Klumpp Rd Park n' Ride

[Golliwog]

http://www.translink.com.au/klumpproadparknride.php

Where: 72 Klumpp Road, Upper Mount Gravatt which is located east of the Hibiscus Sports Complex
Investment: $7.2 million
Start: Mid 2010
Finish: Late 2010

....

What the Klumpp Road park 'n' ride will provide
•parking for approximately 150-200 cars
•new traffic lights timed with the Timor Street traffic lights to provide safe access
•better access for walkers and cyclists
•landscaping using drought resistant plants
•a safe parking areas with security cameras and lighting.

....

Any changes to current services?
It's likely that routes 120, 125 and 186 will service the park 'n' ride as follows:

•Route 120 (Garden City to Brisbane City) operates at least every 30 minutes during the day, Monday to Saturday and hourly in evenings and on Sunday.
•Route 125 (Garden City to Brisbane City) operates at least every 30 minutes during the day, Monday to Saturday and hourly evenings and on Sunday.
•Route 186 (Wishart to Brisbane City) operates in morning and afternoon peak times, providing customers with a fast and frequent service to Brisbane City, via the busway.

[#Metro]

$36 000 per car park. Each car park costs as much as a brand new car.
 

Question is: Will there be any sheltered bicycle racks at a position closest to the buses? 

[Golliwog]

Doesn't look like it on the pretty picture they have on the site. Perhaps a suggestion worth passing on to Translink?

[somebody]

You have to be joking.  What's the point of having a park and ride with such a crap service?

And why are Translink doing so little besides park and rides which are really a waste of money?

[Golliwog]

The service is better than it looks. The 30 minute frequencies are the off peak ones. The 120 has a 10 minute frequency during peak, although the 125 Has a truncated route for this period which doesn't include Klumpp Rd. The 186 has a 15 minute peak frequency.

[Jon Bryant]

You have to be joking.  What's the point of having a park and ride with such a crap service?

And why are Translink doing so little besides park and rides which are really a waste of money?

Because it takes some foresight and a true commitment to sustainable transport.  Still planning using 1960 theories!!!

[WTN]

I think the money is better spent on more bus services.  New routes even. 

Translink's original idea may have stemmed from the site's proximity to the Griffith Uni Busway station.  It's quite a walk though.

[#Metro]

This is a very interesting way to spend public transport money on cars. 
On the other hand, I would rather they park and ride than drive to the CBD.
Though I question why park and rides even need to exist. The whole idea of busway was "flexibility" and "ability to jump off busway and go into the suburbs" and "transfer free trip". So I wonder why feeder services (or the bus itself) won't do the same job?
Perhaps not?

Maybe don't build a park and ride. Build a kiss and ride for the car, and then the rest of the spaces can be for bicycles and motorbikes.
And how do we know that only bus commuters will use it, and not, say uni students or other people?

[Golliwog]

http://translink.com.au/about-translink/what-we-do/infrastructure-projects/klumpp-road-park-n-ride

Klumpp Road park 'n' ride now open!
Construction is now complete on the new Klumpp Road park 'n' ride and the facility is open for business.

We appreciate the patience and cooperation demonstrated by local residents throughout construction.

The Klumpp Road park 'n' ride provides:

•parking for nearly 200 cars, including 3 disabled parking bays
•new traffic lights timed with the Timor Street traffic lights to provide safe access
•better access for walkers and cyclists (there's even bicycle storage)
•landscaping using drought resistant plants
•a safe parking area with security cameras and lighting.
This means people can safely park their cars and transfer to bus services to complete their journey. This encourages more people to use public transport for most of their journey.


Any changes to current services?
In early 2011, an extra 10 services (five morning and five afternoon) were introduced each weekday on route 186 between Wishart and the city.

