Buses to use Captain Cook Bridge full time

[Mr X]

Was thinking about Cultural Centre - Mater Hill congestion earlier- is it really necessary for every bus to go through that stretch? Where we have two high freq BUZ's going similar directions in this corridor, shouldn't some just be re-routed via the Captain Cook Bridge?

Major targets I think are:
- 200 vs 222: the 200 should go via CCB to provide a full time express route from OCR to the city. Anyone needing South Bank from the 200 route can just swap to a 222 at Woolloongabba.
- 111 vs 160: 160 could go via CCB and 111 remaining flagship service
- 109: I think someone once suggested something like this before, a 109 could go express to the city, non stopping boggo rd and pa hospital and the 109/66 merged route could form the city 'all stopper' BUZ via south bank.

How congested is the CCB in peak hour? Could bus lanes be installed easily?

[Golliwog]

Sticking with the routes I know. I would be surprised if even half of the patronage on the 109 was city bound. Since the opening of the Urbanest complex next to South Bank station, a large number go to and from there, and another large chunk is taken by interchange at CC for northern routes, South Bank for GC trains, Boggo Rd for other trains (though these can catch any route), and Mater Hill for various. I assume some live nearby, and others change at Mater Hill rather than catch the 209/169/139.

I would say that a bus lane could be installed fairly easily, but you would have to take consideration of where the buses exit the Riverside expressway. If you don't have a bus lane on at least part of the exit, if theres decent traffic then your bus could end up hanging back into the buslane, making the whole exercise pointless. You would of course have to deal with complaints from those who have now lost their car space, but thats simple enough to deal with.

[SurfRail]

130, 135, 140, 150, 200, 250 and 555 should be going via Captain Cook Bridge (as the 155 does) with interchanging at Buranda - other routes can continue as per present.

160 should just be scrapped and the resources used to provide BUZ services on the 180, with the proposed upgrade for later in this year allocated to the 100 or a more worthy route.  Likewise Route 88 - use those resources to fund more 77s, or a western BUZ, or to provide general frequency upgrades to the all-stoppers like the 174/175, 184/185 etc.

[somebody]

130, 135, 140, 150, 200, 250 and 555 should be going via Captain Cook Bridge (as the 155 does) with interchanging at Buranda - other routes can continue as per present.

I've thought about that before, but I'm not completely convinced.  Serving Buranda means an increase in the peak time congestion there so may not be a good idea.

160 should just be scrapped and the resources used to provide BUZ services on the 180, with the proposed upgrade for later in this year allocated to the 100 or a more worthy route.  Likewise Route 88 - use those resources to fund more 77s, or a western BUZ, or to provide general frequency upgrades to the all-stoppers like the 174/175, 184/185 etc.

Agree about the 160 being scrapped.  Not convinced about scrapping all of the 88 though - just the western part.  That would make the 88 virtually a 160 via CCB.

[SurfRail]

I've thought about that before, but I'm not completely convinced.  Serving Buranda means an increase in the peak time congestion there so may not be a good idea.

I'll have to take your word there.  I've never noticed an enormous amount of congestion whenever I have passed through in the peak, although you would expect a lot of this could be mitigated by not having all the rockets stop there.  Rockets are really for peak hour commuters to get to the CBD, so should be optimised for that purpose.

[somebody]

I should have said that I would agree for the 250, 270 and 555 routes which already serve Buranda.  It would also speed the current through CBD route slightly for those routes.

[SurfRail]

I should have said that I would agree for the 250, 270 and 555 routes which already serve Buranda.  It would also speed the current through CBD route slightly for those routes.

Always the option of Griffith Uni as well, as the 130/135/140/150 all pass through it.  Changing there or at Buranda makes little difference I would think, as the busway is very quick whether you are stopping at HPW, Greenslopes and Buranda (111, 555) or not (Mains Road services).

[somebody]

I should have said that I would agree for the 250, 270 and 555 routes which already serve Buranda.  It would also speed the current through CBD route slightly for those routes.

