P332 Zillmere to University of Queensland (UQ).

[verbatim9]

[giving birth to kittens]

@LDT
yep.....the route has gotten so successful that proper rail/bus integration for this entire region seriously needs to be looked at.....the route technically does feed rail(zillmere station)...obviously the transfer penalty and walk to the station is keeping people on the bus.....the travel times to roma st are fairly similar for both modes so we definitely need action....

It is assuming the penalty is a fixed thing. It is not. Terminating at Chermside and building that rail station slip road for the bus (New Bus Network Proposal) would mean that pax would get the train (plenty of space there) and the same budget could now fund increased peak hour frequency on the bus route because it is not driving all the way to the CBD. Waiting times at bus stops would be reduced, due to higher frequency.

Honestly, it sounds like the direct bus network is about to collapse.

Rerouting 77 is a good alternative. That is likely to be cost neutral. Takes all the UQ pax at Northern busway stations not already served by the 66, then via tunnel to Buranda busway platforms (interchange with SE Busway) and then to UQ. There is PLENTY of room on the 77, it is one of the worst performing / empty bus routes in the entire network!!

Honestly, in peak hour, the problem could most likely be solved by building a bus platform between Zillmere Rd and Pretoria St, immediately next to the train station.

In vehicle time in peak is 10 min longer by bus than by bus and train. Which is to say that provided the weighted time lost by transferring is less than 10 minutes, you won't have to convince people to transfer, they just will.

The reason that the infrastructure is important though is that good infrastructure is how you manage transfer penalty. As a rule of thumb, transfers cost you between 1.5x the actual time lost, and 3x the actual time lost. And the number of physical obstacles in between the bus door and the train door is what influences the multiplier.

At Zillmere you have the following obstacles: a 5 min walk, minimal shelter, a traffic light, two flights of stairs and poor signage. That's just about as bad as it gets. So even if you get the timetabling very tight, you lose 8 min actual time, 5 to the walk, 3 to margin of error (5 if you are going for less ambition timetable integration). Which, with the bad multiplier is at least 24 min weighted time lost.

It's no surprise that nobody "spends" 24 min on a transfer at Zillmere to save just 10.

But with a better stop, the physical obstacles are just two flights of stairs, which is pretty close to as good as it gets, ie low multiplier. Also, without the walk, you only need 5 min actual time (or just 3 if you are going for the same ambition level of co-ordination as before). Throw in a 1.5 multiplier and you've got just 7.5 min weighted time lost.  As you can see, with good infrastructure, averagely synchronised timetables can work, but with bad infrastructure, even the most tightly co-ordinated timing is useless.

A new bus top and kiss and ride on the Eastern side of Zillmere station with Twin High speed Elevators and Eco High Speed Escalators to make a seamless transfer. Plus onboard PIDs on the Bus to notify the ETA of the train at the transfer point.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

22nd January 2016

Transport Minister, SCRAP the P332 Zillmere-UQ bus changes

Greetings,

Rail Back on Track calls on Transport Minister Stirling Hinchliffe to scrap the announced P332 Zillmere-UQ bus. Has public consultation and basic integrated network planning simply been thrown out the window? This route is  ~30 km long!

Instead, Route 77 should be altered to travel to UQ Lakes. The 77 is one of the most underutilised bus routes on the TransLink network. Northern busway passengers who would catch the first bus past and then transfer to Route 66 UQ Lakes, could now simply get the route 77 directly to UQ Lakes.

Enough of the gimmicks, lack of consultation and games! In the time Brisbane City Council has been resisting basic bus reforms, Auckland (NZ) almost finished the task and Hobart completed theirs. We even had time to come up with our own proposal http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Buses carrying high levels of air (even in peak hour), massive service duplication, competition between buses and trains, entire suburbs without decent public transport (Yeronga, Bulimba, The Centenary Suburbs and The Northwestern Suburbs), and an incredible complexity of routes are all problems.

Is it any wonder that Brisbane City Council's bus patronage has collapsed?

Why does the Queensland Government continue to sign bus contracts with Brisbane City Council? It is clear to us that the current offering is NOT value for money, in our opinion.

In addition to scrapping the P332 Zillmere-UQ changes, we call on Transport Minister Stirling Hinchliffe to legislate stripping Brisbane City Council of all public transport functions. The City of Brisbane Act (2010) should be altered to force upload of all bus operations to the Queensland Government. Every other Australian capital city manages to get by without handing this task to a local council.

Any concerns about potential funding loss can also be dealt with by fixing the funding to a set percentage of Brisbane City Council's budget. This too can be included in an altered City of Brisbane Act.

The sooner all public transport functions are stripped from the Lord Mayor and Brisbane City Council, the sooner we can look forward too fast, frequent and affordable public transport for all.

Enough is enough!

