POLL: My Old Cleveland Rd corridor proposals

[somebody]

But the 222 would leave from KGSBS, the 204 from Adelaide St. 

STB's Best headway from CBD = 15 minutes.
Simon's Best headway from CBD = 8 minutes (assuming competence).

[STB]

But the 222 would leave from KGSBS, the 204 from Adelaide St. 

STB's Best headway from CBD = 15 minutes.
Simon's Best headway from CBD = 8 minutes (assuming competence).

Just because it's a BUZ, doesn't mean that it has to operate every 15mins.

[Gazza]

How do you figure? Examples?

[somebody]

I think he's saying that you can make it more frequent.

I'll rephprase:

But the 222 would leave from KGSBS, the 204 from Adelaide St. 

STB's worst timetable headway from CBD = 15 minutes.
Simon's worst timetable headway from CBD = 8 minutes (assuming competence).

[STB]

How do you figure? Examples?

Route 199.  If we follow Melbourne's example of the tram network, they run every 12 minutes off peak IIRC.

[Gazza]

Sorry, when I read I interpreted as a BUZ with 30 min frequency 

[somebody]

I still think the notion of 204 from Adelaide St and 222 from KGSBS is on the same level as the railway engineer in NSW in the 19th century who got up and said we should go with 4'8.5" knowing that SA and VIC were going with 5'3".  It matters not that going 5'3" in SA/VIC had been at NSW's urging, I guess.

In fact, I am more open to arguments about that decision than I am about city stop locations.  Perhaps getting rolling stock to fit a gauge which was only used in Ireland was a problem?

Probably shouldn't reprise one of my previous responses, but suffice to say I am baffled by the defence of the mediocrity.

[SurfRail]

There are no express stops on the Gold Coast Highway, and it would easily be as busy, more likely busier, a corridor than Old Cleveland Road.  Care to explain what is so special about the eastern suburbs that it makes implementing similar stop spacing to the GC Hwy an issue there?

I don't get this high frequency parallel services cruft - it's something that appears to be endemic to Brisbane.

What makes GC Hwy "right" and Coronation Drive/O-C Rd/Lutwyche Rd "wrong".  Can't it just as easily be the other way around?

I disagree.  The Gold Coast Highway service structure means every bus serves every stop, which makes it easier for everybody to use - and it is still as fast as Old Cleveland Road.  You don't need to make a choice about which bus stop to go to if you want good service, and you don't have to have multiple services with different profiles. Better frequency for everybody, not just people who live near arbitrarily sequenced stops. 

For instance, why do people at Camp Hill get all the BUZ services, yet somebody at the western edge of Carina between the Carina and Carindale stops gets absolutely nothing?  Both have unit complexes, a row of shops, sporting facilities nearby etc.  The walking distance between the BUZ stops is ludicrous at times, as Gazza has pointed out - this part of Carina is well outside the comfortable walking range, yet I pass about 3 yellow stops on the way.

Just resequence everything and put bus stops every 600 metres.  If you have higher frequencies available at each resulting stop, dwell times are reduced as people can just get on anything.

[somebody]

it is still as fast as Old Cleveland Road. 

I challenge this aspect.  Clearly it isn't as on average the bus is stopping more often, unless I'm missing something.

[SurfRail]

it is still as fast as Old Cleveland Road. 

I challenge this aspect.  Clearly it isn't as on average the bus is stopping more often, unless I'm missing something.

Allowing for some discrepancies which won't let me plot the routes completely accurately (busway infrastructure, won't let you plot the 204 through Bedivere St without doing a loop), here are some rough sketches.

Route 200 - approx 16km end to end.

Route 204 – approx 19km end to end.

Route 760 - approx 22km end to end.

Times taken end to end for, say, the bus departing closest to 10am:

Route 200 – 38 min in, 40 min out (avg 39 min)
Route 204 – 58 min in, 54 min out (avg 56 min)
Route 760 – 51 min north, 47 min south (avg 49 min)

Stops served en-route (both directions):

Route 200 – 19 stops.  Average spacing is 842m.
Route 204 – 54 stops.  Average spacing is 351m.
Route 760 – 55 stops.  Average spacing is around bang-on 400m.

