Poll: Webster Rd & Prince Charles Hospital service (325/335)

[somebody]

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/091116_325,335,P339.pdf

For those that don't want to click the link, main point is that the 325 goes via the busway and Kelvin Grove Rd, but the 335 goes via the Valley.  P339 is almost exactly the same as the 335, but runs peak direction only and doesn't serve Chermside.  Both routes run on a basic hourly frequency.

At first I was thinking of a BUZ 325, but I'm starting to adopt a more thoughtful pose.  The 325's route is faster, but this is largely undone by needing to use the portal at Roma St/Turbot St.  Countering that, the 335 has better connectivity and increases the "network effect" more than the 325 does as it serves both the Valley and RB&WH. 

Whichever way others think, I am strongly in favour of a single route to PCH, rather than the current arrangements.  Currently, if you miss a 335 from the Valley, your best option is to get a train to Roma St and grab a 325.  You may miss the 325 and then you'd want to catch a bus to RB&WH.  And vice versa.  Who's going to think about that?  It is good that they both come from the same stop in the CBD though.

[#Metro]

I don't see the option I want above.
I think all that needs to happen is the frequency of 325 is increased
and maybe the desto made clear that it goes via PCH.

The 325 is the best IMO, connects multiple rail and busway lines.

[somebody]

I don't see the option I want above.
I think all that needs to happen is the frequency of 325 is increased
and maybe the desto made clear that it goes via PCH.

The 325 is the best IMO, connects multiple rail and busway lines.

Isn't that the first option?  If you explain what you want me to add, and how it is different from what is already there, I will do so.

[#Metro]

The first option wants me to agree with chopping something. No need to chop it IMO. Just put more buses on.

[somebody]

The first option wants me to agree with chopping something. No need to chop it IMO. Just put more buses on.

Hmm, but you are stongly in favour of chopping the 411?

EDIT: I've clarified the option.

[somebody]

The first option wants me to agree with chopping something. No need to chop it IMO. Just put more buses on.

So, just leave the 335 at hourly frequency on the current route?

[#Metro]

Hmm, but you are stongly in favour of chopping the 411?

No not necessarily. So does that mean that I must vote for the chop of any and every route that is proposed?
No, of course not.  

Should these routes be cut- I'm thinking no.
A route should only be touched if there is a benefit of some sort- what is the benefit here? It's not very clear what the benefit is.
If one route is a BUZ, then that should be enough IMHO. If anything, route 335 should be extended along route 325's route
into Boondal station. That would ensure superior connectivity AND boost frequency along that stretch.

[#Metro]

Some background re: 411.   

The 411 was a HYPOTHETICAL scenario where I demonstrated that (a) it is possible to
raise to very high levels of service frequency of routes if overlapping were reduced and (b) further show
that people were willing to transfer and (c) showed that this time saving may be high enough
to defeat the effects of the transfer penalty because we know high frequency is what attracts riders.

I also found more data from the Airtrain website which suggested that high traffic congestion should also be penalised, and I
raised the question whether it was really fair to penalise transfers and apparently ignore any potential
penalties that might need to be applied to take into the effect that congestion would have on those services on one
of Brisbane's worst roads- Coronation Drive.

If a passenger in a bus values 1 minute of in vehicle time with a value of 1, is it reasonable
to say then that the passenger values time on a bus in free flow traffic the same as they would
value time in a bus stuck in a horrendous jam on Coronation Drive, even if the time taken were the same?

The motorists don't seem to value time this way, so I wonder why a bus passenger would be any different.

The second thing is this: There is a perfectly good Ipswich railway line, and yet we run huge numbers of buses parallel to it.
Why do we continue to do this? If that railway line were a busway, the bus would be jumping on it and going to the city.

So I also raised the question about whether there was any logical difference between a bus approaching a busway
station and a feeder bus approaching a railway station to transfer passengers (with increased frequency to boot).

My conclusion is that, well, there really is no difference between the two scenarios, so why we continue
to run so many buses in parallel to rail and not make proper use of the Ipswich line cannot be explained by the argument that
"passengers don't like to transfer and the transfer would make journey times longer".

So as you can see, I ran the 411 hypothetical as a "thought experiment" to arrive at some results, and it really
wasn't conceived for supporting the cutting of route 325/335 at the time I made it because I had not thought
of something like that then.

