SEQ Bus Network Review

[#Metro]

The case with the 130/140/150 was they already had very high frequency, so forcing a transfer was only going to p%ss people off and not deliver a net benefit to them. Of course, there could be benefits elsewhere on the network, but people only care about their backyard. That's why for every truncation, forced transfer or similar, you need to provide a subsequent increase in frequency or ease of access. Generally, a doubling in frequency at the key times (peak, inter-peak, and weekend off-peak during the day) is enough to make pax happy.

Garden City is 15 km or so from the CBD, and Browns Plains is almost 30 km. The arguments being made here are not on technical grounds nor capacity grounds nor connectivity grounds, but on the grounds that it will make some people angry if there is change. From my hardline perspective, I see a lot of other people missing out just because of selfishness. That's public money being used, if it were private funds I would not mind, but it is very inequitable that those with decent services can hog the resources so that those who don't have them continue to miss out.

As an aside, I have looked at the TL bus review and I believe that TransLink's decision to downgrade the BUZ 100, BUZ 444 and remove the 306 from Nudgee Beach was done on sound grounds and that the right decision was made in regards to these vs needs elsewhere in the city despite all the political hoo-hah. Cuts are a natural and normal part of renewal and allow new services to be created elsewhere. Creation and Destruction are complimentary forces that go hand in hand.

The fact that any particular bus is "full" during peak hour is not a strong enough reason for immunity to reform when one considers that almost all bus routes would be expected to be full in peak anyway.

[techblitz]

Meh...
If a route is performing well with high patronage then leave the darn thing alone and keep its current passengers happy. Only when that route comes under threat from another competing route and starts losing passengers then it becomes an issue. If no money can be found for new frequent upgrades then the next best option is to cut back where you can eg: what bt have done. Also look at new fare structures or improve d/running by streamlining depots etc.

Ps: LD heres one for you

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=8357.0

* And most importantly of all, it travels in a straight, direct, line so passengers don't have to wonder where the bus goes, and don't have to look at maps - the service becomes an intuitive part of the road itself. A similar approach has been taken with the BUZ 100 Inala BUZ - which can be thought of as part of Ipswich Road.

Night folks....

[#Metro]

Meh...
If a route is performing well with high patronage then leave the darn thing alone and keep its current passengers happy. Only when that route comes under threat from another competing route and starts losing passengers then it becomes an issue. If no money can be found for new frequent upgrades then the next best option is to cut back where you can eg: what bt have done. Also look at new fare structures or improve d/running by streamlining depots etc.

Ps: LD heres one for you

I agree with James for the following reasons:

1. It is a serious mistake to consider current users of a bus service only and neglect (the less visible but just as important) wider network

2. It is inequitable that more money than necessary be spent when there are alternatives - this denies other people decent services in their area.

3. Just because someone is angry/upset does not mean that a decision taken is wrong.

4. "Full buses at peak hour" is no justification for the retention of a service. Most buses are full during peak hour anyway and what is to say that the alternative service we put on will not be full also? It also neglects the issue of frequency. If three services per hour are full on this service, that's less than 200 people. Furthermore, we have neglected the issue of frequency - it may be possible to double the frequency at no additional cost given the sheer length of the route.

5. People pleasing and avoidance of criticism are not public transport planning principles. Equity, frequency and connectivity are. If people got their way, everyone would have their own personal home rocket (like mine LOL) express from their front door to the CBD. Sure it is more convenient, but at what cost - the legacy of our tradition of avoiding offending people is the world's highest fares, highest subsidies, and entire suburbs with no high frequency public transport. That is the cost, and I think it is just too much.

[James]

your stating the obvious...and trying to make it sound as if I don't know that frequency increases/more resource allocation can be gained from truncating routes.
Your having trouble accepting that TL made the correct judgment in retaining the 315 on its current alignment and frequency. And somehow you can guarantee that people being told to transfer at N.Boondall wont get p%ssed  off? The 315 is doing so well that hornibrook are using their near brand new extended axle buses to cope with demand. Perhaps SR can chime in as he knows someone from hornibrook who could perhaps tell us why TL refused to change that route. Even though its rather obvious...

I'm stating the obvious, and then you proceed to ask what you mean.  Lets break it down for you, nice and simple.

We have a bus. bus bus bus bus bus. It runs one daily service from James' house to Point X, 10km away. On the way it passes Hub A, James' favourite shopping centre, 5km away. There is a frequent bus from Hub A to Point X which James could transfer, but does not use because he has a direct trip. Now, if we terminate the bus to James' house at Hub A, the bus only travels 5km. This means we have an additional 5km of in-service km we can use. This means we can now add on one extra service per hour. James now has half-hourly frequency.

James may have to transfer, but now his bus comes more often, so he does not need to wait as long if he finishes his appointment at Point X early, or schedule his life around the bus. If he misses the first service, he only needs to spend 29 minutes thinking about how bad PT is, rather than 59 minutes. While every journey may be a bit longer, it is easier for James to get around.

Getting back to the 315, I'm sorry, but a bus running every half-hour in peak is why people laugh at Queensland for being a hick state. By terminating the route at North Boondall, the frequency of the bus can be doubled. Not only will the bus be more frequent now (and thus attract more passengers to the service), if they miss the bus they now only need to wait for 15 minutes, rather than the current 30 minutes.

This method also provides more capacity for your apparently 'overcrowded' and 'well performing' 315. Sure, we could double the frequency all the way to the CBD, but that doubles the cost, and a similar patronage increase could be achieved through no net cost increase.