Running these figures come up with some interesting results:

Route 200 – average speed = 25.26km/h
Route 204 – average speed = 21.1km/h
Route 760 – average speed = 26.9km/h

I think the bus priority measures roughly cancel each other out (eg busway for the 200 and 204 from the City to the Gabba, bus lanes for most of the 760 from Broadbeach to Miami and some bus signals a little further south).

Applying the Old Cleveland Rd corridor logic (ie resequence bus stops to put them closer together and make every 3rd bus stop an express stop) to the southern Gold Coast Highway, it appears to me that you would end up with:
-   Slower travel times for everybody, especially on the resulting coverage route
-   Less frequent service at most stops
-   Little or no improvement in journey times as people go out of their way to find the express and pile onto it.

[somebody]

Surely what you have just posted shows a 4km/h difference due to stopping patterns.

[#Metro]

Route 200 – average speed = 25.26km/h
Route 204 – average speed = 21.1km/h
Route 760 – average speed = 26.9km/h

LOL, the speed for a car is roughly TWICE this.
I can see why the E busway would be useful, but congestion issues downtown need to be sorted first, as well as funding from the infrastructure fairy gods...

[SurfRail]

Surely what you have just posted shows a 4km/h difference due to stopping patterns.

Que?

[somebody]

25.26 - 25.1 = 4.16km/h
(200)   (204)

[Mr X]

25.26 - 25.1 = 4.16km/h
(200)   (204)

:conf

[SurfRail]

25.26 - 25.1 = 4.16km/h
(200)   (204)

It shows the 204 is slower than the 200.  No kidding - we knew that. 

Look at the numbers for the 760.  Faster than the express even though the stops are more than twice as close together all the way along!

The 760 is only representative of the other routes trafficking the corridor in various places - 700, 702, 706, 761, 765 etc.  They all have the same stopping pattern and around the same travel times over the common stretches.  By having all the buses doing the same thing, you get concentrated frequency and avoid the need for duplication of service and infrastructure.

If the GC Hwy corridor can achieve this without express routes, why is it so hard for Brisbane?

[somebody]

Couldn't the 760 being faster be due to less frequent red traffic lights and/or less intense other traffic?

Only way that proves anything is if the general traffic speed around the same time is the same.

[SurfRail]

Couldn't the 760 being faster be due to less frequent red traffic lights and/or less intense other traffic?

Only way that proves anything is if the general traffic speed around the same time is the same.

The Gold Coast Highway south of Broadbeach is not that indistinguishable from other busy State controlled roads of about the same lane configuration, like Old Cleveland Road, especially (as you will note) I have picked 10am as the time of comparison.

Also plenty of signalised intersections, and not all of them have bus jump lanes.

[somebody]

FWIW, Old Cleveland Rd ranks as the number 3 worst road in the 2010 RACQ study, here: http://www.racq.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/56622/RACQ_2010_Red_Spot_Survey.pdf

Gold Coast Hwy doesn't get a rank.

I still want a traffic speed though.

[Gazza]

I don't get why it has to be skewed so far one way or the other.

I mean at present it's a slow all stopper, or a BUZ that bypasses a lot of people that probably should have a frequent service closer to them (Living in blocks of flats etc), and its not as if there is any rhyme or reason to where the express stops are. It's not like say on the rail network, where the express stop of Indooroopilly is chosen because its a major destination in itself.

Why does the 222 stop at Kismet St but the 200 doesn't for instance?

Don't get me wrong, I totally see the merit in keeping stops a decent distance apart for faster travel, because travelling on ones like the 199 is horribly slow at times.
At the same time I think 600m spacing is bang on, and its not too close at all. Its the right balance between keeping the bus moving, but at the same time making it reasonably accessible to the population that lives around it.

[somebody]

Why does the 222 stop at Kismet St but the 200 doesn't for instance?

