SEQ Bus Network Review

[longboi]

I like the idea. The use of these metrics made no sense to the average commuter.

However I wouldn't say opening up the books for all and sundry would make a difference. No matter the cost, people will say their bus is justified to run at a high subsidy because of (old people/poor people/sick people/school kids).

The only way this sort of thing can be successfully communicated is if you can show what people will get in return for their one-seat journey on the 341.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Oh I just love seeing pretty much empty 340/341's going through Chermside/Aspley all following each other. I stopped at the newsagent at Aspley the other day and saw a 340, 341, 346, 680 all pass by within seconds. Honestly. The amount of passengers on those 4 buses could have been squeezed onto 1 bus. 1 bloody bus. I know its the holidays but jesus. Talk about waste in the public transport network. In saying that later on the way home I passed a packed 338. Had to have been about 3 or 4 passengers onboard that i saw

[techblitz]

Traditional methods of evaluating bus network rely on evaluating 'agency side' metrics such as the service cost, value-for-money and whether the patronage on the service is 'high' or 'low'. Unfortunately these metrics do not easily capture or communicate on-the-ground customer perceptions of how convenient any particular individual service may be from the customer perspective.

i think the percieved convenience of the 110 to moorooka shops from the south serves as the perfect example for that statement...

its why not only customer feedback is needed but bus driver feedback as well...and done on a regular basis.... to paint the bigger picture for a bus route.
Rather pointless defining a route only by the number of passengers it carries if you dont know the demographic or age of the passengers.

[#Metro]

I'm going to make a general comment. There are valid points.

(Using the indexes I have constructed, the highest values are span of SIN = 10, and
maximum 'weighted overall wonderfulness' WOW = 100).

The current 110 Moorooka is an hourly service during the weekday. It has good span (SIN =
9) but it is not that wonderful (WOW = 71). (Comparison; 199 has a SIN of 9 and
WOW of 92, being a log scale this is a BIG difference).

There is a decision to make here. Sending 110 via Ipswich Rd to the CBD would result in
duplication and internal competition with a proposed Ipswich Rd BUZ 125. Because 110 then has to
travel all the way to the CBD, it is likely the frequency would remain hourly.

Alternatively, by re-arranging the network it is possible to put a service  that is more wonderful than the
current service through Acacia Ridge. (901 CityConnector, Inala-Garden City via Coopers Plains; SIN = 9, WOW = 76.)
In other words, it may be possible to re-arrange things so that a major improvement to frequency though Acacia Ridge
can happen.

Acacia Ridge services would go from a bus once per hour to a bus twice per hour, reducing
waiting times at the bus stop by 50% (30 minutes). The tradeoff would be you'd have to
connect to a train at Coopers Plains to go to the CBD and the bus would continue to Garden City
rather than the CBD.( I must say while this sounds controversial in Brisbane, it is stock
and standard fare in many cities elsewhere that the local bus takes you to the local train
station.)

However, the price of that might be Moorooka Shops may be more hassle to get to. But then if you don't
accept it, you forgo easy access to Garden City, (you have to use 122 Inala which is an hourly coverage
service).

So it seems like you can have two hourly services separately serving two destinations (CBD, Garden City)
OR one half hourly CityConnector service that serves both (CBD, and Garden City).

So the question is: would you be willing to connect to a frequent train in return for a
bus that comes at double the frequency of the existing one, half the waiting time, and
allows you to go to both the Brisbane CBD and Garden City outside your house?

The problem with Acacia Ridge to Moorooka Shops is that if you send the bus that way, then
you commit to duplication against bus services on Ipswich Road and probably also commit to
low hourly frequency due to having to drive all the way to the CBD. Maybe people want this
option, you decide.

There's no easy answer and the geometry does make it difficult to go to Moorooka shops
without changing to a high frequency 125 at Salisbury station. If anyone has a network
plan that they think pleases more people, is significantly better than the status quo while not
using any more money than currently, please post it.

[SurfRail]

I remain of the opinion that they would not have come up with the idea of not having a direct replacement for the 110 if there was sufficient demand to justify it.  They don't try to inflict transfers on people for the sake of it.

[James]

FWIW Lapdog, residents actually have half-hour frequency through Acacia Ridge the majority of the time.

110/115 combine on weekdays to provide half-hourly frequency between Learoyd Rd and the CBD, and 110 is half-hourly during the day on Saturdays and half-hourly in the Sunday "peak" direction (8:30am - 12:30pm inbound, 1:30pm - 5:30pm outbound). So a replacement feeder bus would need to be "go network" frequent (7am-7pm 7 days a week) most likely, in order to prevent whining.

Techblitz, you can get "driver observations" about where each bus gets its patronage by looking at go card history (and to a lesser extent, paper tickets).

[techblitz]

I remain of the opinion that they would not have come up with the idea of not having a direct replacement for the 110 if there was sufficient demand to justify it.  They don't try to inflict transfers on people for the sake of it.

Theres really only one response to that....TL took that precise same view with some of the gold coast routes which they deemed sufficient enough to finish early because there was not sufficient demand to justify running them later......or is translink just full of it??....(ouch)

Seems your contradicting yourself one way or the other......if your arguing the demand factor then its a simple case of "whats good enough for the 110 is good enough for the gold coast".....unfortunately TL didnt have goliath standing in the way of thier "demand responsive" plans for the gold coast.....they have free reign to say " our way or the highway".

Its now been 3 months since jan 20....there have been many jibes at translink since then over early finishing services...still nothing....time for them to come clean on lack of funds....or else they will lose that little bit of credibility each day....judging by your facebook posts...im sure you would not disagree...


Lets see how this tendering stuff pans out....QR need to move quickly and get salisbury upgraded to dda and redesign coopers plains (to get those bus stops closer to the station)...if they ever want to get bus transfer commuters onside....coopers plains would have to be the car friendliest rail station in brisbane....not bus!
The fact that when you check the 122/124 stops and you dont even see an @coopers plains rail stop....is testiment to this...

[James]

Theres really only one response to that....TL took that precise same view with some of the gold coast routes which they deemed sufficient enough to finish early because there was not sufficient demand to justify running them later......or is translink just full of it??....(ouch)

Seems your contradicting yourself one way or the other......if your arguing the demand factor then its a simple case of "whats good enough for the 110 is good enough for the gold coast".....unfortunately TL didnt have goliath standing in the way of thier "demand responsive" plans for the gold coast.....they have free reign to say " our way or the highway".

Its now been 3 months since jan 20....there have been many jibes at translink since then over early finishing services...still nothing....time for them to come clean on lack of funds....or else they will lose that little bit of credibility each day....judging by your facebook posts...im sure you would not disagree...

Lets see how this tendering stuff pans out....QR need to move quickly and get salisbury upgraded to dda and redesign coopers plains (to get those bus stops closer to the station)...if they ever want to get bus transfer commuters onside....coopers plains would have to be the car friendliest rail station in brisbane....not bus!
The fact that when you check the 122/124 stops and you dont even see an @coopers plains rail stop....is testiment to this...

techblitz, the Gold Coast problem could be solved simply by running a peak-only network. The Nerang/Clearwater routes are a great example. Instead of running them from 6am - 2pm, run them 6am - 10am and 2pm - 6pm. Problem solved. This can be applied all over the coast. Extending on this, I think it'll be a non-issue post-LRT implementation. People will get decent frequency and span of hours back.