[STB]

With all this 315/310 talk, might I suggest about melding routes 310 and 315 into one route and terminating it at Sandgate station where there is facilities to interchange are.  North Boondall does not make sense as there are no facilities to allow an interchange to happen (unless you are happy to cross 4 lanes of a busy road and walk in between some houses).

I do think there still needs to be a route maintained along Sandgate Rd as not all areas along that road are accessible by rail, and there is also the employment attractors with the industrial areas along Sandgate Rd near Geebung and Virginia that are not necessarily near rail, given that people would realistically only walk up to 1km before they would say to themselves, I'd rather drive than walk this.

[James]

With all this 315/310 talk, might I suggest about melding routes 310 and 315 into one route and terminating it at Sandgate station where there is facilities to interchange are.  North Boondall does not make sense as there are no facilities to allow an interchange to happen (unless you are happy to cross 4 lanes of a busy road and walk in between some houses).

I do think there still needs to be a route maintained along Sandgate Rd as not all areas along that road are accessible by rail, and there is also the employment attractors with the industrial areas along Sandgate Rd near Geebung and Virginia that are not necessarily near rail, given that people would realistically only walk up to 1km before they would say to themselves, I'd rather drive than walk this.

Sandgate station termination isn't smart in my personal opinion, especially given the bus runs within 1km of the Shorncliffe line for about 3/4 of the trip. The 310 is an even worse route than the 315 - I'd much rather see a half-hourly 315 and the 310 cease to exist. The bus could simply turn into a side street and go right to Boondall North station. My biggest concern would be the buses getting back on to Sandgate Road.

I believe it has been discussed here before, but industrial areas are very poor trip generators. We cannot have buses covering every possible PT journey, and I'd be far more concerned about making PT more attractive in residential areas with non-existent weekend/off-peak services than industrial estates where trip generation is non-existent on weekends.

[SurfRail]

Perhaps SR can chime in as he knows someone from hornibrook who could perhaps tell us why TL refused to change that route. Even though its rather obvious...

It's a complete mystery to me why the 315 doesn't just exist as part of a suite of upgraded feeder routes to Sandgate.

The 680 needs heaps more resources thrown at it which could come from the Deagon-City leg of the 315.

[STB]

With all this 315/310 talk, might I suggest about melding routes 310 and 315 into one route and terminating it at Sandgate station where there is facilities to interchange are.  North Boondall does not make sense as there are no facilities to allow an interchange to happen (unless you are happy to cross 4 lanes of a busy road and walk in between some houses).

I do think there still needs to be a route maintained along Sandgate Rd as not all areas along that road are accessible by rail, and there is also the employment attractors with the industrial areas along Sandgate Rd near Geebung and Virginia that are not necessarily near rail, given that people would realistically only walk up to 1km before they would say to themselves, I'd rather drive than walk this.

Sandgate station termination isn't smart in my personal opinion, especially given the bus runs within 1km of the Shorncliffe line for about 3/4 of the trip. The 310 is an even worse route than the 315 - I'd much rather see a half-hourly 315 and the 310 cease to exist. The bus could simply turn into a side street and go right to Boondall North station. My biggest concern would be the buses getting back on to Sandgate Road.

I believe it has been discussed here before, but industrial areas are very poor trip generators. We cannot have buses covering every possible PT journey, and I'd be far more concerned about making PT more attractive in residential areas with non-existent weekend/off-peak services than industrial estates where trip generation is non-existent on weekends.

Here's what I'm trying to illustrate for Redcliffe and Sandgate.

Red route is route 690, blue route is 695.  Routes 311, 312, 313 and 314 would be deleted, as well as routes 310 and 315 deleted and that general area replaced by a flexilink taxi service operating outside of the shops at Sandgate and servicing the area previously serviced by the 311, 312, 313 and 314 routes, including the interchange at Sandgate. 

I'd create a new all stops route 309 between Toombul and the City to pick up areas not serviced by the train and help those with mobility issues with getting to the station, running along Sandgate Rd.  Route 335 would continue as is to Sandgate station. 

There would be a north loop in Redcliffe (697 - generally following the northern part of current route 690) and a south loop in Redcliffe (696), to fill in the areas in Redcliffe starting and terminating at Peninsula Fair (future Kippa Ring station), those routes would continue to the future Kippa Ring station once built and terminate there.  Also I'd delete the northern part of route 695 (they can access route 660).  Route 660 remains untouched and if there was a lot of grief from the northern tip of route 695, just extend route 665 down into that area and terminate it at Kippa Ring station / Peninsula Fair.

Discuss.

[SurfRail]

I think there is enough justification for a Victoria Avenue feeder as well.

When Kippa-Ring opens, the focus then becomes east-west to get people to KR Station.

[STB]

I think there is enough justification for a Victoria Avenue feeder as well.

When Kippa-Ring opens, the focus then becomes east-west to get people to KR Station.

I had that in mind for the south loop (696).

[STB]

Here's a more detailed look at what I'm thinking.  This is with the thought that the next major review of this area would be once the Moreton Bay rail link opens in 2016.

Route descriptions:
Route 660 - Redcliffe to Caboolture
Route 665 - Kippa Ring to Deception Bay
Route 690 - Kippa Ring to Sandgate via Redcliffe
Route 695 - Kippa Ring to Sandgate via Brighton
Route 696 - Kippa Ring to Redcliffe (South)
Route 697 - Kippa Ring to Redcliffe (North)

Routes 310 and 315 deleted.  I haven't thought about the other routes out of Sandgate, except routes 311, 312, 313 and 314 which I previously mentioned I'd delete with a flexilink taxi replacement out of Sandgate shops.  All services would connect with trains.

