CityGlider articles and discussion

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

CityGlider bus fares could double

CityGlider bus fares could double
Article from: The Courier-Mail
Ursula Heger

June 22, 2009 12:00am

FARES on the CityGlider bus service could be more than double normal fares because of a row between the State Government and the Brisbane Lord Mayor.
The State Government yesterday refused to commit to the rapid-transit project after Mayor Campbell Newman announced the project last week without consulting the Government over the final plan for the services.

Transport Minister Rachel Nolan said there were numerous problems with what Cr Newman had announced.

"At this stage the State Government cannot determine whether we would be able to salvage this project ... I have not had any contact from Brisbane City Council on the matter and state government officers had their first preliminary briefing on it only on Friday," she said.

The State Government has so far put $320,000 towards the project, while council has earmarked $4.5 million next financial year. Cr Newman announced the project with council's Budget last week, heralding the inner-city rapid transit project as a "new era of service".

But council may be forced to put the project out to tender - a move that could result in a 250 per cent increase in fares to cover the running costs without the state government subsidy.

Council Opposition Leader Shayne Sutton said yesterday the service would not be what was promised by the Lord Mayor.

"This is not going to be the service that (Cr) Campbell Newman announced in his budget speech on Thursday," she said.

"It will have similar buses that work on city routes at the moment and ticket prices are likely to be two and a half times the cost of regular trips."

Public and Active Transport chairman Jane Prentice said yesterday the cost of the fares had not been calculated, but private operators may be considered through the tender process.

"The fare price hasn't even been decided or considered yet," she said.

"We are talking to TransLink about whether we go to tender for this or whether they want BT (Brisbane Transport) to do it."

She said first stage of the project set to be completed mid next year, referred as the "vanilla" stage, will probably use the providers' existing bus fleet.

Cr Prentice confirmed she had submitted a plan to reintroduce a bus or transit lane on Ann Street -originally removed by the Lord Mayor when he was first elected.

Ms Nolan said she was always opposed to having the lanes removed, and their removal had severely impacted the frequency of bus services.

"We've invested billions in public transport infrastructure projects such as the construction of Brisbane's busway network and support all forms of bus priority because shorter trip times are the surest way to attract people out of their vehicles," she said.

[ButFli]

All this money and political maneuvering. Has anyone bothered to check if this scheme is worthwhile? I think it reasonable to assume that before a Government embarks on such a project there has been some study into the likely viability of it but with the bungling that goes into transport planning in Queensland I really have to wonder.

I have caught the Route 66 from the 'Gabba many times in peak hour and not once have there been more than 10 people on board. Despite this apparent low-patronage the service is allocated a bendy bus more often than not. I want to know why, given that the latest cross-inner-city route is under patronised, does this city need another one? Surely the $5million could be spent on PT projects where there is an actual need for increased capacity.

Before Government goes and spends money on new-fangled buses that require special stops why can't they try re-instituting bus lanes, especially in the CBD. With the ICB and soon Hale Street Bridge there is no need for private through-traffic to be in the CBD anyways.

[O_128]

Well this make tranlink completly pointless if diffent fares are charged on this route

[Derwan]

Well this make tranlink completly pointless if diffent fares are charged on this route

Yeah it'll be like the Airtrain or catching a train to the Ekka!   

But seriously though - when will the BCC realise that they are part of an integrated public transport system - and work WITH TransLink rather than doing their own thing?  Nothing should be announced until the consultation process with TransLink is complete.  In fact, any announcement regarding public transport provided by the BCC should be a JOINT announcement with TransLink.

Until this happens, they're just playing silly, childish games!

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

CityGlider to become CityIdler

CityGlider to become CityIdler
Tony Moore
June 27, 2009 - 7:30AM

Brisbane's new CityGlider bus from Newstead and West End faces lengthy waits at traffic lights for cars coming off the Hale Street toll bridge, West End's community association said.

WECA president Darren Godwell said traffic from the Hale Street Link (HSL) would cross straight across the Melbourne Street path of Council's new $4.5 million CityGlider service.

