Rod Harding promises to fix Brisbane Buses

[v6hilux]

Just saw his head on the news - Rod Harding want's to be the boss of Brisbane Council after the March 2016 council election and promises to fix the buses.

[SurfRail]

The best thing any candidates running for BCC at an election can do to "fix" the buses is to hand them over to the State and exit the field.

[James]

I've generally become sceptical of anybody pledging to "fix" any bus service after the farce that was the SEQ Bus Network review.

Is he going to properly fix the buses (as in tearing the MaroonGlider into pieces, introducing proper high frequency service to areas that need it, feeding buses to trains) or is he going to "fix" the buses (i.e. more frequent direct services to the City, ensuring services run on time, soft efficiencies). The latter would be much welcomed, but won't come without a rate rise and won't solve the actual problem.

I don't care how the service is fixed, I just want to see it fixed - whether that be competitive tendering, sacking the current bus-centric BT planners at the helm, uploading BT to the State Govt. or something more radical.

[ozbob]

It is beyond terminal ... fix the buses? Sure thing ...   

[Stillwater]

Mr Harding wants to be a politician, say no more.  When not in power, aspirant politicians promise any thing people want.  In power they become politicians and say things like:

I have made it a priority to talk to the unions and the state government to sort that out
I have appointed a committee to look at that
I am awaiting advice from my department/council
I will move immediately to appoint outside consultants to have a look at that
While that remains a priority, I am looking at this other thing for the time being
I said I would look at that in my first term, so it is early days yet
We need to get this right, we have only one change to do it, so I will be launching a broad-ranging public consultation exercise as the first stage
This will cost money, and we don't yet have it -- this matter becomes one of fiscal rectitude

There are numerous other replies, but you get the picture.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th March 2015

Bus Cost Explosion To Engulf Lord Mayor Graham Quirk?

Greetings,

New Bus Network Proposal (Updated)
http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Current Brisbane City Council Bus Network
http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus

Report: Frequency is Freedom
http://backontrack.org/docs/bus/reform/BusReformBlueprint.pdf

RAIL Back on Track is aware that ALP Lord Mayor challenger, Rod Harding has promised to fix Brisbane's Bus Network.

Our view is our Brisbane bus network must be reformed. Brisbane's sister city, Auckland (NZ) has gone through the process, and it is delivering record bus patronage at a time when our bus patronage has stagnated and fallen. Graham Quirk's bus network simply does not work as part of a connected sustainable public transport network.

Graham Quirk's bus network is riddled with waste, duplication, inefficiency, slow and tangled routes, complicated routes and black holes - entire suburbs that have poverty of service. This creates massive pressure to push up fares.

Our members have over 12 months, analysed Graham Quirk's bus network, and independently developed a high-quality New Bus Network Proposal for Brisbane. We even ran the public consultation ourselves.

Our New Bus Network Proposal is available online, along with public feedback and the entire network plan, for free.

Bus reform means Brisbane will have Australia's best bus network within 2 years flat. Because existing resources are recycled, our bus reform proposal is near cost-neutral to proceed with and requires no new major infrastructure, guaranteeing rapid delivery.

Ultimately, any solution must include transferring the bus operations away from Brisbane City Council, as we believe irreconcilable institutional differences between Brisbane City Council and the Queensland Government has caused this situation to come about.

RAIL Back on Track is politically independent, and we are happy to talk with anyone who will listen about our ideas. All that needs to be done is just approach and ask us.

Fix the buses?  Let's do it!

Best wishes,
Robert

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

References:

Labor's Rod Harding to take on Graham Quirk in Brisbane lord mayoral race
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/labors-rod-harding-to-take-on-graham-quirk-in-brisbane-lord-mayoral-race-20150310-13zrbl.html

Brisbane Bus Survey: Jackie Trad Must Fix Graham Quirk's Bus Network
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11315.0

[Stillwater]

a very good media statement 

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th March 2015

Bus Cost Explosion To Engulf Lord Mayor Graham Quirk?

Greetings,

New Bus Network Proposal (Updated)
http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Current Brisbane City Council Bus Network
http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus

Report: Frequency is Freedom
http://backontrack.org/docs/bus/reform/BusReformBlueprint.pdf

RAIL Back on Track is aware that ALP Lord Mayor challenger, Rod Harding has promised to fix Brisbane's Bus Network.