Routes 120, 125 and 186 will service the park 'n' ride as follows:

•Route 120 (Garden City to Brisbane City) operates at least every 30 minutes during the day, Monday to Saturday, and hourly in the evening and on Sunday.
•Route 125 (Garden City to Brisbane City) operates at least every 30 minutes during the day, Monday to Saturday, and hourly in the evening and on Sunday.
•Route 186 (Wishart to Brisbane City) operates approximately every 10 minutes in morning and afternoon peak times, providing customers with a fast and frequent service to Brisbane City, via the busway.

[Golliwog]

MEDIA RELEASE: http://translink.com.au/about-translink/reporting-and-publications/media-releases/release/314
New Klumpp Road park 'n' ride opens
Friday 6 May 2011

Mount Gravatt commuters can now use 200 new car parking spaces at the new $6.7 million Klumpp Road park 'n' ride, near the Hibiscus Sports Complex.

State Member for Mansfield Phil Reeves today officially opened the new park 'n' ride on behalf of Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk.

Mr Reeves said the park 'n' ride would make it easier for Mt Gravatt and Mansfield commuters to park their cars and complete their journey to the city on bus.

"The Klumpp Road park 'n' ride improves access to public transport for commuters and provides parking for 200 cars, including disabled parking bays and direct pedestrian and bicycle access and bicycle racks," Mr Reeves said.

"The new traffic lights are timed with the Timor Street traffic lights to provide safe and improved access to the facility for walkers and cyclists.

"The Queensland Government is committed to making public transport the easy choice for commuters, by making it more accessible and convenient and the Klumpp Road park 'n' ride facility will provide more incentive for local residents to use public transport.

"Many people live within walking distance of the public transport network, but for those who have to drive or ride to catch a bus, this new facility will give them more convenient and safe access to regular bus services."

Minister Palaszczuk said TransLink closely monitored the demand for public transport and related infrastructure to ensure commuters are getting the services they need.

"Mt Gravatt is a rapidly developing area, so this park 'n' ride will help to address the growing demand for public transport facilities," Ms Palaszczuk said.

"We're delivering more than 1300 new park 'n' ride spaces for public transport users over the next three years through the TransLink Station Upgrade Program.

"The park 'n' ride at Upper Mt Gravatt and many others like it throughout the TransLink network are helping to change commuter behaviour by making it easier and more attractive to make public transport the first choice," Ms Palaszczuk said.

For more information on public transport, visit translink.com.au or phone 13 12 30, anytime.

[dwb]

You have to be joking.  What's the point of having a park and ride with such a crap service?

And why are Translink doing so little besides park and rides which are really a waste of money?

Political promises.

I don't agree but they're a fact of life. Perhaps RBOT should be targeting the local rags in each of the park and ride areas with press about how funds could otherwise be spent improving a SERVICE for all, rather than a few carparks for some and same service for everyone else.

[dwb]

PS, I strongly believe EVERY park and ride space they do build, and have in their network, should be charged... even if it is only $3/day!!

[dwb]

A boom gate and a go card reader set to charge the flat fee. Easy.

[ozbob]

I don't agree but they're a fact of life. Perhaps RBOT should be targeting the local rags in each of the park and ride areas with press about how funds could otherwise be spent improving a SERVICE for all, rather than a few carparks for some and same service for everyone else.

Do it constantly Dwb, sometimes we get up sometimes we don't.   The spin that comes forth from the local pollys, the authorities on how wonderful the new local park n' ride is, is often overwhelming for the locals ...

We have had the station buses in the media a few times.  We continue to work away.

One of the real issues about charging for park and ride is that it immediately moves the problem to the local streets and area in a more major way in some respects. But if that is blocked off for longer term parking then some charging via go card might be practical.  Reduced charges for those who have used public transport that day, full fee parking for those who don't?

[#Metro]

If something is in short supply, people should be charged for it. This money raised could then be fed into putting on station buses.
But really the bus network could be re-organised. There are already heaps of bus routes anyway, surely we can re-organise what we have already got than pile up more and more routes.

