Increased peak hour 174/175s

[somebody]

It seems that peak hour 174 and 175 runs are to be added.

I would have thought that this service was better provided by 189 and 176 runs for Logan Rd, with 171s and 181s for Newnham Rd.  Creek Rd, served by the 174 is the only bit which does not have a rocket service and therefore either requires the 174s or people to be made to walk to Logan Rd or Cavendish Rd.  It's 1.6km - 800m walk to the nearest.

The major limitation with the rocket service is that it doesn't serve Woolloongabba.  Interchanging at Buranda for South Bank isn't onerous IMO.

[STB]

Obviously they have patronage data to support upgrading the 174 and 175, I've got no problem with with.  Don't forget that corridor has also recieved another boost with the 180 BUZ.  But that's not the only BUZ coming in...so I've heard...

[somebody]

I expect the rockets I mention do OK in the AM peak, but in the PM peak the *cough* city stop locations *cough* cause problems.  And the 189 doesn't run in the PM peak.

180's a different market isn't it?

[somebody]

This link: http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/bulletin/1316662906

shows that it is more talking about shoulder peak services.  Which is good.

[WTN]

I expect the rockets I mention do OK in the AM peak, but in the PM peak the *cough* city stop locations *cough* cause problems.  And the 189 doesn't run in the PM peak.

180's a different market isn't it?

180 is a different market, mostly. I mentioned elsewhere that the 180 serves only 2 stops on Logan Rd. Hardly a replacement unless you use those stops.

This link: http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/bulletin/1316662906

shows that it is more talking about shoulder peak services.  Which is good.

The beginning of the peak period really. While this is welcome, the end of peak, evening and Sunday frequencies are neglected. It's still 30 minutes after 6pm (inbound), 7pm (outbound) and all day Sunday.

[somebody]

Re: 180

I guess I haven't given hope that the 180 will serve Cavendish Rd between Holland Rd and Chatsworth Rd.

[WTN]

Re: 180

I guess I haven't given hope that the 180 will serve Cavendish Rd between Holland Rd and Chatsworth Rd.

Whilst off topic, I hope too that the 180 will be routed off Logan Rd and onto Chatsworth and Cav Rds. Logan Rd already has a trunk route (but can be improved).

[SurfRail]

174 and 175 sound like good candidates for a combination of the BUZ and Go-Zone concepts (ie at least a BUZ level of service on the common stretch from the city to Mt Gravatt Central).

[somebody]

Re: 180

I guess I haven't given hope that the 180 will serve Cavendish Rd between Holland Rd and Chatsworth Rd.

Whilst off topic, I hope too that the 180 will be routed off Logan Rd and onto Chatsworth and Cav Rds. Logan Rd already has a trunk route (but can be improved).

What's the trunk route for Logan Rd?  170?  If the 180 gets off Logan Rd, I think the 170 should use Cornwall/Juliette Sts.  Losing off peak service at Wellers Hill is a non issue with Logan Rd services, Holland Park West busway and the 120 surrounding the stop.  Similarly the slight reduction at Greenslopes is a non issue as the 170 doesn't divide gaps.

[WTN]

The only real trunk route along Logan Rd is the 175. It stays on all the way from the Gabba to Garden City. But it is also an all stopper route, so it's slow when it makes lots of stops. It also relies on its sister route 174 to give a reasonable frequency up until Mt Gravatt Central. There is no cityxpress equivalent like the 200/222 to connect all the white stops, which makes rationalisation more difficult.

170 doesn't stick to Logan Rd long enough to be a true trunk route. It serves 3 white stops from Holland Rd to Mt Gravatt Central, then veers off into Broadwater and Newnham Rds. It leaves the inner and outer sections unserviced (or serviced by 180 and 120/GCL respectively). Rerouting to serve the other sections could be difficult. The Wellers Hill stop you mentioned is actually under the M1 freeway, a fair distance to the locations you mentioned, so could be a difficult one to replace if enough pax complain. Similar story with the Hillgrove stop on Broadwater Rd. Newnham Rd is covered by 174 and 590 so fewer issues there. But I'm not convinced straightening the 170 is a good idea.

[WTN]

Actually I have another idea: reroute the 174 so it follows the 170 to Mt Gravatt Central, then follow the existing 174 on Creek Rd. The service can remain all stops but provide increased frequency on sections shared with the 170. The new 174 will be faster too.

The 175 could have its frequency increased after removal of bus stops that are WAY too close to each other, or another express route could cover much the same stretch.

[somebody]

Actually I have another idea: reroute the 174 so it follows the 170 to Mt Gravatt Central, then follow the existing 174 on Creek Rd. The service can remain all stops but provide increased frequency on sections shared with the 170. The new 174 will be faster too.

The 175 could have its frequency increased after removal of bus stops that are WAY too close to each other, or another express route could cover much the same stretch.

I've suggested something similar myself.  I don't see much point in the 170 as it currently is.  All it does is divide the service from the 174/175.  It would be better to remove it and have at least half hourly service 18x7 coordinated on each of the other routes.