BCC bus timetable changes

[ozbob]

Quest --> Brisbane City Council's Public and Active Transport Committee reviews proposal to change bus timetables

BRISBANE's bus timetables will get a shake-up to reflect actual running times, with some services changing up to 24 minutes.

But there will be no changes to frequency and no changes to trip numbers under the proposed timetable review, Brisbane City Council's Public and Active Transport Committee heard this morning.

Brisbane Transport's Greg Spelman said it would be the first comprehensive review of bus timetables in the city in more than 10 years.

"As Brisbane has grown and developed, timetables have become increasingly inaccurate.

"Services would more accurately reflect real world running conditions.

"This is just making sure those times are accurate."

Bus drivers are also being put under pressure to keep to "unrealistic timetables and deal with increasingly frustrated passengers", Mr Spelman said.

At the moment, if one service is running two minutes late, that will impact the next service, and has a "cascading effect" on even unrelated routes, the committee was told.

Weekday trips would have an average trip time increase of three minutes across the city and Saturdays and Sundays would have a two minute increase.

The project involves reviewing the running times for all trips in the network, including more than 10,000 independent weekday trips, more than 5300 Saturday trips and more than 4300 Sunday trips.

Brisbane Transport is currently negotiating a new contract with TransLink, and the updated timetable will form part of negotiations.

Deputy Mayor Adrian Schrinner said TransLink had to pay "extra hours to council based on actual running times".

"TransLink is underpaying council significantly because the timetable doesn't reflect the real, actual running time," Cr Shrinner said.

"We're being underpaid $5.2 million at the moment because they haven't upgraded the timetable in 10 years."

The committee was told the new timetable would be in place "sooner rather than later" so council could enter the contract with TransLink on that basis.

Examples of changes include the 112 Mt Gravatt campus to city inbound in the peak AM, which will have a trip time increase up to 15 minutes.

The 220 Wynnum to City cityxpress outbound in the peak PM would have up to 21 minutes trip time increased, the 335 Sandgate station to city inbound would have a peak AM increase of up to 24 minutes, P236 Balmoral via Thynne Rd to city prepaid fare express inbound peak AM would have an increase up to 16 minutes.

EXAMPLES OF PROPOSED TRIP INCREASES

■ 112 Mt Gravatt campus to city — Inbound peak AM — up to 15 minutes

■ 120 BUZ Garden City to city — Inbound peak AM — up to 9 minutes

■ 200 BUZ Carindale Heights to city — Inbound peak AM — up to 15 minutes

■ 220 Wynnum to city cityxpress — Outbound peak PM — up to 21 minutes

■ P221 Wynnum to city prepaid fare rocket — Inbound peak AM — up to 23 minutes

■ P231 Balmoral via Riding Rd to city prepaid fare express — Inbound peak AM — up to 15 minutes

■ P236 Balmoral via Thynne Rd to city prepaid fare express — Inbound peak AM — up to 16 minutes

■ 335 Sandgate station to city — Inbound peak AM — up to 24 minutes

■ 351 Bridgeman Downs to city rocket — Inbound peak AM — up to 8 minutes

■ 353 McDowall to city all stops — Outbound peak PM — up to 25 minutes

■ 445 Fig Tree Pocket to city all stops — Outbound peak PM — up to 8 minutes

■ 460 Heathwood to city CityXpress — Inbound peak AM — up to 14 minutes

[ozbob]

Network design still unsatisfactory.

[ozbob]

This really shows up the serious failure that is public transport in Brisbane and SEQ.

BCC is only interested in trying to improve the on time running to meet contractual obligations in effect. 

The fact the network itself needs review and redesign is ignored. 

H O P E L E S S !

Looks like TransLink and the State Government have thrown in the towel.   

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

23rd August 2016

Brisbane Transport bus timetable changes?

Greetings,

Announced today that BCC intends to review the Brisbane bus timetables.  It seems that it is only to address running times, not route and/or network design and frequencies.

Quest --> Brisbane City Council's Public and Active Transport Committee reviews proposal to change bus timetables

Brisbane bus network needs a complete root and branch review (1).  Continuing to run near empty buses to congest the CBD along the same bus routes  and the same frequencies is costly, inefficient and stops buses being deployed on new routes such as cross-suburban connectors, and better frequency out in the suburbs, and more buses to feed key bus, ferry and rail stations.