[mufreight]

Another look at it goes like this, a 200 space park and ride takes 200 cars off the roads, 4 bus loads but to encourage that usage also requires a step up and go frequency, sub four minutes in peak sub seven minutes off peak, local feeder bus services complimentary to a step up and go frequency and a local feeder bus route provides a workable solution that minimises the overall numbers of parking spaces and encourages the uptake of public transport.
The problem that exists is that the Translink bureaucracy is focused on counting beans and minimising costs to justify increased salaries and bonuses by not providing the levels and standards of service required to attract an increased uptake of all modes of public transport.
Richlands rail carparking being a prime example, if the cars occuping the entire 650 car spaces carried only one passenger yes that is 650 cars off the roads but less than one train load, the local feeder bus service brings in more than that number in the between peaks and were a frequent feeder bus service operated from Springfield those numbers would grow quite appreciably but to work effectively requires reasonable frequency and RELIABILITY co-ordinated with the other transport modes.

[dwb]

I don't agree but they're a fact of life. Perhaps RBOT should be targeting the local rags in each of the park and ride areas with press about how funds could otherwise be spent improving a SERVICE for all, rather than a few carparks for some and same service for everyone else.

Do it constantly Dwb, sometimes we get up sometimes we don't.   The spin that comes forth from the local pollys, the authorities on how wonderful the new local park n' ride is, is often overwhelming for the locals ...

We have had the station buses in the media a few times.  We continue to work away.

One of the real issues about charging for park and ride is that it immediately moves the problem to the local streets and area in a more major way in some respects. But if that is blocked off for longer term parking then some charging via go card might be practical.  Reduced charges for those who have used public transport that day, full fee parking for those who don't?

Yes I realise that RBOT does articles about station feeders being possible solutions to carparking issues, but I don't think that is necessarily all that relevant, especially when talking about buses, most people are within walking distance already.

$3 all day parking, is less than the ticket, so quite cheap, I suggested it as such so that it is low so as not to offend parkers, nor displace too many of them (the ones who want the close park will pay for it, still cheaper than city) and it will still raise some cash and most importantly lend itself to teaching the public that parking is not free and cannot be provided for free. That way, in the future, perhaps a more realistic cost might be reflected in the charge.

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=532.msg24289#msg24289

$3.8m for 100 car spaces... roughly $38,000/space as identified by another writer.

Let's look at this another way...

Let's assume TL borrows money and pays the loan off over 15yrs at current home loan rates. Monthly repayments would be $33964.56 (according to ANZ home loan calculator at 6.91%).

If the monthly repayment needs to be covered by the 100 people who park, and they can park a maximum of 4wks x 5days x100 spaces, then $34k needs to be spread over 2000 'uses'. That means each 'use', which equates to a day's parking cost, would be $16.98.

Does it really make sense to spend all the money on this especially when the 385 is already on of the cities most 10 overcrowded routes?? Wouldn't it be better to increase frequency? After all, the 100 people who park (if new customers) will fill up 1.5 buses in peak time, when its already full, and yet no service changes are planned.

This is why parking should not be free, for PT uses or otherwise, all they're doing is soaking up funds that could be better spent.

Now assuming half the cost is for the turnaround and drivers' facilities and the loan is paid off over 25 years, that still equates to a monthly repayment of $13,320 (or $6.66/'use'). I think it is fair to charge at least half of this to the user. That means there should be boom gates and you get charged $3 on top of your fair to park). This means the fare would go from $3.20 to $6.20 (zone 1-3 peak is $3.20).

If the government is serious about reducing subsidy then it should do so intelligently - and that means looking at the least economically efficient parts of its business. Carparking has got to be the most inefficient.

[ozbob]

Obviously station bus routes are selected so that folks who normally drive don't have too.  The other possible advantage is that midi buses could be used for other runs servicing lower density areas.  There would be an economy of scale if a midi fleet of buses was built up.

