents signed a petition for better services in 2010 but were still awaiting delievery.

"There are a few major issues with the bus services in the Centenary suburbs," he said.

"One of the issues is that there are eight different routes which are quite indirect.

"Frequency of the services needs to be improved as people are waiting up to 30 minutes when 15 minutes is a good standard.

"Also there are no buses that run late at night on weekends."

Rail Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow said Centenary families were not being put first when it came to public transport.

"Our objection to the Maroon CityGlider is that it does not serve any people who do not have access to frequent bus services already," he said.

"More concerningly, it appears that Brisbane City Council now wants to block moves to remove waste, complexity, and low frequency legacy routing from its bus network.

"These pivotal reforms from the bus network review will result in a better quality network of services using recycled funds that would see more frequent, simpler, legible bus services and bus upgrades in suburbs that don't currently have decent, frequent services."

Mr Dow called on TransLink to to report and carefully review the Maroon Glider route after 12 months.

However a TransLink spokesman said it was a Brisbane City Council issue.

Public and Active Transport Chairman Peter Matic said the Lord Mayor was investing half a billion dollars in public transport this year despite all fare revenue from buses and ferries going to the State Government.

[#Metro]

A good looking article. Love the bit where the TL spokesperson distances themselves from the BCC.

[somebody]

Public and Active Transport Chairman Peter Matic said the Lord Mayor was investing half a billion dollars in public transport this year despite all fare revenue from buses and ferries going to the State Government.

Huh?  What is this half billion dollars the council is investing?  Buses paid for by the state?

[Gazza]

Love the bit where the TL spokesperson distances themselves from the BCC.

Yes, loved that bit.

Go Translink!

[The Reaper]

From the Brisbane Times, where readers got to ask questions of LM Graham Quirk: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/lord-mayor-chats-live-20130227-2f4tx.html

When asked about the SEQ bus review:

The bus review is a matter for the State Government, who now determine fares and bus services including bus routes. Reviews have been held over the years by former administrations both Labor and Liberal when we had the responsibility for bus services.

The bolding is mine.

When asked when the Maroon CG extends to Stones Corner but not Coorparoo:

The maroon glider has been tagged as a food and footy service. It links key restaurant areas and sporting stadiums in our City. The route has been chosen on that basis.

Chosen by whom? 

[kazzac]

If Translink are supposed to be in charge of route planning why did they allow the Maroon 'SillyGlider" to go ahead?

[ozbob]

If TransLink were properly in charge of route planning, the Maroon Glider would never happened.

It was a political stunt from BCC, pure and simple.  TransLink were forced to go with it but they managed to make some changes to make it a bit more useful than first proposed by BCC.

The whole saga is an excellent demonstration of why public transport planning needs to be properly integrated by the responsible organisation, for the benefit of the network, not a political serfdom ...

When the whining starts with the bus review implementation, BCC will find it rather awkward to explain why they are funding the MG whilst others are in their concepts experiencing change (eg. loss of single seat journey)  route truncation, simplification etc.  Hence the BCC's feeble attempt in the BT article to suggest it is a TransLink outcome, ie. the MG.  People are not that stupid ...

[Gazza]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

[somebody]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

[newbris]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

Can buses turn into the Roma St busway inbound at the bottom of Countess St or is that not a viable option ?

[somebody]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

Can buses turn into the Roma St busway inbound at the bottom of Countess St or is that not a viable option ?

They used to be able to but they closed that entrance due to too many people getting confused and turning into it.  I think they sometimes open it on special event days, probably with someone (cop?) directing traffic away.

[newbris]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

Can buses turn into the Roma St busway inbound at the bottom of Countess St or is that not a viable option ?

They used to be able to but they closed that entrance due to too many people getting confused and turning into it.  I think they sometimes open it on special event days, probably with someone (cop?) directing traffic away.

What a shame. The 380,381 etc would be so much more reliable if they used Roma St busway/KGS to access the CBD rather than surface roads. They regularly get gridlocked coming out of the city in peak. Thanks for the info Simon.

[SurfRail]

They could just put a bollard there like the one out at Sinnamon Park, couldn't they?

Running the 350 down Roma St is one of the many definitions of stupid they have perfected.

[somebody]

They could just put a bollard there like the one out at Sinnamon Park, couldn't they?