There is no better demonstration of the failure that is public transport in Queensland than this.  Have TransLink and the Queensland State Government given up completely?



Best wishes
Robert

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

1. Brisbane - bus network proposal
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11047.0

[ozbob]

[ozbob]

Bus network is broken, slow it down to fit in with the congestion mess.

I am really appalled by all of this sadly. 

I really wonder why we even bother with the weak spineless outfits that purport to administer public transport in this banana-land state.

TransLink is a completely neutered,  the State Government lacks moral courage.  Not looking too bright is it team?

[tazzer9]

While their at it, why not make layover have an extra 30 minutes of layover time, just in case the buses run that late.   Biggest worry is how much some of the timetables are out by, even if some of the extra time is just padding.

[nathandavid88]

Here's the Brisbane Times version of the article.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbane-bus-review-probes-services-arriving-25-minutes-late-20160823-gqyx6h.html

Brisbane bus review probes services arriving 25 minutes late
Tony Moore

Some Brisbane buses take 25 minutes longer to complete their routes than timetables allow, resulting in the Queensland government underpaying Brisbane City Council $5.2 million a year.

A council committee meeting on Tuesday morning was told the first review of bus services since 2012 was about to begin.

Some Brisbane bus timeteables have not been reviewed for 10 years.

Translink – the state government's public transport authority – pays council to run the bus services based on how long it takes to travel the route, which is set out in the timetable.

Translink approves the bus timetables.

Increasing traffic congestion on major roads used by buses is now making buses take longer to cover their routes, council's public transport review team told the committee.

"So they have been hit by increasingly inaccurate running times, despite timetables being prepared as accurately as possible," the team leader told the committee.

Brisbane's deputy mayor and committee chairman Adrian Schrinner said the cost was preventing additional services.

"Translink is underpaying the council significantly," he told the committee on Tuesday.

Enoggera Ward councillor Andrew Wines said the "cascading" effect of accumulated delays on successive bus journeys meant the cost needed to be addressed.

"It really is quite a significant figure," he said.

Translink has been contacted for comment.

Brisbane's public transport committee on Tuesday morning was shown that bus routes in 2016 take an extra 25 minutes longer to complete than they did in 2012.

The report shows the worst five bus trips include:

    353 bus route McDowall to City requires an extra 25 minutes to complete.
    335 Sandgate station to the City requires an extra 24 minutes to complete.
    221 Wynnum to City (inbound) requires an extra 23 minutes to complete.
    220 Wynnum to City (outbound) requires an extra 21 minutes to complete.
    236 Balmoral to City (inbound) requires an extra 16 minutes to complete.
    112 Mt Gravatt to City (inbound) requires an extra 15 minutes to complete.

Council is about to begin a review of its bus services, the first since 2012 when council took over the review from Translink.

Early issues that have been:

    Increasing "under-payment" from Translink as bus routes run well over time.
    Unpopular bus runs to train stations which are not popular with commuters.
    Routes where services are being repeatedly cut, because earlier runs over lap.

That could mean removing some "frequent" services, which are becoming increasingly "cut out" as bus journeys run over time and into the next scheduled service, the briefing suggests.

Brisbane buses carry 50 per cent more people than south-east Queensland's trains, the committee was told.

While trains carry large numbers of suburban commuters in and out of the city, buses provide direct links to hospitals, shopping centres, universities and major sports grounds.

Council's Opposition Leader Peter Cumming asked if the review intended to add extra bus services to rail stations.

Cr Schrinner said unfortunately bus routes to train stations were some of the "most unpopular" bus routes with commuters, despite being popular with public transport academics.

"It is because the train frequencies are not as good as the bus frequencies and also because people do not want to be squeezed onto crowded trains," he said.

Deagon Ward councillor Jared Cassidy asked if the review meant cutting the number of seats offered on some routes.

He also asked if the line-up of buses across the Victoria Bridge and the Southeast Busway contributed to the extra time spent on southside bus routes.

Cr Schrinner said the review - only in its infancy - would ensure bus services were deployed according the 2016 customer demand.

He said increasing on-road traffic was affecting the time spent on buses, more than the time on the Victoria Bridge.

[Gazza]

Will be interesting to see how the padded timetables make things look for routes that duplicate rail services.