The Coopers Plains issue is also similarly solved by diverting buses closer to the station. Not that it is a giant issue, station is only about 400m walk from the nearest bus stop, wouldn't require a huge diversion to get them serving Coopers Plains station.

[#Metro]

FWIW Lapdog, residents actually have half-hour frequency through Acacia Ridge the majority of the time.

110/115 combine on weekdays to provide half-hourly frequency between Learoyd Rd and the CBD, and 110 is half-hourly during the day on Saturdays and half-hourly in the Sunday "peak" direction (8:30am - 12:30pm inbound, 1:30pm - 5:30pm outbound). So a replacement feeder bus would need to be "go network" frequent (7am-7pm 7 days a week) most likely, in order to prevent whining.

Techblitz, you can get "driver observations" about where each bus gets its patronage by looking at go card history (and to a lesser extent, paper tickets).

Yes, it is half hourly on the weekend. These routes duplicate all the way from Salisbury to the CBD against 125/124 and 100. The frequency is not an exact 30 minute cycle, but I expect this can be fixed without too much fuss. BUZ via Acacia Ridge is not justified IMO as it would mean another place (i.e. Yeronga etc) would have to miss out.

Again it is easy to talk about individual routes, but the network is the final design. If you commit to run those buses to Moorooka Shops, then you pretty much commit to running all the way to the Brisbane CBD, and that route length is spent on duplication down Ipswich Rd (which has BUZ on it either way) rather than extending service to other areas.

[James]

Yes, it is half hourly on the weekend. These routes duplicate all the way from Salisbury to the CBD against 125/124 and 100. The frequency is not an exact 30 minute cycle, but I expect this can be fixed without too much fuss. BUZ via Acacia Ridge is not justified IMO as it would mean another place (i.e. Yeronga etc) would have to miss out.

Again it is easy to talk about individual routes, but the network is the final design. If you commit to run those buses to Moorooka Shops, then you pretty much commit to running all the way to the Brisbane CBD, and that route length is spent on duplication down Ipswich Rd (which has BUZ on it either way) rather than extending service to other areas.

Nope, ignoring issues such as traffic and service bunching (e.g. delays on the zone 5 section of the 115 route don't affect the 110 route), frequency is exactly every 30 minutes.

While just saying 'Here's your half-hourly frequency' to residents and walking off seems nice in theory, in the end it will make residents angry as they are not being compensated for their forced transfer. Whenever one feederises routes (short of the bus routes being air parcels or misplaced frequent routes), you need to compensate users with a net time gain/span of hours gain. While the 'network' philosophy is important, most passengers will only use "their bus", so if you cut "their bus" and just leave them out in the cold and say 'Well Centenary has a BUZ, move there!', it won't wash with residents. You need to show them that they either have a gain from increased frequency or increased span of hours.

The only exceptions really are when the placement of the route in the first place was not under sound transport planning practices. For example, BUZ 444. Why on earth a family of cows in Pinjarra Hills deserves frequency better than a family of humans in Jindalee is beyond me.

I believe FUZ for 110 between Richlands and Garden City via Inala/Acacia Ridge could work well - think something along Boundary Rd/McCullough St. Direct Sunnybank shops - Garden City link right there, Beenleigh - Springfield line, Sunnybank - west side of town, 130/140-150, I could go on. Could work really nicely. 7-7-7 would be all that is necessary.

[SurfRail]

Theres really only one response to that....TL took that precise same view with some of the gold coast routes which they deemed sufficient enough to finish early because there was not sufficient demand to justify running them later......or is translink just full of it??....(ouch)

Seems your contradicting yourself one way or the other......if your arguing the demand factor then its a simple case of "whats good enough for the 110 is good enough for the gold coast".....unfortunately TL didnt have goliath standing in the way of thier "demand responsive" plans for the gold coast.....they have free reign to say " our way or the highway".

What horse berries!  The Gold Coast's route structure has never been the issue for me apart from some jiggery pokery around the edges. Our services finish later because the BT network is sucking money out of TransLink's budget.  The buses exist to operate the services, the money doesn't.  The BT review, which was meant to happen first, would have allowed this. 

Coming back from Melbourne today, I can't say I relish the idea.  People transferring from trains to trains, trams to trams, buses to buses, buses to trams, trams to trains and trains to buses, every point of the compass, with facilities often much more rudimentary than what is on offer at places like Coopers Plains.  Brisbane is the most backwards and insular place in the country by far, especially with regards to public transport.

Bring on tendering, bring on State ownership and control of everything, bring on modern transport planning not beholden to hick councillors and know-nothings.

[#Metro]

While just saying 'Here's your half-hourly frequency' to residents and walking off seems nice in theory, in the end it will make residents angry as they are not being compensated for their forced transfer. Whenever one feederises routes (short of the bus routes being air parcels or misplaced frequent routes), you need to compensate users with a net time gain/span of hours gain. While the 'network' philosophy is important, most passengers will only use "their bus", so if you cut "their bus" and just leave them out in the cold and say 'Well Centenary has a BUZ, move there!', it won't wash with residents. You need to show them that they either have a gain from increased frequency or increased span of hours.

The only exceptions really are when the placement of the route in the first place was not under sound transport planning practices. For example, BUZ 444. Why on earth a family of cows in Pinjarra Hills deserves frequency better than a family of humans in Jindalee is beyond me.

Firstly, when I look at the timetable for the 100 and 115 (it's combined timetable), I can see a 115 leave at 12:12 and the next service is 110 at 12:42(Weekday, departing QSBS). This is a 30 minute gap as you and I agree (the way the timetable is displayed I did misread a bus leaving The Parks, as being on the same line as one leaving Inala). My mistake!

[#Metro]

*** LONG POST WARNING ***

Some comments:

1. I will agree with Techblitz re the Moorooka Shops issue. It is going to be harder to access that part of the world specifically from Acacia Ridge if the bus is sent to the local train station rather than driven all the way to the CBD. On the other hand it is going to be easier to get to Inala Shopping Centre (double the frequency) and Garden City (double the frequency). A key issue in all of this is that Salisbury Station is not DDA AFAIK. If this station becomes DDA, you'd be able to get a high frequency bus 125 from there to Moorooka Shops. (Not perfect, I know).

2. I will agree and disagree with James. Yes, people get angry about ANY change good or bad for them. People like to concentrate benefits on themselves ('my bus, my house, my area!!') and disperse costs on others ('screw everyone else!'). This is just human nature, and you see it everywhere, so I agree with you that some people may be upset because in any redistribution someone is going to think that they are entitled to more ('my house!!').

Where I disagree is with the BUZ through Acacia Ridge operating at 15 minute frequency. Has anyone looked at Google Maps and made a judgement about the size, location, density and possible demand from there? It seems like a very industrial area with a pocket of low density residential and doesn't strike as somewhere I would put a BUZ, but I am happy for people to disagree with me.