[#Metro]

So, just leave the 335 at hourly frequency on the current route?

I would support BUZ 325. I don't really want to touch anything else, except maybe suggest that the 335 be extended to Boondall railway station to enhance connectivity and that gap filling occur to make sure 30 minute frequency was kept to at least 7pm on the 335. That Aspley section (black line) of the 335 needs to be served still, as do people in the Valley.

Ideas for cutting/extension/gap filling that are not the "core" idea of boosting frequency on 325 could be included as "considerations" as options IMHO. Often there are things that I might not agree with, but they get included anyway as things to consider as it really is up to TL to do the work and make the call on these things.

I think of it like this:

Core:
1. Boost 325 frequency to BUZ levels <----- This is the main game

Options:
Gap filling on route 335  <---- nice to have, but not essential
Rerouting
Extensions
etc

[somebody]

If anything, route 335 should be extended along route 325's route into Boondal station. That would ensure superior connectivity AND boost frequency along that stretch.

Not sure what you are outlining here?  Is it the 5th option?

From the Valley, if the via Kelvin Grove Rd (only) options proceeded, you would need to either train it to Roma St, or bus to RB&WH, bus to Chermside and then continue.  You could also bus to CBD and then out, or train to Newmarket or use the 370 to Chermside.  It's not very nice, I'd have to admit.

No not necessarily. So does that mean that I must vote for the chop of any and every route that is proposed?

No, but some consistency in your logic would be nice.

[#Metro]

Not sure what you are outlining here?  Is it the 5th option?

The 335 currently terminates at Taigum Shopping Centre. If you look at the route diagrams, this could be extended via Taigum, Boondal West, Roghan East, Boondal School, Roscommon East to Boondall Station.

If 325 were a BUZ AND 335 were not extended, pax in Aspley could get to Boondall Station by transferring at Taigum Shopping Centre, which is a transfer from low frequency route (335) to a higher frequency route (BUZ 325)

But when they would want to do the return journey, they would be stepping off a high frequency route (BUZ 325) into a low frequency route (335), so the connection is lost in 30-60 minute waiting period "limbo". This is why interchange facilities must be a high standard.

This extension would allow a passenger waiting at Boondall and wanting to go to PCH, to catch the first bus that arrived regardless of whether it was BUZ 325 or 335 and still be guaranteed to get to PCH. The 335 is 8 minutes longer, but the act of a passenger waiting at Boondall and letting that bus go so that they can catch a "faster" BUZ 325 could mean them waiting up to 15 or so minutes, which is a net time loss.

So, even if the 335 takes a few minutes longer it might be worthwhile extending it to Boondall station. It would allow pax to catch whatever bus first arrived at Boondall to get to PCH, and it would also allow pax in that Aspley area that are not serviced by the BUZ 325 to connect directly to rail if they need to.

Like I said though, I'm not so much worried about this, the BUZzing of 325 is the main game.

[#Metro]

No, but some consistency in your logic would be nice.

I am in support of the BUZ 325 idea though! 
I'm just saying, the option I want is not there.

This one comes close:

Upgrade both route's frequency on current routes for a BUZ to PCH & Chermside

So I am putting my vote there. I take it to mean this:
Upgrade both route's frequency on current routes; BUZ 325 to PCH & Chermside

[somebody]

The 335 currently terminates at Taigum Shopping Centre. If you look at the route diagrams, this could be extended via Taigum, Boondal West, Roghan East, Boondal School, Roscommon East to Boondall Station.

That's possible, but it would mean that beyond Taigum Shops has a better service than the Chermside-Taigum bit by either route, which would be weird.  And it would be weird to run from Boondall via Carseldine station: as you point out it is 8 minutes slower that way.

Upgrade both route's frequency on current routes for a BUZ to PCH & Chermside

So I am putting my vote there. I take it to mean this:
Upgrade both route's frequency on current routes; BUZ 325 to PCH & Chermside

No, what I mean is both routes running every 30 minutes, but combining so that there is a 15 minute frequency between Grange/Days and Chermside shops via PCH.

[somebody]

Ok, I've added an 8th option.  If that's what you want.

ozbob, is it possible to change the forum software so people not logged in can see the results of polls?

