SEQ Bus Network Review

[#Metro]

Even the Minister seemed to be backing away from the changes.  Highlighted was the planned axing of the 172, leaving a 700m walk to the nearest service.  The Minister promised that Greenslopes Hospital would be served.

I would just phone up the hospital, and offer some payment for the private bus service that the hospital runs to the busway station in exchange for translink branding. The service could stay free and have TL branding, problem solved. 172 should NOT come back.

[ozbob]

I am more concerned with getting some basic bus services in wider catchments so that PT can become a more realistic option for the community.  I don't really expect the 524 to be running at midnight to get me home from the razzle dazzle, but a bit better frequency during the day would be nice.  The only way that wider improvements will occur is if there are some savings elsewhere.   Unless they start feeding rail may as well scrap it and put in monorails and sell fairy floss to the waiting pax.

If they keep reacting to every bit of feedback it is going to be completely botched anyway.  So may as well accept that mediocrity is the outcome and sit in Coro drive for 2 hours and enjoy the single seat journey to everywhere ...

Next?

[#Metro]

Council complained about single seat journeys being removed.  Well maybe they shouldn't have removed the bus lane on Coronation Drive!  Not to mention Lutwyche Rd.

Of course they complained - Brisbane City Council is Brisbane's largest BUS company!! Talk about conflict of interest here!

The current system is unsustainable:

1. It has huge waste, 8.6 passengers per bus on average over the BT area is truly shocking (cf. Sydney, Newcastle = 30)
2. It fails to serve large sections of the city
3. It regularly collapses during periods of rain or mild congestion on coronation drive
4. It clogs up the CBD - Cultural Centre is now at overcapacity
5. The previous gov't lost an election on the back of ever increasing 15% and 20% fare rises - this just cannot keep happening
6. Subsidy is already huge, gov't has no money to pour into that. The money for the Lord Mayor's Bus Tunnel which he doesn't even have neither the authority nor the funds to construct may be better poured into suburban bus-rail interchanges (a la Perth, a la Toronto) as the capacity of the train network will be improved with the advent of Cross River Rail. We are already getting a tunnel - a rail tunnel- with massive capacity, why not use it?

Ottawa, on which Brisbane's busways had the same problem - buses jamming up the CBD. Solution - convert to a connective network and build light rail on the core section. Ottawa didn't have rail, Brisbane does have rail and should use the capacity of that properly.

I can't really see an easy way out for the politicians - it's either 20% fare rises year on year (that will go down like a stone) or burning huge cash that we don't have from the State Gov't AND EVEN IF the money, through some miracle, can be found, the system PHYSICALLY will not work as the core is already OVERLOADED. BCC will have to invent a new kind of physics to find the space!

[HappyTrainGuy]

Exactly. No point running air parcels at high frequency late night while everyone else not on one of the 26 (or 27?) new HF routes completely misses out on any sort of service at all after 9pm.

As Bob correctly points out, some routes will need high frequency till late night, but that doesn't apply to all routes. There should be a minimum standard (like I said in another post, I feel 7-7 is slightly too restrictive, i'd say more 6-9 or 7-9), with frequencies after 9pm being determined on a route by route basis.

Non-HF routes should at least be 30-60min frequencies 9pm till late (ie: 11pm or midnight or so), so at least there is an option there.

I am going to disagree here, simply because I would prefer one bus that ran every 15 minutes late at night and walk (extra if required) rather than four buses that went to my suburb on an hourly frequency with all different routings and different bus numbers leaving from different parts of the CBD.

Huh. Superstops will fix that.

What I think they will do and should be doing is matching services to the secondary services. That way you can catch a train or a Frequent route to an area serviced by the same stop/interchange and then feed into the secondary route to get home rather than the mess we have now which you can see from the new proposed north west, north and north east maps.

[#Metro]

Huh. Superstops will fix that.

Possibly; a similar scheme is in place in Canberra, however, multiple routes on different alignments all fan out to diluted frequencies in the suburbs. Go Frequent Network Services will have the greatest legibility - much more convenient to simply run them rather than the more obscure, slower windy secondary routes.

