Hybrid - super buses for Brisbane? Ministerial statement

[#Metro]

I absolutely do not support continuing a CBD work, suburbs live distinction. It is the cause of most of our transport issues. It steals large amounts of time off many people and is extremely resource wasteful among other things.

I'm not saying Brisbane will be Paris, but inner Brisbane used to be less like what you're suggesting than it is now... it's just that the planners are saying that certain areas should be served by metro not by trams.

It isn't clear what you're trying to say here. Just because you might not support a CBD-suburbs distinction doesn't mean one doesn't already exist. I think the planners are wrong with this London/Paris style metro in the CBD. Not only do the trip volumes not make sense (I mean seriously you need at least 10 000 - 15 000 pphd to even think about metros) but areas which DO have these volumes are skipped over (SE Busway). And the figures they use 'trips' as they put it projected in 2031 appear to include other modes such as car/walking/bicycle all lumped together.

They are going to increase mobility in places which are already mobility rich and ignore places which are not.
That doesn't make sense to me at all!

[dwb]

They are going to increase mobility in places which are already mobility rich and ignore places which are not.
That doesn't make sense to me at all!

I believe you are the one saying we should solely upgrade the SEB with a north-south subway (in addition to CRR) in place of SEB.... while IGNORING any east-west connectivity.

Even ICRCS suggested upgrade to east-west connectivity is needed.

[O_128]

They are going to increase mobility in places which are already mobility rich and ignore places which are not.
That doesn't make sense to me at all!

I believe you are the one saying we should solely upgrade the SEB with a north-south subway (in addition to CRR) in place of SEB.... while IGNORING any east-west connectivity.

Even ICRCS suggested upgrade to east-west connectivity is needed.

Yes but the east west connection is an idiotic and stupid idea which really needs to be a CRR2 from indro to cannon hill via UQ and new farm

[dwb]

They are going to increase mobility in places which are already mobility rich and ignore places which are not.
That doesn't make sense to me at all!

I believe you are the one saying we should solely upgrade the SEB with a north-south subway (in addition to CRR) in place of SEB.... while IGNORING any east-west connectivity.

Even ICRCS suggested upgrade to east-west connectivity is needed.

Yes but the east west connection is an idiotic and stupid idea which really needs to be a CRR2 from indro to cannon hill via UQ and new farm

Why?

[Golliwog]

It isn't clear what you're trying to say here. Just because you might not support a CBD-suburbs distinction doesn't mean one doesn't already exist. I think the planners are wrong with this London/Paris style metro in the CBD. Not only do the trip volumes not make sense (I mean seriously you need at least 10 000 - 15 000 pphd to even think about metros) but areas which DO have these volumes are skipped over (SE Busway). And the figures they use 'trips' as they put it projected in 2031 appear to include other modes such as car/walking/bicycle all lumped together.

They are going to increase mobility in places which are already mobility rich and ignore places which are not.
That doesn't make sense to me at all!

Just because the city is currently mostly CBD-suburb commutes, doesn't mean we should just keep building around this model. It doesn't work. The SEB corridor already has plenty of 'mobility' and according to the document dwb put up (http://www.scribd.com/doc/34239150/Connected-City-River-City-Blueprint-Forum) is estimated to have a capacity up to 30,000 when that document was put together. Routes like the current 199/City Glider sure, they have the frequency, but don't have any of the priority that the busway has (Class A for almost all of it). If those routes were replaced by a metro (or heavy rail, though that wouldn't have a small stop spacing like metro) then how many buses would you be able to shift out to the suburbs?

[dwb]

It isn't clear what you're trying to say here. Just because you might not support a CBD-suburbs distinction doesn't mean one doesn't already exist. I think the planners are wrong with this London/Paris style metro in the CBD. Not only do the trip volumes not make sense (I mean seriously you need at least 10 000 - 15 000 pphd to even think about metros) but areas which DO have these volumes are skipped over (SE Busway). And the figures they use 'trips' as they put it projected in 2031 appear to include other modes such as car/walking/bicycle all lumped together.

They are going to increase mobility in places which are already mobility rich and ignore places which are not.
That doesn't make sense to me at all!

Just because the city is currently mostly CBD-suburb commutes, doesn't mean we should just keep building around this model. It doesn't work. The SEB corridor already has plenty of 'mobility' and according to the document dwb put up (http://www.scribd.com/doc/34239150/Connected-City-River-City-Blueprint-Forum) is estimated to have a capacity up to 30,000 when that document was put together. Routes like the current 199/City Glider sure, they have the frequency, but don't have any of the priority that the busway has (Class A for almost all of it). If those routes were replaced by a metro (or heavy rail, though that wouldn't have a small stop spacing like metro) then how many buses would you be able to shift out to the suburbs?

