Missing frequents and ex-tram corridors

[aldonius]

Looking at the old tram map and comparing it to the BUZ and rail map is an interesting exercise.
In particular, it provides strong support for legible BUZes along Riding Rd, along inner Waterworks Rd, along Beaudesert Rd through Moorooka, and along Logan Rd. (These corridors have various combinations of infrequent service, but it's not legible nor necessarily a consistently sufficiently frequent headway.)

I've attached an image showing frequent bus stops with a 400m buffer, and train/citycat stations with an 800m buffer, overlaid on a population density map (other ferries are missing, but the only place that's really impacted is KP). IMHO, this reveals the key gaps in the present frequent network.

Other corridors that need frequent service would include something to Stafford City (the old 79 route; I believe it has a daytime-frequent service already) and something along Chatsworth Rd / Winstanley St.

[AnonymouslyBad]

I think the problem itself is the existence of these tram replacement all-stoppers (I call them that because, tweaks for busway etc. aside, that's what they are).

Nobody wants to make the all-stoppers high frequency; they swallow up too much patronage to justify a BUZ running alongside; and because even 50 year old routings are sacred in BCC land, they're surrounded by milk runs for every development since.

Just another reason we need meaningful network reform...

[James]

^ Agree, we need to let go of the tram routes. The 2013 BCC bus network review did this, but then everybody got upset over the bus they've been catching for 20+ years changing.

This is a really good map - it really shows where the gaps in the frequent network are, even smaller gaps like those between the 200/222 BUZ stops on Old Cleveland Road.

[STB]

I've actually thought in the past that route 205 could be an all day route along Winstanley St and Chatsworth Rd, negating for the most part routes 202 and P208 (still would need a hospital connection from the eastside along there somehow though).

[Cazza]

Allows the 200 to be abolished too with more resources pumped into the 222 for 10 mins or better all day. But we can all agree that the current network is a bit of a shambles.

[tazzer9]

Inner waterworks road could be improved by removing the 379 completely (maybe as apeak hour only?)  and make the 380 and 381 every 30 minutes off peak combining to form a 15 minutes buz style service between payne road and the city.  Along with removal of about 5 bus stops to speed up services.  especially in the ashgrove and red hill area.

[aldonius]

^ Agree, we need to let go of the tram routes. The 2013 BCC bus network review did this, but then everybody got upset over the bus they've been catching for 20+ years changing.

It's more that the tram routes have all this relatively dense old development around them. And they usually follow a main road. So for the most part they're where a route should go anyway, IMHO.

This is a really good map - it really shows where the gaps in the frequent network are, even smaller gaps like those between the 200/222 BUZ stops on Old Cleveland Road.

"Gaps" is exactly how I think about it.

As I said earlier, I think the density supports at least daytime-frequent service along the Chatsworth/Winstanley corridor, and for that matter the Macrossan/Stanley/Meadowlands corridor too. Meanwhile on Waterworks Rd I think the plans we previously put forward for a BUZzed 380 are still good, but if that can't happen then tazzer9's solution works.

Allows the 200 to be abolished too with more resources pumped into the 222 for 10 mins or better all day.

What happens to the 5km of route that the 200 does past Carindale in that case?

[STB]

Allows the 200 to be abolished too with more resources pumped into the 222 for 10 mins or better all day.

What happens to the 5km of route that the 200 does past Carindale in that case?

You could potentially divert route 205 to follow route 200's route between Carindale to the current route 200 terminus, while creating a new local crosstown route between Carindale and Garden City servicing the area that route 205 currently terminates at, but continuing down Scrub Road and then through Wishart and south to Garden City.

[Cazza]

Allows the 200 to be abolished too with more resources pumped into the 222 for 10 mins or better all day.

What happens to the 5km of route that the 200 does past Carindale in that case?

The changes to the 205 to have it run as a BUZ

[aldonius]

Huh, the route I'm actually envisioning for that corridor is actually the 200 from Cazza's map

[SurfRail]

204 should use Deshon St.  203 should use the Buranda to Langlands Park stretch of busway.  Then get rid of the onroad stops between Langlands and Logan Rd adjacent to the 100% grade sepped busway.  That would make abolishing the 200 easier.

[achiruel]

Could the 200 maintain its current Deshon St route until Turbo Dr, then Castlemaine St, Morley St, Cambridge St, Cavendish Rd and then basically the 210 route to Creek Rd, but then turn right to Carindale instead of left to Cannon Hill?

It could stop close enough (I think) to Coorparoo Station to be a viable interchange, although a decent path might be required and would give Seven Hills a decent all-day frequency.

212 could be cut, 210 could adopt 212's Seven Hills detour and cut city end back to Woolloongabba to minimise duplication.

I wouldn't keep it as a full BUZ though, but daytime frequent (6:30am-7pm or so) and 30 minutes 5am-6:30 and after 7pm.

Also need to look at some way of serving Greendale Way. Not sure what the answer is though.

[James]

It's more that the tram routes have all this relatively dense old development around them. And they usually follow a main road. So for the most part they're where a route should go anyway, IMHO.

I more meant in a reference to the number of stops some of these ex-tram routes have, as well as the context of them.

379 is a good example. This would have been a great route when there was nothing past The Grange, but if you were designing the network now, you would send a BUZ route up Kedron Brook & Webster Roads and make the Maygar St / Days Rd section an infrequent cross-town feeder which drops people off near the Truro Street stop.

470 is another one. It has stops every 150m, and continues through to Teneriffe for no reason aside from that's what the old 70 tram did.

It may actually be easier to first rip out all the stops which are too close together, then look at reforming the network. They did this on the 402/412 and it was a rather painless process.

Could the 200 maintain its current Deshon St route until Turbo Dr, then Castlemaine St, Morley St, Cambridge St, Cavendish Rd and then basically the 210 route to Creek Rd, but then turn right to Carindale instead of left to Cannon Hill?

It could stop close enough (I think) to Coorparoo Station to be a viable interchange, although a decent path might be required and would give Seven Hills a decent all-day frequency.

212 could be cut, 210 could adopt 212's Seven Hills detour and cut city end back to Woolloongabba to minimise duplication.

I would send this route down Stanley Street, essentially keeping the Route 210 alignment except going to Carindale, not Cannon Hill. Might be a bit slower in peak, but that area through East Brisbane really needs a frequent service. For somewhere so close to everything, East Brisbane is a shocking PT black hole.

Route 212 can be served by a crosstown route running half-hourly to hourly, sending people in that area to the (frequent) Cleveland Line is hardly any worse than the current option.

[SurfRail]

I'm biased, but a bus along the southern bit of Bennetts Rd would be nice. 

I don't think anything can be done piecemeal anymore - Brisbane's network is just a constant accretion of mistakes and historical detritus.  Need to sit down and do it area by area over the course of 2-3 years like Auckland did.  The time to start that work is now with Brisbane Metro coming.