James' New Brisbane West Bus Network

[James]

I originally had the intentions of submitting this for the TransLink bus review, although as it turned out the thing got canned by BCC. So I had been working on this for the past little while on and off, and I've finally finished it.

Attached is a fully-costed bus network review for the Western Suburbs requiring minimal additional route kms. If reductions were necessary, reductions could still occur on the secondary routes while still providing better service than what exists today. I think most of what I need to say is in that pdf and in the image. Nitpick me as necessary. Frequency of all routes has been fully costed as to ensure this review is more or less cost and route-km neutral.



For those who want to see the entire network in detail, there is a very large image file for viewing here. Note that it is not in your best interests to open this on any mobile device due to its size.

Footnotes:
1. GCL, Sherwood Road and Yeronga bus routes are not included in this review. The only changes to be implemented to these routes in the review is the steam-ironing of the Great Circle Line between Toowong and Bardon down Metroad 5.
2. P419 follows current P443 alignment, P431 follows current P456 alignment and P432 follows current P445 alignment. P-rockets are not shown on the map for simplicity. Aside from P424 (shown on map), there are no other P-rockets in the bus network review.

[techblitz]

so how many routes are currently starting & terminating at indro now as compared to your truncation suggestions?
rather curious...

[James]

Current Indro terminators:
Weekdays:
468
106
105/108
Weekends:
435
105
106 (Saturday only)

Future Indro terminators:
421 (current 430/445)
422 (current 430/432/433)
P424 (current 427)
426 (part 428, part new service)
428 (current 435)
433 (current 453 + 460 south of Mt Omm)
435 (current 468 + 101/102)
105/108

So we would have 9 routes terminating at Indooroopilly. Only 7 of those routes would genuinely be feeding bus/rail (P424 is not a feeder, 105/108 has very few transfer pax). Current system has 3.

[techblitz]

which ones do you have passing through indro and onto UQ instead of the city? Map is a bit blurry for my computer...
TL only planned to terminate 1 or 2 at indro as far as I know and send majority of feeders to UQ (for obvious reasons)

[#Metro]

Excellent work! 

[James]

which ones do you have passing through indro and onto UQ instead of the city? Map is a bit blurry for my computer...
TL only planned to terminate 1 or 2 at indro as far as I know and send majority of feeders to UQ (for obvious reasons)

There is a little link you can click on below the pic which shows the photo in full resolution - note that it is very large.

The 420 CFN and 425 CFN both continue to UQ. The reason why I've terminated most routes at Indooroopilly is because under the former bus review, none of the routes going to UQ were frequent.
Once the review was implemented, I saw this as becoming:
a) Unnecessarily complex, as people try and rattle off the six bus routes which run down Swann Road (it was going to end up like Coro Drive)
b) Layover space at UQ is already at capacity (there are frequently buses parked at the Picardy Road stop because the bus layover area is full, and that doesn't even deal with the 402/412)
c) A timetabling nightmare, when during weekends and Uni break (especially) when demand is lower, being forced to terminate certain buses at Indooroopilly - network complexity.
d) Empty buses in peak, as not everybody is going to UQ.

This change also compensates former users of the 417. People on the western part of Swann Road will now ideally will now catch counter-peak 420s and feed to rail. My only concern is with the 425 being CFN that UQ may very well be over saturated with frequency during weekends. That could easily be solved by chopping that off at Indro and sending the 422 there instead (on non-CFN frequency).

If all of a sudden we see a dramatic increase in patronage and all the buses to UQ go out with standing loads, great, then we can look at adding more services. Same for CBD services. But before we do that, we firstly have to stimulate that demand. And right now there is a lot of air floating around in the western suburbs bus network, even in the middle of peak.

[James]

Is there anything further anybody has to add? Any holes that other people in the west can see but I can't?

[aldonius]

Something I've just realised: you have the new-411 turning right from Bellevue Pde to Indooroopilly Rd - isn't that technically not permitted at present?

[STB]

I'd be factoring some sort of measurement (eg: patronage) for your rationale for changing the route structure, which TL do quite a bit and would be looking for for any public report, such as this.

[Gazza]

One thing that kind of sticks out as odd to me is that Mt Cootha gets a single seat journey to the CBD, but Hawken Drive doesn't....I'd be inclined to switch the routings (411 to City via Milton Rd, Mt Cootha to Toowong)

People who still want a direct trip to Mt Cootha should use the city sights bus

[James]

Something I've just realised: you have the new-411 turning right from Bellevue Pde to Indooroopilly Rd - isn't that technically not permitted at present?