Running the 350 down Roma St is one of the many definitions of stupid they have perfected.

It's a positive move!  At least compared to what the 351/357/359 have to do.

Not sure what you mean about the bollard, something that the bus radios ahead to lower, either manually or automatically?

What a shame. The 380,381 etc would be so much more reliable if they used Roma St busway/KGS to access the CBD rather than surface roads. They regularly get gridlocked coming out of the city in peak. Thanks for the info Simon.

They could just run down Roma St to Turbot St and Edward St.  But common sense moves like that aren't in BT's repertoire.

[SurfRail]

It's a positive move!  At least compared to what the 351/357/359 have to do.

It makes it arbitrarily harder to interchange to other services.  There are ways to stop people entering the busway which are not limited to locking it off.  How serious a problem was it?

What's the problem with the other services you've mentioned? 

Not sure what you mean about the bollard, something that the bus radios ahead to lower, either manually or automatically?

Yes.  Or a chain, like the ones at the coach terminal at Coolangatta airport.

[somebody]

It's a positive move!  At least compared to what the 351/357/359 have to do.

It makes it arbitrarily harder to interchange to other services.  There are ways to stop people entering the busway which are not limited to locking it off.  How serious a problem was it?

What's the problem with the other services you've mentioned? 

Take too long to get from Roma St busway to Queen St - 8 minutes on the timetable.  Barely above walking pace.  The timetable is realistic.

Seriously, if it was something they were the least bit interested in about making it easier to interchange to other services 374/375/379/380/381/470/475/476 would all enter the busway westbound.  To get from Enoggera to Paddington, it doesn't make a huge difference whether you use the 350 or 359 from Enogerra.  In fact, the former saves some stairs.

[longboi]

The Countess St entrance was closed after that woman was killed driving onto the busway and colliding with a bus. Don't expect it to change any time soon.

[somebody]

The Countess St entrance was closed after that woman was killed driving onto the busway and colliding with a bus. Don't expect it to change any time soon.

I don't remember hearing about that, except for something on the south side.  Seems an odd reaction if that's the incident you are referring to.

[SurfRail]

The Countess St entrance was closed after that woman was killed driving onto the busway and colliding with a bus. Don't expect it to change any time soon.

I don't remember hearing about that, except for something on the south side.  Seems an odd reaction if that's the incident you are referring to.

But certainly not unprecedented for Brisbane (eg diversion of the 135).

[somebody]

But certainly not unprecedented for Brisbane (eg diversion of the 135).

The diversion of the 135 was for a problem that happened on the 135.  I don't see how that's comparable.

[Gazza]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

Well, if the CityGlider has taken over that part of its route, shift the 385 to a road without a BUZ.

[somebody]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

Well, if the CityGlider has taken over that part of its route, shift the 385 to a road without a BUZ.

It doesn't cover Coopers Camp Rd, for a start.

[Golliwog]

Now that the Maroon Glider is in, could the 385 go via Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd through Red Hill?

Not without a deviation if it plans to continue to serve Roma St busway inbound.

Why change the 385?

Well, if the CityGlider has taken over that part of its route, shift the 385 to a road without a BUZ.

It doesn't cover Coopers Camp Rd, for a start.

Coopers Camp Rd is the only part it doesn't cover, and I think that Coopers Camp would be perhaps better covered by rejigging the local routes in that area. That said, I'm not too familiar with what those are, other than that there are a few that exist. As far as I can tell, the only reason Coopers Camp is served by the 385 is so that it can get across to Bardon. Though I'd want the CityGlider to serve all the BUZ stops first.

[longboi]

The Countess St entrance was closed after that woman was killed driving onto the busway and colliding with a bus. Don't expect it to change any time soon.

I don't remember hearing about that, except for something on the south side.  Seems an odd reaction if that's the incident you are referring to.

How is it odd?

You reduce the risk of people accidentally entering the Busway by eliminating the hazard. That is one of the most basic principles of OH&S.

Although Countess St isn't where she entered (she entered at Allen St), the Countess St entrance was notorious for people heading to Roma St turning too early into the Busway and therefore identified as a risk. Do you suggest they should have waited until someone else was killed entering at that specific entrance before closing it?

Yes there are other entrances to the Busway from the road network and no, I don't know what makes Countess St any different to those entrances. This is all I was told about the Countess St entrance and why it was closed.