[techblitz]

Stb your plan looks pretty decent come 2016. The new dolphins shopping center will need to be serviced directly keep in mind. Its cnr kligner and ashmole rds. Probably the main reason the new loop is being implemented for newport in the upcoming review.It will be coles largest supermarket in qld when it opens.


Meanwhile on a random day last summer...

Planner to translink : hey i think truncation of the 315 to the shorncliffe line would be great in the moreton review....what do ya think?
Translink to planner: mate 10 points for keeness but unfortunately some routes are just best left alone.

Planner: no worries.. Just thought we could jack the frequency up.

Translink to planner: thats why i gave you ten points

[longboi]

Yes nikko those VFM/P figures come 14th October will start becoming useless.
Just remember however that it was those same values that were used in parliament by certain councellors to argue their case for keeping specific routes.
Putting forward sub-standard analysis of each route translates to a monumental stuff-up by TL would it not?
Anyways I have taken a look at translinks capacity utilisation chart (specifically peak 7.30-8.30am)

Somehow I don't call this a stuff-up as it seems pretty accurate to me.I suspect this is the chart that BT will be using quite a bit for reviews over the next 2 years.
If were going to talk about anecdotal evidence 
I sit at Buranda @ peak almost everyday pm peak and what translink have stated matches up to my observations.

Heres a rundown of brisbanes best performing busway stops at morning peak by how full buses are:

Top10:

1.Stones Corner 94%
2.Langlands Park 93%
3.Buranda 82% and 118 routes  <<<< CAUTION: Beware of those supposedly useless Firing Rockets! (james theres your reason why they never fully deleted the Carindale rockets  )
4.Boggo Road 75%
5.Greenslopes 72%
6. Lutwyche 69%
7. Normanby 68%
8. RCH Herston 64%
9. Holland Park West 61%
10.Griffith Uni 61%

At 82 percent and the amount of routes...clearly Buranda is handling things well and is poised to handle the future growth of garden city ,coorparoo, eight mile plains, calamvale etc.... its clearly where the most action is happening. With p88 deletion and the rocket reductions this will improve.
Stones Corner and Langlands park are real positives and the eastern busway extension cant come quick enough..

Northside busway stations are averaging 58 percent peak capacity so going by the TL chart its safe to assume that its the priority after CC. Dont worry HTG perhaps we will see a restructure of some inner routes once the tradecoast depot is in full swing......
Translink should have done a better in-depth study and included indro on that chart to give a better picture of how full the buses at that bus station.

Ugh...you don't get it. It's not about "full buses". It's about getting a higher return on cost/km and at the same time addressing those issues like CBD stops, Cultural Centre etc. It just so happens that a well designed, trunk and feeder network does just this.

I didn't say the figures were wrong, I said they would have been meaningless if the original review had gone ahead as intended. I also have said (in the past) that they are a simplification of the ACTUAL data that TransLink planners/strategists/contract managers etc. use. It was a mistake simplifying these and releasing them to the public. It should have either been all or nothing.

I'd be interested to find out how you could possibly know whether a route is value for money by sitting at Buranda watching buses.

[STB]

Stb your plan looks pretty decent come 2016. The new dolphins shopping center will need to be serviced directly keep in mind. Its cnr kligner and ashmole rds. Probably the main reason the new loop is being implemented for newport in the upcoming review.It will be coles largest supermarket in qld when it opens.


Meanwhile on a random day last summer...

Planner to translink : hey i think truncation of the 315 to the shorncliffe line would be great in the moreton review....what do ya think?
Translink to planner: mate 10 points for keeness but unfortunately some routes are just best left alone.

Planner: no worries.. Just thought we could jack the frequency up.

Translink to planner: thats why i gave you ten points

Thanks for this info.  Routes 696/697 is effectively a two way loop (the driver would just switch the desto at the terminus and put in the route in the DCU), so the passenger would be able to just stay on board until he/she reached the shopping centre.  Route 665 could be looped around Ashmore and Klinger after coming from Kippa Ring station before returning to Deception Bay.  I wouldn't suggest changing the 660 though, rather would see that stay on the main road if possible to avoid any minor diversions.  So it would be serviced by routes 665, 690, 696 and 697.

[techblitz]

impossible for anyone to tell how busy a route is just by sitting at Buranda for 10 mins BUT
do it long enough at the same time each day and you can see that TL weren't fibbing on the 82% mark that they quoted. Sit at the cultural center long enough and you will eventually see that TL weren't fibbing on the 38% mark.
I trust everyone of translinks figures that were quoted on that review. Especially the peak/counter peak chart which no doubt took a good bit of analysis to achieve.

And I trust this statement by them as well:

In July 2012, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads announced a review of TransLink's South East Queensland bus network to improve service frequency, reliability and affordability.
Since then we've analysed data about every bus route in South East Queensland, worked with our delivery partners to understand what's happening on the ground, reviewed the main transport corridors across the networkand involved passengers in three stages of passenger participation.

Pst Pst Sandgate Rd corridor 

Unfortunately they didn't get the chance to have decent consultation with councellors .

[Set in train]

Great discussions on the Carindale and Redcliffe/Sandgate services but have I missed the comments about the next step in Logan's bus changes?