The 417 does it, so I don't see why the new 411 wouldn't be allowed to do it?

The reason why I sent it by there is because not providing the retirement home there with a service (along with the fact there are a number of elderly residents in this area) would shoot down 411 CFN in one foul swoop. This little section deals with the only really useful section of the 417 as well.

I'd be factoring some sort of measurement (eg: patronage) for your rationale for changing the route structure, which TL do quite a bit and would be looking for for any public report, such as this.

I'm going by mostly anecdotal evidence, TransLink's own basic figures and applying the concept of terminate and transfer.

Lets use the 460. I figure that this route should only run to Richlands. BUT a Mt Ommaney connection is important, but it is a bit of a dead end. Now the 453 should terminate at Indooroopilly. Outside of peak, feeding to rail is a backwards step. I thus combined the 460 south of Mt Ommaney with a revised 453 between Mt Ommaney and Indooroopilly and cut said route at Indooroopilly. Large amounts of stuff is based off what you see in the TL bus review. Both 430 BUZ and 440 BUZ are exact copies of what was stated in the review, minus the section of the 440 BUZ west of Mt Ommaney (as I felt 7.5 minute frequency through Riverhills was overkill).

425 CFN is one of the routes which uses the terminate and transfer concept. Cut the route at Indooroopilly, and as it is replacing the 428 as well, extend the thing to UQ. Same can be seen with 421, 422 and 428. 420 CFN just uses what was stated in the bus review but increases the frequency. As much as I would have loved to reduce the frequency to Moggill, it is de-BUZing the 444 which single-handedly killed the review in the western suburbs.

The St Lucia Local in TransLink's review was an awful route, 411 CFN/420 CFN/425 CFN looks after practically most of the St Lucia Local's former route in a much nicer and more efficient fashion which improves connections. It was very much obvious that that route had coverage in mind, all these routes have patronage in mind. Route modifications in the Inala area were done to ensure most passengers remained within 400m of a bus service, which aside from 440 BUZ and the 433 (which on my map I've called the 432 - whoops!), are coverage routes.

My review has shades of TransLink's review all over it, I have just gone to the extent of costing the thing and modifying some routes. If I had access to TransLink's figures of course I'd be able to do a better job, but I don't, so I had to go on what I saw TransLink do and what the review rated each route as.

[Gazza]

Couple of other thoughts

-432...What do you think of sending it via Progress Rd , Wacol Station Rd and Sumners Rd, rather than via the Centenary?

Is a couple of km longer, but it does mean that stretch of Sumner Rd near the tavern doesn't get missed, interchange at Wacol, some service to the industrial estate...

-421...Send via Cuberrla St, past Fig Tree Pocket PS & Jesmond Rd rather than going up and back gunnin st.
The road layout would allow a bus to do this.

-410...Nerdy detail, but number as 409 in keeping with other UQ routes.

-455...Inclined to send it down Park Road. Same length and it can't hurt to market it as a 'cafe route' and get a few tourist pax on it.

-GCL1...Consider routing around Toowong to make access to UQ routes as easy as possible from the northside.

-GCL2...Could be shortened slightly by not going all the way around Indro...Just send it up station rd.

[James]

Couple of other thoughts

-432...What do you think of sending it via Progress Rd , Wacol Station Rd and Sumners Rd, rather than via the Centenary?

Is a couple of km longer, but it does mean that stretch of Sumner Rd near the tavern doesn't get missed, interchange at Wacol, some service to the industrial estate...

-421...Send via Cuberrla St, past Fig Tree Pocket PS & Jesmond Rd rather than going up and back gunnin st.
The road layout would allow a bus to do this.

-410...Nerdy detail, but number as 409 in keeping with other UQ routes.

-455...Inclined to send it down Park Road. Same length and it can't hurt to market it as a 'cafe route' and get a few tourist pax on it.

-GCL1...Consider routing around Toowong to make access to UQ routes as easy as possible from the northside.

-GCL2...Could be shortened slightly by not going all the way around Indro...Just send it up station rd.