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

References:

Route P332
http://jp.translink.com.au/travel-information/network-information/buses/T/p332

Get to the University of Queensland on extended P332
http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-notices/70496/details

Route Review: Reroute 77 bus to UQ Lakes
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11740.msg163209#msg163209

Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report (2007)
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/
sept07_final_report_brisbane_mass_transit_investigation_lmt.pdf

[James]

@james

sour grapes that translink listened to them?.....so youve resorted to calling them a whinging spammer? Perhaps the guy who constantly comments on the logan services is a whinging spammer too huh? Translinks page is there for feedback..be it negative or positive.There was far more than just one commenting on the 330 overcrowding....

Yes, because if you post every single time the bus is late (without considering departing at a different time or suggesting an improvement), you are a whinger. The 428 which arrives at UQ just before 10am is always full, so I either catch the 411 or avoid 10am starts. Simple.

I think what I find most outrageous is that the service was extended to the very stop this bus user boards at. It is insane. In case it isn't obvious, I'm in absolute disbelief.

A new bus top and kiss and ride on the Eastern side of Zillmere station with Twin High speed Elevators and Eco High Speed Escalators to make a seamless transfer. Plus onboard PIDs on the Bus to notify the ETA of the train at the transfer point.

Lets be realistic, just making the train station look less rape-y and minimising the walk to the stairs would be enough. Brisbane people have it pretty good when it comes to transferring - in places like Vancouver, you have to deal with snow, freezing temperatures and miserable weather.

[ozbob]

Right on James.  It is time Brisbane-ites grew a set and toughened up!

[achiruel]

I suspect part of the problem with the interchange at Zillmere is just how far the stops are from the station. I mean, it's not super far, 280m to the outbound and 200m to the inbound stop according to Google Maps, but it's far enough to be inconvenient for many people. And to be honest I don't really see any way around it, although I do wonder why the inbound stop isn't located closer to Zillmere Rd and why the outbound one isn't sited on the southern side of Zillmere Rd. Lack of local knowledge may well be a problem here.

[techblitz]

^ finally someone with sense......literally THE only way you will pull people off the 330 to transfer into rail is to pull the route entirely and replace it with a truncated route....proper forced transfer....then put a new lower frequency route from zillmere to chermside to cover that shopping section.

What we need more fruitgroves......hands down the best station to transfer at when heading inbound........and yep it gets a lot of passengers jumping off the 150/rockets and feeding into rail.Correctly placed bus stops is the key to transfer uptake here folks...

@james

while the decision was band-adish.....the fact that passengers consistently hammered translink on the issue and got a reaction is a bloody brilliant.
You call it whingy........i call it major when people are getting left behind at thier local multiple times.....and something completely out of their control...what would you have them do mr fixit? By your rationing they should just walk to the damn train station becuase its their own fault for trying to catch consistenly full 330's. By your rationing also....every passenger across SEQ should just shut thier mouth and not comment on facebook if an issue arises with their bus....

I either catch the 411 or avoid 10am starts

students....i dunno....

[ozbob]

The response by BCC is knee-jerk and flawed. People can complain.

A proper integrated solution should be implemented not band aids. Sorting the 77 would deliver benefits for thousands, not a handful of passengers

It is the same approach as simple fare cuts.  BCC is the major problem for public transport in SEQ.  Until we get a Government with political courage it is only going to drift along from mediocre to p%ss poor.

[techblitz]

its really a case of firepower....translink has more pull against the private operators eg: hornibrook,surfside....but much less pull against BCC/BT. Its no doubt much easier for TL to come to an agreement with a private operator than it is with BT. This is all in the hands of the politicians....someone who can ignore all the union/political rhetoric and GET IT DONE.

[ozbob]

We have SEQ, apart from the Brisbane region bus, being tightly controlled by TransLink and Government.  We are rationed as to services and spans.  To wit, the battle to get a somewhat decent network for MBRL.  One hour buses out west regularly being cancelled.  It is difficult to get anyone to take notice.  Meanwhile personal rockets laid on at great expense and inefficiency around Brisbane.

BCC runs amok, does what it wants with no regard to the overall network.  BCC is anti other operators and sees them in terms of competitors not team partners in an integrated network.

The game has to called out for what it is.  It is a tragedy for public transport, not only for SEQ but for Brisbane sadly. 

[techblitz]

BT has a network large enough that they can simply chop and change/extend to their hearts delight...which is what we have recently seen with the legacy way re-routes ( billion dollar tunnel assistance) and this new p332.....network size/staffing power/fleet numbers and most importantly funding is giving them a huge advantage to play hard ball.


The p332 was a no-win situation for translink in any case...BT have the 330 patronage numbers and "sorry bus fulls" to pretty much guarantee packed buses for this new extension...

The other 2 options have definite merit...77 re-route or more 330`s....but once again...depot movements/bus avaiability need attention... and as you rightly put it ozbob " only for a handul of pax ".  Thats why we have seen this band-aid fix.....they obviously thought messing with depot movements/bus availability wasnt worth it......the lazy way out as they say....

