Eastern Busway

[#Metro]

0.5 BN on 1km extension of the Eastern Busway OR 0.5 BN on massive BUZ upgrades all over Brisbane. Indeed, the New Bus Network Proposal is near-cost neutral, so the amount of upgrading you could do is just MASSIVE.

[Gazza]

How long would those BUZ upgrades go for?

You don't just spend the money once and get frequent routes forever do,  you?

Also, Techblitz, why do you say that we should just accept the governments policy/ advocate for what we think they'd "like". If we did that why does RBOT even need to exist?

We should aim to provide evidence based alternative viewpoints if we think the gov has it wrong.

[#Metro]

The purpose of infrastructure is to facilitate service. Even if you build the infrastructure, it is useless until you run services on it.

[Gazza]

I get that, but remember that QR is $850 Mil per year to run, BT is $300 Mil.

That's per year.

So how many years of improved service would you get out of $500 mil?

Of course, improved services are definitely a very good thing.
But don't fall into the trap of thinking that a one off injection of $500 mil gets us BUZtopia for the next 40 years.

[SurfRail]

Cheaper yes. But not as good.

What would be better - CRR or an entirely new maglev between the Gold and Sunshine Coasts via Brisbane CBD?

That's your answer right there.

Bus lanes are like a busway, but without all the bits that matter. I mean headways on a piece of infrastructure are governed by two things. How often you stop and for how long. And without full intersection preemption (which would probably mean boom gates and all for safety), then bus lanes will always involve more and longer stops than a busway.

he bits that matter are segregation from general traffic and intersection priority.  Bus lanes and bus signals deliver this, with or without indented bus bays.  I am perfectly prepared to agree that they do not deliver the same benefit as a 100% grade separated busway, but what you need to realise is this:

- The busway was NEVER planned to be 100% grade separated.  From around Camp Hill to Carina, it was intended to be median running with traffic signals, similar to parts of the T-ways in western Sydney.  From Belmont to Capalaba there were also bits with open level crossings.

- The cost differential is ridiculous.  It results in massive amounts of capital expenditure locked up in concrete instead of in expanding the bus fleet.

But when did this group become about advocating for second or third best options simply because they are financially more likely. We didn't do it with BAT. Instead we consistently pointed out that CRR was a much better option, even though it was unfunded and BAT to all intents and purposes was.

Actually, our position all along has been that BaT was more expensive.  The core section was more expensive that the core section of CRR because of the bus component requiring a larger tunnel, and delivering the same benefit as CRR would have involved adding in all the approach works to the north and south later on which IIRC comprised around $2bn of the cost of delivering CRR (not to mention that some of those works such as Dutton Park to somewhere further south would have required additional tunnels).  False economy.

[HappyTrainGuy]

As far as I can see you haven't actually refuted anything I've said other than "politics too hard".  It ISN'T too hard - that is why this group exists.

Bus lanes work.  T2 lanes work.  There is ample room for 2/3 lanes the whole length from Langlands Park to wherever you like, which means there is room for bus priority without an orgy of cement and overpasses.  Same for Mains Rd, same for Gympie Rd, same for most of the other radial arterials and a good number of crosstown ones too.

The purpose should be to improve the passenger carrying capacity of roads before resorting to all new corridors at enormous expense (which can't presently be funded anyway).

But when did this group become about advocating for second or third best options simply because they are financially more likely. We didn't do it with BAT. Instead we consistently pointed out that CRR was a much better option, even though it was unfunded and BAT to all intents and purposes was.

I prefer to look at it as the ideal way. It might be the best option to have but it doesn't mean its the best option to have overall. Look at Gympie Road. The busway there does what?? It duplicated an existing corridor, slightly extended a trip generator point (Lutyche shops), places where there are apartments next to a busway stop the majority of buses don't even use it and the 370 all stops bus has a faster transit time than buses that use the busway. It might be the best option for this exact network going forwards but this network is just fundamentally flawed and wasteful. Quite frankly I still say they should have widened the road through Lutyche and Wilson to 3 lanes in each direction with the instillation of peak hour (6am-10am/3-7pm in both directions) bus lanes between Chermside and the inner city busway with the network getting a complete and total overhaul. Suburbs like Bracken Ridge, Sandgate and Carseldine losing direct city services. More buses pumping passengers into railway stations and interchange hubs. Higher capacity services running Chermside-City run similar to the CityGlider - catch bus X to Chermside and transfer onto the GreenGlider etc. The railway would finally have increased usage and a reason to increase the frequency off and counter peak (remember during peak its still common to see empty seats on the Caboolture line before Northgate).