432 - I don't think there's much of a market for interchange at Wacol, especially given cross-town links to Goodna already exist in Forest Lake, and it is simply one stop from Richlands to Darra and change there. That route goes through a whole lot of nothing as well. At least while the 432 goes through a lot of nothing between Richlands and Mt Ommaney, at least it does that nothing quickly.

Sumners Road is not very pedestrian friendly either, and most are within semi-walking distance (800m) of the frequent route. Not to mention the area doesn't currently have a full time service -> less backlash if one doesn't service there. Sending the bus that way also adds a lot of route km for not much gain. The 451 doesn't get good patronage by any means, admittedly it is set up for failure though. If resources became available I'd seek to send a Darra feeder bus down Sumners Road before I send the 432 there.

421 - Valid point, once again, me copy-pasting the TL bus review. Falls under the same case as the 432 via Wacol. Is it worth serving these residents in exchange for giving the residents in Mandalay a longer trip? I'd look to see whether there's a market for it. It's more simple than just adding on an extra few hundred metres a la serving Norman St.

410 - Numbered that way because of the trunk/feeder system. Notice that every trunk route ends in 0. 411/425 keep their numbers mostly for legacy reasons, and the fact in my review I hadn't actually planned on making the 425 CFN - it just happened I could scrape the resources together to do that.

455 - The reason why it is via Milton Rd is thanks to the original 'super stops' idea the review caters towards. I'd look at whether the demand is there. The stop is awfully close to the Cribb St stop which will have a bus every 7.5 minutes 6am - 11pm, and a train line quite close too at 15 minute frequency. I'm indifferent as to whether this occurs though, if the 455 ends up using the same stop as the 410/430, so be it.

GCL 1 - Fair point.

GCL 2 - Nothing around the Indooroopilly terminus is confirmed at this point. This is something I haven't delved into in the review, but I've considered three options with relation to pax changing to buses/trains.
1. No rail interchange for non-UQ routes (i.e. terminate Indro terminators at the bus station).
Least ideal option, but requires the least infrastructure. Buses could just go around the corner and sit on the railway side of the shopping centre.
2. Interchange at the Coonan Street Stops
Buses would proceed down Station Road, then on to Coonan Street. Buses would stop there, and then proceed over the bridge to terminate. I suggest buying the former Nelson Place retirement home (I think?) site and pouring asphalt on it. The big downside is buses stopping there block traffic, not to mention that footpath could be hazardous come people going to walk down the stairs when changing to a train inbound.
3. Interchange at the Lambert Road Stops
Buses would proceed down Station Road, Westminster St, Clarence Rd and to the stop the current 427/428/432 use. The biggest issue with this one is figuring out where to send the out of service buses to layover. This option also could run into serious congestion in peak due to the multiple schools in the area. Pax also need to cross a road for interchange inbound, and do face a considerable walk.

Of course, long-term a rail-bus interchange (like what has been discussed on this forum) will need to be built, but that's another thing.

I am erring towards option #2. If you did the bus stop effectively and forced cars to merge a bit earlier/split a bit later in the opposite direction, I think you could make it work and negate those pedestrian access issues. On the Eldorado side (Indro-bound stop), there should be enough room for some form of bus pull-in to be built. Option #2 does screw with legibility to a degree though - signage would fix that though.

One thing that kind of sticks out as odd to me is that Mt Cootha gets a single seat journey to the CBD, but Hawken Drive doesn't....I'd be inclined to switch the routings (411 to City via Milton Rd, Mt Cootha to Toowong)

People who still want a direct trip to Mt Cootha should use the city sights bus

The current 411's high route-km (thanks to non-awful off-peak frequency) puts a lot of funds towards the new 411 CFN. Milton Road also really isn't that high demand, and Mt Coot-tha deserves decent frequency. CitySights bus is really pricey, and Mt Coot-tha is suffering from some parking issues I believe thanks to the fact the 471 is an inferior service.

[Gazza]

Mt Coot-tha deserves decent frequency.

I disagree. It's perhaps one of the least important routes in the network.

If you are driving up there, chances some are probably going to stop at one of the other picnic grounds on the tourist drive, and you need a car to get to those.

[Gazza]

421 - Valid point, once again, me copy-pasting the TL bus review. Falls under the same case as the 432 via Wacol. Is it worth serving these residents in exchange for giving the residents in Mandalay a longer trip? I'd look to see whether there's a market for it. It's more simple than just adding on an extra few hundred metres a la serving Norman St.