[somebody]

What makes Countess St different to other entrances is that it is a left turn immediately before another left turn that cars are legitimately trying to make.  They think the busway IS Roma St.  Most realise after turning 20 degrees or so and just drive over the footpath on to Roma St.  Or they were doing it deliberately to avoid the traffic lights.

Most other entrances are more obvious, and the one from the Captain Cook Bridge is no exception - a lot of signs there.  Allen St - might be a bit less well signed but a  non-intentional mistake there is still unlikely.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Roma Street was easy to enter because you come out from under a bridge, a 2m wall on the left and turn left arrows on the road (pretty sure there is also left had lane must exit signs). The first thing you encountered was the busway entrance with the actual left hand exit now relocated at the traffic lights. Prior to the busway it used to be a give way and you drove through the current busway entrance onto Roma Street.

There needs to be better signage such as "Left turn at lights" or a diagram on/before the bridge etc rather than the no extrance bus only signs once you have commetted to the turn or even return to the give way lane.

[somebody]

Or they could just leave the entrance closed.  There is no particular need for this entrance IMO.  Just get used to routes stopping at Roma St stop 125 I/B and Roma St busway o/b.

[longboi]

What makes Countess St different to other entrances is that it is a left turn immediately before another left turn that cars are legitimately trying to make.  They think the busway IS Roma St.  Most realise after turning 20 degrees or so and just drive over the footpath on to Roma St.  Or they were doing it deliberately to avoid the traffic lights.

Most other entrances are more obvious, and the one from the Captain Cook Bridge is no exception - a lot of signs there.  Allen St - might be a bit less well signed but a  non-intentional mistake there is still unlikely.

I actually had that explanation in my post originally but edited it out and played dumb, thinking it would only start some ridiculous argument over Countess St vs. any other entrance.

But yes, the cost-benefit of closing it off was a no-brainer. It's not really necessary considering the handful of routes which travel down that street all continue onto Turbot or Tank.

[somebody]

Tank St?  No routes use that.  I think you meant Herschel St.  Of course, the via Herschel St routes have never used the portal.  Death to that move!

[longboi]

Tank St?  No routes use that.  I think you meant Herschel St.  Of course, the via Herschel St routes have never used the portal.  Death to that move!

Yep I did mean Herschel. Bit hard to get a bus down Tank St, especially to North Quay 

[newbris]

According to my wife it is the getting to/from Adelaide St to Roma St that is the problem for her Countess St buses (379/380/381). Just doing that loop around to Adelaide St or the return trip can add an age to the trip...specially when the city if gridlocked in the evening peak. Using the busway or another surface route would be preferable time/reliability wise. Btw, I noticed the bus review mentions terminating the 379 in the city rather than the valley so some changes are afoot.

[SurfRail]

But certainly not unprecedented for Brisbane (eg diversion of the 135).

The diversion of the 135 was for a problem that happened on the 135.  I don't see how that's comparable.

Closure of that buway entrance only affects the 2 routes which have been diverted.

[newbris]

But certainly not unprecedented for Brisbane (eg diversion of the 135).

The diversion of the 135 was for a problem that happened on the 135.  I don't see how that's comparable.

Closure of that buway entrance only affects the 2 routes which have been diverted.

Doesn't it remove the potential for all Ashgrove musgrave rd routes to access KGS ?

[somebody]

Doesn't it remove the potential for all Ashgrove musgrave rd routes to access KGS ?

It at least prevents them from accessing Roma St's inbound platform.  They may be able to enter the busway at Turbot St and access KGSBS in that way.  But it was unlikely for Musgrave Rd routes to access the busway in that way anyway, and that portal would not allow bypassing much traffic.  The Kelvin Grove Rd one is a bit better, particularly on the outbound.

I think Countess St, L Roma St, L Turbot St, R Edward St, L Queen St (or Elizabeth St) is a fine option for Musgrave Rd/Waterworks Rd routes on the inbound.

[newbris]

Doesn't it remove the potential for all Ashgrove musgrave rd routes to access KGS ?

It at least prevents them from accessing Roma St's inbound platform.  They may be able to enter the busway at Turbot St and access KGSBS in that way.  But it was unlikely for Musgrave Rd routes to access the busway in that way anyway, and that portal would not allow bypassing much traffic.  The Kelvin Grove Rd one is a bit better, particularly on the outbound.