Always the option of Griffith Uni as well, as the 130/135/140/150 all pass through it.  Changing there or at Buranda makes little difference I would think, as the busway is very quick whether you are stopping at HPW, Greenslopes and Buranda (111, 555) or not (Mains Road services).

But if you move the 130,135,140,150,555 all to the CCB then your only single interchange routes are the 111 and 160 (IIRC), the latter not running evenings or weekends.  I don't really consider that to be sufficient frequency to ask that number of people to interchange.

If we want to try to get something done here, I think we shouldn't aim quite so high.  And putting the privates onto the Captain Cook Bridge dovetails nicely with them not being allowed onto Adelaide St.

[AnonymouslyBad]

Yeah, I think the BUZ routes should actually be the last to go. These are the "flagship" routes and so it should be safe to assume that they use a common corridor into the CBD.

I think a lot of the all stops routes need to go. 124, 174, 204, etc. These don't have a lot of passengers getting on and off through the South Bank stretch, and they have the least business being there - being all stops, they are really local services. They can interchange at a busway station like they would at a train station. Same idea.

As others have mentioned, the long-haul routes can probably go too: 250, 270, 540, 555. I know these are somewhat considered the "flagship" routes of their own regions, but something's got to give. These routes come a long way - get them into the city as soon as possible as that's where the most people are going, and they all offer easy interchange if not. Plus, the routings through the city itself are best suited (on purpose) for the Captain Cook Bridge.

Not so sure on the 109. It's somewhat of a flagship route (not quite a BUZ, but may as well be) and it's unique. I don't think it's reasonable to expect someone to catch two buses from South Bank to UQ. In a way, the short route and almost constantly going through major destinations should make the 109 a key candidate to stay where it is.

[somebody]

Oh yeah, I'd add my voice to leaving the 109 as a via South Bank route.  O/B this is often nearly empty arriving at the Cultural Centre.  It gets a bit of a work out at South Bank for reasons which aren't at all obvious to me.  Perhaps people doing what they have always done back when the 109 didn't serve Park Rd?

Ideally there would be a modal shift to trains to reduce demand on this.  What is holding this back is the poor counter peak train frequency.

[Bulimba30A]

I still think there is merit those routes stopping at Buranda particularly with the opening of the Eastern Busway. I think a single transfer is sellable, but not sure about a double change which would be required if you want to go east (either by bus or train).  Also to take a train analogy, I don't think I've ever seen lines running express through a junction (even in Sydney where express stopping patterns are common).

Of course, even then there are less connections at Buranda than Mater Hill. I think on balance though I would support Captain Cook Bridge services in preference to the extra connections at Mater Hill.  I think though it would give added weight to a direct Buranda to Gabba service potentially to RBWH via Story Bridge.

[AnonymouslyBad]

Might also be worth adding here - I've noticed that in peak hour, the turn off from the busway onto the Captain Cook Bridge is often (not always) full itself. The CCB itself is a surprisingly good run, but I'm not sure that many more buses can actually get onto it without spilling back onto the busway and blocking traffic. This may actually be as much of a consideration as anything else; it would explain why not much is being done about the Cultural Centre. I think with the number of buses around the CBD now, it may be necessary to consider more alternative routings like the Story Bridge, or even the William Jolly and Go Between Bridges.

[Bulimba30A]

On reflection I like your points anonymous and definitely keep the 109 the way it is (other than the oft mentioned combination of 109 and 66).

[Bulimba30A]

Another one for pigs might fly, but I've often thought a solution to this would be closing that entry to general traffic heading east along Stanley St during peak, I guess turning it into a bus only ramp.

[Golliwog]

I'd add though, if the 66 just HAS to serve The Gabba, then perhaps leave the 109 and scrap the 29 and just extend the 66? Though in terms of frequency, I think thats a bit of overkill.

In terms of the alternative routes into the CBD, you'd have to make changes around the CC to allow buses on the busway to use William Jolly and Go Between, which would make that an even more congested area than it currently is. Via Story Bridge could work, though if they're coming from the SE busway then that would make the Gabba junction worse seeing as theres no turning lane.