That's the most stupid part.

I mean at present it's a slow all stopper, or a BUZ that bypasses a lot of people that probably should have a frequent service closer to them (Living in blocks of flats etc), and its not as if there is any rhyme or reason to where the express stops are. It's not like say on the rail network, where the express stop of Indooroopilly is chosen because its a major destination in itself.

However, Cribb St, Wesley Hospital and Indooroopilly school less so, and BBC, Auchenflower much less so.

I wouldn't have a problem in principal with culling some stops from the 204.  If 200/222 are currently serving every 3rd stop it's a bit hard though.

[SurfRail]

I'm yet to be convinced that doing away with parallel services is anything other than ideal.  Everybody should have good frequency if possible - this just denies it, whereas you can just consolidate the frequency and properly serve every stop with a consistent stopping pattern if you review spacings.

The Gold Coast Highway gets away with one every 400m on average, but I wouldn't be arguing for that everywhere because the GC Hwy is nice and straight and is trafficked by a lot of unfamiliar passengers.  600m seems perfectly reasonable in other parts, and there are bus routes on the Coast where the average probably exceeds that already. 

I am not in favour of having council cabs provide coverage services along main roads, because they are generally much more expensive to run.  The best outcome is to have better average stop spacing and limit that type of coverage to where buses don't penetrate at all.  BCC's stop placement is quite bad in that respect, and is probably one of the reasons they implemented so many express services in the first place.

[somebody]

And equally I'm yet to be convinced that it is ideal.

Surely patronage is the ultimate performance indicator.  If we accept that we should be able to get an answer in an ideal world with perfect info.  As it is, we're both just guessing really.

[SurfRail]

And equally I'm yet to be convinced that it is ideal.

Surely patronage is the ultimate performance indicator.  If we accept that we should be able to get an answer in an ideal world with perfect info.  As it is, we're both just guessing really.

Gold Coast Highway is around 10-11 million per annum last figures I saw, around half of Surfside's patronage.  Admittedly I could not claim to know the OC Rd figures, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn it is similar - especially if you include the Veolia routes (and why wouldn't they)?

[somebody]

Let's be clear: you are against having an 8 minute headway from QSBS A for the O-C Rd corridor from basically the same resources which are employed presently.   

You're so funny.

Say what?  I never said that!

I'll never understand why you would ever want to do something like this:

I did, and I think what I'm saying is rather reasonable and logical.

Route 222 - Carindale to Roma Street BUZ via Old Cleveland Rd (or higher frequency)
Route 204 - Carindale to City via Old Cleveland Rd All Stops
Route 205 - Carindale Heights to City (QSBS) via Chatsworth Rd BUZ
Route 250 - As current, express Carindale to Stones Corner
Route 202 - Leave as is - All stops alternative to route 205.

So still with the divided city stop locations 

Either you believe there is no possible patronage increase above 15 minutes frequencies, or you don't care because it doesn't fit your world view.  Probably doesn't matter which; either way, it's just daft.  Just like Translink.

[achiruel]

My ideas for Carindale Routes (not only via OC Rd)

1. 222 Carindale - City (Roma St)via OC Rd, Eastern Busway & Cultural Centre Express (every 5 min peak/10 off-peak/15 after 9pm)
2. 202 Carindale - City (Roma St)via Winstanley St/Samuel St/Chatsworth Rd/Logan Rd/Stanley St/Main St/Story Bridge/Gipps St/Barrry Pde/Brunswick St to RBWH and then via INB to Roma St (if this is even possible?) (all stops) (10 minutes peak/15 off-peak/30 evenings)
3. 204 Carindale - Woollongabba via OC Rd, Deshon St, Logan Rd, Stanley St, Woolloongabba Busway Stn (all stops) (10 minutes peak/15 off-peak/30 evenings)
4. 205 Carindale Heights - City (Roma St) via Winstanley St/Samuel St/Chatsworth Rd/SEB/Capt Cook Bridge Express (BUZ)
5. 209 Carindale - UQ via EB Express (current frequency)
6. 212 Carindale - Woolloongabba via Stanley Rd/McIlwraith Ave/Stanley St East (maybe a 211 Rocket non-stop from Norman Pk station?) (10 minutes peak/15 off-peak/30 evenings)

I'd do a map but for some reason Google Maps is incredibly slow for me right now.