[somebody]

Note, I've clarified the 3rd option.  If you voted for that, you can change your vote if there was confusion. (2 votes at present)

EDIT: Actually, you'll have to post something to tell me.  Apparently I forgot to click "Allow user to remove vote".

[ozbob]

Yes, when you set it up, just make sure the button for 'show results to anyone' is selected.

I have tried to change it but this poll won't show publicy for some reason.  If you check out the polls on the report card for example, they were all publicly viewable.

[#Metro]

I've already voted and I can't change it. Oops!
Just leave it, subtract one from this option: "Upgrade both route's frequency on current routes for a BUZ to PCH & Chermside"

That's possible, but it would mean that beyond Taigum Shops has a better service than the Chermside-Taigum bit by either route, which would be weird.  And it would be weird to run from Boondall via Carseldine station: as you point out it is 8 minutes slower that way.

It is an improvement on the status quo IMHO.
It is no more "strange" than the 325 serving Boondall via Geebung Station.
Yes it is 8 minutes longer which is "seen" but what about the "unseen" bit- catching the first bus that arrives at Boondall is still likely to be faster overall because the next BUZ could be up to 15 minutes away and 8 minutes < 15 minutes. AND you add a connection to rail for those people in Aspley who can't catch the 325 anyway.

Like I said, BUZzing 325 is the main game IMHO.

[somebody]

I have tried to change it but this poll won't show publicy for some reason.  If you check out the polls on the report card for example, they were all publicly viewable.

Seems that only the polls you create are publicly viewable.  Odd.  Do you create the thread and then add the poll to it later?

[ozbob]

Ok, I've added an 8th option.  If that's what you want.

ozbob, is it possible to change the forum software so people not logged in can see the results of polls?

It is publicly viewable now, was a chain of permissions issue ..

[somebody]

It is publicly viewable now, was a chain of permissions issue ..

Cool.  Thanks.

[somebody]

It is no more "strange" than the 325 serving Boondall via Geebung Station.
...
Like I said, BUZzing 325 is the main game IMHO.

The 325 is a strange route, but I don't follow what is strange about the Boondall-Geebung link?  What I find strange is that it crosses the Gympie Rd services, mainly 330/340.  You could also argue that the bit beyond Chermside should be tacked on to the 333, but then that's unreliable enough already.

Interestingly, no one else is in favour of sending the 335 via Kelvin Grove Rd.

EDIT: meant to say that I don't understand why the 325 is such a high priority over other routes?  It's really only the service to the PCH which I'm thinking of doing something about.

[Golliwog]

I don't favor sending in on Kelvin Grove Rd. It already has the BUZ 345 and also the 390 every 15 minutes already, both of which take the Normanby-Roma St route with the 390 then going to Adelaide St. I also think having a high frequency route/s running between the city and RBWH via The Valley is a good boost to the network.

I disagree with TT in the idea of boosting just one of the routes though. I think running both at higher frequencies (say each every 20 minutes to give a 10 minute frequency out to the hospital or wherever it is they split) has the added benefit of giving the corridor the higher frequency it needs, but also improving access along the ends of each route where they run seperately.

On a side note, how important is running the 325 via Church Rd (near Taigum)? If the 335 was extended to Boondall Station taking the current windy route the 325 takes, could the 325 have its route 'streamlined' so that it provides a quicker journey to Chermside while the 335 does the windy part. Also what about taking the 335 away from Chermside and following the route of the P339? Or would that remove to many connections? Although they would still be able to transfer to the 330 at Ellison Rd.

As for the extension to Parliament in the city, it bothers me little, although I do see the accessibility benefits for those not willing/able to trek all the way to the current stop.

[somebody]

I don't favor sending in on Kelvin Grove Rd. It already has the BUZ 345 and also the 390 every 15 minutes already, both of which take the Normanby-Roma St route with the 390 then going to Adelaide St. I also think having a high frequency route/s running between the city and RBWH via The Valley is a good boost to the network.

Kelvin Grove Rd is certainly adequately served.  That's not the reason to go that way, or not to.  The reason to go that way is that it is faster, I think around 4 minutes.  The reason to go via RB&WH is the connectivity of doing so.

I disagree with TT in the idea of boosting just one of the routes though. I think running both at higher frequencies (say each every 20 minutes to give a 10 minute frequency out to the hospital or wherever it is they split) has the added benefit of giving the corridor the higher frequency it needs, but also improving access along the ends of each route where they run seperately.