Already many of them are slower than if you provide interhange...I reckon the time wasted with direct buses will become even more stark.

[brissypete]

I wonder if this might cause more issues of early running and people missing the bus because drivers dont observe the timetable.  Similar issues happen off peak with trains since the last timetable update added fat.

Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk

[ozbob]

@Schrinner @StirlHinchliffe SEQ >>> Brisbane. Brisbane bus network is ruining public transport not only for Brisbane but all of SEQ.#qldpol

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) August 23, 2016

. @Schrinner @StirlHinchliffe we all know what is really needed. Proper bus network reform. Other jurisdictions have done very well.#qldpol

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) August 23, 2016

[ozbob]

Will be interesting to see how the padded timetables make things look for routes that duplicate rail services.

Already many of them are slower than if you provide interhange...I reckon the time wasted with direct buses will become even more stark.

Indeed.  Beyond farce.   I think they are also trying to confect a case for the ' quack metro '  ...  two wrongs never make a right ...

[ozbob]

 

@Robert_Dow @StirlHinchliffe we support network reform - just not the botched, unworkable & highly unpopular version cooked-up last time.

— Cr Adrian Schrinner (@Schrinner) August 23, 2016

[verbatim9]

The 370 333 332 330 331 340. 341 along the Gympie road corridor and Northern busway guaranteed late every weekday morning as well as afternoon peak except for School holidays when traffic volumes are lower. Also allowing buses priority approach onto and off busways especially the Northern busway @ Gympie Road, Lutwyche Rd and off at Bridge road Herston would help.

[ozbob]

@Schrinner @StirlHinchliffe Good! Let's do it. Great gains can be made.

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) August 23, 2016

[SurfRail]

What a f%cking dill.

Brisbane is such a damned backwater.  It wouldn't be so bad if they weren't dragging the other more enlightened areas down with them.

[#Metro]

I think Adrian meant to write:

"we support ^{#^$%*} network reform - just not the botched, unworkable & highly unpopular version cooked-up last time."

#^$%* = A whole heap of technicalities, exclusions, exceptions and variations that actually mean "We DON'T support bus network reform."

In any case, it has already been done ---> http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

BCC should not even be conducting a bus review. It is the CONTRACTOR not the REGULATOR.

I am pretty sure the Lord Mayor was on record somewhere that the last bus review was a "one off", well, clearly it isn't.

The right way to do this would  be to announce a bus reform commission, import all the people who sat on the Fare Review Panel PLUS Peter Quick from the Sunshine Coast (he used to work for BCC in the transport section) and perhaps add one or two BCC staff to it.

Having to review the bus network again so soon after the 2013 review is an admission of failure. It is not working!!

"Underpayment". Really - they want more money from TransLink to fuel their cost explosion. As was predicted in the Audit.

*BOOM* (Sound of costs and gov't subsidies going through the roof at City Hall)

[#Metro]

Oh dear.

Cr Schrinner said unfortunately bus routes to train stations were some of the "most unpopular" bus routes with commuters, despite being popular with public transport academics.

"It is because the train frequencies are not as good as the bus frequencies and also because people do not want to be squeezed onto crowded trains," he said.

[James]

Good to see that the timetables are at least going to get a re-jig. Some of the bus timetables in the western suburbs are older than the University students now using those services. It would be funny if it wasn't true. Regardless, it is merely re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, with cuts to the routes which don't fit with BCC's philosophy (rail feeders). Of course the feeder buses will fail when they run less often than the direct service option.

Here's hoping this next "review" might at least force 'soft' changes (like 435 terminating at Indro full-time, or the removal of more air parcel services from Cultural Centre).

[HappyTrainGuy]

335... to increase by 24 minutes...... what the f****?

I can tell you exactly where those delays occur. Transiting the Valley/CBD and Webster road congestion. Also the detour it takes around the Prince Charles hospital due to everyone rushing to get a parking spot on the street. Outbound in off peak blantly shows the congestion through the Valley. Address the real f%cking problem. Argh! The old translink review for the northside was great. It provided a network to get to the shops. To the train station. To bus stations. To major points of interest. It even had redundancy for the rail network should that go tits up/rail closures. f****. Can they do anything right. 

Oh dear.