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/logan

Information sessions

Find out more about your new bus network - visit an information session:

Date                                   Time                           Venue
Monday 14 October           9am to 5.30pm    Hyperdome Shopping Centre
Tuesday 15 October           9am to 5.30pm     Logan Central Plaza
Thursday 17 October           9am to 9pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre
Saturday 19 October           9am to 4pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre
Wednesday 23 October   9am to 5.30pm     Logan Central Plaza
Thursday 24 October           9am to 9pm           Hyperdome Shopping Centre
Friday 25 October           9am to 5.30pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre
Saturday 26 October           9am to 4pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre

[longboi]

impossible for anyone to tell how busy a route is just by sitting at Buranda for 10 mins BUT
do it long enough at the same time each day and you can see that TL weren't fibbing on the 82% mark that they quoted. Sit at the cultural center long enough and you will eventually see that TL weren't fibbing on the 38% mark.
I trust everyone of translinks figures that were quoted on that review. Especially the peak/counter peak chart which no doubt took a good bit of analysis to achieve.

Ok, I'm not going to try anymore.

If you think I am saying the figures are lies then clearly you have poor comprehension skills.

Let's just be clear I'm NOT talking about the entire publicly released report. I am only talking about the 'patronage' and 'value for money' indicators that were listed on the website against each route.
I am saying they were too simplistic and made it appear as if the bus review was simply cutting services left, right and centre. I am talking about how these simple indicators led to resistance from the community and the myriad of feedback which said things such as "You're cutting the 444! But that service has high patronage! This makes no sense!".

[ozbob]

Great discussions on the Carindale and Redcliffe/Sandgate services but have I missed the comments about the next step in Logan's bus changes?

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/logan

Information sessions

Find out more about your new bus network - visit an information session:

Date                                   Time                           Venue
Monday 14 October           9am to 5.30pm    Hyperdome Shopping Centre
Tuesday 15 October           9am to 5.30pm     Logan Central Plaza
Thursday 17 October           9am to 9pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre
Saturday 19 October           9am to 4pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre
Wednesday 23 October   9am to 5.30pm     Logan Central Plaza
Thursday 24 October           9am to 9pm           Hyperdome Shopping Centre
Friday 25 October           9am to 5.30pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre
Saturday 26 October           9am to 4pm           Grand Plaza Shopping Centre

Good point --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10260.0

[somebody]

One thing I would like to see the 335 adopt tomorrow would be a route modification to all services between Kirby Road and Hamilton Road. When heading inbound instead of running onto Gympie Road and then having it do the long loop to nowhere to get back onto Hamilton Road have it run down Ellison Road and Murphy Road so it can access Kittyhawke Drive behind Westfield and then merge back onto Hamilton Road to use the stops that the 325 currently does. Outbound the 335 would continue along Hamilton Road avoiding entering the interchange/westfield using the same stop as the current 325 before turning off onto Kittyhawke Drive/Murphy Road/Ellison Road and then resuming its route by turning onto Kirby Road. Reasons for this is that it will attract more potential patronage than those that would use the Gympie Road stops (still covered off by the 338, 680 and the P341 rocket during peak hour), provides the local RSL/residential apartments with a bus route for the first time via Kittyhawke Drive, gives the option of adding a stop for Westfield at the far northern end for the very first time (closer than the current 336/337 stops on Murphy Road), there is still planned development and future expansion along Kittyhawke Drive, provides those that live close to Ellison road a bus as opposed to walking through 400m of unlit parkland and then crossing busy Gympie Road to get to/from the stop locations or waiting for the 2 hourly 336/337 that only runs between peaks, removes the 335 from the same grid lock that the arvo services including the 338/340/350/680 suffer from, Chermside-PCH has a uniformed stop location, Chermside-Grange would then have 1 route for mapping when combined with the 325 leaving only Grange-City to be fixed to provide 1 merged route City-Chermside via Webster Road (at a later date also allows the Webster Road corridor to have 1 route cut with a frequency boost ie 325/335 cut at Chermside with the 325/335 under a buz/30 minute standard).

This idea is an incredibly hard sell.  Google Maps reckons its the same time on the inbound as the current route and 200m longer, so presumably longer on the outbound than the current route.  You have to argue that the places served justify the change.  One thing that's clearly wrong on the 335 I/B is serving the Gympie Rd stop f/s Hamilton Rd rather than the 325 stop Hamilton Rd approaching Gympie Rd.

By all means retain the 330 as a buz but cut it at Chermside

Meh.

[HappyTrainGuy]

During peak hour it would by far attract a higher patronage than currently just because of the new stops and new areas with a decent public transport service. It would only need a few people for that to happen. The times I've used the 336/337 there has always been people using them as a quick hop to/from Chermside. Another argument could be during peak hour it would reduce congestion at the Chermside interchange. I've already documented the issues with the outbound 330/335/340 effectively blocking the entire interchange due to them all arriving at the exact same time and at times multiple services (eg 2x 330/2x 340). The worst I have ever seen it was when a electric wheelchair tried to board the 330 in peak hour. The 598 was in the bay so the 330 had to turn in sharply. As everybody onboard had to shuffle around the 340 and 335 queued up behind in the thru lane. The 598 was boxed in by the 330 turning in sharply and a parked bus on the other side. The inbound 320/322 was boxed in by the 335. A terminated 370 then stopped short of the crossing. The rear of a inbound 370? was across the zebra crossing and then there was the waiting inbound 333 in the bay. Didn't manage to get any photos at the time but I've taken plenty of photos of the 320/322/330/340/335/370/598/parked buses playing chaos.