That's my thinking too, although I couldn't see 20 minute frequency on both routes off peak.  There are higher priorities in the network (100, Everton Park, 180, 300 etc.)  My thinking is to get as much of the system up to 15 minute frequency as possible and then start thinking of further upgrades.

On a side note, how important is running the 325 via Church Rd (near Taigum)? If the 335 was extended to Boondall Station taking the current windy route the 325 takes, could the 325 have its route 'streamlined' so that it provides a quicker journey to Chermside while the 335 does the windy part. Also what about taking the 335 away from Chermside and following the route of the P339? Or would that remove to many connections? Although they would still be able to transfer to the 330 at Ellison Rd.

Firstly, I'm not really in favour of the 335 extension.  I think going via Church Rd is to serve Taigum shops.  I think it probably should stay as is.

As for taking the 335 out of Chermside, I couldn't favour that either.  What about people that live on Webster Rd but would like to get the bus to the shops?  You'd be halving their frequency to half an hour.

I do see an strong argument for a via Kelvin Grove Rd routing for the P339.  It is faster that way, and for those that can't walk more than 400m, the 370/379 isn't too far away unless you live right in the middle of Windsor & Wilston stations.

As for the extension to Parliament in the city, it bothers me little, although I do see the accessibility benefits for those not willing/able to trek all the way to the current stop.

I just see a need for improved service to that end of town.

So, if you voted for this, was it due to not liking running inbound along Ann St?

[#Metro]

That's my thinking too, although I couldn't see 20 minute frequency on both routes off peak.  There are higher priorities in the network (100, Everton Park, 180, 300 etc.)  My thinking is to get as much of the system up to 15 minute frequency as possible and then start thinking of further upgrades.

I agree. I suspect that where the 335 diverts to Taigum is a milk run / "coverage" service, which would explain its low frequency.
However, I disagree with getting as much of the system up to 15 minute frequency, I understand where you are coming from though. I doubt that will ever happen in Brisbane. IMHO there are 84 or so routes BT operated, at 2 BUZzes a year, this would take 42 years to complete.

You get the idea. There are just too many.

IMHO the gaps in the BUZ network should be filled in, and then they and the rail lines should all be tied together in a big bundle by BUZzing the GCL. 15 minute rail frequency should happen. This would create a core frequent network, which could be put on a map. It is the minimum "anywhere to anywhere" network using the least resources IMHO. Gazza's frequent corridors could be added to that too.

IMHO we should be very selective about which routes get BUZzed and which one's don't.
A few more additions to radial routes would help, and then some cross-towns...

[somebody]

IMHO there are 84 or so routes BT operated, at 2 BUZzes a year, this would take 42 years to complete.

That's not an opinion.  I think the number should be much higher actually.  There are apparently >400 routes in SEQ.  Perhaps BT operate 84 full time/daytime routes?

IMHO the gaps in the BUZ network should be filled in, and then they and the rail lines should all be tied together in a big bundle by BUZzing the GCL. 15 minute rail frequency should happen.

What is and isn't a gap is open to interpretation.  You could argue that Webster Rd is covered by the 333 & 345 if you wanted to.

My priorities, are improved frequency on all routes really, especially the inner parts.  I guess I don't need to repeat my priorities.

[#Metro]

We cannot BUZ everything. We can't even hope to get close, and it would spread ourselves too thinly.
The amount of bus-km required, buses and time to do it would be astronomical.

however, picking a few trunk lines and weaving a net over them, by adding a few routes which are spaced far as possible apart, will
maximise coverage of the core frequent network. Frequent corridors can be added.

My priorities, are improved frequency on all routes really, especially the inner parts.

IMHO:

1. Improved frequency on those routes that carry high patronage (the one million club) but are not BUZ.
Only a few services need to be added to these routes to reach BUZ standard. (BUZ 196, BUZ 375)

2. Adding the minimum number of BUZzes on selected radial arterial roads that do not have BUZ on them or rail nearby "the gaps".
(BUZ 100 on Ipswich Road, BUZ 450, potential for a BUZ 180 or 185)

3. BUzzing GCL and a cross town to tie it all together. (BUZ 599/598 & 358)

[somebody]

1. Improved frequency on those routes that carry high patronage (the one million club) but are not BUZ.
Only a few services need to be added to these routes to reach BUZ standard. (BUZ 196, BUZ 375)

Could it be that other routes do not have high patronage because they don't have high frequency.

