2 Mar 2014: Bulimba debacle highlights need to remove public transport from BCC

[ozbob]

Media release 2 March 2014



SEQ: Bulimba debacle highlights need to remove public transport from BCC

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 latest Bulimba transport debacle (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"In BCC's most recent wave of CityCat cuts, the stopping order of CityCats was reversed, causing CityCats to serve Teneriffe before Bulimba on inbound CityCat runs. This apparent move to 'save money' in order to prop up BCC's hi-waste anti-transfer bus network has resulted in a significant decrease in service between Bulimba and Teneriffe, causing overcrowding on peak services."

"Instead of reinstating the previous service pattern to solve the network problem, BCC has opted to add peak sweeper services, instead of simply reverting to the previous timetable, which had over 50% more capacity than the current one."

"Such cuts are only the tip of the iceberg - Brisbane City Council has also failed to supply high frequency services to large areas of Brisbane (such as the Centenary suburbs and Bulimba itself). Instead, Brisbane City Council has instead opted to introduce a MaroonGlider which is almost completely duplicated by existing high-frequency services, and retain services which are low frequency and anti-patronage (2)."

Under BCC's stewardship over the bus network planning, a function it is not even supposed to have given the creation of TransLink in 2004, we have seen:

* Forced explosive and unaffordable fares, some of the highest in the world
* Forced explosive subsidies, some of the highest in the world
* Forced low or no service to large parts of Brisbane (Yeronga, Bulimba, Wynnum Rd, Centenary Suburbs, Albany Creek, etc.)
* Forced low frequency and low span of service hours on the majority of the network
* Forced 'legacy routing' and indirect service, often disconnected from rail access
* Major upset over buses driving over the BCC council boundaries

"These cuts and areas missing out on service have been caused by Brisbane City Council's refusal to reform the broken bus network, which is resulting in some of the world's highest fares and some of the most inaccessible public transport in the country. Other bus regions are also now having service cuts."

"The Queensland Government must act to pass legislation amending The City of Brisbane Act 2010, reversing its 1925 decision to hand BCC public transport control and removing all public transport functions from BCC. Brisbane Transport must be structurally separated from BCC and stand on its own two feet like all other TransLink bus operators do."

"No transit agency in the world has made its fares more affordable or improved services by retaining and protecting waste, duplication and inefficiency. The BCC bus network MUST be reformed so that fares can come down."

"We call on the state opposition to provide a credible bus network reform plan, one that removes transit planning control from BCC and brings it into line with all other Australian states and territories where responsibility is at the state, not city, level."

References:

1. Sweeper ferry service to ease congestion on Bulimba-Teneriffe route http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/sweeper-ferry-service-to-ease-congestion-on-bulimbateneriffe-route-20140228-33rjr.html

2.Brisbane: MaroonGlider bus adds to bus cost explosion http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10553.0

Contact:

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

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Bulimba ferry timetable decision may be reversed

[techblitz]

Bus and ferry services across Brisbane were cut as a cost saving measure last year.
Cr Quirk said council statistics showed patronage across the network had increased as a result of the changes.

Interesting.....

[ozbob]

Where is the data? 

If true, all the more proof that the TransLink bus review was well on track to achieve the projected additional 20 Million trips per annum.

[#Metro]

Remember that the great selling point was that the BCC review did not touch most of the network. It also introduced no new BUZ services.

The test should be did the service patronage increase over and above background levels / trend and did they increase significantly.

The only real changes I can think of that may have increased patronage were the 66 + 109 merger and the 234.

[ozbob]

Scott Emerson needs to grow some balls and implement the brisbane component of the TransLink bus review.

Yo, that is one way of putting it.  I don't trust BCC or governments with their spin too much .. have learned over the years they are not very honest in the end.

Interesting blog comment:

Local councils shouldn't be responsible for planning decisions when it comes to public transport in SEQ. We have a region-wide system manager and integrated ticketing system for a reason.

The buck should stop with one office, not 3 (Council, TMR and the Transport Minister's unqualified advisor-of-the-week).

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/bulimba-ferry-timetable-decision-may-be-reversed-20140305-3475t.html

[techblitz]

Remember that the great selling point was that the BCC review did not touch most of the network. It also introduced no new BUZ services.

The test should be did the service patronage increase over and above background levels / trend and did they increase significantly.

The only real changes I can think of that may have increased patronage were the 66 + 109 merger and the 234.

if you factor in the fact that the 385 was barely handling 5 minute frequency with still sardine packed loads.......it now has room to grow at peak with the maroon glider offsetting its numbers......it would be an almost certaintly that passengers along this corridor have increased...with a mix from the gap/paddington/bardon.

its not only about patronage increases but spare seats to help grow patroange...the 118 now has plenty of spare seats due to being pulled from 8mp.....room to grow.
119/120 has potentially increased patronage due to more seats being available from queen st at peak.
There was a recent post on facebook translink page of completely full 119/120/121`s down earl st and a passenger couldnt board...

[SurfRail]

Scott Emerson needs to grow some balls and implement the brisbane component of the TransLink bus review.

Yo, that is one way of putting it.  I don't trust BCC or governments with their spin too much .. have learned over the years they are not very honest in the end.

Interesting blog comment:

Local councils shouldn't be responsible for planning decisions when it comes to public transport in SEQ. We have a region-wide system manager and integrated ticketing system for a reason.

The buck should stop with one office, not 3 (Council, TMR and the Transport Minister's unqualified advisor-of-the-week).

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/bulimba-ferry-timetable-decision-may-be-reversed-20140305-3475t.html

I endorse this comment. 

[James]

if you factor in the fact that the 385 was barely handling 5 minute frequency with still sardine packed loads.......it now has room to grow at peak with the maroon glider offsetting its numbers......it would be an almost certainly that passengers along this corridor have increased...with a mix from the gap/paddington/bardon.

its not only about patronage increases but spare seats to help grow patroange...the 118 now has plenty of spare seats due to being pulled from 8mp.....room to grow.
119/120 has potentially increased patronage due to more seats being available from queen st at peak.
There was a recent post on facebook translink page of completely full 119/120/121`s down earl st and a passenger couldnt board...

It has room to grow in peak... and the corridor is now a massive air carrier in the off-peak. I've done a trip down it on a Friday night, it carries air and inbound, the 385 and MGLD follow each other from Bardon to the City! You likely could have solved 385 issues by running the P374 through KGSBS and terminating it at Bardon.

P119/120 was an obvious move IMO - but nevertheless, it was a good move. Needs to happen to more of the lesser BUZes and the 300 series BUZes (180 and 345 are two prominent ones in my mind - there are too many buses to Chermside for KGSBS to handle, so that has to be cleaned up in a wider service review).

And 118? I think we know what the 118 is in a similar class to...



But lets be honest, the changes were generally either cuts or cosmetic. No actual serious improvements (aside from the two mentioned by Lapdog).

[HappyTrainGuy]

The 335 has one extra stop inbound now....... well that's my input for the northside review