[somebody]

One wonders why the 598 comes into the interchange at all.  It's more logical out on Hamilton Rd with the 325 (& s/be 335) if you ask me.  All three should do the same thing to make it easier to reach PCH.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Another reason to send both inbound/outbound buses via Ellison Road/Kittyhawke drive to reach the same stops as the 325's

[somebody]

Another reason to send both inbound/outbound buses via Ellison Road/Kittyhawke drive to reach the same stops as the 325's

The 335 I/B already passes the 325 I/B stop at Chermside, just doesn't serve it.

[HappyTrainGuy]

335 inbound currently uses the Gardens Stop that the 330/338/680 also uses and then the Gympie Road stop that the 330/333/340/370 currently use. It proceeds further along Gympie Road before turning onto Wallace Street as a means of getting back onto Hamilton Road. At no point in time does the inbound 335 share the same stop as the inbound 325 until it has turned back on to Hamilton Road. Outbound it bypasses the 325 stop/Stop F? and runs into the interchange to use the same stop as the 330/340 does 

Edit: For reference/idea sake.
Yellow = Currently provided bus stop infrastructure/current route bus stops
Black = Current Outbound 335 via Gympie Road/Chermside Interchange
Red = Current Inbound 335 via Gympie Road
Green = My new proposed Inbound 335 (using current 337 stops on Ellison Road)
Blue = My new proposed outbound 335 (using current 336 stops on Ellison Road)

[somebody]

Depends on which map you believe.  The online map has it doing 3 lefts into Hall and Thomas Sts before Hamilton Rd, but the PDF has it turning right into Wallace and Farnell Sts.  Hmm.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I don't need to rely on any online maps as I know where the majority of routes actually travel around parts of the northside FYI you should also not 100% rely on the online maps. The waypoints in the routes are the stop locations. Not the physical route the bus takes. Depending on the layout of the roads Google will produce its own way between the two waypoint locations. This was pointed out pretty much on the first day when Translink upgraded their JP when members here noticed random detours between some stops. If you have a good eye you will also notice the 335 inbound also makes a backstreet detour through East Aspley between stop locations.

[longboi]

I don't need to rely on any online maps as I know where the majority of routes actually travel around parts of the northside FYI you should also not 100% rely on the online maps. The waypoints in the routes are the stop locations. Not the physical route the bus takes. Depending on the layout of the roads Google will produce its own way between the two waypoint locations. This was pointed out pretty much on the first day when Translink upgraded their JP when members here noticed random detours between some stops. If you have a good eye you will also notice the 335 inbound also makes a backstreet detour through East Aspley between stop locations.

It's actually HASTUS that does that.

The Google map and JP aren't actually "linked" as such. The route map is just an overlay on the Google map.

[ozbob]

Overall, mediocrity inflicted on the community tomorrow 14th October 2013.  A sad indictment to weak political leadership and petty politics, bureaucratic and political incompetence.  This has set back public transport years in SEQ.

=====================

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/brisbane

Summary of changes

Type of change    Route

Timetable changes*    

104, P129, 131, 156, P157, 162, 181, 186, 193, 198, P201, P205, 209, P217, 222, 224, 301, 308, 329, 350, 364, 369, 379, 380, 381, 393, 396, 397, 398, 402, 416, 451, 470 and 590.

Changes to route alignment (where the bus goes)
   
117, 138, 153, 199, P216, 310, 325, 335, P341, 363, 414 and 476.


Timetable changes and changes to route alignment
   
204, 303, 367, 435 and 475.


Bus stop and timetable changes    

P119, 161, 170, P179, 200, 213 and 385.


Route removal    


328, P356, P374, 436 and Chermside FlexiLink.


Merging of routes    

66, 109, P133, P137, 177 and 183.


Changes to bus stops    

110, 115, 134, 135, 155, 171, P176, 196, 212, 215, P221, 225, P231, P236, 302, 321, 334, P384, 819, Maroon CityGlider and City Loop.

New Route    234.

* Timetable changes could mean a change to departure times, frequency or span of hours.

[James]

With the re-routing of the 414, James now has 5 bus routes to UQ departing from three stops within 800m of his house. Unfortunately due to express pattern mediocrity along the Hawken Drive/Swann Road corridor, he cannot wait for all of those services at any one time.

This really is a bit of a pathetic state of affairs. And to think those living along the route of the 414 could have a HF route to take them home instead of the awful urban safari tour which they have now.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

13th October 2013

BCC Bus Review Reveals Hi-Waste Bus Philosophy

Greetings,

Many RAIL Back On Track members are of the view that legislation separating of Brisbane Transport (BT) from Brisbane City Council (BCC) and for the bus contracts to be thrown open to competition is now needed to rescue the Brisbane and indirectly the rest of the SEQ bus network.

It is our opinion that any savings made by BCC this year will be engulfed by BCC's bus cost explosion and yet another round of harder cuts will be required again next year to keep the bus network financially afloat. Some of BCC's changes are cosmetic and do not constitute fundamental reform. For example from tomorrow, the Wishart 161 rocket will now stop at all busway stations, slowing the passenger journey times for everyone on that service while actually costing slightly more to run due to this extra stopping. There is no actual saving here and any new passengers this bus will carry as a result of the changes will not be genuinely new passengers but simply be passengers cannibalised from other busway services. It would be cheaper and simpler to simply make passengers connect at Upper Mt Gravatt Busway station but the hi-waste design philosophy adopted by BCC prevents this.