An issue with applying your principle James, is that there are a LOT more coverage routes (30 minute and hourly frequency) and doubling all of them will likely exceed the amount of route-km saved (though feel free to disprove me on this). If you can present a comprehensive network for the whole city and associated scheduling that (a) conforms to this principle across the entire city and (b) costs about the same as the current network then that would be worth posting.

To get to the bottom of this, I did a little rough exercise.

I assumed:
* That a person got the train and a new crosstown bus 901 operating at 30 minute daytime frequency (following the alignment of the 122 Inala from Coopers Plains Rail to get to Mitchell St Acacia Ridge).

* I also compared how many bus-route km was consumed to get 1 person from the Brisbane CBD to this point in Acacia Ridge on each service.

* I also assumed that the connection between bus and train was timed/co-ordinated by TransLink to be such that the 901 bus would leave Coopers Plains 8 minutes after the train departs to give time for walking and waiting for the bus.

* I assumed they got rid of the small car park on the Eastern Side of the station and put in a bus entry port so the bus stop is next to the train station exit.

* I assumed that there was no BaT project in operation.

* I also assumed that a person knew that 110 and 115 were equally good to get to the location in Acacia Ridge (legibility tends to degrade with multiple route numbers).

* I assumed that people take the train to the CBD when using the connected network option (i.e. train km do not count in the bus-km consumed calculation as space exists on the train for the majority of the day). Even if this were false, it would only justify direct services during peak hour.

Result: Yes a connected network is likely to be 8 minutes longer for getting to this location and this increase in the average trip time is due to the 8 minute walking between bus and train. The maximum/worst case journey time for both direct bus and rail is about the same at around 66 minutes. The average journey time for a connected network is about 8 minutes longer.

Now if BaT is in operation, and assuming that the connecting bus connects to BaT tunnel trains, the expected 10 minute time saving by Beenleigh trains using the BaT tunnel would likely mean that Acacia Ridge residents heading to from the Brisbane CBD would be no worse off using the connected network option.

One thing to notice though - a direct service to this location is more than 100% more expensive (as it consumes about DOUBLE the route-km by driving all the way to the Brisbane CBD) than a connected network option. So theoretically you're paying twice as much (in fares and taxes etc) for this 8 minute time saving (or entire suburbs elsewhere in Brisbane are missing out on upgraded services). I'll leave people to decide for themselves whether that is worth it or not.  (I have to say that with such an ENORMOUS difference in route km consumed, um, private operators stand to make an enormous cost reduction by introducing a connected network).

Personally I think that in an age where there was no BUZ on Ipswich Rd maybe I could understand the whole direct service and overlap convoy approach, but we now have a BUZ on Ipswich Rd (BUZ 100 currently and BUZ 125 in a connected network), so the original reason/purpose for this whole direct/convoy approach in this area no longer applies and is now pure legacy routing duplication. Rail services have also been upgraded massively all day so we are not in the previous situation where making connections was infeasable because nobody could stomach another 30 minute wait for the train after waiting 30 minutes to 60 minutes for the bus to turn up. Those are two very major changes from the Brisbane that used to exist and should not be ignored.

My Working

BT/Direct service

30 minute wait (QSBS) + 36 minute ride (Mitchell St) = 66 minutes max
15 minute wait (QSBS) + 36 minute ride (Mitchell St) = 51 minutes average journey time

BT bus service will provide direct access to CBD, once per hour access to Inala Shopping
Centre and no access to Garden City.

Route km consumed, services per weekday:

(Bus 110: 25 inbound services + 26 outbound services) x 17.4 km (approx, Mitchell St Acacia Ridge) = 887.4 bus-km/day
(Bus 115: 12 inbound services + 11 outbound services) x 17.4 km (approx, Mitchell St Acacia Ridge) = 400.2 bus-km/day

TOTAL Bus-km consumed to get to (Mitchell St, Acacia Ridge, approx) = 1287.6 bus/km

Connected Network (901 CityConnector)

15 minute wait (Central) + 30 minute ride (Coopers Plains) + 8 minute transfer + 13 minute bus ride  = 66 minutes max
7.5 minute wait (Central) + 30 minute ride (Coopers Plains) + 8 minute transfer + 13 minute bus ride = 58.5 minutes average journey time

Bus access will provide access to CBD (via Coopers Plains Rail), twice per hour access to Inala Shopping Centre, and twice per hour access to Sunnybank Plaza and Garden City. So much improvement in terms of access to major local shopping centres with this change.

(Bus 901: 38 inbound + 38 outbound services) x 6 km (Bus stop to train station) = 456 bus-km/day (approx) (distance from Acacia Ridge to train station, bus continues to Garden City, that distance to Garden City is not counted as we assume pax are going to/from CBD)

1287.6/456 = 2.8x more bus route-km consumed each day by using a direct service model to get to
this same spot. 1287-456 = 831 bus-km difference.

This is something the numbers can guide you on, but ultimately the decision is a personal one. Happy to be corrected if errors have crept into my calculations.

[#Metro]

Curious question: Would you pay 2x more for an 8 minute time saving?

(For those people who say "the money saved would not be spent on fare reductions,  just more bus service for other people not in my area/area X, why should I care?" remember that the lack of bus service to an area in a different part of the city can be thought of as a social cost borne in the form of extended waiting time and trips not made or alternatively as a lost opportunity. From a government/public perspective, ideally we should care about all areas within our political boundaries, and in this case this is the entire city and TL network area, not just 1 suburb).

[ozbob]

...
What horse berries!  The Gold Coast's route structure has never been the issue for me apart from some jiggery pokery around the edges. Our services finish later because the BT network is sucking money out of TransLink's budget.  The buses exist to operate the services, the money doesn't.  The BT review, which was meant to happen first, would have allowed this. 

Coming back from Melbourne today, I can't say I relish the idea.  People transferring from trains to trains, trams to trams, buses to buses, buses to trams, trams to trains and trains to buses, every point of the compass, with facilities often much more rudimentary than what is on offer at places like Coopers Plains.  Brisbane is the most backwards and insular place in the country by far, especially with regards to public transport.

Bring on tendering, bring on State ownership and control of everything, bring on modern transport planning not beholden to hick councillors and know-nothings.

+1  ...

Off to Geelong today ...  yee haa!   

[#Metro]

Some practical experience:

Remember, every person and their dog had a go at the Portland Planners when they made this change. And there was WASTE GALORE!!

How did the 1982 network transform the possibilities of mobility in the city? 

The old network was solely about going downtown.  The new network was about going anywhere you wanted to go.

The old network was infrequent.  The new network required easy connections, so it was designed to run at high frequency (most lines every 15 minutes or better all day).  Remember: Frequency is freedom!

The old network was wasteful, as many overlapping lines converged on downtown.  The new network was efficient, with little overlap between lines, and with lines spaced further apart to the extent that the street network allowed.  This is how the resources were found to increase frequency so much.