"For it to be a regular, reliable mass transit option along that route, it is going to have to contend with the tollway traffic across the HSL," Mr Godwell said.

"For the approach, the on-ramp is on Cordelia Street, and coming off the bridge it comes on to Merivale Street," he said.
"And both of those intersections are on Melbourne Street."

More than 14,000 cars a day will use Cordelia Street, while 18,700 cars will use Merivale Street by 2011, according to Brisbane City Council.

Mr Godwell said planners were aware of the issue but were keeping quiet about the difficulties this posed for the public transport project.

"So the flow of traffic on the mass transit route will have to be given priority over the flow of traffic on and off the toll bridge," he said.

"It means for those using the toll bridge there is going to be some significant congestion in the AM and PM peak."

Mr Godwell, whose community association opposed the Hale Street Link project, said the traffic concerns were a major flaw in the project.

"Mass transit needs to be reliable. It must be regular and it must be affordable. It is supposed to be there every five minutes or seven minutes."

Brisbane City Council accepts there will be delays at traffic lights, but says it is working through a series of plans to cope with the situation.

It said the CityGlider service proposed a bus every five minutes - 12 buses every hour - in each direction.

A spokesman confirmed there would be conflicts, but said they would be similar to traffic conflicts elsewhere in the city.

Gabba Ward councillor Helen Abrahams has questioned why Brisbane City Council wanted a private operator to operate the CityGlider bus service.

"It's got a separate card, other than the GoCard, it's got a separate paintwork and design, it's got a different route.

"And it was acknowledged that it was a possible intention to privatise it, to put it out to tender."

Brisbane City Council's administration said they hoped to fund the program through Translink.

"BCC would welcome State funding and the integration with the Go Card ticketing system if they could help fund it, but unless they do, Council will have to go it alone."

[O_128]

What a complete waste of money. No GO CARD! why bother no one will carry two cards with them. Why is the HSL going ahead if it is not ficing congestion but adding to it. It is not to late to make this a dedicated rail bridge in stead with a few design adjustments

[ozbob]

"BCC would welcome State funding and the integration with the Go Card ticketing system if they could help fund it, but unless they do, Council will have to go it alone."

Marvellous headline on the article above ...

Unless it is part of the normal integrated ticketing and zones won't get past first base.  

Cheap non solution.  When the folks see the light rail in operation on the coast, they will wonder why they cannot have the same.

[#Metro]

My understanding is that the BCC wants the service, but to get it funded they have to deal with the State Government.
You know how fantastic communication is between governments. Despite the fact that they are being funded by the same people, represent the same people, and cover the same area, and have their buildings located on the same street (george st) with just 800 m between buildings, they have to have disagreements... don't ask me why... I think it is some game to see who can waste the most time and money. This is the same scenario that gave us the Indooroopilly Station underpass, were half was new, and the other half was third-world.

Route 66 is underused, but only for now. Woolloongabba is being redeveloped, and the planners thought that a service like this would go some way to 'complete the loop' around the city. I suppose that it is also a nice demonstration of what can happen when a service is introduced too early- it locks up funds needed on more urgent things. It will be used more as time goes on.

I suppose Council has decided to go it alone if they can't get a proper, clear answer that makes sense. The Newstead-City-West End corridor is worthwhile because there is no busway (why?) along this corridor and it is the most patronised route in the whole of Brisbane.

I would be very surprised if the GoCard was not able to be used. If the state government refuses to fund it, then why can't they still use the go card and just bill the BCC the full cost? Is it not cash that is on the card? I know in overseas countries (hong kong?) they can go into the store and buy things with their card- so I'd be surprised if that wasn't possible here.

Sometimes I think transport would be better provided by a non-profit charitable trust. There's always this political garbage that gets in the way with governments...

[O_128]

jsut another reason why either state or local government should be abolished.

[mufreight]

Why not both

[stephenk]

I have caught the Route 66 from the 'Gabba many times in peak hour and not once have there been more than 10 people on board. Despite this apparent low-patronage the service is allocated a bendy bus more often than not. I want to know why, given that the latest cross-inner-city route is under patronised, does this city need another one?