I think once you get very close to a terminus it's fine to do a bit more coverage (Think of the loop the 444 does at Bellbowrie)

And its not really much worse than the inefficient up/back and U-turn the route does along Gunnin st.

[James]

I disagree. It's perhaps one of the least important routes in the network.

If you are driving up there, chances some are probably going to stop at one of the other picnic grounds on the tourist drive, and you need a car to get to those.

Disagree again. The 471 will often go out with decent loads thanks to tourist traffic. And we are talking about an hourly (or worse) urban safari route here. Maybe there'd be merit in bending the route back to Toowong at night or having every second trip go to Toowong.

[James]

I've got a map of just the frequent network here. Note that west of a line stretching from along Pallara to Rocklea then up through Tennyson and following the Brisbane River to the CBD, all former areas covered by the current frequent network are covered under the new frequent network. No cuts here. 



Notice how nicely St Lucia, Toowong and Taringa are covered by the combination of the 410, 411 and 430. The 420/430 round out Indooroopilly/Taringa east nicely IMO, and given the new route serving Kenmore is almost frequent, I think the western suburbs as far as Kenmore will be completely covered by frequent routes.

[ozbob]

Media release 15th October 2012



SEQ: BCC Bus Review Fail a Raw Deal for Brisbane and SEQ

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport believes that the Brisbane City Council bus review is not making an appropriate amount of service changes and is continuing to support low frequency routes with significant amounts of duplication, leading to ongoing high fares and high subsidy, and consequently stagnating patronage.  Wastage in the Brisbane bus region means less service funds for the other bus regions of SEQ.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Brisbane City Council's bus review stage two was implemented yesterday but does not go far enough with proposed network changes."

"A RAIL Back On Track member has suggested by reducing the number of bus routes along Coronation Drive from 24 to 8 and feeding customers to Indooroopilly and Toowong railway stations, the number of frequent bus routes in the western suburbs can be increased from the current three to up to six, including a west Toowong/Taringa feeder bus which increases the number of bus services in these areas from four services on a Sunday to 60, and improves frequency in many areas from hourly to every 15 minutes. [1]"

Such a review would provide six frequent routes, including: - Frequent route running from UQ to Indooroopilly via Toowong, increasing frequency for users of the 411, 414, 415, 470 and parts of the 417 - Frequent route from UQ to Moggill, allowing for passengers from Moggill to be fed to rail and provide a frequent route to UQ from Indooroopilly along Swann Road - Frequent route to the Centenary suburbs, a current PT black hole

"While this concept only covers Brisbane's western suburbs, this concept can be expanded to cover the bus networks in all parts of Brisbane - whether it be north or south of the river!"

"If Brisbane City Council was legitimate about its claims to look after the ratepayers of Brisbane, it would move away from the mantra of a direct service network model and instead move towards a legible, frequent, connective network like that which is outlined in this suggested network."

References:

1. James' New Brisbane West Bus Network http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10275.0

2. Map of Frequent Network Brisbane West http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10275.msg133256#msg133256

Contact:

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

[ozbob]

Media release 19th October 2013



SEQ: Brisbane bus network failure - again

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 says that BCC's failure to adequately reform the bus network and either terminate buses at Indooroopilly or send them to UQ and encourage pax to transfer to rail is a public transport disaster, and leads to massive delays across the public transport network.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Last evening, due to a rain event which occurred several hours prior to peak hour, traffic along Coronation Drive was banked back as far as the University of Queensland and Gailey Fiveways. Such severe traffic congestion frequently occurs whenever it rains. This severe congestion caused significant delays for all bus passengers, meaning for some passengers, it was faster to walk to their final destination."

"Buses running to the CBD to form outbound peak services were also significantly affected, resulting in chaos at CBD stops with bus services being delayed at their origin for up to half an hour."

"A shift to a connective bus network in the western suburbs which connects to rail and encourages passengers to transfer at Toowong and Indooroopilly would help prevent buses being caught in congestion, reduce the amount of dead running and allow for more frequent services (1). This means even if there are road delays, they do not cause as much inconvenience."

"The bus pictured below was running over 45 minutes behind schedule (2). Passengers were better off walking to Toowong."



References:

1. James' New Brisbane West Bus Network
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10275.0

2. https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/1379674_751378791554367_121052777_n.jpg

Contact:

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