Our view is our Brisbane bus network must be reformed. Brisbane's sister city, Auckland (NZ) has gone through the process, and it is delivering record bus patronage at a time when our bus patronage has stagnated and fallen. Graham Quirk's bus network simply does not work as part of a connected sustainable public transport network.

Graham Quirk's bus network is riddled with waste, duplication, inefficiency, slow and tangled routes, complicated routes and black holes - entire suburbs that have poverty of service. This creates massive pressure to push up fares.

Our members have over 12 months, analysed Graham Quirk's bus network, and independently developed a high-quality New Bus Network Proposal for Brisbane. We even ran the public consultation ourselves.

Our New Bus Network Proposal is available online, along with public feedback and the entire network plan, for free.

Bus reform means Brisbane will have Australia's best bus network within 2 years flat. Because existing resources are recycled, our bus reform proposal is near cost-neutral to proceed with and requires no new major infrastructure, guaranteeing rapid delivery.

Ultimately, any solution must include transferring the bus operations away from Brisbane City Council, as we believe irreconcilable institutional differences between Brisbane City Council and the Queensland Government has caused this situation to come about.

RAIL Back on Track is politically independent, and we are happy to talk with anyone who will listen about our ideas. All that needs to be done is just approach and ask us.

Fix the buses?  Let's do it!

Best wishes,
Robert

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

References:

Labor's Rod Harding to take on Graham Quirk in Brisbane lord mayoral race
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/labors-rod-harding-to-take-on-graham-quirk-in-brisbane-lord-mayoral-race-20150310-13zrbl.html

Brisbane Bus Survey: Jackie Trad Must Fix Graham Quirk's Bus Network
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11315.0

Fairfax radio news has followed this is up.  Thanks for the interest!   

[hU0N]

I've generally become sceptical of anybody pledging to "fix" any bus service after the farce that was the SEQ Bus Network review.

Is he going to properly fix the buses (as in tearing the MaroonGlider into pieces, introducing proper high frequency service to areas that need it, feeding buses to trains) or is he going to "fix" the buses (i.e. more frequent direct services to the City, ensuring services run on time, soft efficiencies). The latter would be much welcomed, but won't come without a rate rise and won't solve the actual problem.

I don't care how the service is fixed, I just want to see it fixed - whether that be competitive tendering, sacking the current bus-centric BT planners at the helm, uploading BT to the State Govt. or something more radical.

The Maroon Glider performs a very useful function in providing service to what would otherwise be a black hole centred on the Jubilee The (Effie St) stop. If bus services in this area were to be rationalised, 377 and 378 should be the first to go. These services feature two hour headways; ALL stops on the route located 400m or less from either the 61, 380 or 385; and routeings that bypass all the local trip generators.

For that matter, you could divert the 385 to cover the Jubilee The (Effie St) stop and return to Coopers Camp Rd via Leslie and Fletcher (this would require the Coopers Camp Road stop moved to the western side of the Fletcher Parade intersection, about 60m from where it currently is). If you did that, you could get rid of 377, 378 and 61 without any loss of coverage.

[techblitz]

^good suggestions for the west but for the part that matters.....east of CC

[James]

The Maroon Glider performs a very useful function in providing service to what would otherwise be a black hole centred on the Jubilee The (Effie St) stop. If bus services in this area were to be rationalised, 377 and 378 should be the first to go. These services feature two hour headways; ALL stops on the route located 400m or less from either the 61, 380 or 385; and routeings that bypass all the local trip generators.

For that matter, you could divert the 385 to cover the Jubilee The (Effie St) stop and return to Coopers Camp Rd via Leslie and Fletcher (this would require the Coopers Camp Road stop moved to the western side of the Fletcher Parade intersection, about 60m from where it currently is). If you did that, you could get rid of 377, 378 and 61 without any loss of coverage.

A black hole consisting of a single stop! My heavens to goodness, a single stop will lose service!!! Diverting the 385, like you suggest, would be grossly inconvenient to 385 users further along the bus route and add significant service-km for minimal gain.

377 and 378 serve a coverage purpose, while MGLD serves a patronage purpose. If you simply improved the GCL to run 6am - 9pm 7 days a week on 30 minute frequency, this would no longer be an issue - pax can transfer at Bardon. 385 can be retained, MGLD burned at the stake, problem solved.

[hU0N]

A single stop it might be, but it is the ONLY reliable bus service for about 600 or so houses.  The 377 and 378 don't count precisely because they are designed for a coverage purpose, and therefore are inherently not useful.