The old network was complicated, with routes often zigzagging from one street to another.  The new network was simpler, easy to keep in your head.  Many streets that were formerly served by a patchwork of overlapping routes, such as Division, now had a single route from end to end, so that you needed only remember "the Division bus."  Transit became an intrinsic part of the street.

This is always a tough sell, because many people value transit only for the commute downtown.  These people tend to complain when the network is optmized to serve many kinds of trip at once, which is exactly what the grid does.  A frequent grid is the ultimate in versatility, equity and freedom.  It does not pick favored destinations for favored markets. Instead, it delivers anywhere-to-anywhere mobility for wherever you might want to go.  Today, the non-downtown elements of the grid, especially 72 and 75, are among TriMet's most productive lines. 

http://www.humantransit.org/2012/08/portland-the-grid-is-30-thank-a-planner.html

[techblitz]

I will agree with Techblitz re the Moorooka Shops issue. It is going to be harder to access that part of the world specifically from Acacia Ridge if the bus is sent to the local train station rather than driven all the way to the CBD. On the other hand it is going to be easier to get to Inala Shopping Centre (double the frequency) and Garden City (double the frequency). A key issue in all of this is that Salisbury Station is not DDA AFAIK. If this station becomes DDA, you'd be able to get a high frequency bus 125 from there to Moorooka Shops. (Not perfect, I know).

heres some of ozbobs pics of salisbury ..2nd pic...after the carpark keep going up the hill another 80-100  metres and theres your 125 stops ....folks remember that with 110/115 removal...a whole new type of passenger(elderly,expectant mothers etc) will now have to use salibury station.





Article on the cultural significance of moorooka shops......

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/lifestyle/welcome-to-brisbanes-little-africa-20090420-absf.html

It should be served adequately from all directions.......granted the 125 buz TL suggestion is definitely workable....but elderly/expectant mothers need to taken into account for and those stations need to be fixed.....the councellors could have an absolute field day with it...come tender time...

[#Metro]

heres some of ozbobs pics of salisbury ..2nd pic...after the carpark keep going up the hill another 80-100  metres and theres your 125 stops ....folks remember that with 110/115 removal...a whole new type of passenger(elderly,expectant mothers etc) will now have to use salibury station.

One thing I doubt BCC has EVER done is a comprehensive and exhaustive bus stop review. Too many bus stops slow services down and this costs heaps! Then there is stop access which may be not so great as well. Bus stop poles could be shifted to be closer to the train station exit (and a lot of other cases like this).

It should be served adequately from all directions.......granted the 125 buz TL suggestion is definitely workable....but elderly/expectant mothers need to taken into account for and those stations need to be fixed.....the councellors could have an absolute field day with it...come tender time...

It is not possible to serve every origin with every destination. Choosing direct service there means giving up decent frequency to Inala Shopping Centre and Garden City Shopping Centre, both of which are arguably strong demand generators equal or greater than Moorooka Shops.

Just stating the tradeoffs.

[#Metro]

Looking closely, I think there may be a solution.

There is a coverage route in the area that can be diverted from Acacia Ridge sent through Moorooka shops and then terminated at Yeronga station. As it is a coverage service it would be an hourly service, but that's what coverage is all about. Somewhere else in the city (probably the tail end area of 116 Rocklea) would have to get the snip, or some hardcore steam ironing to make up any route-km shortfall to fund this, but I think there is a solution.

[James]

2. I will agree and disagree with James. Yes, people get angry about ANY change good or bad for them. People like to concentrate benefits on themselves ('my bus, my house, my area!!') and disperse costs on others ('screw everyone else!'). This is just human nature, and you see it everywhere, so I agree with you that some people may be upset because in any redistribution someone is going to think that they are entitled to more ('my house!!').

Where I disagree is with the BUZ through Acacia Ridge operating at 15 minute frequency. Has anyone looked at Google Maps and made a judgement about the size, location, density and possible demand from there? It seems like a very industrial area with a pocket of low density residential and doesn't strike as somewhere I would put a BUZ, but I am happy for people to disagree with me.

An issue with applying your principle James, is that there are a LOT more coverage routes (30 minute and hourly frequency) and doubling all of them will likely exceed the amount of route-km saved (though feel free to disprove me on this). If you can present a comprehensive network for the whole city and associated scheduling that (a) conforms to this principle across the entire city and (b) costs about the same as the current network then that would be worth posting.

Of course BUZ through the area is daft, but the fact is, there is already 3bph going from Acacia Ridge to Wooloongabba/CBD and 1bph going from Acacia Ridge to Inala/Garden City. What you're selling them is 2bph to Acacia Ridge and Inala/Garden City, connecting to rail (which is effectively 2tph). You have provided an increase in frequency for one group of people, yet have screwed the other group.

The issue with the network is not excessive route-km, it is excessive duplication meaning route-km in a lot of areas is waste. Now BUZ into Acacia Ridge isn't necessary (arguably overkill), but at the same time, your proposed solution on average will result in longer trip times AND forces a transfer. Remember, unless trip times decrease thanks to a transfer, people will not buy it.

If you cut the 411 at Toowong and said 'sorry, no increase in frequency, but you can get to Chatsworth Rd using the BUZ there now!', I would have kittens at such a proposal. Users need to see the benefit to them in order to accept a cut. 411 is a good example of how with no additional resources, frequency can be doubled.

Maybe in Acacia Ridge to give the 4bph during the day, you could operate 2bph Inala - Garden City and 2bph Inala - Coopers Plains (or dare I say, Moorvale/Moorooka via Coopers?). Or as shown in your calculations, you could double frequency and still save money.

Article on the cultural significance of moorooka shops......

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/lifestyle/welcome-to-brisbanes-little-africa-20090420-absf.html

It should be served adequately from all directions.......granted the 125 buz TL suggestion is definitely workable....but elderly/expectant mothers need to taken into account for and those stations need to be fixed.....the councellors could have an absolute field day with it...come tender time...

But is Acacia Ridge full of Africans? I think no. When considering ethnic movements, one needs to consider where groups actually live. I am well aware of the large Sudanese population in Moorooka, but most of them are in the Moorooka area - very few live in Acacia Ridge (as far as I know).

Also, if it is so significant, the shops should be served by BUZ - something which doesn't occur currently due to 100 BUZ routing.

Looking closely, I think there may be a solution.

There is a coverage route in the area that can be diverted from Acacia Ridge sent through Moorooka shops and then terminated at Yeronga station. As it is a coverage service it would be an hourly service, but that's what coverage is all about. Somewhere else in the city (probably the tail end area of 116 Rocklea) would have to get the snip, or some hardcore steam ironing to make up any route-km shortfall to fund this, but I think there is a solution.

You could always just send the 116 even further south to fulfil a coverage role in Acacia Ridge. It already does ugly things in Tarragindi and Moorooka.

[Gazza]

What about sending the 100 via moorooka shops?

[#Metro]

The issue with the network is not excessive route-km, it is excessive duplication meaning route-km in a lot of areas is waste. Now BUZ into Acacia Ridge isn't necessary (arguably overkill), but at the same time, your proposed solution on average will result in longer trip times AND forces a transfer. Remember, unless trip times decrease thanks to a transfer, people will not buy it.