[petey3801]

Exactly. No point running air parcels at high frequency late night while everyone else not on one of the 26 (or 27?) new HF routes completely misses out on any sort of service at all after 9pm.

As Bob correctly points out, some routes will need high frequency till late night, but that doesn't apply to all routes. There should be a minimum standard (like I said in another post, I feel 7-7 is slightly too restrictive, i'd say more 6-9 or 7-9), with frequencies after 9pm being determined on a route by route basis.

Non-HF routes should at least be 30-60min frequencies 9pm till late (ie: 11pm or midnight or so), so at least there is an option there.

I am going to disagree here, simply because I would prefer one bus that ran every 15 minutes late at night and walk (extra if required) rather than four buses that went to my suburb on an hourly frequency with all different routings and different bus numbers leaving from different parts of the CBD.

So what happens if you live somewhere like Acacia Ridge, where there are no HF routes, anywhere near the place? That's a lot more than a couple hundred meters to walk...

[#Metro]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/national/watch/dac45e18-38ff-381b-bfee-ce1e51ae1601/emerson-backflips-on-bus-service/

[HappyTrainGuy]

So what happens if you live somewhere like Acacia Ridge, where there are no HF routes, anywhere near the place? That's a lot more than a couple hundred meters to walk...

The same as what people in Warner have been doing for years by driving to Lawnton/Bray Park/Strathpine railway stations. Just the Southside version of it

[Gazza]

Exactly. No point running air parcels at high frequency late night while everyone else not on one of the 26 (or 27?) new HF routes completely misses out on any sort of service at all after 9pm.

As Bob correctly points out, some routes will need high frequency till late night, but that doesn't apply to all routes. There should be a minimum standard (like I said in another post, I feel 7-7 is slightly too restrictive, i'd say more 6-9 or 7-9), with frequencies after 9pm being determined on a route by route basis.

Non-HF routes should at least be 30-60min frequencies 9pm till late (ie: 11pm or midnight or so), so at least there is an option there.

I am going to disagree here, simply because I would prefer one bus that ran every 15 minutes late at night and walk (extra if required) rather than four buses that went to my suburb on an hourly frequency with all different routings and different bus numbers leaving from different parts of the CBD.

So what happens if you live somewhere like Acacia Ridge, where there are no HF routes, anywhere near the place? That's a lot more than a couple hundred meters to walk...

In Acacia Ridge, the S410 and S407 could run a combined routing, using the 110 routing, so that connections are made with Cooper Plains Gold Coast trains, but the S410 and S407 need to be half hourly.

[ozbob]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/national/watch/dac45e18-38ff-381b-bfee-ce1e51ae1601/emerson-backflips-on-bus-service/

I go to Greenslopes Hospital a lot.  Sometimes I use the 172 other times I get the bus down Logan Road and walk.   It is a fair walk and if you are not well too far.  The Courtesy bus services are good as well ( http://www.greenslopesprivate.com.au/For-Visitors/public-transport.aspx ).  I think TL must have been thinking that the courtesy buses would probably do.   The words used by the Minister were simply ' a bus ' would be going past the hospital, what that really means is yet to be shown.   Could be they might ramp up the courtesy bus and support it?

[#Metro]

So what happens if you live somewhere like Acacia Ridge, where there are no HF routes, anywhere near the place? That's a lot more than a couple hundred meters to walk...

I would agree with you, but only to the extend that another HF service or rail service within 1km or so was not available. As someone who uses night services a lot, I'd prefer just one frequent service every 15 minutes over four hourly services that fan out everywhere. Its still faster, even after accounting for a longer walk.

[#Metro]

I go to Greenslopes Hospital a lot.  Sometimes I use the 172 other times I get the bus down Logan Road and walk.   It is a fair walk and if you are not well too far.  The Courtesy bus services are good as well ( http://www.greenslopesprivate.com.au/For-Visitors/public-transport.aspx ).  I think TL must have been thinking that the courtesy buses would probably do.   The words used by the Minister were simply ' a bus ' would be going past the hospital, what that really means is yet to be shown.   Could be they might ramp up the courtesy bus and support it?