Cr Schrinner said unfortunately bus routes to train stations were some of the "most unpopular" bus routes with commuters, despite being popular with public transport academics.

"It is because the train frequencies are not as good as the bus frequencies and also because people do not want to be squeezed onto crowded trains," he said.

Might wanna check that. Petrie-Northgate has a higher peak hour frequency than their toted buz peak hour standard with a train every 7 minutes. Not to mention the span of hours are longer.

[#Metro]

Might wanna check that. Petrie-Northgate has a higher peak hour frequency than their toted buz peak hour standard with a train every 7 minutes.

It's octopus ink. Radar chaff. Smoke and mirrors.

1 train = 15 - 16  buses.

Major capacity was added to the Ipswich corridor. Train frequency upgraded to BUZ frequency on the FG, BNL and CL.

There should be no issue with feeding buses into Indooroopilly, Morningside, or Mitchelton, which is where most of the New Bus Network feeds into. Where there might be issues (i.e. accessibility ramps etc) this can be fixed with minor, low cost works.

Where that isn't good enough, close timetabling co-ordination of buses with trains can work.

Most of the New Bus Network proposal does not rely on interchange anyway. http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Road network will continue to degrade because it is Priority C, interchange to trains to get Priority A.

Time to stop listening. Take their bus functions away!

[HappyTrainGuy]

Might wanna check that. Petrie-Northgate has a higher peak hour frequency than their toted buz peak hour standard with a train every 7 minutes.

It's octopus ink. Radar chaff. Smoke and mirrors.

1 train = 15 - 16  buses.

Major capacity was added to the Ipswich corridor. Train frequency upgraded to BUZ frequency on the FG, BNL and CL.

Where that isn't good enough, close timetabling co-ordination of buses with trains can work.

Most of the New Bus Network proposal does not rely on interchange anyway. http://tiny.cc/newnetwork

Road network will continue to degrade because it is Priority C, interchange to trains to get Priority A.

2 trains = the entire peak hour 330/331/332 capacity.

[#Metro]

What bothers me is that they want $5 million for slower services! Pay more and get less!

[HappyTrainGuy]

The sad thing is its also the reason why the railway line doesnt scream a higher frequency - especially with the Caboolture line. The feeder services along most of the line are non existent or they are hourly or worse. Meaning you have to rely on people walking to the station or them driving there. Now consider most of these stations are in some shotty locations and people just won't use them. Next time you are on a plane taking off or landing in Brisbane from the north at night you can see every train station just completely lighting up the station and its grounds. Look around it and its just darkness with unlit pathways, a couple street lights here and there if you are lucky and or all the bright populated areas are well away from the station ie Narangba, Morayfield, Dakabin, Petrie, Sunshine, Virginia etc. You can spot Strathpine instantly as the industrial area is lit up more than the streets and pathways away from the station. Not many people are going to walk along a unlit pathway thats well away from everything when its already dark at 5.30pm for half the year.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Hey BCC. Since the Geebung overpass went in what was done to address the 1 minute interchange time on some services?? You know how in that 1 minute you missed both trains in both directions. Because you do provide excellent feeder services. Like how the 325 stops 1km away from the train station while the 326/327/336/337 stop at the platform entry gates. The same entry gates that we look at from the bus as the train departs even though the bus is running ahead or on time.



Hey BCC. What's been done to address the overcrowding at Chermside bus interchange??? Not with passengers but with so many buses arriving at the same time combined with the sh%t house stop arrangments? Like how 1x 333 sits idle in 2 bays while a 330, 340, 335 all fight over the same bay often blocking the interchange. And because your drivers park buses where they shouldn't because of this poorly designed system buses can't even get around other buses. Like how the 330 blocked the 340. It had to reverse and then got stuck between the 330 and a parked bus. Or how the 354 driver asked if the driver of this bus could move forward because he couldn't get out. The bus was parked there due to another bus in front having used the same stop at the same time.















Must be only related to Chermside then..... but wait. What about Aspley? Where is this 346 meant to stop if all the bays are occupied with buses saying out of service or depot?


Just a one off.

Two...

Three...


Hey just add some fat and it will work itself out. The rest of the other network can have its crappy bus network but give the northside the Translink network as it was something that people up here could actually f%cking use instead of using a car!