If you cut the 411 at Toowong and said 'sorry, no increase in frequency, but you can get to Chatsworth Rd using the BUZ there now!', I would have kittens at such a proposal. Users need to see the benefit to them in order to accept a cut. 411 is a good example of how with no additional resources, frequency can be doubled.

Maybe in Acacia Ridge to give the 4bph during the day, you could operate 2bph Inala - Garden City and 2bph Inala - Coopers Plains (or dare I say, Moorvale/Moorooka via Coopers?). Or as shown in your calculations, you could double frequency and still save money.

Show me a network map and scheduling that complies with your principle consistently across the entire city. Do you have a map of how this 2 bph proposal is going to work, because it sounds like (a) its still going to be effective half hour frequency and require a transfer (i.e. plus 8 minute walk) for pax going to only one destination. What are the travel times like?

When designing a network and someone says "Service in this areas should be X!" I have to make a decision to cut service elsewhere in the city in the model to make up the extra route km. It is not easy. I decided the extra route-km would be better spent extending the service to Garden City and Sunnybank Plaza, both of which are larger than Moorooka Shops. For passengers heading to those new destinations, they get a lot of benefit (30 minute time saving). There's also a coverage route that can be altered to serve that area.

Its hard to enact 20 minute cycles (3 buses/hour) simply because it means that connection times with trains operating on 30 minute or 15 minute cycles don't match up.

Gazza's idea may be more workable.

[#Metro]

What about sending the 100 via moorooka shops?

Ipswich Road is a fast road between Inala and Moorooka. Sending it via Acacia Ridge is possible, but will cause a significant extra amount of delay to be introduced to the 100 service.

An alternative option, is to make the bus turn into Muriel avenue or Granard Rd and go down Beaudesert Rd. This would serve Inala but not solve the Acacia Ridge issue. It would then also duplicate BUZ 125 along this section, although that might be something that can be lived with.

[James]

Show me a network map and scheduling that complies with your principle consistently across the entire city. Do you have a map of how this 2 bph proposal is going to work, because it sounds like (a) its still going to be effective half hour frequency and require a transfer (i.e. plus 8 minute walk) for pax going to only one destination. What are the travel times like?

When designing a network and someone says "Service in this areas should be X!" I have to make a decision to cut service elsewhere in the city in the model to make up the extra route km. It is not easy. I decided the extra route-km would be better spent extending the service to Garden City and Sunnybank Plaza, both of which are larger than Moorooka Shops. For passengers heading to those new destinations, they get a lot of benefit (30 minute time saving). There's also a coverage route that can be altered to serve that area.

Its hard to enact 20 minute cycles (3 buses/hour) simply because it means that connection times with trains operating on 30 minute or 15 minute cycles don't match up.

Gazza's idea may be more workable.

Increasing Inala - Acacia Ridge to 4bph (2bph to Garden City, 2bph terminating at Coopers) provides a 4bph service to the CBD (with connection). What you suggest is:
- 1bph increase to Garden City
- 0bph +/- to Inala
- 1bph decrease to Moorooka/City (with transfer imposed)

Given the CBD is the primary destination for a lot of PT users, I do not see how cutting frequency AND imposing a transfer is a decent solution to the problem. Your calculations in this particular section are also flawed:

Connected Network (901 CityConnector)

15 minute wait (Central) + 30 minute ride (Coopers Plains) + 8 minute transfer + 13 minute bus ride  = 66 minutes max
7.5 minute wait (Central) + 30 minute ride (Coopers Plains) + 8 minute transfer + 13 minute bus ride = 58.5 minutes average journey time

Unless you provide 4bph from Coopers Plains, the max wait time at Central is actually 30 minutes (as only 1 in every 2 services connects to the 4tph at Coopers Plains). Correct calculations:

Connected Network (901 CityConnector)

30 minute wait (Central) + 30 minute ride (Coopers Plains) + 8 minute transfer + 13 minute bus ride  = 81 minutes max
15 minute wait (Central) + 30 minute ride (Coopers Plains) + 8 minute transfer + 13 minute bus ride = 66 minutes average journey time

Your calculations show a situation under 4bph between Coopers Plains and Inala via Acacia Ridge, not a situation at 2bph. Under 2bph, the average journey time is 15 minutes longer. Hardly attractive.

You also stated that the route-km used in this system is a mere 36% of the route-km used in the current network - surely we could add additional services to Coopers Plains on weekdays to give 4bph on weekdays without sending that amount above 50%.

[#Metro]

1. Area

Potential connected network map showing Acacia Ridge. The black line is half hourly
frequency though the middle of Acacia Ridge from a hypothetical 901 CityConnector to
Garden City. (Red = frequent, Green = Hourly coverage route)

As you can see, you have Inala to the left, flood plain, Acacia Ridge (low density, and an
area of about 2 km x 1.5 km, and containing about 2693 homes [2011 ABS QuickStats]).

I pose the question: Does it justify 4 buses per hour, all day? It may get the
proposal through the door politically, but given the area, would those buses be running
with low/no occupancy? It's BUZ frequency for an area where you're probably not going to
get (or need?) BUZ patronage. Maybe someone with some better knowledge can make sense
of this (STB?).


(Model subject to change and refinement)

[#Metro]

2. Travel and Waiting Time

Unless you provide 4bph from Coopers Plains, the max wait time at Central is
actually 30 minutes (as only 1 in every 2 services connects to the 4tph at Coopers
Plains). Correct calculations:

I agree with you. Thanks for the correction. If only every second train is capable of
connecting to bus during the off-peak, the maximum journey time in the off peak of 81
minutes. (during peak there are 4 buses/hour, so it is around 58.5 minutes).

(In the future, the extra time saved from BaT project will make up for the 8 minute
allowance for walking and waiting between train and bus).

I agree that if you're going to the CBD in the off peak, then it is not so nice!
It seems tricky, and answers are not so easy. During peak there are more 901 buses (4/hour)
and perhaps that could be boosted more perhaps during peak? Would that be a possible solution?
Politics to one side though, off peak I just am not sure that there is a patronage case
that demand requires BUZ level frequency.

You also stated that the route-km used in this system is a mere 36% of the route-km
used in the current network - surely we could add additional services to Coopers Plains on
weekdays to give 4bph on weekdays without sending that amount above 50%.

FULL LENGTH ROUTE (i.e. the whole thing, not just thinking about just to/from Acacia
Ridge) (110 Inala, total weekday service ): 585 bus-km Outbound + 608.4 bus-km inbound =
1193.4 km (115 The Parks, total weekday service): 300 bus-km Outbound + 327.6 bus-km
inbound = 627.6 km -- Total bus km from returning 110 and 115 to 'central bus pool': 1821
bus-km

The 901 Cross Town service is probably most useful when extended to Richlands (adds access
to all Ipswich line destinations, + 2km approx). Sending the service cross town to Garden
City via Sunnybank consumes a lot of route km IMO. (22.2 km x 38 services/direction/day x
2 directions) = 1687.2 <--- this is still less than the bus-route km consumption of the
110 + 115 direct combined.