Passengers will be pleased no doubt when they realise that they are now paying more for less and the council is dipping into their rates to the tune of $400 per rate payer annually to prop up the BCC hi-waste bus network which has the remarkable feat of managing to carry 50% loads of air through Cultural Centre at the height of morning peak hour and 80% loads of air at other times all while claiming with a straight face that "the bus network is not broken and does not need revolutionary change ...".

As we keep saying, what is not sustainable shall not be sustained. Perhaps it will take a financial catastrophe at Brisbane Transport or passenger revolt at yet another 7.5% fare increase coming in three months time before BCC will listen to reality, and if so, so be it.

What an embarrassment it is that private car parks are now actively swooping on bus passengers exiting bus stations outside City Hall to peddle cheap parking deals.

It is also embarrassing that an identical bus review performed by Brisbane's sister city, Auckland (NZ) came to identical conclusions as the TransLink Bus Review did and is now being implemented.

The State Government must do something and not sit idly by as workers, families and ratepayers are are taken to the proverbial cleaners. It must pass legislation altering the City of Brisbane Act 2010 to strip BCC of all public transport functions.

The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport.

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.0

Re: Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.msg125285#msg125285

The Costello Commission of Audit assessment of BCC:

"Increases in the payment required to be made to operators (especially to BT) for the
provision of bus services are a significant financial risk for the State." page 2-122

"Payments increased by 61% between 2008-09 and 2011-12, and are expected to increase by a further
35% between 2011-12 and 2015-16. "

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Brisbane bus network 'more efficient' with changes

The second round of changes to Brisbane's bus network will begin on Monday, with 85 alterations to Translink services to come into effect.

Routes 328, P356, P374, 436 and the trial Chermside Flexilink have been scrapped, while several other routes have merged.

Most of the service alterations will result in changes to bus frequency, routes and locations of bus stops.

Sixty-five of the changes are as a direct result of the Brisbane City Council bus network review, which was completed earlier this year.
Advertisement

A full list of changes are available on the Translink website.

BCC Public and Active Transport Chair Peter Matic said the bus network would be more efficient.

"These changes are about simplifying the network, improving connectivity between services, having less overcrowding on buses and eliminating service duplications," he said.

"While almost 70 per cent of commuters will remain unaffected by the changes, I realise they will affect some people – however when we undertook the review, we looked at what would benefit the greater majority of commuters."

However, public transport users group RAIL Back On Track described some of the changes as "cosmetic", and said some passenger journeys could be slower than before.

"It is our opinion that any savings made by BCC this year will be engulfed by BCC's bus cost explosion and yet another round of harder cuts will be required again next year to keep the bus network financially afloat," RAIL Back On Track administrator Robert Dow said.

Mr Dow said legislation was needed to allow private companies the opportunity to win bus contracts in Brisbane.

Meanwhile, Lord Mayor Graham Quirk opened a new bus depot in Eagle Farm on Sunday.

The depot will initially house 120 of the city's buses, that will service central and northern Brisbane.

Bus depots in Bowen Hills and Richlands will now be sold, and all staff at those facilities will be re-deployed to other depots, Cr Quirk said.

The 6.2-hectare Eagle Farm site has been leased to the council by the Queensland Treasury Corporation on a 25-year lease, with two further 10-year lease options available.

[ozbob]

Channel 7 News --> Bus review rolls out

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

14th October 2013

Re: BCC Bus Review Reveals Hi-Waste Bus Philosophy

Greetings,

The sad reality for Brisbane is that the high cost direct service Brisbane bus network model largely continues on the bus network despite the 85 routes changed today.  Mediocre feeder bus support for the rail network is making our public transport  one of the most inefficient on the globe.

The bus changes today just confirms the failing network model and that BCC is unable to grasp that there is the need for proper true network reform.  The sad thing is that we now have a public transport network that comprises the Brisbane Bus network and the rest of SEQ public transport networks.  It is not really integrated in the sense that a proper review and changes as proposed by TransLink would have achieved.  The impact of BCC's political intransigence is that service cutbacks will be foisted on the other regions, in order for the Brisbane Bus network to maintain its highly cost inefficient network.

The Minister for Transport should find some political courage and move to make TransLink the proper transport authority and get a truly integrated, cost efficient, frequent network for all of SEQ.  This is turn would then allow for proper fare reform.  Fare affordability is the worse customer index by a long shot.  The largely bus service cuts today are just going to drive more people away for public transport with rather sad outcomes for the fare box generally.

The bus review failures are a tragedy for public transport in SEQ.

Best wishes
Robert

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

Sent to all outlets:

13th October 2013

BCC Bus Review Reveals Hi-Waste Bus Philosophy

Greetings,

Many RAIL Back On Track members are of the view that legislation separating of Brisbane Transport (BT) from Brisbane City Council (BCC) and for the bus contracts to be thrown open to competition is now needed to rescue the Brisbane and indirectly the rest of the SEQ bus network.