[ozbob]

It is the cumulative affect of many band aids that has lead to arguably, one of the worst bus networks in existence. 

I really do think this is a line in the sand.  We will be going all out now. 

If anyone here does not support Brisbane bus network reform.  Time to go thanks.  A united view point is now required.

[HappyTrainGuy]

While everyone here keeps harping on about building an interchange at Zillmere how about we address the real issue about the rollingstock that plagues brisbane's northside. I'm talking about the BT buses that are suited for each route. You know.... so I don't have to watch those new optiums prime buses doing an inbound/outbound 338 in peak hour. Because if there is a bus needed its a high capacity to run the 338 from Chermside to Brendale/Eatons Crossing/Strathpine/Bald Hills/whereever the damn thing goes depending on what timetabled bus you get on.

And stop it with all this foam about interchanges on the eastern side of Zillmere. It's not going to happen. The bus stop is way back due to parking/property entrances/left turn lane at the intersection. The overpass is still going downhill where the intersection is so its impossible to have a stop there. It can be moved closer to the intersection but its not uncommon to see two buses stopped there in the afternoon so this will create a few nice traffic problems. And especially nothing major is going to be spent at the station when the eastern side of the station has been marked for removal. All this mention of Zilmere as an interchange point. How about fixing the bracken ridge running and extending the route to carseldine railway station and use the proper interchange there. They have two of them on both sides for christs sake. And the entire 330/331 peak hour capacity can but put onto 2 trains. That's where the interchange should be. Jump on the bus that takes a few minutes to get to the train station, board a train that departs more frequently than the bus in peak hour, avoid the Murphy Road/Gympie Road congestion and enjoy the Northgate-Bowen Hills limited express

One advantage of the new route extension is that the 332 will have a uniform stop at Chermside now due to its flawed bay allocation.

If anyone here does not support Brisbane bus network reform.  Time to go thanks.  A united view point is now required.

I understand that its a compromise but for the northside its still just another bandaid solution unfortunately. The whole northside network needs to be redone. Many routes that we know of today and in that reform are routes designed in the 80's that have just had extension after extension applied while competing with the railways. The most recent one would have been the 325/328/335/339 debacle. For example when some 335/339 terminated at Taigum interchange it would then run out of service to Boondall railway station and then do the 328 College Green loop. Customers could stay on the bus but they had to swipe off at Taigum , travel for free and tag back on at Boondall and tag off when getting off (This was even printed on the 325/328/335/339 timetables). The same for some inbound 325/335/339 running where the College Green loop was done first then it would either form a 325 at Boondall or run express but out of service to Taigum to form the inbound 335/339. Nothing like seeing a bus rock up to the first stop and having 5-6 people already waiting to tag on inside the bus before the doors opened. Must have been one of the reasons why the council thought the 328 should have its own route. Instead we got no via Chermside 339's that once terminated on Kirby road in the pre translink era. That was extended to Taigum in the late 90's where it stayed. Then came the early 2010's. Where the 325/335/339 did nothing and a new and extended 328. This was followed by the 328 getting cut due to no one using it, the 325 now doing the old college green route (like it and the 335/339 did previously), 339 cut in favor of more 335s and the 335 being extended to Sandgate railway station.

[ozbob]

... I understand that its a compromise but for the northside its still just another bandaid solution unfortunately. The whole northside network needs to be redone. Many routes that we know of today and in that reform are routes designed in the 80's that have just had extension after extension applied while competing with the railways ...

Exactly.

Brisbane network reform needs to proceed. Not more bandaids.

A clue to the mindset that operates within BCC is here

March 10, 2010.

Couriermail --> Lord Mayor Campbell Newman wants State Government to run buses

[techblitz]

it really has developed into a conundrum for the entire region.....a case of too little too late....i was warned years ago in 2009 by a business owner selling his fish and chip shop that bracken ridge was about too boom...and boom it did.....if a proper rail/bus interchange point was setup be it carseldine,geebung,zillmere or wherever...we could have had the new kipparing trains run express directly to said station....and pull a hell of a lot of people off buses through forced transfer...ultimately freeing up lots of buses for other parts of the peak network......

[#Metro]

All this mention of Zilmere as an interchange point. How about fixing the bracken ridge running and extending the route to carseldine railway station and use the proper interchange there. They have two of them on both sides for christs sake.

No. Bus network planning cannot be done in a route-by-route isolated process. A whole-of-network approach must be adopted. That is the lesson of the 2013 TransLink bus review. No individual route analysis anywhere - just a single map with everything on it. Houston did it that way.

If you look at the current bus network http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus or the new bus network, http://tiny.cc/newnetwork then sending the bus to Carseldine would cause an entire 4.5 km section of Murphy Road to lose service. And we are talking from 15 min frequency to hourly.