Left over: 1821 - 1687.2 - = 133.8 bus-km (not a lot). Assume 14 km for this "booster
shuttle" (Richlands-Coopers Plains, have to include Richlands as it seems silly for the
service to die just before connecting to the Ips line), and 34 services inbound and 34
services outbound (need slightly less boosting in peak as the 901 increases frequency
then), this is (34 x 2 x 14 = 952 bus-km, so not enough savings to do this boosting).

(Even if we assume no Richlands connections, just cut out at Inala, still not enough: 34 x
2 x 12 = 815 bus-km required).

You may notice a problem here: It is very hard to keep and apply bus km saved contained to
only any particular suburb, because the new route(s) are likely to be very different from
its predecessors (i.e. for this one we are going to Garden City) and the routes spread out
everywhere.

Like I said, it is not easy. From what I can figure out, adding booster services so that 4
buses/hour operate during the day will mean net cuts to frequency in other areas.

[#Metro]

The only other possibility is to adopt a Melbourne Smart Bus approach and upgrade the entire 901 to 15 min frequency all day, because I think the shuttle bus "booster" idea isn't great - it's not lengthy enough to get decent patronage just from Acacia Ridge IMO. This will mean net cuts to other areas and really really scraping it to make it all cost neutral.

[STB]

My personal thoughts on that area is that route 100 could effectively be removed quite safely, with route 110 (or a variation of that) becoming the primary citybound all day route - at least every 15mins peak, every 30mins off peak.  Those areas around route 100 could simply just have local routes connecting with trains at Richlands, Darra and Oxley.  I also think route 460 should be removed completely, with a restructure of the Mt Ommaney routes, with a BUZ route to that area.

I certainly think you can also have a crosstown route from Garden City to Richlands, which would fill in via the current route 161's area in Holmead Road (not servicing Nardie St), operating every 30mins, perhaps every 15mins at peak hour.

I'm not entirely sure of the importance of linking Moorooka with Inala, given that I know that those two areas are very culturally different, and not directly related, but if route 100 was removed with local routes instead, and route 110 being the primary route, you still wouldn't have that loss overall.  At the moment, if you think about it, there is currently 2 routes between Inala and Moorooka, routes 100 and 110, with route 100 being a BUZ, I think that's overkill.

[techblitz]

^ a combo idea really does seem the logical choice here...

richlands - inala plaza - azalea - freeman - blunder - inala ave to 110 current perhaps?

Fairly circuitous...but keeps a lot of eldery/disdvantaged/ethnic commuters happy....suddenly motivates a lot of commuters into oxley or richlands as a much faster option to the cbd. Fixes the salisbury non DDA problem for passengers from the south into moorooka shops 

[STB]

^ a combo idea really does seem the logical choice here...

richlands - inala plaza - azalea - freeman - blunder - inala ave to 110 current perhaps?

Fairly circuitous...but keeps a lot of eldery/disdvantaged/ethnic commuters happy....suddenly motivates a lot of commuters into oxley or richlands as a much faster option to the cbd. Fixes the salisbury non DDA problem for passengers from the south into moorooka shops 

I wouldn't do much to the 110 routing within the Inala area honestly.  The surrounding area, I'd look at deleting route 100 and restructuring the local routes to operate out of Inala Plaza and then service the surrounding area feeding into stations like Richlands, Darra and Oxley.

[#Metro]

Thanks for the ideas. 
Very Helpful!

My personal thoughts on that area is that route 100 could effectively be removed quite safely, with route 110 (or a variation of that) becoming the primary citybound all day route - at least every 15mins peak, every 30mins off peak.  Those areas around route 100 could simply just have local routes connecting with trains at Richlands, Darra and Oxley.  I also think route 460 should be removed completely, with a restructure of the Mt Ommaney routes, with a BUZ route to that area.

I hadn't thought about this idea and while very controversial, it would probably solve the problem and allow Annerly road to be covered nicely as well. The lack of any bus stops beyond Muriel Ave (as it is motorway to Inala) also helps. It would also solve the Moorooka Shops issue if routed via Muriel Avenue as you could perform a bus-bus connection with a Hi CITY 125 / BUZ 125.

[#Metro]

How does competitive bus contracting work in London?

With competitive bus contracting confirmed for introduction into Brisbane, we look at how the process is managed overseas.

Latest from LDT Blog ---> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?blog=124;sa=topic;id=9

[James]

2. Travel and Waiting Time

Unless you provide 4bph from Coopers Plains, the max wait time at Central is
actually 30 minutes (as only 1 in every 2 services connects to the 4tph at Coopers
Plains). Correct calculations:

I agree with you. Thanks for the correction. If only every second train is capable of
connecting to bus during the off-peak, the maximum journey time in the off peak of 81
minutes. (during peak there are 4 buses/hour, so it is around 58.5 minutes).

(In the future, the extra time saved from BaT project will make up for the 8 minute
allowance for walking and waiting between train and bus).

I agree that if you're going to the CBD in the off peak, then it is not so nice!
It seems tricky, and answers are not so easy. During peak there are more 901 buses (4/hour)
and perhaps that could be boosted more perhaps during peak? Would that be a possible solution?
Politics to one side though, off peak I just am not sure that there is a patronage case
that demand requires BUZ level frequency.

Unless patronage figures cannot support half-hourly direct services, we should not be considering lower frequency services. The reason the TransLink bus review sank was people were being provided with slash-and-burn inferior options in many places. I would have had a fit if the 444 replacement was any less than every 10 minutes in peak and half-hourly between 5am and 11pm. Yes, the 444 isn't really a deserving candidate, but you do not simply rip out services from under people's feet and provide them with crap hourly feeders. Doing that is the way to deter patronage.  Your calcs also do not account for other services being replaced (namely the 117 and 122). I'll only calculate weekdays to simplify things. The following process is the process I used to calculate everything in my own review. Note I've only accounted for in-service running, as it is nigh-on impossible to account for dead running. For example, I got a peer at a run-sheet for a 428 (Sherwood run), and found that the bus later ran a 174, 180 (I think) and a 444.

Current Routings
110: 23.7km/trip 115: 27.4km/trip 117: 15.8km/trip 122: 19.0km/trip
110: 23.7 x (23 + 24) = 1113.9km/day
115: 27.4 x (11 + 12) = 630.2km/day
117: 15.8 x (17 + 16) = 521.4km/day
122: 19.0 x (12 + 12) = 456km/day
Total in-service km: 2721.5km

Proposed New Routings
122 - Richlands - Garden City via Inala, Acacia Ridge and Robertson: 21.2km/trip
Steam-ironed and renumbered 122.
Span of hours: Half-hourly 6am - 9pm
122: 21.2 x (15 x 2 x 2) = 1272km/day
122A - Inala Plaza - Coopers Plains via Acacia Ridge: 12.6km/trip
Short-running of 122 - ensures all trains will be met by buses during span of hours.
Span of hours: Half-hourly 7am - 7pm, 9pm - 11pm
122A: 12.6 x (14 x 2 x 2) = 705.6km/day
116 tail: 8.5km/trip
Tacked onto the end of 116 trips which currently go to Rocklea. Coverage route, a la 117.
Span of hours: See 116 trips which proceed to Rocklea as current.
116: 8.5 x (11 + 11) = 187km/day
TOTAL IN-SERVICE KM = 2164.6km/day

In-service km saved: 2721.5 - 2164.6 = 556.9km/day

Look - not only do we save route km, but granny still gets a direct trip to Moorooka and maybe even the city (if you enjoy going via everywhere to get there!). Yet we still give Acacia Ridge a 7-7-7 like routing which feeds into two frequent services (100 BUZ and rail at Coopers Plains), and 2bph which goes to Richlands and Garden City (frequent routes there). When looking at an area, thanks to how complex the BCC bus network is (not to mention how interlocked a network is), one needs to look at the big picture. Look at every single route.