I get that the 61 and the 385 pretty much shadow each other the whole way to Bardon, which is wasteful, so one of them should go.  To put this decision in perspective though, cutting the 385 would reduce peak hour service to The Gap by just 25%, while cutting the 61 would reduce peak hour service to Bardon by 100%.  Why is it that The Gap deserves sooooooooooooooooooooooooo much service, and the better part of Bardon deserves none.

In the final washup, the 385 might have been around longer, but it doesn't do anything that the 380 group doesn't already do, except provide service to one stop on Coopers Camp Road.  With this in mind, why should the 385 be sacrosanct?  Why shouldn't the western half of the 61 be prefered, when it is clearly at least as good a route, and possibly a better one (especially if it could be rejigged to cover Coopers Camp Road)?

[James]

A single stop it might be, but it is the ONLY reliable bus service for about 600 or so houses.  The 377 and 378 don't count precisely because they are designed for a coverage purpose, and therefore are inherently not useful.

I get that the 61 and the 385 pretty much shadow each other the whole way to Bardon, which is wasteful, so one of them should go.  To put this decision in perspective though, cutting the 385 would reduce peak hour service to The Gap by just 25%, while cutting the 61 would reduce peak hour service to Bardon by 100%.  Why is it that The Gap deserves sooooooooooooooooooooooooo much service, and the better part of Bardon deserves none.

In the final washup, the 385 might have been around longer, but it doesn't do anything that the 380 group doesn't already do, except provide service to one stop on Coopers Camp Road.  With this in mind, why should the 385 be sacrosanct?  Why shouldn't the western half of the 61 be prefered, when it is clearly at least as good a route, and possibly a better one (especially if it could be rejigged to cover Coopers Camp Road)?

It is the only reliable bus service for 600 homes because that is the current design of the network.

If you re-designed the network, you could have a frequent route serving the stop (a revamped GCL), and hence you would retain a reliable bus service to those 600 homes. Sure, they would have to transfer to reach the CBD, but if that's the only argument you can come up with to save the MaroonGlider, it is pretty safe to say the route should be cut.

The 385 deserves retention because it is a proven bus service. It was one of the best performing BUZ services in Brisbane, and just because The Gap may get a 380 BUZ, doesn't mean a 385 BUZ can't also serve it in order to get comprehensive high-frequency coverage of the area. Also, what is "The Gap" and what is "Bardon"? The other part of Bardon actually has the 375, 385, MGLD and a bunch of other rockets I can't bear to think of.

[newbris]

The Maroon Glider performs a very useful function in providing service to what would otherwise be a black hole centred on the Jubilee The (Effie St) stop. If bus services in this area were to be rationalised, 377 and 378 should be the first to go. These services feature two hour headways; ALL stops on the route located 400m or less from either the 61, 380 or 385; and routeings that bypass all the local trip generators.

For that matter, you could divert the 385 to cover the Jubilee The (Effie St) stop and return to Coopers Camp Rd via Leslie and Fletcher (this would require the Coopers Camp Road stop moved to the western side of the Fletcher Parade intersection, about 60m from where it currently is). If you did that, you could get rid of 377, 378 and 61 without any loss of coverage.

A black hole consisting of a single stop! My heavens to goodness, a single stop will lose service!!! Diverting the 385, like you suggest, would be grossly inconvenient to 385 users further along the bus route and add significant service-km for minimal gain.

377 and 378 serve a coverage purpose, while MGLD serves a patronage purpose. If you simply improved the GCL to run 6am - 9pm 7 days a week on 30 minute frequency, this would no longer be an issue - pax can transfer at Bardon. 385 can be retained, MGLD burned at the stake, problem solved.

As someone who lives locally I don't agree with this. The glider provides the only cross town link in this super hilly area at the moment for people who want to move between the major centres of Paddington, Bardon and Ashgrove. I don't agree it is 1 stop.

All the other routes are radial into town. The glider has performed a very key cross town function "between" the steep terrace hills, rather than along them like most other routes.

Waiting instead for a 30 minute frequency jubilee tce bus and then a connection to travel a few stops to paddington makes an existing 8 min trip possibly 30 min (after two avg waits and travel time) for a few stops. It also cancels out all the after nighttime footy transport (the gap already has a dedicated footy bus) and after dinner, after movies, after drinks transport. The extensive onwards to other suburbs park and ride I see at ashgrove village coles would also cease. So maybe all this is still acceptable in the interests of a network but it will certainly be keenly felt and be a massive downgrade to the point I doubt any of my family would/could travel that way again by bus.