I would actually support the next busway expenditure being on grade seperating, or at least upgrading some of the intersections on the busway, rather than extending to the north or east.

[somebody]

I disagree with running the all stops routes via the Captain Cook Bridge though.  It isn't logical.  If speed is important take an express route.

Sorry, not trying to argue every point.

I've thought about that before, but I'm not completely convinced.  Serving Buranda means an increase in the peak time congestion there so may not be a good idea.

I'll have to take your word there.  I've never noticed an enormous amount of congestion whenever I have passed through in the peak, although you would expect a lot of this could be mitigated by not having all the rockets stop there.  Rockets are really for peak hour commuters to get to the CBD, so should be optimised for that purpose.

I've noticed it only in the PM.  I'm not that much of an early riser.

Removing the 119, 171, 176, 179, 181, 189, 201, 217 (probably missing a few) from serving Buranda maybe, possibly, would compensate.  Although the Eastern Busway increases congestion here.  A major downside of that would be the inability to transfer to a City Precincts service at Buranda, except for the !@#$ P206 not serving it, even though it traverses it.

If the private operators use the CCB there needs to be better signage (or destos) to clearly show which routes go via South Bank.

I still think there is merit those routes stopping at Buranda particularly with the opening of the Eastern Busway. I think a single transfer is sellable, but not sure about a double change which would be required if you want to go east (either by bus or train).  Also to take a train analogy, I don't think I've ever seen lines running express through a junction (even in Sydney where express stopping patterns are common).

Of course, even then there are less connections at Buranda than Mater Hill. I think on balance though I would support Captain Cook Bridge services in preference to the extra connections at Mater Hill.  I think though it would give added weight to a direct Buranda to Gabba service potentially to RBWH via Story Bridge.

Not quite true with the trains in Sydney.  Wolli Creek, Sydenham, Strathfield, Lidcombe and Granville are all missed sometimes, and some of those off peak.

Not sure which routes you mean by "those routes".  Although I know what you are saying about the double transfer.  Those who have transferred onto a 250 or 555 and are heading to South Bank might struggle as they aren't as familiar with the system as us.  Which is why I suggested improved information.

[Bulimba30A]

In respect of sydney, it's only really the inter urbans that skip those stations.  There may be some peak suburbans but I think these are fairly rare and an exception to the regular stopping stations.

I completely agree with the frustration of the 206 (and even 207) not stopping at Buranda. They are the existing services that could provide good connectivity to/from Eagle st now.  In relation to 217, if people desperately want to go via ccb from kismet st (as thats the only stop 206 and 207 dont serve) they can use 222 and change.

[Bulimba30A]

Sorry "those routes" was a reference to 130, 140, 150 etc stopping at Buranda.

[Bulimba30A]

A lot of the information issues can be solved by just having 2 monitors at each major bus station from Buranda inbound indicating the bus number and destination heading in the direction you want, eg at Buranda you'd have one that lists "next bus to city via southbank" and one that lists "next bus to city via ccb" similar to the next north and south/west monitors at the city rail stations.

[somebody]

In respect of sydney, it's only really the inter urbans that skip those stations.  There may be some peak suburbans but I think these are fairly rare and an exception to the regular stopping stations.

I completely agree with the frustration of the 206 (and even 207) not stopping at Buranda. They are the existing services that could provide good connectivity to/from Eagle st now.  In relation to 217, if people desperately want to go via ccb from kismet st (as thats the only stop 206 and 207 dont serve) they can use 222 and change.

Correct on the current off peak timetable in Sydney, but it wasn't always so.

207 (& 206) could easily serve Kismet St.

Sorry "those routes" was a reference to 130, 140, 150 etc stopping at Buranda.

If we mess with this, I think the 130 & 140 MUST be kept together. I can accept that there are grounds for messing with a few things with the 150.  Reliability is poor, the route is too long, etc.