I would hope that they just take up the TransLink trusted service idea - the bus route is only really helpful if you live near it and are prepared to wait an ENTIRE HOUR. I've been on this bus and the trip with all the winding etc is horrible. If you really are that incapacitated, it would be better to have medical transport come to your front door and take you straight there.

A shuttle with TL branding to the busway under a TransLink Trusted Service banner would be a way forward. why duplicate something that is already there and supplied by the hospital?

I think a sore point is alterations to the BUZ network - withdrawing high levels of service is going to be a problem politically, the other stuff would be easier IMHO.

[somebody]

I am more concerned with getting some basic bus services in wider catchments so that PT can become a more realistic option for the community.  I don't really expect the 524 to be running at midnight to get me home from the razzle dazzle, but a bit better frequency during the day would be nice.  The only way that wider improvements will occur is if there are some savings elsewhere.   Unless they start feeding rail may as well scrap it and put in monorails and sell fairy floss to the waiting pax.

If they keep reacting to every bit of feedback it is going to be completely botched anyway.  So may as well accept that mediocrity is the outcome and sit in Coro drive for 2 hours and enjoy the single seat journey to everywhere ...

Next?

Ok, but 100 in competition with rail feeders, 222 and 88 go completely against that.

So what happens if you live somewhere like Acacia Ridge, where there are no HF routes, anywhere near the place? That's a lot more than a couple hundred meters to walk...

I think what HTG said:

What I think they will do and should be doing is matching services to the secondary services. That way you can catch a train or a Frequent route to an area serviced by the same stop/interchange and then feed into the secondary route to get home rather than the mess we have now which you can see from the new proposed north west, north and north east maps.

For example, the North Shore Line (Sydney)'s nightride service has an on demand taxi from it to cover Wollstonecraft and Waverton.  It doesn't necessarily need to be met by a full sized bus at 10pm.  In certain cases it may well be justified to have the full sized bus.

BTW, Acacia Ridge has its last service (110) leave QSBS at 11:42pm.

[kazzac]

Look likes the new frequent route 23(now 125) will travel along  Lillian Ave Salisbury, only about a 10 minute walk from my work.I will be able to catch the new route 23 and change at Buranda for a train[Cleveland line] or Mater Hill station for one of the new frequent services to M'side if I'm ever without a car again. Of course I will always get home quicker driving then using PT,but if there is more connecting services, I won't mind using PT travelling to/from work occasionally.

[SurfRail]

The solution for Greenslopes is just to run the awful looking coverage route via there.  FIXED.

This isn't a backflip - it's public consultation which fills in gaps in the planner's priorities and knowledge.

[somebody]

1. It has huge waste, 8.6 passengers per bus on average over the BT area is truly shocking (cf. Sydney, Newcastle = 30)

These aren't comparing the same thing.  The former is passenger-km per service-km, the latter is boardings per bus trip.  Although the ~25 boardings per bus trip in Brisbane compares badly to the ~35 boardings per bus trip in Newcastle.

[Fares_Fair]

The solution for Greenslopes is just to run the awful looking coverage route via there.  FIXED.

This isn't a backflip - it's public consultation which fills in gaps in the planner's priorities and knowledge.

Agree 100%, it's not a backflip.
The Minister, Mr Emerson, responds to an important issue swiftly - and resolves it.
All the hallmarks of needs-based democracy in action.

[#Metro]

Have to say it was disappointing but not entirely unpredictable to see BCC councillors having a go at the changes, ripping up timetables in session etc.  Just adds more reason why BCC really is more a hindrance to decent PT than a help 

It would be nice to see residents of Centenary, Northwest and Bulimba converge on city hall ripping up timetables etc with the level of service they get and the petitions they have lodged for improvements over the years.


http://urbanist.typepad.com/files/abundant-access-diagram-1.pdf

[Gazza]

So in fairness. Here are the real negatives as I see them, and how to fix them.