The purpose of infrastructure is to facilitate service. Even if you build the infrastructure, it is useless until you run services on it.

The Northern busway. The 330/331/332/333/334/335/340/341/369/370/374/375/379 are just some of the routes that use Gympie Road. Remove the 333/340 and name all the bus routes that actually use all or any part of the northern busway. Complete and utter waste of money. And the Lutyche stop inbound design. What a cockup that was with buses still not being able to use the full platform length.

[SurfRail]

And idiotic things like the 333 and 340 not stopping at Truro St.  Why?

[HappyTrainGuy]

And idiotic things like the 333 and 340 not stopping at Truro St.  Why?

You can say the same for many stops along that RBWH-Chermside leg. Take the stops near Thondley Street on the weekend. Despite the 333/340 running past at around 5-6am the first 370/375/379 doesn't show up until after 8am (saturday is 7am?? IIRC). Should one be wishing to go to the city you either have to walk to the Windsor stop or to the underground stop at Lutyche. Rode Road is even worse as you have to only rely on the 370 instead of the 370/375/379 combo. And Federation street. Granted its not a popular stop but is it really that difficult to have any bus that happens to be going past at the time to pick up any passengers.

[BrizCommuter]

So why hasn't any other first world city built fully grade seperated busways like Brisbane has? How does London manage its 2 billion bus trips per annum when it has no busways? Why can't bus lanes work in Brisbane when they work perfectly in cities with far worse traffic congestion like London and Paris?

+1. Further big infrastructure busways in Brisbane are not cost effective.

[#Metro]

Penny already dropped in Perth.

Perth's MAX light rail plan set to be dumped for $1.2 billion bus service


THE Barnett Government's $2.5 billion light rail election promise would be dumped and replaced with a rapid bus transit system, under a plan set to go before Cabinet next year.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/perths-max-light-rail-plan-set-to-be-dumped-for-12-billion-bus-service/story-fnhocxo3-1227251842778

[colinw]

Ok, let's try this again without the dummy spit (deleted first attempt at this post  )

My position is that spending another dollar on that white elephant Eastern Busway would be just a continuation of the group-think induced waste that got Brisbane public transport into this mess to start with.

My personal position is that I do not wish to see another busway or rail extension in Brisbane until such time as the infrastructure we have now is used effectively, and the bus system run on rational lines.  (The only exceptions to that being fixing the SCL and linking heavy and light rail on the Gold Coast, neither of which are Brisbane specific issues)

Right now, building another hyper-expensive busway extension would simply promote more of the same waste, and add more stress to the inner city bus-jam.  The existing Eastern Busway would have to be some of the least effective infrastructure spending we have ever had - hundreds of millions of dollars for very little effect.

To do so within less than 1km of a perfectly good railway that could do far more would be irresponsible in the extreme.

Carindale & Capalaba would be better served by a far more modest spend in redesigning the bus network, and perhaps some bus lanes and traffic light priority measures.

[SurfRail]

^ I broadly endorse this view, however I would make a specific exemption for extending the Springfield line further towards Ripley (plenty of existing capacity for it) and probably even the Gold Coast line to Elanora (once the Coomera River section is done there will be room for 8tph which is enough, and those now function as Beenleigh line expresses in a way they never properly did before 2014).

Anything else will need the outstanding infrastructure shortfalls to be dealt with (CRR, NCL, Manly-Cleveland, city to at least Kuraby) - so no Maroochydore, no Flagstone, no Trouts Rd.  Mind you those are about the only 3 other rail extensions I think will ever be needed - beyond that we are into the territory of purpose built metros for inner Brisbane, more light rail etc.

[pandmaster]

More busways are a waste of money. It is continuing a failed paradigm. Bus priority is the much more sensible option I think infrastructure wise. I absolutely agree that generally, with some exceptions, infrastructure needs to be better utilised first before more is built. Cleveland line frequency improvements and network reform would help in the OCR area.

One day I would love to see trams back on the old tracks again. 