We have raised the notion of using go cards to control park and rides.  There was a very savage public backlash, but I agree that some charging is perfectly reasonable.  Many places around the world do charge for the equivalent of our park and rides.  The cost of these bits of tar is getting to be considerable.  I have little doubt that TransLink has a longer term plan to charge, which I don't have a problem with.  It is the quantum and the method, and what will be done to overcome the major issue of out of control parking generally that I do have a problem with.  Station buses are a very constructive approach to the problem.  The alternative is just more bits of tar ...  further discussion --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=532.0

[#Metro]

MAKE THE PROBLEM FUND THE SOLUTION

If the carpark gets full, charge them! It costs between $30 000 - $50 000 per car park. It locks up land for other uses. Lots of car parking is reasonable for lower density areas and a legitimate and helpful way to get to PT, however if demand >> supply, then they should pay. It is quite expensive to get a person out of their car this way.

Once again, in more enlightened jurisdictions, like, oh I don't know, Perth (yes, Perth again!), they can use SmartRider to pay for parking.
Brisbane dreams about these things... Perth does it.

From the TransPerth website
http://www.transperth.wa.gov.au/UsingTransperth/CarParking.aspx

Transperth is currently installing new Parking Vending Machines (PVM's) at all stations. Once the new machines are working at your station you can continue to pay for parking using your SmartRider, however funds will be deducted from your SmartRider straight away. Please ensure you have sufficient credit to pay for parking.

Pay 'n' Display car parks are fenced car parks and patrolled by attendants between 7.00am and 9.00pm Monday to Friday, excluding Public Holidays. A flat fee of $2.00 applies whether you are parked the whole day or part thereof. A valid parking ticket must be displayed, correct side up, on the vehicles dashboard at all times.

So let's say you have a 200 person car park at $2 each, that's $400 bucks right there. I don't know exactly what bus running costs are like, but I know BT bus operators might be paid around $30 per hour and that wages make up much of the bus running costs. So let's double that figure to $60. -- so that's 6 hours worth of bus, so that might get you six feeder bus runs into the train or busway station.

Assuming that each bus is only 50% full at peak hour, that's 33 people per bus run x 6 = 198 people, so almost as many people as the car parking brings in!

The elephant in the room is really re-organising the bus network. There are already so many buses, I doubt that it is a good idea to keep piling more and more routes up just to avoid a re-organisation. It seems wasteful. Buying new, smaller buses might be good, but then again could MaxiTaxis be used?  No need to buy land for depot expansion and no need to spend money on training and staff to figure out how to maintain the newer models, just hire MaxiTaxis for the time they are needed and then they can do private work in the off-peak. There might be a handheld touch on or off thing that could be done, and many taxis have smartcard readers in them as well.

[#Metro]

And if there is not enough $$$, buy bicycle racks. Lots and lots of them. The good ones where you can lock through the bicycle frame rather than the wheel. 100 bicycle spaces costs roughly $10 000, still a bit costly, but NOWHERE as costly as $30 000 - $50 000 for ONE car park! And you meet your health goals as well.

[ozbob]

The taxi solution does not work on the scale needed.  We need a proper dedicated bus fleet with legible timed routes with go card capability.  Pay for parking and station buses (in various guises), not only for rail but key bus stations as well.  There is a transport storm looming, it was interesting observing the parking overloads already on the western line last week, and this is just the beginning ... it is not looking too bright.  There really is a need to get out of the failing paradigm.

[dwb]

Obviously station bus routes are selected so that folks who normally drive don't have too.  The other possible advantage is that midi buses could be used for other runs servicing lower density areas.  There would be an economy of scale if a midi fleet of buses was built up.