[AnonymouslyBad]

In terms of the alternative routes into the CBD, you'd have to make changes around the CC to allow buses on the busway to use William Jolly and Go Between, which would make that an even more congested area than it currently is. Via Story Bridge could work, though if they're coming from the SE busway then that would make the Gabba junction worse seeing as theres no turning lane.

Yeah, I was thinking if routes were put on the William Jolly and Go Between, they should be skipping that section of busway altogether and using normal streets. This would obviously make for a slower trip, but obviously I'd only suggest this for all-stops routes.
I'm really not sure what routes could do this, though, I don't know if I'd suggest it for routes coming from Buranda because they still need to use that Stanley St turn. I can't see this actually happening (because it might take road space away from precious cars!!) in any case.

As far as Story Bridge goes, I was thinking mostly of Ipswich Road services. I thought it would be possible for them to service Woolloongabba (for interchange) and then come straight back out? Or is it a one-way turn there?
Come to think of it, if it's not possible at the Gabba they could do interchange at PA Hospital and then just continue straight down to the Story Bridge. Why there's not already proper interchange at the PAH is beyond me, in fact I think they moved the stop further away from the busway about the same time it opened!
Most of these are City-Valley routes anyway, so it'd just be Valley-City instead. Perhaps there is a reason they don't already do this, though, I'm not sure how well this corridor copes in peak (or even which direction is actually the peak flow).

A lot of the information issues can be solved by just having 2 monitors at each major bus station from Buranda inbound indicating the bus number and destination heading in the direction you want, eg at Buranda you'd have one that lists "next bus to city via southbank" and one that lists "next bus to city via ccb" similar to the next north and south/west monitors at the city rail stations.

I like this idea! Even if it was the newer style monitors for which every city route clearly stated "via South Bank" or "Express" or whatever else, that would do.

I disagree with running the all stops routes via the Captain Cook Bridge though.  It isn't logical.  If speed is important take an express route.

I'd agree if the busway could support every route, but it can't. It isn't really much more logical for all stops to use the busway either, because the busway is an express stopping pattern. By definition I'd say the most logical place for all stops is on the street, (it should also be noted that many nearby areas are underserviced due to the busway) but again I think pigs will fly before this is seen as a good move politically.
Failing that, the CCB is really only a minor time saving if the busway is functioning properly - maybe two minutes. So using it is not going to make the all stops "fast", they'll still be seen as an all-stops and they'll still be used the way they are now, they just won't be stopping flagship routes from getting through on the correct flagship route.

[somebody]

The busway is only slightly slower for the Adelaide St & QSBS bound routes, but CCB makes a bigger difference for Elizabeth St.

Imagine getting on a 555 and instead of turning right from Alice St into William St, veering left onto the CCB and heading straight to Buranda.  That'd save at least 5 minutes and probably more IMO.

[AnonymouslyBad]

The busway is only slightly slower for the Adelaide St & QSBS bound routes, but CCB makes a bigger difference for Elizabeth St.

Imagine getting on a 555 and instead of turning right from Alice St into William St, veering left onto the CCB and heading straight to Buranda.  That'd save at least 5 minutes and probably more IMO.

Yeah, the 250, 555 etc. should all be on the Captain Cook Bridge with their current routes. Those city routings have CCB written all over them (which is not surprising as they pre-date the busway).
Elizabeth St should always be tied to CCB, same for Margaret St (and the corresponding streets in the other direction). SE Busway should connect to the QSBS tunnel and Adelaide St, that alone is more than enough to fill it up.
I think it's only the private operators that try to access Elizabeth St from the busway, but maybe there's a couple of BT routes I'm forgetting...

[Mr X]

Route 105?

[AnonymouslyBad]

That's the one.

[somebody]

Route 105?

Yes, plus 107+108 - the peak time versions.
172
Also 202 IIRC, or maybe that's 203?
184, 185, 210, 212 Stanley Bridge all stoppers
112 IIRC
Not sure about 113/117, but I think one of them goes that way.

[SurfRail]

The list is:

Gardens routes - 105/107/108/112/113/172/202
Eagle St/Valley route - 184/185/210/212