TransLink - Have your say on route 503

[ozbob]

http://www.translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/bulletin/1291788886

Have your say on route 503

On 13 December 2010 TransLink made a number of changes to bus services in the Ipswich region.

We want to hear your feedback as part of a review of route 503 (Bundamba to Riverlink Shopping Centre via Eastern Heights).

Tell us whether you'd prefer route 503 to continue to service the Ipswich Public Hospital or if we should change the route to service the St Andrew's Private Hospital instead.

Option 1: Change route 503 so it services the private hospital instead of the public hospital

This option will remove route 503 from the front entrance of the Ipswich Public Hospital and reinstate the route in Pring Street to better service the St Andrew's Private Hospital.

The public hospital will continue to be serviced by route 515, every 15 minutes between 7.30am and 6pm on weekdays, and 30 to 60 minutes at all other off-peak times, seven days a week.

This option would provide the medical and hospital precinct with the following routes:

   * Western section - route 515 (front door of Public Hospital in Chelmsford Avenue)
   * Central section - route 509 (back door of Public Hospital in Churchill Street)
   * Eastern section - route 503 (front door of Private Hospital in Pring Street

Option 2: Keep the current route 503

This option has three routes providing 1,093 services a week to the Ipswich Public Hospital:

   * routes 503 and 515 (front door)
   * route 509 (back door)

This option has been based on boarding information.

Please note, a single bus route looping around to the front doors of the Ipswich Public Hospital and St Andrew's Private Hospital is not an option able to be considered by TransLink.

Have your say on which option you'd prefer

Call us on 07 3338 4439 between 9am 5pm on weekdays, until Friday 4 March 2011.

Submit your response via the online survey.

[#Metro]

This is the first time I have ever seen TL consult on a bus route.
Good stuff.

[ozbob]

 

[ozbob]

From the Queensland Times click here!

Public or private hospital stop?

Public or private hospital stop?

Zane Jackson | 1st March 2011

IPSWICH bus commuters are being asked to choose whether they want to stop at the city's private or public hospital, but with no option to stop at both.

TransLink is asking route 503 bus users to choose between stopping at the public hospital on Chelmsford Ave or St Andrew's Ipswich Private Hospital on Pring St, which is also close to other medical services.

Public submissions for the rejigging of the route, which travels from Bundamba to Riverlink Shopping Centre via Eastern Heights, close this Friday.

It currently stops at the front of the Ipswich Hospital, but if St Andrew's is the preferred option, that stop will be axed, leaving the route 515 to stop at the main public hospital stop.

With both hospitals only one kilometre apart, Robert Dow from commuter lobby group Rail Back on Track said the service should stop at both.

"It's pleasing to see they are seeking public opinion on any changes," Mr Dow said.

"They should stop at both. What's the problem with doing both?"

He said some people going to hospital have mobility issues, and public transport options should help to get patients close to those facilities.

Chris Murphy, who recently left St Andrew's as CEO, said buses used to stop outside there before the routes were taken off.

"The hospital would support the reintroduction of a service. We have a bus stop there, so a return of service would be good," Mr Murphy said.

A TransLink spokesman said going to both hospitals is not on the agenda and won't be considered.

"While it might seem simple to service both hospitals, doing so would mean the bus would have to loop around both St Andrews' Private and Ipswich public hospitals, which would add substantially to the travel time," he said in a statement.

The 509 bus stops on Churchill Street behind the hospital.

In other public transport news, "hail 'n' ride" bus services are officially over from today.

Ipswich was one of the last areas in south-east Queensland to have a hail 'n' ride bus service, and the changes are expected to boost on-time performance.

Passengers must now stop at dedicated TransLink bus stops to board or leave a bus service.

Mr Dow said commuters should now see a more efficient service.

TransLink said they had a 10-week amnesty and ran an extensive awareness campaign involving driver announcements and advertisements letting people know about the changes.

To tell TransLink what bus route you would prefer, call them on 3338 4439 between 9am 5pm until Friday, or visit the website www.translink.com.au

[ozbob]

A TransLink spokesman said going to both hospitals is not on the agenda and won't be considered.

It is this sort of response that is distancing both ends of George St from the public.  People going to and from hospitals often have mobility issues.

They way people are being treated in Ipswich is most unsatisfactory IMHO.  Another nail in the political coffin no doubt ...

[dwb]

Quote
A TransLink spokesman said going to both hospitals is not on the agenda and won't be considered.

It is this sort of response that is distancing both ends of George St from the public.  People going to and from hospitals often have mobility issues.

They way people are being treated in Ipswich is most unsatisfactory IMHO.  Another nail in the political coffin no doubt ...

No Bob, this (stating the available options and stating the unavailable options) is a actually an integral component of authentic engagement. TL is being upfront that the option to service both is not on the table. Whether it should or shouldn't be on the table is perhaps more what you are talking about, but that is not what your post inferred as you said "this sort of response is distancing...".