-Some changes which increase walk distance need to be backed up with greater availability of flexitaxis funded by the savings of the new network. Have them on standby for 12 months after the changes. Some people might transition to the new routes, some people wont be able to, so in the end it will sort itself out. This is the #1 thing for translink to do, because if we start causing genunine distress without alternatives that will sink the whole network revival.
-Any cut back in 100 daytime frequency or overall span.
-590 not serving Murrarie.
-Full removal of Sherwood Rd buses past the markets. They should use depot movements to service it at least.
-Cutting the 411. There will be lots of routes on Hawken and Swann but they go to indooroopilly, which is a big detour. Keep the 411 as a frequent shuttle to Toowong at least, or leave as is.
-Not 100% keen on what they are doing with the 110/115 either. Have a common routing through acacia ridge and send them via coopers plains station, and link with Gold Coast expresses.
-S400 should serve greenslopes hospital, and that should be adequate.
-Changes to 118 are just bizzare. Just can the whole route.
-Don't cut frequency on the 120, it might be ok to do so late at night if it can be proven the buses are empty.
-Dont cancel routes on public holidays, what about workers, people going to stuff like Ekka  peoples day, leisure activies, and people going to shopping centres that are open on public holidays.
-Don't cut 138 to Stretton, too far to the BUZ. At least run to Fruitgrove station for the rail or the BUZ.
-Dont cut the 152 to Stretton just extend the S408, and use it to feed into the BUZ.
-Keep 172 going to Greenslopes hospital. 172 is a coverage route, so thats the whole point.
-If you are going to cut the 192, extend the Cityglider along Dornoch to replace it, or heck run some/all to UQ. Simple. Its too far/hilly in some parts to use the other BUZes.
-I have my own ideas how Bulimba/Cannon Hill should be arranged. Will do a separate post later.
-If we are cutting the 212, send the 210 along Russel and Macrossan to bring it a lil closer, and serve Oatseon skyline drive with a new cross town local from Seven hills to Camp Hill and Holland Park west, using Boundary Rd, to feed into Morningside rail at one end and Holland Park West busway station at the other, plus all the other frequent routes.
-230...Just BUZ it already! Again, my network idea comes into play here. wait and see.
-If the 250 is being truncated offpeak it needs to be every 15 mins.
-If the 256 is being cut, just extend the bus that goes to the Stradbroke Ferry terminal out to the lighthouse after doing its run, and combine with a local route that terminates at cleveland station like 272
-Dont cut 260 weekend service, but do send via rochedale estates.
-263...Why does it need to go so far south into the ultra low density area?
-274 already finishes early at 8pm, dont cut back evening trips.
-Same goes for 280, 282
-301 doesnt really link with the 300 BUZ properly, and Hamilton North Shore really should have a CBD route, or just more citycats going there.
-Around Banyo and Nudgee dont cut back so much. S205 should extend selected trips to nudgee beach, and the S200 should go to ACU via Tunfell, Earnshaw, Redhill, and then St Vincents Rd to Banyo station.
-321...Have something along Gregory Tce or Water St. there needs to be a couple of link routes from RBWH to the City, via the valley, spring hill etc.
-350 proposal is cr%p at the moment, it shouldnt deviate into Rode and Trouts Rd and will make things very frustrating for current users. Keep it straight and give Trouts Rd in McDowall/Everton Park its own local route.
-363 might become more important these days due to so many routes using the busway to reach the CBD. Northside Valley links please.
-372...Other coverage options needed.
-376....Keep it, to avoid a double change to reach the valley etc.
-378...Again, needs a demand responsive option.
-380. Will the locals like the changes? So long as the S112 is Frequent it might work.
-385...S100 needs to be frequent.
-390....If we cut this, maybe that could fund the FGY frequency upgrades into the evening, and on weekends.
-393...There needs to be something doing this connection in the new network design, dont cut it yet.
-435...There needs to be something to Brookfield Village aged care. Flexitaxis?
-444, keep it frequent till 9pm or so.
-What services the area the GCL used to do in Bardon?
-P331 might need to stay or something.
-P426 should use western freeway still.
-456 needs to mirror the BUZ route, not go to Sinnamon park.
-P461...I think keep it in peak but only to Mt Ommaney, just to give that direct trip from Forest lake.
-P456...just have some that start at beaudesert so they get a single seat trip to the city via the Gateway.
-Keep 443

[ozbob]

Media release 13th March 2013



Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport urges Brisbane City Council to provide bipartisan support to allow the Go Network to go ahead.