[#Metro]

When looking at an area, thanks to how complex the BCC bus network is (not to mention how interlocked a network is), one needs to look at the big picture. Look at every single route.

I already did - for the entire city.

I tend to favour longer continuous routes over short feeders as services below 5km in length tend to not have enough destinations on them, which causes patronage to be low. I find the idea of a 'special' short feeder just for boosting frequency along that section to be unappealing. I'd like the service to connect to more places than just the train station.

I have come around to your view when you point out that 2 buses / hour run through Acacia Ridge and that the 122 takes that to 3 buses per hour. I generally disfavour hourly services as I think that if you have to wait a whole hour to go anywhere, why bother with public transport? While hourly routes do exist in my Hi Frequency Network concept model, I have tended to favour 30 minutes as a basic frequency standard. After all, the city is 1 million + people, hourly waits as a standard is just unacceptable, especially given the high fare levels.

Fortunately there does appear to be a solution. A feeder exists in the Hi Frequency Model that runs along Tarragindi Rd and Coopers Plains - this can be extended from Greenslopes Subway (Busway) through Acacia Ridge and to Inala. When combined with the 901 CityConnector it gives 15 minute frequency in Acacia Ridge to Coopers Plains Rail. BaT opening will eliminate the 8 minutes allocated for transferring. It is expected that the service will be co-ordinated with train arrivals/departures from Coopers Plains Rail.

A coverage service can also be extended from Sunnybank/Acacia Ridge to run through Moorooka and connect at Yeronga Station. That solves the issues Techblitz has raised.

Overall, the number of buses through Acacia Ridge rises from 3 buses/hour to 4 buses/hour.

[James]

I already did - for the entire city.

I tend to favour longer continuous routes over short feeders as services below 5km in length tend to not have enough destinations on them, which causes patronage to be low. I find the idea of a 'special' short feeder just for boosting frequency along that section to be unappealing. I'd like the service to connect to more places than just the train station.

I have come around to your view when you point out that 2 buses / hour run through Acacia Ridge and that the 122 takes that to 3 buses per hour. I generally disfavour hourly services as I think that if you have to wait a whole hour to go anywhere, why bother with public transport? While hourly routes do exist in my Hi Frequency Network concept model, I have tended to favour 30 minutes as a basic frequency standard. After all, the city is 1 million + people, hourly waits as a standard is just unacceptable, especially given the high fare levels.

Fortunately there does appear to be a solution. A feeder exists in the Hi Frequency Model that runs along Tarragindi Rd and Coopers Plains - this can be extended from Greenslopes Subway (Busway) through Acacia Ridge and to Inala. When combined with the 901 CityConnector it gives 15 minute frequency in Acacia Ridge to Coopers Plains Rail. BaT opening will eliminate the 8 minutes allocated for transferring. It is expected that the service will be co-ordinated with train arrivals/departures from Coopers Plains Rail.

A coverage service can also be extended from Sunnybank/Acacia Ridge to run through Moorooka and connect at Yeronga Station. That solves the issues Techblitz has raised.

Overall, the number of buses through Acacia Ridge rises from 3 buses/hour to 4 buses/hour.

I disagree with the point on short feeders. Three reasons:
1. Short feeders can, and do, work. 411 feeder is a mere 4km in length, yet you fully supported that. Yes, my own CFN 411 goes to Indro, but it is not useful for connecting St Lucia with Indro - it is too slow. Other examples exist too (402? 29?).
2. I see the bus as an extension of the train service. Just like how buses run off the busway and run a service, trains dump passengers on to buses and buses run off the railway line. I see this as Inala - City FUZ/TUZ via Acacia Ridge and Moorooka.
3. There is already 4bph through Acacia Ridge. 110 + 115 + 117 + 122 (all at 1bph). Ignoring the fact the services bunch (117 goes through 2 mins before 110 off-peak), it is 4bph.

Theoretically, if the current network was rearranged better, you could actually give residents a 4bph service to the CBD (admittedly the last two options are more difficult for pax to remember, especially the last one).

Thankfully though, another route can be extended to provide 4bph. If that can be done, provided the numbering is sequential/easy to remember (110/115 is easy to remember - sequential), I support it.

[#Metro]

I disagree with the point on short feeders. Three reasons:
1. Short feeders can, and do, work. 411 feeder is a mere 4km in length, yet you fully supported that. Yes, my own CFN 411 goes to Indro, but it is not useful for connecting St Lucia with Indro - it is too slow. Other examples exist too (402? 29?).

Article: why circulators (often) don't work. http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/seattle-transit-blog-is-reporting-some-grief-from-the-rainier-valley-area-in-southeast-seattle-regarding-king-county-metros.html

There are good reasons not to let bus routes get too long (mostly having to do with the difficulty of maintaining schedules) but there are also good reasons for them not to get too short.

Forgive me if this seems obvious but:  People get on a bus because it takes them to (or at least toward) where they're going.  The shorter a route is, the fewer places it goes, and thus the fewer people will tend to get on it.  Very short routes, say under 3 mi, tend to do very poorly unless they're the sole means of reaching a major destination (such a shuttle between a major hospital and a nearby rail station.) 

Short circulators can be used, but only as an exception. All the examples you cite are connected to the University of Queensland which is the second largest demand generator after the Brisbane CBD. Here services like you describe can work, as demand is so high that getting decent patronage is not an issue. The same with 401 and 601 services in Melbourne that are also short services. This is not the situation in low density Acacia Ridge. But in general, I like to have bus route length in excess of 5km so that enough destinations are connected to get decent patronage.

2. I see the bus as an extension of the train service. Just like how buses run off the busway and run a service, trains dump passengers on to buses and buses run off the railway line. I see this as Inala - City FUZ/TUZ via Acacia Ridge and Moorooka.

3. There is already 4bph through Acacia Ridge. 110 + 115 + 117 + 122 (all at 1bph). Ignoring the fact the services bunch (117 goes through 2 mins before 110 off-peak), it is 4bph.

Regarding point #2 - see point #1.

Theoretically, if the current network was rearranged better, you could actually give residents a 4bph service to the CBD (admittedly the last two options are more difficult for pax to remember, especially the last one).