Good community engagement based on principles such as IAP2's will what be what brings TL closer to the community, not building false expectations that everyone can have what they want. I'd highly recommend you check out IAP2's website www.iap2.org.au and I strongly applaud TL for finally entering this space!

[colinw]

I prefer this site myself: http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/

Since 1979, we have been campaigning against gobbledygook, jargon and misleading public information.

Can't see it catching on here.

[somebody]

I agree with dwb.  If they won't consider going to both hospitals then it is more constructive to say so up front.  If you don't like the idea that they won't consider it, that's not really the same issue, but at least they are doing a level of public consultation here which is to be applauded.

[ozbob]

Having a bus service the hospitals so the lame can access is not unreasonable.  Crikey ...  

Sorry, too much spin, I will be campaigning for a proper community service.

RAIL Back On Track is a community advocacy group.  If you don't agree with that please leave ...

Go and talk to the people affected in Ipswich.  What a load of codswallop.

[ozbob]

The fact that TransLink has presented an ultimatum, choose one or the other indicates that both destinations warrant service.

The people of Ipswich have suffered enough with the botched bus withdrawal.  Did you know that revised timetables for the bus runs in Ipswich were done in 2007?  TransLink and the Government failed to implement and address the issues in a timely manner.  They then 'punished' the citizens for their own systemic failings using poor patronage as the justification, little wonder considering the failure to fix the timetables first.

The sooner both TransLink and the present government fade away the better life will be, would be a fair assessment of the sentiment out in Ipswich.

[dwb]

The role of TL is not to ask the world what it wants then start at the top, the role of TL is balance a variety of needs with limited resources within constraints outside of its control. The role of planners within TL is to do the best they can within those constraints and a variety of other political and funding constraints.

Authentic community engagement will build trust between TL as an organisation and the community. Authentic community engagement means being honest about what we can and can't have (within whatever constraints there are). There is absolutely NO POINT in asking what the world wants then having no ability to deliver on it, hence you ask what you can deliver on, in this case the question has been asked as to whether it is more important to service the private hospital or to service the public hospital which has other services that access it.

I bet there are a 1001 constraints that you have no idea about here and the planners involved at TL are being as open and honest as they can within our system (what the board, what the minister, what the finances will allow) without explaining what those all are. I personally would prefer them to do that at least to a greater extent (ie that the available funding, buses, drivers in this situation is fixed and that a longer route will simply undermine frequency), then people can themselves make better informed contributions. The problem is that planners and authorities aka departments have constraints placed upon them that they can't get around... if they try they'll be out of a job in second.  TL would have done a good job to explain this better, however it certainly wouldn't happen in what the media prints!

Get over your moral outrage, calm down and think about what I'm saying. There is a difference about whether you like the options or whether TL is doing a better job than it has with other routes in actually laying out what some of the options are and aren't.

[ozbob]

I understand your view point, but this is just a simple fix.  At a recent meeting I attended in Ipswich this was raised as a major issue from their local perspective.  One gentleman suggested that 'it could be fixed overnight', and quite frankly I agree.  

Some of the folks who lost their bus routes, can no longer access the Flexilink cabs due to mobility issues.  They could the bus.  Some of us are trying to get low level access coasters to provide some sort of service.  Ipswich City Council has been engaged with the flood stuff, it is now time to get back on track and help these people.  That is the way I see it.  

[somebody]

Having a bus service the hospitals so the lame can access is not unreasonable.  Crikey ...  

Sorry, too much spin, I will be campaigning for a proper community service.

RAIL Back On Track is a community advocacy group.  If you don't agree with that please leave ...

Go and talk to the people affected in Ipswich.  What a load of codswallop.

Ouch.

AIUI, they haven't refused to provide any service to either location, just that they won't entertain having both locations served by the 503.  Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me.  Looking at a map it would be a milk run if they did serve both locations.

[ozbob]

It is Ipswich and not Brisbane CBD.  Folks want it, this will just lead to a lot of messing around, and not really necessary.  I am sure the locals will remember come the next election.

[mufreight]

The Translink attitude of you have a choice of either (a) or (b) neither of which is satisfactory to a considerable number of those potential users of the services is typical, there is no practical reason why both hospitals can not be served in an adequate manner either on the actual route in both directions or by a single direction of travel loop, a concept beyond the imagination of the Translink (missing link) transport planners who obviously have no intention of providing any level of convenient service to meet the proven needs of the local comunity.