I would prefer the 380/381 cut and replaced with the 385 down waterworks bus lane as translink planned and then into the busway at Roma St (plus remove a stop or two where possible for performance). The glider would then provide the main lateral cross town jubilee, latrobe tce function and some of the 380/381 buses could go to another region.

[James]

As someone who lives locally I don't agree with this. The glider provides the only cross town link in this super hilly area at the moment for people who want to move between the major centres of Paddington, Bardon and Ashgrove. I don't agree it is 1 stop.

All the other routes are radial into town. The glider has performed a very key cross town function "between" the steep terrace hills, rather than along them like most other routes.

Waiting instead for a 30 minute frequency jubilee tce bus and then a connection to travel a few stops to paddington makes an existing 8 min trip possibly 30 min (after two avg waits and travel time) for a few stops. It also cancels out all the after nighttime footy transport (the gap already has a dedicated footy bus) and after dinner, after movies, after drinks transport. The extensive onwards to other suburbs park and ride I see at ashgrove village coles would also cease. So maybe all this is still acceptable in the interests of a network but it will certainly be keenly felt and be a massive downgrade to the point I doubt any of my family would/could travel that way again by bus.

I would prefer the 380/381 cut and replaced with the 385 down waterworks bus lane as translink planned and then into the busway at Roma St (plus remove a stop or two where possible for performance). The glider would then provide the main lateral cross town jubilee, latrobe tce function and some of the 380/381 buses could go to another region.

Ideally I'd like to see a 15-minute frequency GCL serving this stop, so it wouldn't be an issue - I was just suggesting an immediate improvement to prevent the area becoming a PT black hole.

So what? People can transfer. Transfer from the GCL to the 385. The 'cross-town' function you mention would be better served by a GCL running a lot later (and preferably more frequently), and it would only serve Ashgrove - Bardon, it would serve Ashgrove - Toowong, Bardon - Mitchelton and so forth. Park n Ride at Ashgrove would no longer be necessary under an improved network (like one proposed in LDT's network) because more people would be served by high-frequency options running later in to the night and more often. Even then, a 380 BUZ going down Waterworks Rd would still see Park n Ride occur at Ashgrove, and Ashgrove would be on at least one frequent route (possibly even two if GCL became frequent).

If we followed your plan, people on Coopers Camp Rd (two BUZ stops) are left without service, and this service is very well established, not to mention is not the cause of duplication. In terms of inconvenience, you inconvenience far more passengers by re-routing the 385 than you do the MaroonGlider.

[#Metro]

We all need to pull together to get bus reform through and on the table. An excellent effort by all and a practical plan ---> http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Perfection is not the goal. Practical result on the ground is. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good



This natural diamond crystal contains flaws and the flawless diamonds called paragons are rare.

"Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without."

—Confucius, attrib.[1]

The BCC Bus Network is hardly a paragon of perfection, and our proposal is a major improvement on it.

[newbris]

As someone who lives locally I don't agree with this. The glider provides the only cross town link in this super hilly area at the moment for people who want to move between the major centres of Paddington, Bardon and Ashgrove. I don't agree it is 1 stop.

All the other routes are radial into town. The glider has performed a very key cross town function "between" the steep terrace hills, rather than along them like most other routes.

Waiting instead for a 30 minute frequency jubilee tce bus and then a connection to travel a few stops to paddington makes an existing 8 min trip possibly 30 min (after two avg waits and travel time) for a few stops. It also cancels out all the after nighttime footy transport (the gap already has a dedicated footy bus) and after dinner, after movies, after drinks transport. The extensive onwards to other suburbs park and ride I see at ashgrove village coles would also cease. So maybe all this is still acceptable in the interests of a network but it will certainly be keenly felt and be a massive downgrade to the point I doubt any of my family would/could travel that way again by bus.

I would prefer the 380/381 cut and replaced with the 385 down waterworks bus lane as translink planned and then into the busway at Roma St (plus remove a stop or two where possible for performance). The glider would then provide the main lateral cross town jubilee, latrobe tce function and some of the 380/381 buses could go to another region.

Ideally I'd like to see a 15-minute frequency GCL serving this stop, so it wouldn't be an issue - I was just suggesting an immediate improvement to prevent the area becoming a PT black hole.