That doesn't work.

The New Bus Network proposal would deal with the 66 overcrowding issue by converting the 66 (and also the 333) to 150 pax superbuses and all door boarding. That would effectively double/triple capacity on those routes very quickly, all with the same labour costs to operate.

I think a bus interchange at Zillmere is possible. If level crossings are possible, then this is possible also. Offending intersections can be signalised or altered.

[HappyTrainGuy]

... I understand that its a compromise but for the northside its still just another bandaid solution unfortunately. The whole northside network needs to be redone. Many routes that we know of today and in that reform are routes designed in the 80's that have just had extension after extension applied while competing with the railways ...

Exactly.

Brisbane network reform needs to proceed. Not more bandaids.

A clue to the mindset that operates within BCC is here

March 10, 2010.

Couriermail --> Lord Mayor Campbell Newman wants State Government to run buses

Re old bus timetables.
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7120.msg76212#msg76212

[SurfRail]

No love for Bald Hills as an interchange?

[aldonius]

Not in the 330's current incarnation - it's half a suburb away. And the RBoT330 follows the same routing, with a bus access lane for transfer at Zillmere.

[SurfRail]

Certainly not in the current form.

Would be more in the nature of a local route, which might enable the 330 to be straightened out a bit.

[HappyTrainGuy]

All this mention of Zilmere as an interchange point. How about fixing the bracken ridge running and extending the route to carseldine railway station and use the proper interchange there. They have two of them on both sides for christs sake.

No. Bus network planning cannot be done in a route-by-route isolated process. A whole-of-network approach must be adopted. That is the lesson of the 2013 TransLink bus review. No individual route analysis anywhere - just a single map with everything on it. Houston did it that way.

If you look at the current bus network http://tiny.cc/checkyourbus or the new bus network, http://tiny.cc/newnetwork then sending the bus to Carseldine would cause an entire 4.5 km section of Murphy Road to lose service. And we are talking from 15 min frequency to hourly.

That doesn't work.

But that's exactly what you have done with your network reform (at least from what I can see for Brisbane's northside). As I've been saying for ages the whole northside pt network needs to be redone. If you read the bottom of the post you quoted you will also see this.

Anyway, since this isn't going to happen and as I've been saying for ages for the 330 its changing the routing through Bracken Ridge so you aren't touching Murphy Road at all. If you aren't aware (has to be about 5-6 months ago - I've been mentioning this fact all the way back in the 2013 translink review as the road was under construction and due to open around the same time as the new network was to be introduced in conjunction with the MBRL plans) you can now drive straight down Norris Road into Carseldine railway station without having to go via Lacey or Murphy Roads or even along Beams road to access any the station. For arguments sake on outbound trips instead of going left at the roundabout onto Telegraph Road turn right onto Depot Road and then left onto Quinlan Street and make to the current outbound terminus outside the retirement village. The inbound section now forms the current outbound leg. When the inbound section gets to Telegraph road instead it turns right and travels along Telegraph Road towards Norris Road (no buses currently travel along here/the road will be upgraded to 2 lanes in both directions with new intersections new shared pedestrian/cycling infrastructure with construction starting in mid 2016 IIRC). Left onto Norris Road/Roghan Road (Currently no buses travel along this section where housing is booming). Right onto Carselgrove Road (This section is only covered by a few peak hour rockets with multi story townhousing along this section). Right and terminate at Carseldine Railway Station where there are multiple multistory apartment complexes.



Currently its about a 5 minute trip by car from the roundabout on Lemke/Telegraph/Depot road to Carseldine railway station at ~6-6.30pm on a weekday. 8 minutes would give you roughly a 36kph average. Telegraph Road is 70kph zone/Norris Road and Carselgrove road 50kph zones.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Not in the 330's current incarnation - it's half a suburb away. And the RBoT330 follows the same routing, with a bus access lane for transfer at Zillmere.

Bus access lane? Seriously. The hell with all this foam??

[#Metro]

But that's exactly what you have done with your network reform (at least from what I can see for Brisbane's northside). As I've been saying for ages the whole northside pt network needs to be redone. If you read the bottom of the post you quoted you will also see this.

No, the New Bus Network Proposal has the bus continue to Chermside Interchange. It is a major shopping centre, and is necessary to connect with other buses in the area plus allow people to get to the shops. It is also necessary for all day patronage generation, not just peak hour only.

Proposal is to connect Pretoria St and Zillemere Rd with bus access. Could be a Council Election Promise Hey?

How are people going to get to Chermside shops with your proposal?

Perhaps check your browser display settings or download the proposal in Google Earth - it clearly has the bus continue to Chermside.

NB: New Bus Network Proposal was subjected to rigorous internal and external review, including open public consultation. It is a collective work.

[ozbob]

Our bus network proposal is a solution.  It is not the solution.