Especially when all of you're eastern and western bus routes transfer on to the metro.

Basically it is saying rather than build an east-west busway that will be at capacity, let's build metro. Or at least, let's build it in stages with an ultimate goal of metro. In a way SEB was built for light rail but they'd be no point changing it, you'd be spending lots of money to carry half as many passengers. But metro, yep that's good idea. But let's not go through the whole process again east-west.

[aldonius]

Regarding longitudinal seating and Gold Coast, I'm advocating shorter workings, Kuraby termination or closer, purely to maximise use of what will be the best line-haul corridor from the get-go. Sure, in the long long term metro is great, but 1000-pax heavy rail at (ultimately) <3 minute headways with fairly wide station spacing is pretty darn good as well.

[#Metro]

Just because the city is currently mostly CBD-suburb commutes, doesn't mean we should just keep building around this model. It doesn't work.

Whether you like it or not, the houses are there and will continue to be there. Will they be serviced or not?

The SEB corridor already has plenty of 'mobility' and according to the document dwb put up (http://www.scribd.com/doc/34239150/Connected-City-River-City-Blueprint-Forum) is estimated to have a capacity up to 30,000 when that document was put together.

Wrong. And I even participated in that forum when that document was being made! The SEB DOES NOT have 30 000 pphd capacity!

Routes like the current 199/City Glider sure, they have the frequency, but don't have any of the priority that the busway has (Class A for almost all of it). If those routes were replaced by a metro (or heavy rail, though that wouldn't have a small stop spacing like metro) then how many buses would you be able to shift out to the suburbs?

Considering that 199 carries ~ 1000 pphd, and the busway is an order of magnitude ABOVE this, metro on the SEB would take far far more buses of city streets and allow huge amounts of buses to be re-allocated to frequency in the suburbs.

[somebody]

Wrong. And I even participated in that forum when that document was being made! The SEB DOES NOT have 30 000 pphd capacity!

Says you.

The only parts I can think of which would struggle at that sort of loads is Buranda, and the loop to get on CCB.  If they fix the loops, and make more routes express through Buranda then the next constraint is Griffith Uni station.  A number of rockets could express there also, 151 & 153 are only two examples.

[#Metro]

I believe you are the one saying we should solely upgrade the SEB with a north-south subway (in addition to CRR) in place of SEB.... while IGNORING any east-west connectivity.

Even ICRCS suggested upgrade to east-west connectivity is needed.

Viz.

This is what the subway should be modelled on. The gray line is the subway system that runs North-South (roughly) in Toronto. The buses run east-west across the city at high frequency ferrying people to the subway system. Subway services run every 4-5 minutes all day doing line haul work and well into the night this way. Building a subway in the inner city, which is already saturated with PT would only compete more with walking, cycling, ferry services and existing surface bus options than cars. Where you have problems is the outer suburbs.

I just don't agree with the paris model metro being plonked into the inner part of Brisbane without thought to what its purpose is. As you can see from the diagram, rather than run buses all the way to the CBD, turn them back at stations for high frequency all day running in the suburbs.


http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/45/79/f456a1d74fd19961fbe397bf35a0.jpeg

[Golliwog]

Interesting point dwb. I hadn't thought about terminating routes from the west at Toowong, though IIRC from an old thread about truncating the 411 at Toowong, there is a policy of not terminating routes close to the CBD if they are serving passengers performing a somewhere-CBD trip. But if it was a purpose built stop, unlike the existing bus-train interchange at Toowong then it may work.

Back to TT, of course they will still be serviced, I never said they wouldn't. But focusing on building infrastrucutre for them is just going to keep encouraging it. By making inner city living more attractive then you can slow or even stop the expansion of endless suburbs.

What evidence do you have that the SEB can't have a 30,000pphd capacity? If it can't then why is there a BCC/State government document that says it can? So far all I have is you saying it can't do it.

I have never disputed that replacing the SEB with a metro would allow a lot more buses to be put to use in the suburbs. I agree it will, but again, to me it's all about the cost vs. the benefits.

[ozbob]

 ^15000 pphd each direction, won't get much more than that on the present set up.

^ Lord Mayor's Mass Transit Taskforce Report 2007, Brisbane City Council.

The days of every bus running though are coming to an end ...

[#Metro]

What evidence do you have that the SEB can't have a 30,000pphd capacity? If it can't then why is there a BCC/State government document that says it can? So far all I have is you saying it can't do it.