So what? People can transfer. Transfer from the GCL to the 385. The 'cross-town' function you mention would be better served by a GCL running a lot later (and preferably more frequently), and it would only serve Ashgrove - Bardon, it would serve Ashgrove - Toowong, Bardon - Mitchelton and so forth. Park n Ride at Ashgrove would no longer be necessary under an improved network (like one proposed in LDT's network) because more people would be served by high-frequency options running later in to the night and more often. Even then, a 380 BUZ going down Waterworks Rd would still see Park n Ride occur at Ashgrove, and Ashgrove would be on at least one frequent route (possibly even two if GCL became frequent).

If we followed your plan, people on Coopers Camp Rd (two BUZ stops) are left without service, and this service is very well established, not to mention is not the cause of duplication. In terms of inconvenience, you inconvenience far more passengers by re-routing the 385 than you do the MaroonGlider.

Thanks for your comments...great to get some thoughts out there as a local who has lived right across the area. Obviously some of my comments will just be seen as self interest but hopefully some will help as well.

The M5 GCL route may be worthy for directly connecting more far flung places (though not sure what off peak frequency it could support) but it was the "local" cross function I was focusing on in a very hilly difficult area...Rosalie to Paddington, Paddington to Ashgrove, Paddington to Park Rd and vice versa. Before the glider there was nothing. You had to travel the 4km in to town and then out again to travel between any of the local activity centres and I have lived in almost all of them.

The glider linked at least some of them...Suncorp, Paddington, Bardon, Ashgrove and made all sorts of off-peak and post 9pm trips viable due to frequency. Not sure the network connection function works well to replace this when it would see people having to wait, travel a few stops, wait, travel a few stops (Ashgrove to Paddington Central for example) but maybe if it was very frequent with span....given the likely poor off-peak & post 9pm frequency of the M5 bus the removal of the glider will probably kill off these trips. Just saying. Transfers work but rarely for such waits combined with 1 or 2 stops each time unless extremely frequent....maybe the local cross town network function here needs to be on different roads further in towards the city than the M5...Enoggera Tce perhaps ?

Coopers camp just loses the BUZ, still would have it's peak gap rockets and the secondary bus from St John Woods could provide coverage ala the translink proposal. I think the network structure is better served by running the main frequent highly legible bus down waterworks as translink proposed and treating coopers camp as the secondary it is. Frees up lots of 380, 381's for elsewhere.

Using a glider to cover the old Bardon route doesn't seem sensible when looked at sans politics. Moving the glider to serve the far lower density Bardon mt coot-tha area with nothing there but lower density housing (compared to the inner city jubilee area) won't roll with the BCC anyway will it ? if politics says it must stay why don't we move it somewhere useful...possibly an inner ring function ?

Btw, I think obviously the mountain like streets means standard bus stop walking catchment distances often have to be reigned in to be realistic.

[hU0N]

The M5 GCL route may be worthy for directly connecting more far flung places (though not sure what off peak frequency it could support) but it was the "local" cross function I was focusing on in a very hilly difficult area...Rosalie to Paddington, Paddington to Ashgrove, Paddington to Park Rd and vice versa. Before the glider there was nothing. You had to travel the 4km in to town and then out again to travel between any of the local activity centres and I have lived in almost all of them.

The glider linked at least some of them...Suncorp, Paddington, Bardon, Ashgrove and made all sorts of off-peak and post 9pm trips viable due to frequency. Not sure the network connection function works well to replace this when it would see people having to wait, travel a few stops, wait, travel a few stops (Ashgrove to Paddington Central for example) but maybe if it was very frequent with span....given the likely poor off-peak & post 9pm frequency of the M5 bus the removal of the glider will probably kill off these trips. Just saying. Transfers work but rarely for such waits combined with 1 or 2 stops each time unless extremely frequent....maybe the local cross town network function here needs to be on different roads further in towards the city than the M5...Enoggera Tce perhaps ?

I have to say that, also as a local, I couldn't agree with you more.  The point that is frequently missed is how utterly useless the 385, the 380 and the GCL are for providing local mobility around the Paddington / Bardon / Ashgrove area.  The reason is partly the hills, and partly that the region has two activity centres, each of which supplies about half of the necessary services to the entire region.  To understand what I mean, consider a typical Saturday morning (If you live here like we do, you'll probably remember a Saturday when this was your reality).