If reform went ahead it would be a tempered process based both on real data, more detailed local knowledge and so forth.  Similar to how MBRL network was fine tuned.

Our network simply shows that it can be achieved, with great results in terms of redeployed services so everyone wins in the end.  Patronage would be a lot higher, this in turn allows a better fare box and more improved services.

We are on a spiral to failure for many parts of Brisbane, and this is affecting seriously other regions.

[#Metro]

Our bus network proposal is a solution.  It is not the solution.

Exactly. That's why it is called 'proposal' and not 'plan'. Indeed, anybody may download a copy and 'remix' it if they have a better idea. This is actively encouraged. 

[hU0N]

The time is now to push for bus network reform.  Because like it or not, it's absolutely has to come from the Brisbane City Council.

BCC will contribute $175m to the acquisition, maintenance and operation of Brisbane's buses and ferries this year.  According to forward estimates, this amount will grow over the next four years.  And make no mistake, this money is intended to buy a seat at the planning table.  To put this in perspective, that's about $500,000 PER DAY that council contributes to running the network.  Based on the market rate costs of buying, maintaining and operating a bus (which is about $1600 - $2000 per day), the council funds the entire cost of about 300 buses (purchase, maintenance and staff/operation costs), or about one quarter of it's network.

Any network reform that sidelines the BCC can't be called cost neutral unless it REDUCES the overall number of buses in use on Brisbane bus routes by 300, or 25%.  And keep in mind, cost neutral is only half the goal. There has been talk about network reform creating savings that can be put towards lower fares or improved services in other translink service areas.  As wasteful as the BCC network might be, I'm not convinced that taking 25% off the top, plus another xx% for fare decreases AND xx% for redeployment to other areas will leave enough money to run any kind of reorganised network that can give adequate service.  Call me pessimistic.

That's why now is the time to strike.  With elections underway, it needs to be driven home to the various candidates that when it comes to transport policy, BUS REFORM IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS! And that means that any distraction or thought bubble that comes up should really be quickly shut down to reinforce the message that BUS REFORM IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.  Rod Harding's light rail brain fart isn't a possibly good idea at the wrong time.  It's waste and distraction, because BUS REFORM IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.  If a council candidate wants us to say anything nice about their transport policies, we need to ensure that this only happens when their policy is bus reform.

Because as far as we are concerned, in this election BUS REFORM IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.

[SurfRail]

Those numbers don't sound right to me - BCC only tips in around $80m I thought for the $300m or so annual cost of the service contract, which doesn't include new buses.  Their other revenue is from Treasury and washes straight back through the bus lease payment arrangements (so really isn't theirs at all but for accounting magic).

[hU0N]

Check the budget papers. It's $84m for general bus operations, another $10m or so for gliders. About $40m towards the operation of ferries and city cats. $35m or so towards bus purchase / refurb, and a couple extra million towards citycat / ferry purchase / refurb.

Spending on ferry docks and bus stop/station infrastructure is over and above. I didn't include it in the total because I think you could make a case for council to retain responsibility for most/all bus stop and station infrastructure, even without the buses.

Still, the point is that we should be taking this opportunity to push potential Lord Mayors and councillors to make bus reform their key transport policy, because that is the best possibly only chance in the next four years to get reform done in a way that doesn't blow a multi billion dollar hole in Translink's budget.

When it comes to transport in Brisbane, BUS REFORM IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS!

[HappyTrainGuy]

But that's exactly what you have done with your network reform (at least from what I can see for Brisbane's northside). As I've been saying for ages the whole northside pt network needs to be redone. If you read the bottom of the post you quoted you will also see this.

No, the New Bus Network Proposal has the bus continue to Chermside Interchange. It is a major shopping centre, and is necessary to connect with other buses in the area plus allow people to get to the shops. It is also necessary for all day patronage generation, not just peak hour only.

Proposal is to connect Pretoria St and Zillemere Rd with bus access. Could be a Council Election Promise Hey?

How are people going to get to Chermside shops with your proposal?

Perhaps check your browser display settings or download the proposal in Google Earth - it clearly has the bus continue to Chermside.

NB: New Bus Network Proposal was subjected to rigorous internal and external review, including open public consultation. It is a collective work.

Oh for god sake. If you are going to ever refer to routes in your proposed network where talking about routes that are in the current network refer to them a RB-routenumber. There's been many topics and replies now where someone goes off on a tangent about route numbers and stops only for them to not even exist because its a proposed route in their plan.