That document does not specifically say the SEB, it says "busways" (i.e. In general AKA BOGOTA) its figure is also WRONG for Light Rail which should be around 20 000 - 25 000 pphd when placed in Class A ROW (i.e. Ottawa LRT transitway conversion).

THIS doument here shows capacity in pphd (however be careful to note the definition of peak hour). Cultural Centre is at capacity with 9000 pphd. Fantasy to fit 15 000 or 30 000 pphd through there without going to Class A. 50% of services are diverted off the busway flooding CBD streets during peak hour and being impacted by Captain Cook Bridge breakdowns/car accidents. Then you need a bus every 4 seconds or whatever it is at CCB turnoff- a huge waste of labour and duplication that could be re-allocated into the suburbs as higher frequency.

http://www.patrec.org/web_docs/atrf/papers/2009/1834_paper152-Bitzios.pdf

Back to TT, of course they will still be serviced, I never said they wouldn't. But focusing on building infrastrucutre for them is just going to keep encouraging it. By making inner city living more attractive then you can slow or even stop the expansion of endless suburbs.

Where is your evidence of this? The city has been expanding and even if a metro went into the inner city, the outer suburbs would continue to exist anyway. So you haven't solved the problem at all. Cities and land uses change only very slowly (decades and decades) so thinking that an inner city metro will slow or stop sprawl (where are your references and studies for this?) or even implying that public transport infrastructure or supply to the outer suburbs will cause sprawl doesn't seem to make much sense.

[#Metro]

What evidence do you have that the SEB can't have a 30,000pphd capacity? If it can't then why is there a BCC/State government document that says it can? So far all I have is you saying it can't do it.

The second piece of evidence comes from when a crack developed in the off ramps on the Captain Cook Bridge. All peak hour busway services had to be diverted through Cultural Centre. The result was an absolutely unbelievable bus jam bank up stretching all the way down the busway.

[somebody]

^15000 pphd each direction, won't get much more than that on the present set up.

^ Lord Mayor's Mass Transit Taskforce Report 2007, Brisbane City Council.

The days of every bus running though are coming to an end ...

Where's it specify a capacity of the actual busway?  I can't find that.  The only figures given that I can see (2.5 minute headways @ 250/vehicle) were already exceeded at its writing.

[dwb]

^15000 pphd each direction, won't get much more than that on the present set up.

^ Lord Mayor's Mass Transit Taskforce Report 2007, Brisbane City Council.

The days of every bus running though are coming to an end ...

Where's it specify a capacity of the actual busway?  I can't find that.  The only figures given that I can see (2.5 minute headways @ 250/vehicle) were already exceeded at its writing.

From my perspective the difficulty with the SEB at CCBS is the complicated intersections at Grey St and North Quay involving cars, ped and bus cycles and the complexity of routes that serve the station. If you had less routes you could have more passengers. I personally think a lot less buses should go through CCBS in order to greatly increase reliability. I would do this by routing more services via dedicated lanes taken from the Captain Cook bridge and loop improvements to access the bridge (what Simon is getting at) at the southern end of Captain Cook Bridge at Woolloongabba on to SEB.

[ozbob]

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698

BCC site is down at the moment, also cited as a reference elsewhere eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit

The point is the SEB is nearing capacity at peak now.  Will take some changes to how it operates as well as infrastructure improvements to gain significant capacity increases from here.  It is time to think about the options.

[dwb]

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698

BCC site is down at the moment, also cited as a reference elsewhere eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit

Bob, that is the old link style from before the BCC website upgrade, those links don't work any more. You can try searching on the site for the page you want. All links now appear as worded links as per http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-building/about-planning-building/urban-futures-brisbane/River-City-Blueprint/Connected-city/index.htm

[dwb]

The point is the SEB is nearing capacity at peak now.  Will take some changes to how it operates as well as infrastructure improvements to gain significant capacity increases from here.  It is time to think about the options.

Yes cultural and conceptual changes are required. I also believe some short term infrastructure will be required before CRR and any longer term changes to operation of SEB into for example metro will be delivered.

[ozbob]

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698

BCC site is down at the moment, also cited as a reference elsewhere eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit

Bob, that is the old link style from before the BCC website upgrade, those links don't work any more. You can try searching on the site for the page you want. All links now appear as worded links as per http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/planning-building/about-planning-building/urban-futures-brisbane/River-City-Blueprint/Connected-city/index.htm

Thanks!  I thought I was going bonkers ... lol

[dwb]

Thanks!  I thought I was going bonkers ... lol

It's still a possibility

[somebody]

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698

BCC site is down at the moment, also cited as a reference elsewhere eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_rapid_transit

The point is the SEB is nearing capacity at peak now.  Will take some changes to how it operates as well as infrastructure improvements to gain significant capacity increases from here.  It is time to think about the options.