[ozbob]

Petition --> Please commit to building the much-needed Eastern Busway (Coorparoo-Carindale-Capalaba) Adrian Schrinner Carindale, QLD

[SurfRail]

^ Nothing bus lanes and slightly prettier bus stops couldn't do, but Brisbane has some kind of pathological fear of ordinary bus lanes.

Old Cleveland Rd is not the M1 where the option to do this feasibly with walk-up patronage to more closely spaced stations does not exist.  Likewise Gympie Road. 

[HappyTrainGuy]

Likewise Gympie Road.

[#Metro]

Petition --> Please commit to building the much-needed Eastern Busway (Coorparoo-Carindale-Capalaba) Adrian Schrinner Carindale, QLD

"Petition: Implement Bus Reform 2015"

[dancingmongoose]

Petition --> Please commit to building the much-needed Eastern Busway (Coorparoo-Carindale-Capalaba) Adrian Schrinner Carindale, QLD

Our friend Dr Chris Hale is giving the deputy mayor some stick over this petition over on LinkedIn

[ozbob]

^ have you got a link DMG?

[dancingmongoose]

I can't seem to find a way to permalink a LI post, he's pretty much implying stop wasting money on "dubious road projects" such as KSD and fund it yourself.

Screenshot of the conversation below. I'll update with any future developments

[ozbob]

Thanks DMG!   

[colinw]

"Light rail is great for places like the Gold Coast and Canberra that have plenty of room ..."



As for downtown Surfer's Paradise --- yep, plenty of room there!!!! Light rail is actually the least obtrusive and pedestrian friendly way of putting high capacity transit into constrained urban environments, other than spending a buttload on tunnelling of course. 


I suppose the KSD upgrade will probably take away the possibility of extending the Doomben line down to Northshore as well.

As for the Eastern Busway - phooey!  Nothing happening there that a few bus lanes & traffic light priority measures wouldn't fix - plus a km or so of ready made dedicated bus alignment where the old tramway runs.

[SurfRail]

Schrinner is an idiot, partisan hack, one of many on both sides.

[#Metro]

I think it is fair to say everybody is fed up with BCC. The arrogance is just amazing - you had the bus review and they forced it off the table. Six times blocked TL's planning meetings. Window dressing on the final BCC review.

Trad needs to step in and end it.

[James]

If it isn't BCC's responsibility to fund major public transport infrastructure, why did BT bother to draw up the City2Suburbs bus tunnel? Is that not a major public transport infrastructure project?

Trad needs to step in and end it.

If only...

[achiruel]

Could I put in a petition to the State Government to stop funding massive BCC bus route km wastage like the 200 & 222 debacle? 

[#Metro]

New Bus Network would be nice.

BCC funds PT infrastructure in the sense it funds ferry terminal upgrades. So Cr Schrinner isn't even up to speed with his own policies...

[ozbob]

BCC is the home of political opportunists.  The Eastern Busway petition is just further evidence of that.

[#Metro]

The Woodhaven route will have all the basic tenets of SBS: off-board fare collection, real-time bus information, all-door boarding, transit-signal priority, and most importantly, an exclusive bus lane. The existing 14-mile corridor already carries some 30,000 riders a day. NYC DOT believes the SBS upgrade will create travel time savings between 25 and 35 percent.

RBOT architects and co, would this be a goer for Old Cleveland Road? Would it fit? Where would it go?

[dwb]

I saw that linkedin thread too and it was pretty funny. Schrinner came off a bit obvious I think

[Gazza]

What sequence of links do you have to follow to find the LinkedIn thread?

[dancingmongoose]

You can't link to a LI post, you need to be following or connected to one of the people involved in the conversation and scroll down your home feed until you find it.

[hU0N]

The Woodhaven route will have all the basic tenets of SBS: off-board fare collection, real-time bus information, all-door boarding, transit-signal priority, and most importantly, an exclusive bus lane. The existing 14-mile corridor already carries some 30,000 riders a day. NYC DOT believes the SBS upgrade will create travel time savings between 25 and 35 percent.

RBOT architects and co, would this be a goer for Old Cleveland Road? Would it fit? Where would it go?

Short answer is no.

Woodhaven Blvd in New York is 3 chains wide (front fence to front fence), Old Cleveland Road is 1.5 chains wide.  Footpaths use up half a chain, leaving only 1 chain or twenty metres for carriageway, while Woodhaven Blvd has 2.5 chains or 50m for carriageway.  A solution such as proposed for Woodhaven Blvd wouldn't fit on Old Cleveland Road.