My original post was referring to the currently run 330. Not some proposed route that's going to terminate at Zillmere, Chermside or miss 4.5km of whatever. By running the current 330 in a reverse direction through Bracken Ridge and into Carseldine railway station (the current 330 route stays the same from the Cultural Centre to the roundabout the splits Depot Road, Lemke Road and Telegraph road) you introduce a transfer option. Some might elect to stay on the bus for a few extra minutes for their one seat trip while others might prefer the interchange for the faster trip which will soon be running limited express Northgate-City. That has the added advantage of opening up room for passengers Bracken Ridge-Chermside. This also opens up a new residential area in Fitzgibbon that currently has no public transport when needed. Many houses are in the 800m radius but the majority of the multi story town houses are in the 900m+ area. To actually get there to the station you are looking at 1km+ walk for some. Why not send a frequent bus down that way or we can just keep the status quo and have even more parking at Carseldine. It's become so bad now that people are parking near the roundabout on Beams road and walking to the station/parking at the department of main roads and walking. You know that's happening when their carpark has quite a number or cars there despite the main roads facility closing at 5pm.

Now I am mentioning for the first time any cutting of the 330 route. If you terminate the 330 at Chermside that makes a forced interchange. Considering the majority of the 330 patronage comes from Zillmere and Bracken Ridge most could easily be shifted onto the railway line with the new Chermside forced interchange. In fact many people that use the 330 are people that should be using the railway line. The same can be said for other areas that increase the load on the Gympie Road corridor. 7 minute peak hour wait at Carseldine with a faster trip time to the city or wait at Chermside where the wait can be a few minutes to 15 minutes and dealing with Gympie Road traffic. Ah how many times have I mentioned a Chermside forced interchange and people have attacked me on that. 'Somebody' was quick to always blast me for typing that haha.

And connecting those two streets is never going to happen. You can propose and say all you want but the simple fact is that that particular space of land will never be made into a road. Its currently reserved by Queensland rail as a quad track and access/storage area.

[#Metro]

Oh for god sake. If you are going to ever refer to routes in your proposed network where talking about routes that are in the current network refer to them a RB-routenumber. There's been many topics and replies now where someone goes off on a tangent about route numbers and stops only for them to not even exist because its a proposed route in their plan.

If you believe that you have a better idea, then you are more than welcome to download the network and remix it. This is actively encouraged. Yes, it can be confusing, but hey, first world problems...

If you rotate the 330 anticlockwise, a 1.6 km section of Phillips St is unserved. You also need to bend the route back down to Carseldine - lengthening the route ($). However, there is rapid development in that area, so perhaps it could work.

Now I am mentioning for the first time any cutting of the 330 route. If you terminate the 330 at Chermside that makes a forced interchange. Considering the majority of the 330 patronage comes from Zillmere and Bracken Ridge most could easily be shifted onto the railway line with the new Chermside forced interchange. In fact many people that use the 330 are people that should be using the railway line. The same can be said for other areas that increase the load on the Gympie Road corridor. 7 minute peak hour wait at Carseldine with a faster trip time to the city or wait at Chermside where the wait can be a few minutes to 15 minutes and dealing with Gympie Road traffic. Ah how many times have I mentioned a Chermside forced interchange and people have attacked me on that. 'Somebody' was quick to always blast me for typing that haha.

Agree with you there. Not all cuts are bad - certainly was not on the Gold Coast. Trains have plenty of capacity, unlike bus.

And connecting those two streets is never going to happen. You can propose and say all you want but the simple fact is that that particular space of land will never be made into a road. Its currently reserved by Queensland rail as a quad track and access/storage area.

I disagree with that. If QR are using it as an access road, vehicles are driving over it, so what's the difference? Many times a track amplification has occured and the new track has had to go through a car park. What's the difference here??

[aldonius]

Many times a track amplification has occured and the new track has had to go through a car park. What's the difference here??

Will there be space for both during/after the amplification?

[#Metro]

When is the amplification scheduled?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Oh for god sake. If you are going to ever refer to routes in your proposed network where talking about routes that are in the current network refer to them a RB-routenumber. There's been many topics and replies now where someone goes off on a tangent about route numbers and stops only for them to not even exist because its a proposed route in their plan.

If you believe that you have a better idea, then you are more than welcome to download the network and remix it. This is actively encouraged. Yes, it can be confusing, but hey, first world problems...

All I am saying is if you mention any of your routes, say that its a planned route. I was saying absolutely nothing about your planned network. I was talking the current 332 extension, about modifying the running of the current 330 through Bracken Ridge (something I have been saying alot), running rollingstock where it should be instead of seeing an empty ultra high capacity bus doing a 336/337/338 run in relation to some of the problems on the northside and suddenly you are bring up 4.5km of Murphy Road not getting serviced and how are passengers getting to Chermside.

If you rotate the 330 anticlockwise, a 1.6 km section of Phillips St is unserved. You also need to bend the route back down to Carseldine - lengthening the route ($). However, there is rapid development in that area, so perhaps it could work.