I have the document downloaded anyway.

[ozbob]

Thanks!  I thought I was going bonkers ... lol

It's still a possibility

Indeed!   

Remember this?

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/busway-faces-gridlock/story-e6freoof-1111114531589

Busway faces gridlock

    by: Edmund Burke
    From: The Sunday Mail (Qld)
    September 30, 2007 12:00AM

BRISBANE'S flagship busway is in danger of gridlock just six years after the opening of the multimillion-dollar infrastructure project.

A report commissioned by Lord Mayor Campbell Newman has warned that the South East Busway could soon have "traffic jams".

The report, released this month, warns: "The South East Busway is rapidly reaching its vehicle-carrying capacity under the present operational approach. Clearly there is an urgent need to provide additional capacity to address existing capacity constraints and short-term growth.

"The infrastructure capacity of the busways will, however, soon be exceeded if additional capacity is only provided by providing more standard buses."

In peak hour, the Cultural Centre stop has 179 buses an hour, or a bus every 20 seconds.

At the busiest point of the busway, north of Woolloongabba, 294 inbound buses pass in the peak hour. That is a bus every 12 seconds.

The report argues that if measures are not taken, the busway will soon experience traffic jams like normal roads.

It is a disturbing assessment for the State Government, which has invested more than $2 billion in busways across the city.

The Eastern Busway, Northern Busway, Inner Northern Busway and the extension of the South East Busway to Springwood are under construction and have been flagged as solutions to the city's transport problems. The South East Busway was built by the State Government and is operated by the Government's Translink organisation.

But Translink general manager Luke Franzmann has insisted the route can cope with increasing demand.

He said initiatives such as pre-paid tickets and larger buses would avoid gridlock.

"We are rolling out a smart card system. Once that is in place there is less need to handle cash and less delays for the bus driver and that means we can get the buses through quicker," he said. "The Inner Northern Busway will take buses off the street through the central city and that will also improve the capacity through the South East Busway because you are getting buses through faster."

The transport chief added that Translink was conducting a trial at the Cultural Centre station, with people paying for tickets before boarding the bus.

Translink is also investigating the viability of hybrid electric buses that can carry up to 200 passengers.

[ozbob]

The point is the SEB is nearing capacity at peak now.  Will take some changes to how it operates as well as infrastructure improvements to gain significant capacity increases from here.  It is time to think about the options.

Yes cultural and conceptual changes are required. I also believe some short term infrastructure will be required before CRR and any longer term changes to operation of SEB into for example metro will be delivered.

+1

[Golliwog]

One of the main things that is limiting the capacity of CC and the busway through South Bank and across the Victoria bridge is the traffic lights on the busway where cars conflict with buses. Fixing THAT is something that we should be aiming for, not taking the whole busway and re-making it as a metro.

[somebody]

One of the main things that is limiting the capacity of CC and the busway through South Bank and across the Victoria bridge is the traffic lights on the busway where cars conflict with buses. Fixing THAT is something that we should be aiming for, not taking the whole busway and re-making it as a metro.

Which side of the river are you referring to?

I think abolishing CC-Elizabeth St would remove an opposing move on the CBD side.

[#Metro]

One of the main things that is limiting the capacity of CC and the busway through South Bank and across the Victoria bridge is the traffic lights on the busway where cars conflict with buses. Fixing THAT is something that we should be aiming for, not taking the whole busway and re-making it as a metro.

Let's see a concept design for this. It could be done, but then I don't think even that can double busway capacity to 30 000 - 40 000 pphd. Presumably buses would still have to use the Captain Cook Bridge (I just don't see 294 buses/hour stopping at Mater Hill!) and still be exposed to traffic incidents and reliability issues on surface streets.