Interestingly, the other two proposals examined for Woodhaven Blvd could be adapted to Old Cleveland Road.  They were
Option 1) kerbside bus lanes - rejected for providing only minimum benefit for buses (due to conflicts with driveways, turning cars and parking).  It would result in just 15% decrease in peak hour journey times for buses.
Option 3) Class B busway in the median - rejected because it took up too much road space and because it would encourage jay-walking in the express lanes of a very busy road, but would provide a 45% decrease in peak hour journey times for buses.

[aldonius]

In other words, the only useful solution for now is to put in peak T3 lanes.

[#Metro]

Option 3) Class B busway in the median - rejected because it took up too much road space and because it would encourage jay-walking in the express lanes of a very busy road, but would provide a 45% decrease in peak hour journey times for buses.

How did the tram fit if the bus doesn't?

A radical idea would be to run the buses counterflow down the centre of OCR so that the middle of the road could be used as the bus stop, just like a tram.

Worth thinking about.

[aldonius]

How did the tram fit if the bus doesn't?

Mixed running, for the most part; possibly there was road widening out at Camp Hill.

[Gazza]

Trams take up less space too...A bit narrower, and no need for margins either side of the bus lane to account for driver error and the sweep of the bus.

[hU0N]

Option 3) Class B busway in the median - rejected because it took up too much road space and because it would encourage jay-walking in the express lanes of a very busy road, but would provide a 45% decrease in peak hour journey times for buses.

How did the tram fit if the bus doesn't?

A radical idea would be to run the buses counterflow down the centre of OCR so that the middle of the road could be used as the bus stop, just like a tram.

Worth thinking about.

The key issue is station width. A class B busway needs about 4 general traffic lanes in width for the station, assuming up and down platforms are staggered. That's one lane up, one down, one passing lane and a fourth lane width for platforms, medians etc. Passing lane is essential for buses as they rely on high frequency and multiple buses stopping simultaneously to provide capacity, all of which requires passing lanes as stations.

Trams are a bit bigger, so it's often feasible to reduce the frequency and grow the vehicle and still get away with a station that doesn't require multiple tram paths.

Of course, once a level of demand is reached where multiple tram paths would be required, the advantage switches, and bus stations become a more width efficient solution.

[hU0N]

Option 3) Class B busway in the median - rejected because it took up too much road space and because it would encourage jay-walking in the express lanes of a very busy road, but would provide a 45% decrease in peak hour journey times for buses.

How did the tram fit if the bus doesn't?

A radical idea would be to run the buses counterflow down the centre of OCR so that the middle of the road could be used as the bus stop, just like a tram.

Worth thinking about.

Problem is still passing lanes. Without passing lanes at stations, the capacity of the busway maxed out at around 4000ppdh. For that kind of capacity, the project isn't worth the cost.

Counter flow has the disadvantage that you can't even use the nearest traffic lane as an informal passing lane without causing head on bus collisions.

[#Metro]

Yes, there are problems; all concepts will have problems. The skill is in engineering ways that may overcome the problems.

Auckland appears to suggest a median busway, in light rail style for AMETI Project. So while radical it is not unprecedented. Lanes can be separated by low-rise concrete separators.


https://at.govt.nz/ImageResizer/media/304400/ti-rakau-busway.JPG

Auckland: high-end median busway proposed for eastern suburbs
http://www.humantransit.org/2010/12/auckland-high-end-median-busway-proposed-for-eastern-suburbs.html (see pic in this)

https://at.govt.nz/projects-roadworks/ameti/pakuranga-to-botany-busway/

The distance from the current busway to Carindale is around 7 km. This implies about 10 stops.

Many old Brisbane trams had capacities lower or similar (~ 110 pax?) to that of buses that are available today (150 pax). And more people caught the trams back then.

Under bus reform, you could have superbuses with 150 pax per bus running 1 per minute at peak hour (theoretical max) and achieve 150 x 60 buses/hour = 9000 pphd.

If the stations were spaced far enough (750m or so) most buses would have to stop at all stops nonetheless so lack of passing lane may not be such a huge thing. And some places on Old Cleveland Road may well accomodate stations with passing lanes.

There's no harm in modelling the idea as an exploration excercise.