"Renew the 412" campaign

[aldonius]

So I just saw this:

https://www.renewthe412.com/

Good to see more people getting into PT advocacy

[ozbob]

 

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1171682188615503872

[SurfRail]

Like some of the thinking.  I suspect the main opposition to a lot of this will be UQ itself.

You'd need to do something about the 412 terminus.  Possibly this would be a loop from the Chancellor's Place bus stop to Upland Rd, Boomerang Rd E and Hawken Dr with a new stop on Hawken Dr, then straight onto Carmody Rd (so the whole route after Sir FS Dr and Coldridge St is a big one way loop. 

[#Metro]

Turn 402 into a Rocket.

Terminate 411 at Toowong during the off peak only, which will allow the frequency to be boosted to 15 min at minimal or no additional cost.

[STB]

I don't mind some of his ideas - personally I'd prefer route 412 be extended to Indooroopilly full time at a high frequency and delete the 427/428/432s to prevent duplication.  UQ obviously is going to be the biggest headache for any changes in that general area - TransLink/Qld Government wasn't even able to build the busway underground with the UQ Senate voting against it when the UQ Lakes station was being planned.  UQ will basically do what  UQ wants to do, regardless of what students think.

I don't mind the idea of having PIDS for the railway at the Benson St stops - it'd at least give an indication to pax wanting to transfer, but I can tell you right now, no driver is going to hang around for a few minutes beyond his scheduled departure if he sees the train running late - unless it's built into the contract (ala 605/615).

I'm also not a fan of an idea of using double deckers - IMO I would've thought double deckers would have a slower load/unload compared to an articulated bus for only 3 extra pax (according to his numbers that he's quoted in his paper).

In terms of transit lanes - is Sir Fred Schonnell Drive owned by council?

[James]

I don't mind some of his ideas - personally I'd prefer route 412 be extended to Indooroopilly full time at a high frequency and delete the 427/428/432s to prevent duplication.  UQ obviously is going to be the biggest headache for any changes in that general area - TransLink/Qld Government wasn't even able to build the busway underground with the UQ Senate voting against it when the UQ Lakes station was being planned.  UQ will basically do what  UQ wants to do, regardless of what students think.

I don't mind the idea of having PIDS for the railway at the Benson St stops - it'd at least give an indication to pax wanting to transfer, but I can tell you right now, no driver is going to hang around for a few minutes beyond his scheduled departure if he sees the train running late - unless it's built into the contract (ala 605/615).

I'm also not a fan of an idea of using double deckers - IMO I would've thought double deckers would have a slower load/unload compared to an articulated bus for only 3 extra pax (according to his numbers that he's quoted in his paper).

In terms of transit lanes - is Sir Fred Schonnell Drive owned by council?

PIDs would be useful.

The biggest issue I see is the proposed movement through Chancellors Place would take the bus over some quite nasty speed bumps & require modifications to the road beyond what would be needed at each roundabout:
- Removing the drop-off zones and parking zones around the Chancellors Place roundabout (move them into Mansfield Place or to Upland Road)
- Widening the roundabout in to UQ by simply removing the landscaping in this area.

From a network perspective, this would also create a one-way loop - never attractive for PT use, and would cause issues with where services layover. It'd be easier to keep sending the bus down to St Lucia South (either the current stop or a modified stop on Hawken Drive).

Re: SFSD - I believe it is BCC owned, however welcome to be corrected. Unfortunately I doubt transit lanes will do much, a lot of the congestion on SFSD occurs due to flow-on effects from Coronation Drive, especially on the most congested days. I personally lay the blame at the Clem7 merge down on the outbound M3 and GBB traffic lights - and the propagation of traffic congestion back from here.

On the whole though, I think this is a great proposal. The report is well thought out - there are a few errors, but on the whole it has been done well. Some innovative technologies suggested as well which certainly would be worth looking into.

[Cazza]

Overall, a very good plan and initiative. I said it a few times but the best option (I believe) is to run bendies on the 402 and potentially boost its frequency further. The 412 runs fine at its current frequency and it would be a waste of resources running half empty bendies between Toowong and the CBD (for obvious reasons).

I'm also not a fan of an idea of using double deckers - IMO I would've thought double deckers would have a slower load/unload compared to an articulated bus for only 3 extra pax (according to his numbers that he's quoted in his paper).

Definitely. For such a short route with many stops, double deckers will not be a good bus option. They provide low, slow passenger turnover and are better suited for long haul, limited stop routes (used perfectly for the B-Line down in Sydney). Three door bendies are the best option for the 402.

In terms of transit lanes - is Sir Fred Schonnell Drive owned by council?

James beat me to it but I believe anything west of Coldridge St is council owned, with between here and Keith St most likely council owned and east of Keith St is UQ land. I could wrong though.

[verbatim9]

I knew the 412 route would become an issue. Something I have mentioned in the past to be reviewed. Hence longer buses and possible transit lanes along Coronation Drive? Good on them for starting a campaign. Too much inaction leads to frustration.

All door boarding at Chancellor Place would also help 412 reliability.

[#Metro]

An underground station would allow KGS screen style doors allowing fare gates to be installed.

However, the cost would be a lot and disruption significant.

[timh]

An underground station would allow KGS screen style doors allowing fare gates to be installed.

However, the cost would be a lot and disruption significant.

UQ's long term vision for Chancellor's Place is an underground bus station, that I believe is also supposed to connect to UQ Lakes somehow...

[aldonius]

UQ's long term vision for Chancellor's Place is an underground bus station, that I believe is also supposed to connect to UQ Lakes somehow...

The UQ master plan from December 2017 specifically mentions a "cross-campus bus link" while studiously avoiding the word "tunnel". The Site Development plan from the past year or so demurs a bit more (and no alignment is proposed in either; however, it's hard to see how it wouldn't be a tunnel).

DO4.6 Any cross-campus bus proposal linking UQ Lakes and Chancellor's Place:
• integrates with Translink services
• improves network capacity and efficiency
• reduces the number of buses entering and exiting the campus where possible
• helps to alleviate pressure on the city transport network by improving cross-city connections
• improves connectivity and access for the wider community
• allows for through-running routes reducing the number of services terminating on campus.


DO4.19 Upgrade of Chancellor's Place Bus Station:
• considers relocating the station underground to open up land for the redevelopment of
Chancellor's Place into an expanded gateway precinct and activity node
• delivers a larger and more efficient bus station and increased services to and from the St
Lucia campus, and beyond
• manages conflicts between taxi services, service vehicles, Translink services and tour or
charter buses, to provide greater capacity and reliability
• maintains a high level of connectivity to the campus and Chancellor's Place activity hub
• aligns with any future cross-campus bus link to UQ Lakes.