False. There is nothing big missing. The only section of road that is cut this is the left turn at the roundabout to the next intersection for Denham Street. There are no 330 stops along this section of road. As I said and as the map I drew shows. For outbound it turns right at the roundabout, left onto Quinlan Street and then up to the current outbound terminus. But instead of terminating it continues on with the inbound route. It follows the same route until it gets to the servo on Denham Street where the usual inbound service turns left onto Telegraph road then right at the roundabout onto Lemke road (This is the same intersection where the outbound 330 turns right off Telegraph Road onto Denham Street before turning left onto Phillips Street). But instead of continuing with the inbound route to the roundabout to turns right onto Telegraph road (no current bus stops along here) and then continues to the Norris road intersection. It then turns left onto Norris Road (Still no current buses use this). Norris Road then turns into Roghan road at one of the roundabouts and the rest is straight forward.

If you believe that you have a better idea, then you are more than welcome to download the network and remix it. This is actively encouraged. Yes, it can be confusing, but hey, first world problems...

I can't be arsed because the proper and only solution to fixing Brisbane's northside PT network is a total network revision. The current bus network for Brisbane's northside is just fundamentally flawed. You can cut and paste routes here and there but in the end youre still basing a proposed network based off something that is fundamentally flawed from the start. It might improve Albany Creek with a buz or whatever but at the same time to achieve that you've shot to bits the bus routes through Aspley, Geebung, Carseldine, Chermside, Bald Hills and Taigum. Quite frankly first thing I'd seriously cut and go to town on are the northside buz routes. They are the most poorly managed routes on the northside. Just like translink I'd cut the sh%t out of the 340. Cut the absolute hell out of the Gympie Road corridor (the number of routes and stops). Throw more stops onto the Gympie Road corridor (as in merge some of the 370 stops into the 333). Go to town on the Chermside interchange. I'd go one stop further than translink and cut the 330 at Chermside to force a transfer along with rerouting the 330 into Carseldine Railway station. Without changing the fundamental corridors anything else is slapping bandaids on a severed leg. For what its worth the translink review was hands down the best bus network I've ever seen for Brisbane's northisde. Forget the shitstorm that was brought up on the west/southside. It wasn't perfect but it was f***ing what Brisbane's northern public transport users needed. It introduced so many redundancy routes should one key area fail while at the same time using those same redundancy routes as proper local feeder routes between interchanges and major key points of interest. Take the proposed north loop. That one route had so much redundancy should there be a rail delay. It was long but it linked every major interchange be it rail or bus and fed key points of interest. It suddenly opened the whole northside to other transport alternatives. And the east-west routes are what helped enable that.

I disagree with that. If QR are using it as an access road, vehicles are driving over it, so what's the difference? Many times a track amplification has occured and the new track has had to go through a car park. What's the difference here??

As I said its a access road and storage area. You won't be seeing any QR vehicles driving over 2.5m high piles of ballast, sleepers and what not. During track closures you'll see crews using the area as a little staging area. If you do want to have a road you need to add a new intersection which will increase traffic in the area. You'll also need to add a new access lane so widening Murphy Road. Adjust the height of the new road. Build noise barriers. Additional drainage. Lighting. And the list goes on. And all that goes out the window as soon as a 4th line wants to get put through. Quite frankly the money spent on doing all that would be better put towards a better public transport network. You have to remember a large portion of people that catch the 330 are from Bracken Ridge and from Zillmere. If you ever watch the buses in the afternoon there you'll see quite a number get off the bus and then instantly cross Murphy Road. Passengers simply avoid walking to the train station. Quite frankly that area is a sh%t hole. Especially at night when you get the grubs lurking around there. Force the interchange at Chermside and you can shift the loadings from bus onto the rail in an instant especially if the rail journey was even faster than it is now.

Many times a track amplification has occured and the new track has had to go through a car park. What's the difference here??

Will there be space for both during/after the amplification?

Quite simply no. The properties between the bridge and the car park entrance will make way for a 4th track and platform. The current access road is an old siding.

When is the amplification scheduled?

No planned date. The deciding factor is the inner city followed by Trouts Road corridor and CAMOS. Either spend money on a new corridor or push through a quad with possible 5th track Northgate-Bowen Hills. Catch 22.

[#Metro]

False. There is nothing big missing.

Thanks for the map. Idea is good, and could work. Would require extension as Carseldine is further away than the concept map suggests.

I can't be arsed because the proper and only solution to fixing Brisbane's northside PT network is a total network revision.

The New Bus Network is a total revision.

As I said its a access road and storage area. You won't be seeing any QR vehicles driving over 2.5m high piles of ballast, sleepers and what not. During track closures you'll see crews using the area as a little staging area. If you do want to have a road you need to add a new intersection which will increase traffic in the area. You'll also need to add a new access lane so widening Murphy Road. Adjust the height of the new road. Build noise barriers. Additional drainage. Lighting. And the list goes on. And all that goes out the window as soon as a 4th line wants to get put through. Quite frankly the money spent on doing all that would be better put towards a better public transport network.