[techblitz]

while the timetable rejigging has come way too late.....it is good to see them finally taking some form of action....however whats good for one should be good for the other....if BCC/BT get these props through....the onus should be on translink to look at the outer region problem children  eg:534/522 as well as any others having constant peak lateness issues......

It is because the train frequencies are not as good as the bus frequencies

I would say he is purposely having a go at Zillmere/330 and Carseldine/340...the bottom line is that if a HF bus does get delayed by 5+ mins and arrives late to the station then QR`s crap 30 min frequency becomes a big frickin issue....

but we can switch that mr schrinner....

It is because the bus frequencies are not as good as the train frequencies

routes like the 367(ferny grove)...362(Keperra) , 398 (grovely) which are passing stations with proper 15min freq where the bus is only on hourly....

he would have had more merit in highlighting QR`s substandard stations..eg: htg`s concerns but also specifically mentioning the Ipswich/beaudesert rd stations...coopers plains,Moorooka,,salisbury,rocklea.....with the latter 3 looking rather 3rd world by todays standards....

Like how the 325 stops 1km away

lolz if your talking about the o/b stop opposite the rsl carpark...150 metres at most.....chickens feed compared to say coopers plains station which is about double the walk;)

[Golliwog]

Pretty sure this is just BCC's first public salvo in their contract negotiation with Translink. Didn't like what they were being asked to do so decide to make this new review and blame Translink for underpaying them for not performing to the timetables they reviewed 2 years ago.

The article says some timetables haven't been reviewed in 10 years? Utter cr@p, the Translink review was doing the entire network, BCC took over, therefore they too were reviewing the entire network. So only 2 years ago they accepted those timetables as they were. Now they can't perform to contract and are suffering financially, as their contract quite rightly says they should be? Tough.

If BCC is saying that these timetable reviews will be forming part of their contract negotiations, be interesting to see whats already on the Translink side of the table in terms of timetables and other clauses.

[SurfRail]

They are going to absolutely wreck public transport patronage in Brisbane if this goes ahead.  Nobody is going to spend nearly half an hour extra on the bus for the privilege of not having to transfer.

How is this not enraging more people?  Gah.

[achiruel]

Couldn't see this posted elsewhere

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/angry-council-threatens-to-cancel-popular-maroon-city-glider-to-save-5m-20160823-gqzgwl.html

Brisbane's deputy mayor on Tuesday night threatened to cancel the popular Maroon Glider bus service to save $5 million if the state government did not help with the $10 million in costs to build roadworks to support the Queens Wharf casino and hotel development.

Thank <deity> that something useful might come out of the Newman phallus project.

[James]

The article says some timetables haven't been reviewed in 10 years? Utter cr@p, the Translink review was doing the entire network, BCC took over, therefore they too were reviewing the entire network. So only 2 years ago they accepted those timetables as they were. Now they can't perform to contract and are suffering financially, as their contract quite rightly says they should be? Tough.

I think what the article means is that some timetables have not been changed in 10 years. Which is accurate, as the last timetable rejig of most non-BUZ routes was done in 2004/05. Some routes are even worse for wear - GCL for example (2002). While changing a network isn't an indication of a good network, a lack of change over such a long period indicates transit laziness.

They are going to absolutely wreck public transport patronage in Brisbane if this goes ahead.  Nobody is going to spend nearly half an hour extra on the bus for the privilege of not having to transfer.

Really, it isn't padding the timetables with extra time - it will just make the current timetable more representative of how long travel time really is. Take the 335. This service frequently runs 15 minutes late into Chermside. Instead of having it run late (and BCC bear the cost of overtime), the timetable will be adjusted to make the bus arrive 'on time' into Chermside, letting TransLink bear the cost of additional labour. People are already spending this time in transit anyway. The only thing it will do is make services appear less attractive on paper in peak, yet more reliable for users.

I can't believe I'm defending BT here, but this is going to result in more buses running on time. It is a lazy solution though. Instead of introducing bus priority measures or reforming the network, trips will just take longer.

[achiruel]

reforming the network

This is the key, and exactly what Quirk refuses to do!

Considering the pitiful amount of funding BT are putting in these days, Hinchliffe needs to grow a pair and demand BT comply with network reform or he'll get a competent contractor to do the job.