We have raised the notion of using go cards to control park and rides.  There was a very savage public backlash, but I agree that some charging is perfectly reasonable.  Many places around the world do charge for the equivalent of our park and rides.  The cost of these bits of tar is getting to be considerable.  I have little doubt that TransLink has a longer term plan to charge, which I don't have a problem with.  It is the quantum and the method, and what will be done to overcome the major issue of out of control parking generally that I do have a problem with.  Station buses are a very constructive approach to the problem.  The alternative is just more bits of tar ...  further discussion --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=532.0

I do realise that some people may get parked "in" to their properties when people illegally park over their driveway, however in the main this is just a whinging problem that our community has. Go to any major city and people realise that parking is an issue and residents always want the street to themselves. But sorry they do not own the street. The street is a public resource available in many cases for open consumption. It is not the role of government to pander to every single d*ckwit who just doesn't like it when someone else parks in "their" street.

In the places where there is a real problem, then parking regulations and appropriate enforcement should be implemented. BUT in the main residents don't want parking regulations and don't like having to display parking permits. So although they complain about someone else parking in front of their property or in their street, they don't want it regulated.

Furthermore, it is like the issue of where to put bus stops. In the main I think property owners who object to well placed bus stops should be told to go jump. They do not own the street, it is there for public good. I see no reason a bus stop should be moved in front of someone else's property that is sub optimal just bc they're aren't mates with the local politician!!

Rant over.

[ozbob]

Three years ago or so parking was completely out of control around the streets in Oxley, particularly in the general area of the station.  Local residents and businesses quite rightly made a lot of representations about the problems.  Driveways blocked, both sides of streets parked out so that access became very difficult, in some cases rubbish collections unable to proceed.  Business car parks lost.  The council moved to yellow line a number of critical streets on one side, this helped to maintain access.  Strips along the streets were converted to 2 hour street parking as well.  This meant that people visiting for shopping or whatever could achieve a park.  Local residents do have genuine issues and they are the ones who actually want the restrictions!  The park and ride was expanded and the bus options further improved.  This has certainly relieved some of the street parking problems.

[O_128]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

[ozbob]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

Absolutely ...

[Golliwog]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

We do always talk about how high the cost of the road toll and congestion is when you monetise time lost, deaths and injuries...

[#Metro]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

Maybe they just don't do a BCA. Even if they did, BCA's are really for comparison with some range of alternatives. So what were the alternatives then??

[SurfRail]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

Maybe they just don't do a BCA. Even if they did, BCA's are really for comparison with some range of alternatives. So what were the alternatives then??

Doing something competent.  Probably too expensive or hard for them.

[O_128]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

Maybe they just don't do a BCA. Even if they did, BCA's are really for comparison with some range of alternatives. So what were the alternatives then??

Doing something competent.  Probably too expensive or hard for them.

The money could have funded feeder buses in the area which would eventually self fund itself.

[colinw]

PS, I strongly believe EVERY park and ride space they do build, and have in their network, should be charged... even if it is only $3/day!!

I agree about charging for park & rides if we have to provide them at all.

However ...

Assume that each park is used for 300 days each year.  That gives a return of $900 per year for each $36,000 car park.  That is a 2.5% return on investment per annum, or 40 years to recoup the up front cost of construction, without even taking into account overheads, operating costs and maintenance.

So even if we charge $3 per day, it is actually a seriously subsidised carpark, which provides a lousy return on investment.

Making it free is even worse, as it just represents another overhead for the system, without any cost recovery at all.

Surely the priority should be developing services, not subsidising motorists.

In comparison, car parking fees at UK park & ride stations are typically £6.00 or more (£6.50 at the station I generally use when over there).  This is against a background of significantly higher rail fares & fuel prices than here as well.

[SurfRail]

The money could have funded feeder buses in the area which would eventually self fund itself.

Yep, agreed.  Allow me to clarify what I meant:

"Doing something competent.  Probably too expensive or hard for them to figure out - the Panadol alone would send the budget through the roof, and then there wouldn't be money left for an overseas junket to swap notes with Bogota."