[somebody]

2. 202 Carindale - City (Roma St)via Winstanley St/Samuel St/Chatsworth Rd/Logan Rd/Stanley St/Main St/Story Bridge/Gipps St/Barrry Pde/Brunswick St to RBWH and then via INB to Roma St (if this is even possible?) (all stops) (10 minutes peak/15 off-peak/30 evenings)

I think it's possible.  I'm guessing the theory is that it allows interchange with O-C Rd routes at Stones Corner.

Your interchange isn't very nice though.

[O_128]

Extend the 222 to the sleeman sports centre!

[somebody]

Extend the 222 to the sleeman sports centre!

I'd go to Capalaba.  Who cares about the BCC border?

[Gazza]

+1 to that. If they want to spend billions to get a busway out there, at the very least it should have one high frequency route until then!

[mufreight]

Extend the 222 to the sleeman sports centre!

I'd go to Capalaba.  Who cares about the BCC border?

With Translink this now mythical operations border for any licenced operator means nothing and there  nothing now to prevent BT operation services as a contracted service provider outside the boundarys of the city of Brisbane

[Arnz]

BT already serve Strathpine and that's in the Moreton Bay Region council area.

[HappyTrainGuy]

BT already serve Strathpine and that's in the Moreton Bay Region council area.

Be it half assed. BT also serves Sandgate too although they do it as an interchange before running to Bridgeman Downs/Strathpine/Chermside.

[Golliwog]

And they serve Ferny Hills and Arana Hills with the 396/7/8

[Gazza]

Extend the 222 to the sleeman sports centre!

I'd go to Capalaba.  Who cares about the BCC border?

With Translink this now mythical operations border for any licenced operator means nothing and there  nothing now to prevent BT operation services as a contracted service provider outside the boundarys of the city of Brisbane

IMO there should be no borders at all. TL designs a particular service, and then each individual route should be bid on by any operator that wishes to. This skews things towards operators who are geographically closer to the route in question, since they will be able to run it. This would mean stuff like the Richlands-Springfield bus would be done by BT rather than Westside, saving taxpayers money through reduced dead running.

[achiruel]

BT also serve Browns Plains which is in Logan City (140/141/142/150) although I believe the 14x is shared with PRT.

[SurfRail]

Extend the 222 to the sleeman sports centre!

I'd go to Capalaba.  Who cares about the BCC border?

With Translink this now mythical operations border for any licenced operator means nothing and there  nothing now to prevent BT operation services as a contracted service provider outside the boundarys of the city of Brisbane

IMO there should be no borders at all. TL designs a particular service, and then each individual route should be bid on by any operator that wishes to. This skews things towards operators who are geographically closer to the route in question, since they will be able to run it. This would mean stuff like the Richlands-Springfield bus would be done by BT rather than Westside, saving taxpayers money through reduced dead running.

To get the best benefit here you need to take the buses off the council.  The State pays for most of the cost of acquisition and running combined, so it is rankly unfair that BCC has any say about where they will operate.

[somebody]

First step would be allowing others to tender for some of their work.  Another operator isn't going to take the entire basket in one go.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Who said just one provider had to operate one route. Why not share them ie depending on the time of day.

[SurfRail]

First step would be allowing others to tender for some of their work.  Another operator isn't going to take the entire basket in one go.

The State can administer the network until operators can be found to take on the allocation. 

I don't necessarily agree with doing away with contract regions, because that approach does create efficiencies of its own (ie give a depot and certain buses to one operator for routes in the adjacent area so as to limit dead running).  You could just divvy BCC into contract regions based on depot locations and farm them out to Transfield/Veolia/ATE/whoever else wants to have a go and has a viable business plan.