[HappyTrainGuy]

he would have had more merit in highlighting QR`s substandard stations..eg: htg`s concerns but also specifically mentioning the Ipswich/beaudesert rd stations...coopers plains,Moorooka,,salisbury,rocklea.....with the latter 3 looking rather 3rd world by todays standards....

Moreso the areas around the station. Take Zillmere. Okay during the day but at night you get all the grubs lurking around/hanging out on the station steps. Same thing with Bray Park and Strathpine where you get people lurking and drinking in the car park, smoking pot behind the houses and hanging out in the shadows of the unlit parks. Its those types of areas where no one wants to walk home late in the evening.

I would say he is purposely having a go at Zillmere/330 and Carseldine/340...the bottom line is that if a HF bus does get delayed by 5+ mins and arrives late to the station then QR`s crap 30 min frequency becomes a big frickin issue....

Quite frankly that's a load of sh%t.

Yes its a crap train frequency but 2 routes is not an excuse to use to blast an entire proposal. Everyone knows what I think should be done to those two routes with a chainsaw. And thats only picking or referring to the only 2 routes north of chermside.... pretty much across the entire northside that has an off peak frequency of 59 minutes or better. And most of the routes across the northside have a peak hour frequency the same as the railways off peak frequency. What about the 306, 310, 311, 322, 325, 326, 327, 335, 336, 337, 338. What about everyone that uses or has access to those slow, twisty scenic tour routes. You know what we do? We drive everywhere. We then clog Gympie Road, Webster Road, Sandgate Road, Waterworks Road, Stafford Road, Kelvin Grove Road, Maundrel Terrace which then delays the 77, 306, 322, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 340, 341, 350, 357, 370, 374, 375, 380, 381, 384, 385 and what ever route also goes all the way to the city. And that's not including the stupid running patterns such as the 306, 322, 326, 327, 338, 357 where the route suddenly changes where it goes and where it terminates because of the time, if its a school day, if its a private school term, or because of the distance pluto is from Jupiter dictates what bus starts at a different location that's not on your printed timetable. And then BCC approves some big development in Whoop whoop with no PT access. Samford Road here we come!

If I work at Westfield at Strathpine and live at Brendale/Eatons Hill/Albany Creek and I have to close the store at 5pm. By the time that's done to get home on any public transport I have to catch a bus to Chermside to transfer on to another bus to get to the city. I could also catch a train to the city where I would wait for an outbound bus to then get me home. Or if I live in East Aspley and want to catch a Caboolture bound train first thing I look at the bus timetable to see the first bus arrives at Carseldine station at something like 8.45am - if its running on time. But what about the 336 to Geebung.... oh that gets there at 9.45 or something. 2 HF routes which both have a worse peak direction frequency is no excuse.

And plus as I said having a lack of feeder buses because the BCC really want to screw the railways over (remember the 335 is the same route as it was in the early 90's just under a different name) doesn't encourage the use of interchanging or wanting to use trains. The Caboolture trains still have plenty of capacity in peak hour let alone off peak. Why spend more money on running more trains when the return won't be as big. Remember hardly any BCC buses go past QR stations and once you get outside BCC the buses are hourly - all day - and go to bed when the sun sets. Get more buses going to the train stations. Have proper and usable feeder routes. Run the northside the same way Translink wanted to half a century ago. The majority of railway stations are very well lit but the surrounding areas are not encouraging people to walk to/from the stations. Why?? Another BCC issue. Why should they spend money on making it safer and more appealing to walk to/from train stations when they are still competing against them rather than with them to provide a proper and usable public transport system. They are happy to keep spending $$$ on upgrading roads but don't want to spend anything on cycling improvements, pedestrian improvements, reducing speed limits and encouraging active transport where available - even if its just to and from the train/bus station. I just can't think of many stations that have proper cycling links going to/from them. Aspley sorta does. Chermside no. Virginia yes. Sunshine no. Geebung..... yes but poorly. Zillmere no.Carseldine no. Bald Hills.....errrrr..... somewhat. Strathpine minimal. Bray Park minimal. Lawnton.....errrr no. Petrie no but once the railway line is open it will. Toombul..... sorta. Nothing at Eagle Junction. Nothing at Nundah as far as I'm aware of. It just repeats. BCC has no body to blame but themselves.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

24th August 2016

It's "Academic": END Brisbane City Council's Bus Contracting!

Greetings,

It's "Academic" apparently.