[skippy]

The QE11 stadium is rarely used for major events since Suncorp stadium was redeveloped a few years back. Of some consolation is the large stadium carpark is used as a park and ride, being well serviced by many bus routes including BUZ 130 and direct services to UQ. What is most galling is

- the QE11 carpark is only 1600m from the new Klumpp Road park and ride
- there is always several dozen car spaces (check every one of the 15 photos on NearMap)

Why didn't they wait until the QE11 car park is consistently full before spending $millions on one a mile away?

[O_128]

The QE11 stadium is rarely used for major events since Suncorp stadium was redeveloped a few years back. Of some consolation is the large stadium carpark is used as a park and ride, being well serviced by many bus routes including BUZ 130 and direct services to UQ. What is most galling is

- the QE11 carpark is only 1600m from the new Klumpp Road park and ride
- there is always several dozen car spaces (check every one of the 15 photos on NearMap)

Why didn't they wait until the QE11 car park is consistently full before spending $millions on one a mile away?

Where else but Queensland ?

[dwb]

I'm confused as to how a park and ride passes a cost/ benefits analysis. $50000 per carpark is unbelievable

Maybe they just don't do a BCA. Even if they did, BCA's are really for comparison with some range of alternatives. So what were the alternatives then??

Doing something competent.  Probably too expensive or hard for them.

Believe me TL don't like spending their money on park and rides but it is their job to implement political promises. Besides, at least they don't build them close in the city. They fight BCC tooth and nail constantly on the issue of park and ride within 5-10km of the city!

[somebody]

PS, I strongly believe EVERY park and ride space they do build, and have in their network, should be charged... even if it is only $3/day!!

I agree about charging for park & rides if we have to provide them at all.

However ...

Assume that each park is used for 300 days each year.  That gives a return of $900 per year for each $36,000 car park.  That is a 2.5% return on investment per annum, or 40 years to recoup the up front cost of construction, without even taking into account overheads, operating costs and maintenance.

So even if we charge $3 per day, it is actually a seriously subsidised carpark, which provides a lousy return on investment.

Making it free is even worse, as it just represents another overhead for the system, without any cost recovery at all.

Surely the priority should be developing services, not subsidising motorists.

In comparison, car parking fees at UK park & ride stations are typically £6.00 or more (£6.50 at the station I generally use when over there).  This is against a background of significantly higher rail fares & fuel prices than here as well.

All this also ignores the interest on the money.  At 6% & $36k, 300days/year, you are talking about $7.20 per park just to pay for that.

So the charge needs to be more like $10/day or more.

[colinw]

Which aligns nicely with the parking charges I have seen in the UK. £6.50 = $9.87 at today's exchange rate.

[SurfRail]

All this also ignores the interest on the money.  At 6% & $36k, 300days/year, you are talking about $7.20 per park just to pay for that.

So the charge needs to be more like $10/day or more.

But I shouldn't have to pay for parking or tolls - our registration costs are 100% cover for the cost of building, maintaining and upgrading our roads, and the associated social impacts![/ignorance]

[dwb]

I don't believe charging 100% for park and ride is a valid arguement within an context of so much subsidy, at least upon launch.

If you want to guarantee failure, then that is the policy you'd implement, 100% cost recovery.

[somebody]

I don't believe charging 100% for park and ride is a valid arguement within an context of so much subsidy, at least upon launch.

If you want to guarantee failure, then that is the policy you'd implement, 100% cost recovery.

Roll on the failure.  Then that will stop calls for more parking.

[colinw]

In what world is paying $36,000 per car space with cost recovery that doesn't even pay interest deemed a success?

I'd much rather see the space occupied by Park & Ride given over to a combination of sensible interchanges (at rail stations) and commercial development. The development could include car parking developed along commercial lines, as it does at many UK stations.

I find the whole idea of spending $millions for a handful of free car parks repugnant.