[#Metro]

Could it be that other routes do not have high patronage because they don't have high frequency.

It's possible, but if you try to give every route high frequency, you will end up giving no routes high frequency.
The goals of high patronage services and coverage services are mutually contradictory. There is a tradeoff.
It's also likely to be wasteful because they would be all direct services to the CBD, wouldn't they?

This means focus on a few routes to build a high frequency backbone, and then link them to create a net.
The elephant in the room is of course rail frequency.

The BUZ 196 and BUZ 375 are low hanging fruit. Add a few more services in the evening and weekends and they are BUZ.
They might even return profits if they were BUZzed like 199.

Cheap to do, low risk of failure (they are high patronage services), and fills in some gaps nicely. What about the other routes which are not high frequency? If a BUZ cannot be put down everyone's street, what can be done?

Well, now that you have a core frequent network, which can do anywhere to anywhere, you can start thinking about which routes could become feeder services to feed the core frequent network, which IMHO is the track Gazza is on with the Western Suburbs routes.

IMHO its practical for a few reasons:
No need to BUZ everything
High frequency net covers the entire city with trunk high frequency routes

[somebody]

We're getting off topic here.

PCH could be a large trip generator, but it is being held back by the lack of service.  Apparently 4000 employees and 30 000 visitors/month.  Is that 40% of RB&WH+RCH?

I don't follow why the bit beyond Chermside is a welfare run for the 335 but not for the 325?

[#Metro]

PCH could be a large trip generator, but it is being held back by the lack of service.  Apparently 4000 employees and 30 000 visitors/month.  Is that 40% of RB&WH+RCH?

Is RBWH and RCH large trip generators? I'm asking because PA Hospital and QEII don't seem to be.

[somebody]

PCH could be a large trip generator, but it is being held back by the lack of service.  Apparently 4000 employees and 30 000 visitors/month.  Is that 40% of RB&WH+RCH?

Is RBWH and RCH large trip generators? I'm asking because PA Hospital and QEII don't seem to be.

My understanding is that they are.  Give PAH some time.  It wasn't long ago that it was really only served by the Ipswich Rd buses (well, +475/476), again with inconsistent city stop locations.  I believe that the Mater is a substantial trip generator.

QEII?  What goes there besides the 120/P119?  I'm sure there are some other routes, of course, but it is another poorly served hospital.

[somebody]

Pretty inconclusive result.  Seems that there isn't much support for making the 335 go via Kelvin Grove Rd.  I didn't clarfiy what was to happen to the 325 in my second last option.  Doh!

I feel pretty strongly that there needs to be a common route.    If it's via Valley and RB&WH then at least you can reach the route from Roma St via Nth Busway.

The P339 route isn't smart.  That one really should be via Kelvin Grove Rd, with a Charlotte St start and a Margaret St finish IMO.  So long as it avoids the Roma St/Turbot St portal inbound.  Oh well.

[somebody]

I was thinking of drafting up something to release on this one, but I see that someone else has voted for a frequency increase on current routes.  I think this plan is a bit barmy.  What if you are at Roma St and have just missed a 325 when heading to PCH or Webster Rd?  You would need to know that you should get an INB bus to RBH and then grab the 335.  It is similar in Fortitude Valley if you have just missed a 335.  At least if the buses follow a common route you would always have to do the same thing, which is far easier than the present situation.  If you don't know the tricks then you could have a 29 minute wait.  Almost anything is better than such an arrangement IMO.

One other point.  The southbound 335 runs past Chermside shops to serve the 330/333/340 stop on Gympie Rd, and then has to run down to Wallace St and Farnell St to get back to Hamilton Rd.  This also it cannot serve the same Chermside stop as the 325, which is the one which it needs to share a stop with.  I suggest that it should run around Murphy Rd and Kittyhawk Dr to Hamilton Rd continue over Gympie Rd, which might be faster, but more importantly shares the common stop with the 325.  The only missed stop is Chermside Gardens and that is served by the more frequent 330 anyway.  I suppose the major downside of this plan would be that it is slower for Kirby Rd pax bound for Chermside shops, and especially the Chermside Gardens stop as they now have to walk a bit.  They'll get over it IMO.