It is our opinion that any savings made by BCC this year will be engulfed by BCC's bus cost explosion and yet another round of harder cuts will be required again next year to keep the bus network financially afloat. Some of BCC's changes are cosmetic and do not constitute fundamental reform. For example from tomorrow, the Wishart 161 rocket will now stop at all busway stations, slowing the passenger journey times for everyone on that service while actually costing slightly more to run due to this extra stopping. There is no actual saving here and any new passengers this bus will carry as a result of the changes will not be genuinely new passengers but simply be passengers cannibalised from other busway services. It would be cheaper and simpler to simply make passengers connect at Upper Mt Gravatt Busway station but the hi-waste design philosophy adopted by BCC prevents this.

Passengers will be pleased no doubt when they realise that they are now paying more for less and the council is dipping into their rates to the tune of $400 per rate payer annually to prop up the BCC hi-waste bus network which has the remarkable feat of managing to carry 50% loads of air through Cultural Centre at the height of morning peak hour and 80% loads of air at other times all while claiming with a straight face that "the bus network is not broken and does not need revolutionary change ...".

As we keep saying, what is not sustainable shall not be sustained. Perhaps it will take a financial catastrophe at Brisbane Transport or passenger revolt at yet another 7.5% fare increase coming in three months time before BCC will listen to reality, and if so, so be it.

What an embarrassment it is that private car parks are now actively swooping on bus passengers exiting bus stations outside City Hall to peddle cheap parking deals.

It is also embarrassing that an identical bus review performed by Brisbane's sister city, Auckland (NZ) came to identical conclusions as the TransLink Bus Review did and is now being implemented.

The State Government must do something and not sit idly by as workers, families and ratepayers are are taken to the proverbial cleaners. It must pass legislation altering the City of Brisbane Act 2010 to strip BCC of all public transport functions.

The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport.

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.0

Re: Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.msg125285#msg125285

The Costello Commission of Audit assessment of BCC:

"Increases in the payment required to be made to operators (especially to BT) for the
provision of bus services are a significant financial risk for the State." page 2-122

"Payments increased by 61% between 2008-09 and 2011-12, and are expected to increase by a further
35% between 2011-12 and 2015-16. "

[ozbob]

BCC does not give a stuff about the rest of the public transport network.   Time public transport was removed from them.

[STB]

Channel 7 News --> Bus review rolls out

Did anyone notice pretty much no mention of TransLink by BCC.  It's as though TransLink doesn't even exist in BCC's world, and that BCC is the only operator in Brisbane with BCC funding it completely.  Oh dear, poor TransLink, and poor Brisbane ratepayers who have been sold a t%rd when they think they are getting gold standard. 

Get TL to take over complete control of the public transport system, FFS!

[techblitz]

Currently sitting at Griffith Uni station waiting for a bus to UQ. A 111, 160, 161 and 555 all show up at the same time. 4 all stopping services.... Facepalm!

like sitting at CC waiting for a valley bus to come and all the qsbs buses turn up at once...

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

14th October 2013

BCC bus cost explosion engulfs Tennyson, Yeronga & West Toowong

Greetings,

Residents of West Toowong Yeronga and Tennyson will be hit hard by the Lord Mayor's bus cuts today.

What has been the effect of BCC councillors opposition to fundamental bus reform? Many months after BCC and the Rail Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) defeated the TransLink bus review we are now in a position to observe the effects.

In Cr Peter Matic's own ward (Public and Active Transport chairman), services to West Toowong are being cut. The 11.20 am route 416 departing Toowong will be cut. Our members have shown that it is possible to upgrade services to this area if only connections are introduced but BCC's hi-waste anti-connections bus philosophy prevents this.

In the Tennyson and Yeronga ward, the lukewarm support of the sitting councillor has seen her constituents worse off. Today route 104 services are being cut - services departing Corinda station at 5.18am, 5.48am and 6.48pm are gone, the services departing Yeerongpilly station at 5.14am, 5.45am and 6.15am are gone and the service departing the Princess Alexandra (PA) Hospital at 6.44pm is gone. And not only that, the high frequency 196 Yeronga BUZ down Kadumba Street in Yeronga will NOT be implemented. What a raw deal this is for residents in her ward. Improving services for local residents? Not a bit of it.

BCC's bus review is defective and deficient. Why is it that BCC has been unable to supply the high frequency bus services to Morningside, Yeronga, The Centenary Suburbs and the Northwest outlined in TransLink's bus review? Is it because that money is now being spent on the hi-waste philosophy of paying bus drivers to drive air all the way to the CBD to avoid connections? We think so.

Why is it that BCC has been unable to deliver 2000 daily express buses down Legacy Way despite mailing  residents letters saying exactly this? BCC's own transport plan still extols the virtues resulting from 2000 daily express buses down Legacy way, despite the connection to the busway being scrapped.

And what about bus drivers? They are now worse off. Depots are being closed, there is a freeze on driver hiring and it is our opinion that shifts and take home pay for drivers will be reduced as a direct result of the cuts to services. We think there will be more and harder cuts next year as BCC struggles to contain its bus cost explosion.

What is not sustainable shall not be sustained.

Passengers will be pleased no doubt when they realise that they are now paying more for less and the council is dipping into their rates to the tune of $400 per rate payer annually to prop up the BCC hi-waste bus network which has the remarkable feat of managing to carry 50% loads of air through Cultural Centre at the height of morning peak hour and 80% loads of air at other times all while claiming with a straight face that "the bus network is not broken and does not need revolutionary change ...".

The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport.