Obviously DWB you are not aged or infirm and surviving on a pension with no alternative means of transport as is the case with an increasing majority of the residents of the Ipswich area.
The government is obliged to provide these services and the government stance that this degrading of service provided being the responsibility of Translink which has been delegated the responsibility of providing these services by a government that now attempts to deny responsibility has run out of credibility and the political masters should either direct Translink accordingly, failure to do so is at their politicial peril with the levels of dissatisfaction localy on public transport issues alone such that the three State members in the Ipswich destined to loose their seats at the next election.

A beancounter bureaucracy needs to consider the social impacts and Translink has proven that they are not a factor in their transport planning.

[somebody]

I'm confused.

If Ipswich Public Hospital is served by the region's best route, the 515, how come this route would need to serve it?

[mufreight]

The 503 and the 515 services operate effectively in totaly different directions effectively one East West and the other North South

[Golliwog]

But do they have a common interchange point?

[somebody]

But do they have a common interchange point?

Yes AIUI, both the Bell St interchange (i.e. train station) and Riverlink shops.

[Golliwog]

Would going via Bell St or Riverlink to get to the other hospital be out of the way? If not, so long as the buses are timed for a good interchange I see no problem with having one service the public hospital and the other service the private one.

[mufreight]

Yes but would extend the transit times by between 15 minutes and 59 minutes depending on the overlap of services and the hospital destination, not I would think a real incentive to use public transport.
Translink consistently overlooks it's social obligations and makes what should be a reasonable alternative to private transport as inconvenient as possible seemingly with the intention of detering public transport usage rather than encouraging it, unfortunately there are many who have no choice but to endure this failure of Translink to address such problemes in a meaningful manner until the next election.   

[somebody]

If the 503 goes via the public hospital, which seems likely to be the result of such a consultation, that would leave the private hospital unserved.  You'd have to walk from East St.

Do many people use PT to get there?

[mufreight]

If the 503 goes via the public hospital, which seems likely to be the result of such a consultation, that would leave the private hospital unserved.  You'd have to walk from East St.

Do many people use PT to get there?

Too many Somebody, mostly oldies who have no alternative affordable means of transport and the majority would be refferals from the Queensland Public Health system.
What you suggest would inevitably kill a few of these elderly commuters off, either by having to walk beyond their physical abilities or by not being able to purchase food having used their food money to pay for a taxi to get to or from the private hospital, have to give this one the  big time.

[somebody]

If the 503 goes via the public hospital, which seems likely to be the result of such a consultation, that would leave the private hospital unserved.  You'd have to walk from East St.

Do many people use PT to get there?

Too many Somebody, mostly oldies who have no alternative affordable means of transport and the majority would be refferals from the Queensland Public Health system.
What you suggest would inevitably kill a few of these elderly commuters off, either by having to walk beyond their physical abilities or by not being able to purchase food having used their food money to pay for a taxi to get to or from the private hospital, have to give this one the  big time.

Hey, I wasn't suggesting anything.  Rather making a prediction of the likely outcome.  I was actually trying to imply that they wanted to be able to say in the future that they did their consultation, and the public didn't want the service to the private hospital!

[ozbob]

Queensland Times 4th March 2011 Your Letters page 9

Hospital link

Hospital link

TO put Translink and service in the same sentence is to create an oxymoron, and the people of Ipswich are being treated as morons by this company.

There are two hospitals in Ipswich, each giving different but essential services, each adjacent to other essential medical services.  Surely the city of Ipswich is entitled to a bus line that visits both. Separated by only kilometre, I can't believe it's not "simple" to loop round both places.

Why are our Mayor and councillors remaining silent when a Translink spokesman arrogantly states "going to both hospital is not on the agenda and won't be considered"?

Federal MP Shayne Neumann talks about his concern for people whose capacity for independent living is at risk. Isn't having a decent bus service that gives young and old access to hospitals and integral part of independent living?

Is the latest farce a parting gift from the former Transport Minister, Rachel Nolan?

K CROSS Booval

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

Well said!

[mufreight]

Queensland Times 4th March 2011 Your Letters page 9

Hospital link

Hospital link

TO put Translink and service in the same sentence is to create an oxymoron, and the people of Ipswich are being treated as morons by this company.

There are two hospitals in Ipswich, each giving different but essential services, each adjacent to other essential medical services.  Surely the city of Ipswich is entitled to a bus line that visits both. Separated by only kilometre, I can't believe it's not "simple" to loop round both places.

Why are our Mayor and councillors remaining silent when a Translink spokesman arrogantly states "going to both hospital is not on the agenda and won't be considered"?

Federal MP Shayne Neumann talks about his concern for people whose capacity for independent living is at risk. Isn't having a decent bus service that gives young and old access to hospitals and integral part of independent living?

Is the latest farce a parting gift from the former Transport Minister, Rachel Nolan?

K CROSS Booval

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

Well said!

Interesting, where has the Ipswich Mayor been on this issue? missing in action so as not to upset his LABOR mates instead of representing the Ipswich residents.