[#Metro]

So do you want a BUZ 325 in the core frequent network or leave it out for improving frequencies on similar routes  ?

[somebody]

So do you want a BUZ 325 in the core frequent network or leave it out for improving frequencies on similar routes  ?

I'd say put it in, but add a qualifier "or similar service to Prince Charles Hospital".

[Emmie]

One problem with all solutions suggested for Prince Charles Hospital are that it is nearly 1k walk from the nearest bus stop to the entrance to the hospital, according to my interrogation of Translink web. This makes it much too far both for patients and many visitors as well to contemplate getting there by PT. Is there any reasonable solution?  A dedicated bus link to, say, Chermside, could drive right into the hospital grounds and deposit people at the front door, but it's not realistic for a bus that just passes by en route to elsewhere.

[somebody]

One problem with all solutions suggested for Prince Charles Hospital are that it is nearly 1k walk from the nearest bus stop to the entrance to the hospital, according to my interrogation of Translink web. This makes it much too far both for patients and many visitors as well to contemplate getting there by PT. Is there any reasonable solution?  A dedicated bus link to, say, Chermside, could drive right into the hospital grounds and deposit people at the front door, but it's not realistic for a bus that just passes by en route to elsewhere.

Well, a number of people would disagree that its not realistic.  Did you notice that the Northern Busway is planned to go via PCH when it extends past Kedron?  Also, the deviation of buses through Indooroopilly is fairly significant.  I don't see why something similar couldn't apply here.  Also, if you live north of Chemside on the 325 or 335 routes, you currently have the option of using 330/333/340 from the CBD to Chemside or vice versa, which would already be faster by enough of a margin to compensate for the need to interchange.

[Emmie]

I don't mean it's not a good idea for buses to go via PCH - but that it's too far (for many) to walk from the Bus stop outside to the hospital gates, and on (and up) to the entrance to the hospital itself. I'm not approving of this situation, just suggesting a more user friendly bus stop location would be a big help. Presumably if the NB goes close to PCH, it will go really close, which is more than the 325 currently does.

[somebody]

I don't mean it's not a good idea for buses to go via PCH - but that it's too far (for many) to walk from the Bus stop outside to the hospital gates, and on (and up) to the entrance to the hospital itself. I'm not approving of this situation, just suggesting a more user friendly bus stop location would be a big help. Presumably if the NB goes close to PCH, it will go really close, which is more than the 325 currently does.

No worries.  I was always planning to make a mention of this when we are ready to release something.  But it wasn't an aspect that could cause any controversy IMO, so I didn't see the point of including it in the poll.

[somebody]

One problem with all solutions suggested for Prince Charles Hospital are that it is nearly 1k walk from the nearest bus stop to the entrance to the hospital, according to my interrogation of Translink web. This makes it much too far both for patients and many visitors as well to contemplate getting there by PT. Is there any reasonable solution?  A dedicated bus link to, say, Chermside, could drive right into the hospital grounds and deposit people at the front door, but it's not realistic for a bus that just passes by en route to elsewhere.

I think the Translink website is in error here.  It isn't that far.  It's still about 300-400m from the "Prince Charles Hospital" stop to the Jacaranda Dr/Eighth Ave entrance.

One possibility would be to run from Webster Rd, (R) Rode Rd, (L) Main Rd, (R) First Ave, (R) Jacaranda Dr, (R) Wallace St, (L) Gympie Rd.  If those roads are negotiable by buses.  Actually it may be good enough to just use Hilltop Ave.  Both of these possibilities would remove the need for the Kitty Hawk Dr routing for the 335 to get a common stop to PCH at Chermside, which I suggested above.

It does leave the "Farnell St" stop unserved by the 325 & 335, but this is served by the 340, and Chermside interchange isn't that far away, so not an issue.  The Webster & Rode stop would have to be moved and the "Prince Charles Hospital" stop wouldn't be served anymore except by the P339.  The PCH stop would be the only controversial aspect, I would think.

Or, you could just walk the 300+m from Webster Rd.  Second time you go there, you may find that the part of the hospital you want isn't near the main entrance anyway.