Best wishes
Robert

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


References:

Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.0

Second stage of Brisbane bus network changes - 14 October http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/brisbane

BCC's Transport Plan for Brisbane

"Council's TransApex projects also provides a good opportunity for improved bus services. For example, a bus commuter travelling in the peak period between Kenmore and the CBD using Northern Link (legacy way) would experience daily travel time savings in 2016 of up to 26 minutes..."

http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af104/tramtrain/BCC_NorthernLink_JPEG_zpsefb7a290.jpg

Sent to all outlets:

14th October 2013

Re: BCC Bus Review Reveals Hi-Waste Bus Philosophy

Greetings,

The sad reality for Brisbane is that the high cost direct service Brisbane bus network model largely continues on the bus network despite the 85 routes changed today.  Mediocre feeder bus support for the rail network is making our public transport  one of the most inefficient on the globe.

The bus changes today just confirms the failing network model and that BCC is unable to grasp that there is the need for proper true network reform.  The sad thing is that we now have a public transport network that comprises the Brisbane Bus network and the rest of SEQ public transport networks.  It is not really integrated in the sense that a proper review and changes as proposed by TransLink would have achieved.  The impact of BCC's political intransigence is that service cutbacks will be foisted on the other regions, in order for the Brisbane Bus network to maintain its highly cost inefficient network.

The Minister for Transport should find some political courage and move to make TransLink the proper transport authority and get a truly integrated, cost efficient, frequent network for all of SEQ.  This is turn would then allow for proper fare reform.  Fare affordability is the worse customer index by a long shot.  The largely bus service cuts today are just going to drive more people away for public transport with rather sad outcomes for the fare box generally.

The bus review failures are a tragedy for public transport in SEQ.

Best wishes
Robert

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

Sent to all outlets:

13th October 2013

BCC Bus Review Reveals Hi-Waste Bus Philosophy

Greetings,

Many RAIL Back On Track members are of the view that legislation separating of Brisbane Transport (BT) from Brisbane City Council (BCC) and for the bus contracts to be thrown open to competition is now needed to rescue the Brisbane and indirectly the rest of the SEQ bus network.

It is our opinion that any savings made by BCC this year will be engulfed by BCC's bus cost explosion and yet another round of harder cuts will be required again next year to keep the bus network financially afloat. Some of BCC's changes are cosmetic and do not constitute fundamental reform. For example from tomorrow, the Wishart 161 rocket will now stop at all busway stations, slowing the passenger journey times for everyone on that service while actually costing slightly more to run due to this extra stopping. There is no actual saving here and any new passengers this bus will carry as a result of the changes will not be genuinely new passengers but simply be passengers cannibalised from other busway services. It would be cheaper and simpler to simply make passengers connect at Upper Mt Gravatt Busway station but the hi-waste design philosophy adopted by BCC prevents this.

Passengers will be pleased no doubt when they realise that they are now paying more for less and the council is dipping into their rates to the tune of $400 per rate payer annually to prop up the BCC hi-waste bus network which has the remarkable feat of managing to carry 50% loads of air through Cultural Centre at the height of morning peak hour and 80% loads of air at other times all while claiming with a straight face that "the bus network is not broken and does not need revolutionary change ...".

As we keep saying, what is not sustainable shall not be sustained. Perhaps it will take a financial catastrophe at Brisbane Transport or passenger revolt at yet another 7.5% fare increase coming in three months time before BCC will listen to reality, and if so, so be it.

What an embarrassment it is that private car parks are now actively swooping on bus passengers exiting bus stations outside City Hall to peddle cheap parking deals.

It is also embarrassing that an identical bus review performed by Brisbane's sister city, Auckland (NZ) came to identical conclusions as the TransLink Bus Review did and is now being implemented.

The State Government must do something and not sit idly by as workers, families and ratepayers are are taken to the proverbial cleaners. It must pass legislation altering the City of Brisbane Act 2010 to strip BCC of all public transport functions.

The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport.

Best wishes
Robert

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

References:

Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.0

Re: Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.msg125285#msg125285

The Costello Commission of Audit assessment of BCC:

"Increases in the payment required to be made to operators (especially to BT) for the
provision of bus services are a significant financial risk for the State." page 2-122

"Payments increased by 61% between 2008-09 and 2011-12, and are expected to increase by a further
35% between 2011-12 and 2015-16. "

[ozbob]

You have nailed STB.  It is embarrassing that the Government, Minister for Transport and the Assistant Minister for Public Transport are allowing the public transport to disintegrate around their ears ...

Opposition is struggling to make any sound counter arguments. 

H O P E L E S S the lot!

Channel 7 News --> Bus review rolls out

Did anyone notice pretty much no mention of TransLink by BCC.  It's as though TransLink doesn't even exist in BCC's world, and that BCC is the only operator in Brisbane with BCC funding it completely.  Oh dear, poor TransLink, and poor Brisbane ratepayers who have been sold a t%rd when they think they are getting gold standard. 

Get TL to take over complete control of the public transport system, FFS!

[Set in train]

Loving the vigour in your media releases today Ozbob, you are on a roll of the right kind!

Money talks, the costly component of everyone's rates needs to be pushed at every turn.

I am of the strong belief that the Councillors and Lord Mayor are beholden to their council staffers advising them 'what's best' (for them). These elected reps on both sides are the truly weak link, happy to do the bidding of those who work below them. A truly perverse inverse arrangement.

[techblitz]

Lots of TL staff out and about ( green shirts).
Really have to feel for TL. It was thier review that got totally ignored yet they are the ones out and about doing the hard work of letting pax know of the updates.
Should be the councellors and bt backoffice staff doing this!!
especially you know who.....