The 66 is most definitely not under patronised. In the evening peak from QUT Kelvin Grove to Roma St, the bendy buses often close to or full to capacity! The 66 is also heavily patronised from Roma St to QUT Kelvin Grove in the am peak. This 66 is according to Translink probably going to be extended to RBWH, which will hopefully reduce the overcrowding issues that are occurring at RCH Herston.

[#Metro]

We'll it looks like they're all getting off at the city then!

Perhaps it would be good if they actually extended 66 to UQ Lakes to create a defacto "universities" line.

RCH-QUT-City-Southbank-UQ

Cut out Woolloongabba then?

Route 109 simply couldn't handle the sheer volume of people travelling on it early last year when the university students returned; and the bendy buses aren't used as much on that route, despite being overcrowded.

[Otto]

We'll it looks like they're all getting off at the city then!

Perhaps it would be good if they actually extended 66 to UQ Lakes to create a defacto "universities" line.

RCH-QUT-City-Southbank-UQ

Cut out Woolloongabba then?

That is actually, an Excellent Idea !!

The most likely route would be RCH - QUT - Normanby - Roma St - KGSBS - Cultural Cent - Southbank - Mater Hill - P.A Hosp - Park Rd - U.Q.

This would be a good way to combine the 109 and 66 which would then allow artics to do the service and no longer have the very light loading the 66 has between the City and Gabba.

[Emmie]

That is actually, an Excellent Idea !!

The most likely route would be RCH - QUT - Normanby - Roma St - KGSBS - Cultural Cent - Southbank - Mater Hill - P.A Hosp - Park Rd - U.Q.

Otto - that's brilliant.  This would make it a route that links three hospitals and two universities, all of which must have workers and visitors who need to move from one to the other.

And by going through Roma St it allows people from the Ipswich, Caboolture, Shorncliffe rail lines to transfer to a UQ bound bus without dealing with the Toowong mess.

[brismike]

Yes Otto that is a truly fantastic idea. You need to put it up to the transport planners at Translink. 
They do have transport planners at Translink don't they? 

[STB]

They do have transport planners at Translink don't they? 

Yes they do.

[#Metro]

I might write something up this week and send it in!
It would be good to have fellow support, and quite timely too given the Boggo Road (worst name ever- sounds like something associated with a bathroom) Busway will open in a few days.

I'll probably get a PR reply that wastes page upon page of words and begins with the line "Translink is deeply commited to providing high quality blah blah blah..." but, I'll try anyway!!!

Where's my BUZ?

[Emmie]

I might write something up this week and send it in!

Please do, Tramtrain.  You've got backing from RBOT members, definitely.

[#Metro]

Ok, I've written a few paragraphs. 

[ozbob]

Thanks Tramtrain for the  brilliant constructive suggestion for improvement and your contributions.

============================

Media Release 29th July 2009

SEQ: Where's our Buz?

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport commuters has called for a new innovative Buz route. Rail Back On Track members are out on buses, trains and ferries every day observing how our public transport system is performing, and proposing constructive solutions to keep it that way!

Robert Dow, spokesperson for RAIL Back On Track said:

"In a city like Brisbane, more cross-city services are needed if pubic transport is to be the mode of choice over the car."

"Rail Back on Track members are calling for a 12 week trial of an extended and combined route 66; presently Kelvin Grove-CBD-Wooloongabba, and route 109; presently City-UQ lakes, to create a more efficient, high-frequency, cross-city mass transit service."

"This new, combined route will service three hospitals (Royal Childrens, Mater, P.A), two universities; QUT and UQ, and will be accessible from any train route (Roma Street)."

An outline of the proposed route is below:

RCH
QUT
Normanby
Roma St
KGSBS
Cultural Centre
Southbank
Mater Hill
P.A Hospital
Park Rd
U.Q Lakes

"By combining these two routes, no extra buses are required; the extra money saved can then be used to extend the service.