I think Countess St, L Roma St, L Turbot St, R Edward St, L Queen St (or Elizabeth St) is a fine option for Musgrave Rd/Waterworks Rd routes on the inbound.

It looks from the hand drawings in the network review that the Musgrave routes (F6 and F7) will turn right at the bottom of Countess and then right again into the busway. I'd be happy with that.

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review/Route-350.png

[ozbob]

Media release 16 February 2014



Brisbane: MaroonGlider bus adds to bus cost explosion

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 highlights the fact that Brisbane City Council's Maroon CityGlider is cannibalising patronage on the 385 BUZ and to a lesser extent, the 375.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"In February 2013, the MaroonGlider commenced running between Ashgrove and Langlands Park. The new bus service has merely duplicated existing high frequency bus routes. A year on, a RAIL Back on Track member went on trips on the buses running between Roma St and Bardon between 8pm and 9pm on Friday the 14th of February (1-13). This is the prime time for people to be visiting the "food and footy" precinct of Caxton Street, Paddington and Bardon."

"This little experiment showed the classic effects of service duplication. These effects include: - Services bunching together along a corridor, resulting in multiple bus services arriving all at once - Services 'stealing' patronage from other services, meaning that some buses will run empty while other buses will run with much higher loads - Wasted money, as the increase in service does not correspond with a net increase in service amenity (i.e. access to a frequent service) - Low overall and average patronage - on average, there were only 7 passengers on board each service (11 per outbound service and 4 per inbound service)."

"There is no reason why the Latrobe/Given Tce corridor deserves two frequent routes, while areas such as the Centenary suburbs suffer with an hourly bus service at this time of night. The money spent on the MaroonGlider would be better spent providing a BUZ to either the Centenary suburbs, along Wynnum Road, to the Northwestern suburbs or to Bulimba. As it is currently, the MaroonGlider provides new frequent service to very few residents, compared to a Centenary BUZ, which would open up frequent bus services to over 10,000 more residents."

"The MaroonGlider is not based on sound transit planning principles, but rather, is a classic example of Brisbane City Council wasting money on an ideological 'direct services everywhere' plan. The existence of MaroonGlider is yet another reason why Brisbane City Council needs to have its control over Brisbane Transport removed."

"The waste has gone on long enough. All bus regions in SEQ are now suffering. In 2014, it is time to separate Brisbane Transport from Brisbane City Council, and scrap the MaroonGlider immediately!"

Contacts:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Lewis Jones
RAIL Back On Track Member, Resident of St Lucia

References:

1. Outbound 385 - 8pm from Roma Street
12 passengers on board
No photo

2. Inbound MaroonGlider - 8:10pm at Paddington
2 passengers on board
Observation made from another service

3. Outbound MaroonGlider - 8:15pm at Paddington Central
6 passengers on board (4 after Gilday St)


4. Inbound 375 - 8:15pm at Gilday St
1 passenger on board


5. Inbound MaroonGlider - 8:18pm at Paddington Central
6 passengers on board
No photo

6. Inbound 385 - 8:19pm at Paddington Central
4 passengers on board
Observation made from another service

Eventually these three services came together and all passed/arrived at the Caxton
Street stop at once - a classic example of what happens when multiple services run
down the same corridor - they 'bunch' together (or in the case of the 385/MaroonGlider,
are actually timetabled to arrive one after the other).


(Taken on board MaroonGlider)

This is an example of excessive duplication, where the new service provides no tangible
frequency benefits.

7. Outbound MaroonGlider - 8:28pm at Caxton Street
14 passengers on board


8. Inbound 385 - 8:35pm at Paddington Central
5 passengers on board

9. Outbound 385 - 8:40pm (running 5 minutes late) at Paddington Central
20 passengers on board (highest loading service)
No photo available

10. (Observation) Outbound MaroonGlider - 8:40pm at Bardon
2 passengers on board

11. Inbound MaroonGlider - 8:45pm at Bardon
3 passengers on board (positioned behind photograph)


12. Inbound 385 - 8:47pm at Bardon
7 passengers on board

Note: No passengers were picked up between here and Roma Street, due to the
MaroonGlider 2 minutes ahead taking all of the 385's passengers!

13. Outbound 375 - 8:54pm at Paddington
Approx. 10 passengers on board
Observation made from another service