Soon after waking up, you start to think about coffee.  That's at Paddington, so you ride the 61 to Paddington ride the 598 for one stop, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 385 for one stop to Paddington.  After coffee, you remember that you need to deposit some cash at the bank.  Unfortunately only branch ATM's accept deposits, and all the banks are in Ashgrove.  So you ride the 61 to Ashgrove ride the 385 for one stop, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 599 for  two stops.  Your partner then says that she was planning to get her hair cut and maybe get a manicure.  Unfortunately, all the personal care services are at Paddington.  So you ride the 61 to Paddington ride the 598 for two stops, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 385 for one stop.  While you wait, you grab another coffee (because, you know, Paddington is where the coffee is).  Once your partner is finished, you both decide that you should do some grocery shopping.  Unfortunately the full line supermarkets are at.. you guessed it.. Ashgrove.  So you ride the 61 to Ashgrove ride the 385 for one stop, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 599 for two stops.  After your shopping, you remember that you needed a new shirt for a wedding you are going to next weekend.  Unfortunately for you, there aren't any clothes shops at Ashgrove at all.  They are all at Paddington.  So you grit your teeth and ride the 61 to Paddington ride the 598 for two stops, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 385 for one stop to Paddington.  Luckily the shops at Paddington are good, so you get a killer shirt.  Finally you head for home.  You ride the 61 home ride the 385 for one stop, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 599 for one stop home.  As you are hanging up your new shirt you suddenly remember that your suit needs dry cleaning.  That's at Ashgrove.  So you ride the 61 to Ashgrove ride the 599 for one stop.  After leaving your suit with the drycleaner and tucking your ticket securely into your pocket where you can be sure you will wash it later, you head back to the bus stop to go home.  You think to yourself how the yard needs to be tidied up this weekend, and remember that your rake broke last time you used it.  Luckily for you, you are already at the bus stop, and the hardware store is at Paddington.  So you ride the 61 to Paddington ride the 598 for two stops, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 385 for one stop to Paddington.  Finally armed with your rake, you head for home once and for all.  You ride the 61 home ride the 385 for one stop, sit at Bardon and wait, then ride the 599 for one stop home.

I know that if you were more organised you might plan to do things in a different order that reduces the number trips between Paddington and Ashgrove, but that's not the point.  The thing to realise is that locals of the Bardon / Ashgrove / Paddington area need to travel to both the centres at Ashgrove and Paddington all the time.  It's not an either/or situation.  And the lack of parking at both centres actually makes the bus an attractive way to do this, provided it's not a massive pain.  And even with frequency, compared to a 6-8min direct ride on the 61, a GCL -> 385 transfer IS a massive pain.

For a resident of Paddington / Ashgrove / Bardon area, the fact that the Gap BUZ runs through Paddington is of absolutely minimal significance.  It's occasionally useful for trips to the CBD, but no more or less so than the 375 or 61 (it only happens to be more popular because of the three, it arrives first). It could run express after Bardon (as it currently does during the morning and afternoon peaks), and hardly anybody in the P / A / B area would even notice.  The 380 would be more keenly missed, but again only for trips to the CBD.

But what of Coopers Camp Road?  Well, what of it?  There is only one stop on Coopers Camp Road, and it is no better or worse a stop (in terms of catchment) than Jubilee Tce (Effie St), and everyone seems to have very little compunction in ripping the service away from that stop.  The other "Coopers Camp Road" stop isn't even entirely on Coopers Camp Road.  The inbound platform is on Waterworks Road, just about 200m before the 380 stop, while the outbound platform is right on the Waterworks Road corner, only about 80m from the outbound 380 platform.  Claiming that rerouting the 385 from this stop to another stop 80m away would leave the users of the current stop with no service is quite ridiculous.  I've been on buses where the driver has forgotten my stop and eventually pulled up more than 80m further up the street.

Which, eventually, brings us back to the core of the argument.  Convenience.  Who's convenience should we prefer?  I'm not sure how James came to the conclusion that the 385 provides more convenience to more people than the 61.  All that can be said is that the 385 provides more convenience than the 61 to people who live in The Gap.  And this convenience is limited to one thing only.  Along with the 380, it ensures they have good access the local shops in the Paddington / Ashgrove / Bardon area.  Nobody is denying this.

The real question is though, who benefits most from having access to the Paddington / Ashgrove / Bardon local shops?  Is it the people who live in Paddington / Ashgrove / Bardon and rely on these shops for all their shopping?  Or is it the people of The Gap, who rely on the Gap Village and only need the Paddington / Ashgrove / Bardon shop on the odd occasion?  Personally, I answer in favour of the P / A / B locals, but whichever way you answer this question is fine, I'm not going to tell you how to think.  But do give it an answer, because it is the sole, solitary, single deciding factor.