"We congratulate Translink and the Queensland Government on the delivery of the new busway stations that will enable our proposal to work.

"Our members, and no doubt all public transport commuters, look forward to TransLink's response."

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org

[Emmie]

Ozbob - it might be a good idea to send your press release to UQ as well.  UQ medical students currently have no direct public transport option between the university and UQ's Herston campus next to the RBH, and I suspect you might get backing for this route from the university administration, if it means fewer medical students bringing cars on campus.

[ozbob]

Thanks Emmie, will do!



Edit:  Done!

[#Metro]

Thanks to OzBob and everyone on this thread for getting to a result 
I'm going to write in support of the proposal, Translink's PO is below:

Translink
GPO Box 50
Brisbane
Queensland 4001

[Jon Bryant]

Great idea and hopefully a great result.  

I think we should add the combination of the 111, 555 and the 333 to make a single route that runs between Chermside and Loganholme.  No need to change in the CBD and on a 2-3 minute frequency.  This could also be extended to Strathpine (questionable) and Beenleigh (makes more sense).  

Maybe the 444 with the 250 Cleveland (not currently a BUZ) and the 150 with 345 (We can reuse the 333 or the 555).  These become routes that do not terminate in the City and start to build a cross city network not a CBD centric network althought they all go through the CBD.

The 598 and 599 (Great Circle Lines) renamed the 777 or something and on a 5 min frequency.

[haakon]

The 250 is already a two hour long run, having it go to the other side of town would probably exacerbate it's on time running issues. Nor to mention driver rest stops etc.

[stephenk]

Great idea and hopefully a great result.  

I think we should add the combination of the 111, 555 and the 333 to make a single route that runs between Chermside and Loganholme.  No need to change in the CBD and on a 2-3 minute frequency.  This could also be extended to Strathpine (questionable) and Beenleigh (makes more sense).  

Maybe the 444 with the 250 Cleveland (not currently a BUZ) and the 150 with 345 (We can reuse the 333 or the 555).  These become routes that do not terminate in the City and start to build a cross city network not a CBD centric network althought they all go through the CBD.

The 598 and 599 (Great Circle Lines) renamed the 777 or something and on a 5 min frequency.

The 333 already has punctuality issues. I would not extend it's route!

I would like to see the Great Circle Lines have improved frequency to make a more attractive orbital route.

[#Metro]

A [109 + 66] would give us the North-South Axis, as it is mostly busway running, timing issues resulting from interactions with general traffic are kept to an absolute minimum.

The Brisbane River and a lack of Bridges or tunnels is a constraint, ferries help, but it would be good to just bus across (can't go to Toowong from West End, can't reach Bulimba from Newstead).

[STB]

Great idea and hopefully a great result.   


The 598 and 599 (Great Circle Lines) renamed the 777 or something and on a 5 min frequency.

You're joking right?

[stephenk]

RCH
QUT
Normanby
Roma St
KGSBS
Cultural Centre
Southbank
Mater Hill
P.A Hospital
Park Rd
U.Q Lakes

As it opens next week, I would have added RBWH at the top of the list!

[ozbob]

Yes, but has RBWH bus station turn back facilities?  From memory there is a divider between outbound and inbound.  If it can be easily incorporated but at the moment RCH is only a short hop.

[STB]

Just a bit of jargon correction.  A turnback is for a train, turn around is for a bus .

Also just for a bit of useless info, since I'm on the topic of public transport jargon. A dead service/running is a non-revenue bus while a dead train is a train that has broken down.  A non-revenue train is known as an empty service.

[stephenk]

Yes, but has RBWH bus station turn back facilities?  From memory there is a divider between outbound and inbound.  If it can be easily incorporated but at the moment RCH is only a short hop.

There is a roundabout between the RBWH station and Bowen Bridge Rd - I would assume that buses can turn there. Translink have claimed that the 66 should be extended to RBWH soon. However Translink also claim they can't turn buses at RCH, yet they managed to last weekend.

[dwb]

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3756.0