Disagree. The fact that building Clem 7 required digging through solid rock and under the Brisbane river didn't stop it. IMHO this is just laziness dressed up as a physical impossibility. It's possible and can be done. Some other station can be used as a staging area.

In fact, there is a small car park already on the alignment!

[HappyTrainGuy]

Yes and the people that were building the clem 7 were expecting 100,000 vehicles a day to use it. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should. Sure you could build a road between the two but at a massive total expense and turning the area into a real cluster f**k when it comes to traffic flow. Keep the traffic moving but at the same time just destroy the bus network from running smoothly and on time. And all that expense is mute as soon as a 4th track goes through. If you are going to make assumptions about building infrastructure in an area like this make sure you actually know the area and what its like at different times of day. The cost and expense required far out weights the benefit.

[verbatim9]

Good thing about the Clem 7 is that the 77 uses it

[ozbob]

Check the budget papers. It's $84m for general bus operations, another $10m or so for gliders. About $40m towards the operation of ferries and city cats. $35m or so towards bus purchase / refurb, and a couple extra million towards citycat / ferry purchase / refurb.

Spending on ferry docks and bus stop/station infrastructure is over and above. I didn't include it in the total because I think you could make a case for council to retain responsibility for most/all bus stop and station infrastructure, even without the buses.

Still, the point is that we should be taking this opportunity to push potential Lord Mayors and councillors to make bus reform their key transport policy, because that is the best possibly only chance in the next four years to get reform done in a way that doesn't blow a multi billion dollar hole in Translink's budget.

When it comes to transport in Brisbane, BUS REFORM IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS!

Bus reform is very important, a case we have pushed for a while now.  Fare review also matters ... 

I have meet with candidates and briefed them on bus network reform.  We can only do so much, in the end it is up to all candidates including the Lord Mayor to rise to the occasion.

It would help if members could please write letters to the editor, mainstream and local, about the need for bus reform.

Thanks.

[ozbob]

It is looking rather obvious what Team Quirk's strategy appears to be.  Run rough shod over TransLink and the State Government, drip feed minor bus changes (so far P332, P238, 475) and come out with a ' bus tunnel/bridge ' project?

What is needed is a complete reformation of Brisbane's bus network. Expensive bus infrastructure is not needed, is probably not affordable, it is simply matter of using what we have a lot wiser. A solution we have proposed > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11047.0  It is a solution not the solution but it shows what can be achieved.

It is a sad indictment on Team Quirk and Brisbane City Council that they fail to grasp the moment and properly look after the community.

TransLink and the State Government must act to sort this festering mess.

[#Metro]

Sure you could build a road between the two but at a massive total expense and turning the area into a real cluster f**k when it comes to traffic flow. Keep the traffic moving but at the same time just destroy the bus network from running smoothly and on time. And all that expense is mute as soon as a 4th track goes through. If you are going to make assumptions about building infrastructure in an area like this make sure you actually know the area and what its like at different times of day. The cost and expense required far out weights the benefit.

You are welcome to make your case, and I will make mine.
I believe this can go ahead. The distance is quite short. For all the noise about how this bare strip of land cannot be touched - there is already a small car park on it. So there.

And the bus network isn't running smoothly or on time, that was the origin of the original complaint!

I look forward to proper engineering review of the situation.

[James]

@james

while the decision was band-adish.....the fact that passengers consistently hammered translink on the issue and got a reaction is a bloody brilliant.
You call it whingy........i call it major when people are getting left behind at thier local multiple times.....and something completely out of their control...what would you have them do mr fixit? By your rationing they should just walk to the damn train station becuase its their own fault for trying to catch consistenly full 330's. By your rationing also....every passenger across SEQ should just shut thier mouth and not comment on facebook if an issue arises with their bus....

I either catch the 411 or avoid 10am starts

students....i dunno....

The rational way to solve this problem would be to simply add more 330 services. Uses can send a letter saying they regularly observe delays/full buses on xyz services. Personally, I would. I'd much rather catch a train than sit on Gympie Road.

Bus reform is very important, a case we have pushed for a while now.  Fare review also matters ... 

I have meet with candidates and briefed them on bus network reform.  We can only do so much, in the end it is up to all candidates including the Lord Mayor to rise to the occasion.

It would help if members could please write letters to the editor, mainstream and local, about the need for bus reform.

Thanks.

Fare reform appears well on the path to being fixed. Bus reform on the other hand is in total and absolute disarray, with no sign of being fixed.

At least the announced 238 isn't a crime against network planning like the P332 will be.

[#Metro]

The rational way to solve this problem would be to simply add more 330 services. Uses can send a letter saying they regularly observe delays/full buses on xyz services. Personally, I would. I'd much rather catch a train than sit on Gympie Road.

A good crisis is an opportunity to create change. A short service could be put on, visiting rail stations, and terminating at Chermside.

Or is that too hard for QLD?