I think the residents of Centenary, Yeronga, Bulimba and Albany Creek need to be served as they have not much at all at the moment so route-km has been added to there.

Thankfully though, another route can be extended to provide 4bph. If that can be done, provided the numbering is sequential/easy to remember (110/115 is easy to remember - sequential), I support it.

Tweaking is always hard. Hopefully I can release something soon.

[James]

Article: why circulators (often) don't work. http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/seattle-transit-blog-is-reporting-some-grief-from-the-rainier-valley-area-in-southeast-seattle-regarding-king-county-metros.html

Short circulators can be used, but only as an exception. All the examples you cite are connected to the University of Queensland which is the second largest demand generator after the Brisbane CBD. Here services like you describe can work, as demand is so high that getting decent patronage is not an issue. The same with 401 and 601 services in Melbourne that are also short services. This is not the situation in low density Acacia Ridge. But in general, I like to have bus route length in excess of 5km so that enough destinations are connected to get decent patronage.

I think the residents of Centenary, Yeronga, Bulimba and Albany Creek need to be served as they have not much at all at the moment so route-km has been added to there.

122A (122 short-running) is 12.6km long - it connects residents with Inala Plaza (anchor) and Coopers Plains (anchor for travel to CBD). Again, the reason for its existence is to appease residents and make the option we are providing for them not so god-awful. Yes 411 is half a bus for Uni students, but it is also providing huge increases to frequency in West Taringa (up to 4x more frequent services on weekdays, 8x more frequent on Sundays and providing service at night). Admittedly this area has decent housing density.

But if it can be connected to another route, the point is moot.

Re: Bulimba, Centenary and NW BUZes - the resources are already there. 330 can stop at all express stops RBWH - Chermside and 333 can be canned. 200/204 can be re-routed and the 222 can be subsequently canned. 160 can be canned today and there won't be any tears from anybody (aside from a few peak services). And we haven't even touched the southern end of the MaroonGlider. What probably has to be the most upsetting thing is that you actually don't have to do anything significant to the network to give over 15,000 more residents BUZ.

From those cuts, you can easily fund a BUZ into Bulimba and Centenary, and make a start on the BUZ into the Northwest.

[#Metro]

Different city, same story. Mass waste found in the network, reorganization unleashes HUGE frequency across the entire city.

Houston (car is king type city, freeways everywhere, low density, check out the huge car parks in the CBD)

Houston CBD
https://goo.gl/maps/ouKEc

http://transitsystemreimagining.com/
http://transitsystemreimagining.com/web/review-and-download-network-maps/

http://www.humantransit.org/2014/05/houston-a-transit-network-reimagined.html

The plan shows that without increasing operating cost, Houston's frequent network -- the network of services where the bus or train is always coming when you need it -- could grow from this ...

This cool page toggles between the two, so you can see the system growing.

How on earth could we grow a network that much without new money?  There are two answers:

1.  That's how much waste there was in the existing system.  Waste in the form of duplicative routes, and due to slow meandering routes created due to a few people's demands. 

[Jonno]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/shift-in-approach-for-ttc-subway-extension/article19086015/

Toronto takes new role on subway expansion after sparring with TTC

OLIVER MOORE
THE GLOBE AND MAIL
Last updated Tuesday, Jun. 10 2014, 7:15 AM EDT


Toronto city planning department to the lead on environmental assessment for Scarborough line. (Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail)
     
Toronto's city planning department is taking over and broadening the environmental assessment for the Scarborough subway extension after "difficult and quite contentious discussions" with the TTC, leaving the transit agency to focus on construction.

The shakeup in how transit is planned and built in the city will be the model for future projects, according to Toronto Transit Commission chief executive Andy Byford.


Chief planner Jennifer Keesmaat characterized the new approach as the difference between simply "laying down infrastructure" and using transit to create "great thriving prosperous places."

The shift comes after concern on the part of some city staff that the TTC was moving ahead too quickly amid the uncertainty – with two of the five major mayoral candidates vowing to revert to the original plan for light rail – that continues to surround the Scarborough transit plan.

This latest twist in Scarborough, which should not affect the work's overall timelines, also offers a rare glimpse into the project. Progress, which is still at a very preliminary stage, had been delayed by the dust-up over division of responsibilities. Now that that issue has been settled, a request for proposals for initial engineering work is expected to go out this week.

The decision to give city planning the lead on the EA – which will include determining the route and where and how many stations there will be – came after sharp differences of opinion between that department and the TTC over how best to proceed with the project.

"They were difficult and quite contentious discussions," said Mr. Byford, who acknowledged that not everyone on his team was pleased to see city planning assume the new role.

"I have to see the bigger picture. And it seems to me that the city does have a point in saying you can't just look at projects as purely transit projects, you've got to look at what the wider implications for the city are. I'll be honest with you, there's also a bit of me that says we've got quite enough on our plate – and that is the understatement of the year."

The city planning-led EA will look beyond the role of transit as a mechanism purely for moving people.

"Part of the lens that city planning is going to bring to this exercise is really that city-building lens, that place-making lens," Ms. Keesmaat said.

"This change will ensure that we're integrating our considerations for new lines into a network-based approach and also integrating the transit alignment policies with our city-building policies around densification and transformation of urban environment."

Rapid transit, particularly in Scarborough, has shaped up as a key election issue in this fall's mayoral election. Light-rail supporters say that form of transit is cheaper, faster to build and serves more people. Subway boosters insist underground transit is best and prefer to frame the debate as one that has been settled.

Some high-ranking transit officials will admit privately that the subway extension is far from a sure thing, with one saying it would likely be the next city council that decides on the project's future. Another pegged its chances at "60-40 or 75-25."

The long-debated project continues to face hurdles, among them that the original legal agreement for an LRT in Scarborough remains in force. In a recent e-mail, Metrolinx spokeswoman Anne Marie Aikins said that changing that agreement is an ongoing process. Among the difficulties are negotiations over how to divvy up sunk costs.

Another issue is securing the money needed to pay for the controversial project.

Then finance minister Jim Flaherty promised $660-million from the Building Canada Fund last fall, subject to the normal approvals process. Earlier this spring, Mayor Rob Ford revealed that the city had not yet completed its business case or application for the funds, a process that is still under way.

Subway supporters also will have to win a series of big-dollar funding votes at council as the project proceeds over the next few years. If the next mayor is a supporter of the project, that mandate will help carry those votes. But a lot of work remains before the proverbial shovels can go in the ground.

"This will be debated for a long time," subway proponent Councillor Glenn de Baeremaker, who represents a ward through which the subway would run, predicted in a recent interview.

"Will there be a guerrilla war waged [at council] for the next four years? Yes, unfortunately there will, and we'll waste a lot of time and energy and effort focused on attacking each other and sabotaging each other's plan, instead of working together in co-operation and building something really truly spectacular. But in the end, something truly spectacular will be built in Scarborough."

[Set in train]

If you want to have a go at the Lord Mayor et al, Wednesday 27 August is your chance as I have seen advertising for a civic forum at Acacia Ridge.

These are regular forums instituted by former LM, Jim Soorley.