A metro system on the SEB would give

* 30 000 - 40 000 pphd, double that of busway capacity now.
* Single pattern of service
* Carriages fill efficiently (less air, unlike rocket buses) because it stops at all stations
* First service is yours (none of this waiting for "your" bus or whatever to come along while 30 buses fly past you)
* High frequency, high capacity
* Comfortable
* Efficient (because you don't have to buy a bazillion buses and run every single one to the city)
* Automated
* Takes huge amounts of buses off city streets
* Allow duplication and labour to be saved (is there really a need to run buses every 10 second each with their own operator! metro could do this controlled by computer!) which could then be spent on the suburbs in the form of a nice simple and high frequency legible bus network like this (see red lines criss crossing), as already operates in the real world in Toronto:


http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/45/79/f456a1d74fd19961fbe397bf35a0.jpeg

The TTC Subway system. 98% of buses feed the subway system which runs all day and night frequently and high capacity. Buses run east west (connect to Yonge Line) and north south (connect to Bloor-Danforth)
to interconnect to trains. There are just three lines (Yonge University Spadina, Bloor-Danforth and Sheppard) in this city and ~40 stations.

In Brisbane, buses would do their run in the Suburbs and then instead of jumping on the busway, terminate at the North-South Subway that replaces the SEB and be turned back for another run. Pax would transfer to high capacity automated trains which would then take them into the CBD and on to Chermside. The city stop location problem would instantly be solved (because you could remove most of them), high frequency bus everywhere in the suburbs all day using the now surplus labour and buses. Everybody gets to live where they want to without having to consider moving to West End apartment or whatever because some planner thought their single detached family home was some kind of urban abomination.

Please don't tell me that building metro in the inner city will help stop sprawl by encouraging people to live there. By that argument we should be campaigning against the BUZ network lest it cause people to decide to live in places like Inala rather than New Farm or West End (shock horror!)

[SurfRail]

The land use in the inner city is going to be dramatically different in 10 years time - much more intensive, much more of a resident population to move.  UDAs at Bowen Hills, the Gabba and the potential for more to be created are driving construction of new projects.  I am personally involved with the first project to receive ULDA approval at Bowen Hills, and the area is going to be about as common to the Bowen Hills of 5 years ago as South Bank today is to the late 1970s.

I certainly agree with your north-south proposal, but I don't think that should prejudice plans for an inner-city distributor system like the one broadly contemplated.  Underground "something" is clearly the preferred option for that, and doing anything short of metro frequency is a bit of a failed investment.

Do you foresee something like this ever being desirable, or just not in the timeframe covered by Disconnecting SEQ 2031?

[#Metro]

The inner city is already saturated with multiple transport options. These can be catered for using bus, LRT and improved QR services. I don't see the need to build a metro in that area. And exactly where are the patronage forecasts for this metro. I think I read the 2007 Mass Transit Report and this inner city metro had something like 5000 pphd or something like that... hardly worth it.

The problem is in the outer suburbs where most people jump in their car and drive. That's where you need improvements and frequency. The inner city suburbs already have a higher mode share I would presume.

[HappyTrainGuy]

What about blocking off the intersection and divert traffic from William Jolly Bridge into Peel Street so the number of lights are reduced. Traffic from Victoria Bridge can turn left like normal to enter the underground road to the museum/art gallery while all remaining traffic just turns left where the lights used to be.

Only problem with the above is that buses wouldn't be able to make a right turn out of CCBS but nothing is stopping them from running down futher and making a right or combining/extending routes once the Northern Busway is completed.

Then do something similar with the Queen Street Busway enterance. Remove the road traffic from the intersection. Move the lights forward as their's no car lanes which then makes the left hand exit for busses from the CCBS longer. At the same time remove the amount of ped crossings and make a perminate crossing towards Adelaide street with the old bus lanes partly cemented over at the crossing to allow for a shorter ped crossing time. All this would extend the timing of how long the lights are green for so more than a couple buses can make the climb out before it goes red again.


Key. (I didn't add all the lights and possible road routes. Just a quick whip up)
White dots/Lines are traffic lights.
Black lines are pedestrian crossings/areas/footpaths.
Red are for buses/Blue for the busway.
Pink is for random space.
Green is wider/two lanes
Yellow for car traffic.

[somebody]

That would be a good solution but probably not politically achievable, especially on the CBD side.  Even I'm not suggesting removing cars from North Quay.

[Golliwog]

I wouldn't go so far as removing cars from North Quay entirely. My idea for that would be to have North Quay run in a cutting and go under the buses going into QSBS/KGSBS. Think like what is proposed for the Mains/Kessels Rd intersection, but not on such a large scale. If you started the cutting just after Ann St then you could also grade seperate (well, between cars and buses anyway, you'd still have bus vs bus moves) the bus move into Adelaide St (ie: make Adelaide St between North Quay and George St bus only). Probably also raise Queens Wharf Rd up and have that merge in with what would be one/two lanes going from William St to Victoria Bridge so the intersection outside QSBS no longer has 5 legs.

This would remove the right turn from North Quay onto the Victoria bridge for cars. It would be retained in the other direction.