RAIL Back on Track calls on the State Government not to renew Brisbane City Council's bus contracts unless there is a genuine committment by BCC to proper bus network reform.

Brisbane's Bus network is slow, unreliable, disconnected, contains massive ' black hole ' areas, is not meeting basic on time TransLink standards. 

Making it even slower is pointless. It is under the stewardship of a council that has consistently resisted whole of network bus reforms since 2012.

Deputy Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner says that people don't want to catch buses to train stations despite "academics" liking the concept.

Nonsense! Brisbane City Council's own research directly contradicts that claim, see below:

"1.2.3 Feeder services
High frequency feeder services, with adequate priority, are required to/from rail and busway line-haul corridors." (page 5)

"A significant number of comments indicated that direct services were not always
required and they accepted the need to transfer to reach their destination." (page 12)

"Some comment was received as to the preferred network structure. Thirteen percent of
comments received support a system which provides an orbital service in the city with some form of feeder service to this." (page 12)

Source: Lord Mayor's Mass Transit Report.

There have been major upgrades to rail capacity in recent years, both peak and off peak.

Brisbane City Council has sat on its hands for almost ten years. The Lord Mayor's Mass Transit Report was written in 2007!

Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's touted metro is a non-solution.  It will reduce busway capacity from 12 000 - 15 000 passengers  per hour per direction to just 9000 passengers per hour per direction for a cost of $1.5 billion plus. What happens then as thousands of passengers are forced back into even worse road and bus congestion?

Brisbane City Council should not be trusted to review its own bus network for a second time.

The Premier and Minister for Transport should re-purpose the Fare Review Taskforce to create a Bus Review Taskforce. Have it led by Ex-BCC transport director Neil Cagney and include Sunshine Coast transport expert Peter Quick. Representatives from BCC would also be included.

Our New Bus Network Proposal shows how to do bus reform in a cost neutral way > http://tiny.cc/newnetwork
This is not ' the ' solution but an example of how proper bus network reform can deliver tremendous benefits.

We have had enough of the games and so has the long suffering public!

It is time the Queensland Government moved to properly sort the bus transport crisis in Brisbane and SEQ generally.

Best wishes,
Robert

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

References:

Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report
https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/sept07_final_report_brisbane_mass_transit_investigation_lmt.pdf

Brisbane bus review probes services arriving 25 minutes late
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbane-bus-review-probes-services-arriving-25-minutes-late-20160823-gqyx6h.html

[ Attached: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=12396.msg178430#msg178430 ]

[ozbob]

Latest media: It&#38;#39;s "Academic": END Brisbane City Council&#38;#39;s Bus Contracting!
> https://t.co/RFCNNhAr3d#qldpol O_O pic.twitter.com/ZwfC8HDCFm

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) August 23, 2016

. @Schrinner how much better it would be had BCC cooperated with bus reform setup in 2012 hey? #qldpol you make your bed@StirlHinchliffe

— Robert Dow (@Robert_Dow) August 23, 2016

[ozbob]

They are going to absolutely wreck public transport patronage in Brisbane if this goes ahead.  Nobody is going to spend nearly half an hour extra on the bus for the privilege of not having to transfer.

How is this not enraging more people?  Gah.

Yep!

[aldonius]

I have now downloaded all the PDF timetables for SEQ TransLink services. The winners are the 112, 113 and 114 -- whose timetable is dated as being effective from 23 October 2006!

[Stillwater]

It is now clear that BCC is not interested in running an efficient, responsive and responsible integrated bus network.  It is in a power struggle with a state government on a wafer thin majority and too weak to do anything.

[#Metro]

It is now clear that BCC is not interested in running an efficient, responsive and responsible integrated bus network.  It is in a power struggle with a state government on a wafer thin majority and too weak to do anything.

My head hurts!!

[ozbob]

I have now downloaded all the PDF timetables for SEQ TransLink services. The winners are the 112, 113 and 114 -- whose timetable is dated as being effective from 23 October 2006!

Thanks aldonius!

[James]

I have now downloaded all the PDF timetables for SEQ TransLink services. The winners are the 112, 113 and 114 -- whose timetable is dated as being effective from 23 October 2006!

There are actually services out there which are worse than that - many have had their timetable re-written. The 414/415 have not been changed in over 12 years.