Why is the current bus network unsustainable?

1. It prioritises transporting air over transporting passengers.

2. Too many routes means too much complexity. For example, 9 different buses go to the Centenary suburbs; They are 450,453,454,455,456,457,458,459 and 452;  None are frequent. Some buses go to Mt Ommaney first, some go via the Centenary Highway, others go via the Western Freeway, or via the Western Freeway but then Coronation Drive, some stop at Indooroopilly, some don't; Some stop at Milton, others don't One goes to the Darra railway station clockwise in the morning, but then anticlockwise in the afternoon.

3. The current bus network is financially unsustainable and being kept afloat by escalating 15% and 20% annual fare increases. Passengers will not wear fare increases of this magnitude. The previous state government lost an election on the back of this very issue.

4. More buses means the CBD is being flooded with buses Brisbane City Council's own Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report 2007 warned that the current direct service paradigm would lead to massive delays and congestion, which it has at Cultural Centre. This is only going to get worse. There is little capacity left in the CBD for yet even more buses to swamp it. Collapse of the entire bus network is now routine during mild congestion and periods of rain.

5. It denies frequent service to outer suburbs of Brisbane. Money is being spent on duplication required to drive air-laden buses all the way to the CBD. That's money better spent on moving real people in Centenary, The Northwest, Yeronga, Bulimba and so forth on frequent all day services.

6. Connection based networks are the status quo in large cities such as Perth, Vancouver, Paris, and Toronto. The Lord Mayor should look at Toronto, where 98% of buses connect to trains, fares are low, services are simple and frequent and fare revenue covers ~ 70% of operations (system-wide). Toronto carried almost 500 million trips last year. Closer to home, Perth, Western Australia runs a similar feeder system to their trains which now carry more patronage than Brisbane's trains do, despite being a smaller city with a lower population. More recently Auckland, NZ is pushing through a similar frequent network reform based on connections, unlocking access to frequent all day service to the entire city. Brisbane is at risk of being left behind.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"We disagree with the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk about his position on bus connections.

Failure to move forward will ultimately lead to:

1. Escalating fare rises of 15% or higher to support a system that carries more air than passengers.

2. Longer commutes due to regular collapse of the bus system during rain or congestion, for example on Coronation Drive.

3. A congested CBD full of bus gridlock and routine failure of the bus system, destroying Brisbane's livability.

4. Harder to attract jobs and employers as other, competing cities such as Auckland, upgrade their bus networks and offer frequent services to the entire area of the city.

5. Inability to provide frequent, simple and reliable service to outer Brisbane suburbs such as Centenary and the Northwest.

We urge the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk, and his Brisbane City Council colleagues to consider very carefully their opposition to reforms that have been successfully carried out and operated in cities overseas.  Not acting to sort out the bus network to maximise efficiency and connections, and use the other modes optimally is consigning SEQ to more transport failure."

Contact:

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

References:

1. Auckland Bus Network Reforms http://www.humantransit.org/2012/10/auckland-how-network-redesign-can-transform-a-citys-possibilities.html

2. "Networks that are designed to prevent transferring must run massive volumes of half-empty and quarter-empty buses and still have trouble delivering frequencies that make the service worth waiting for.  The waste involved can be colossal, as you can see from the amount of service we were able to redeploy in more useful ways with this redesign."

3. Connections vs complexity http://www.humantransit.org/2010/11/connections-vs-complexity.html

4. Transferring" can be good for you, and good for your city http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail click here!

Feedback extended on bus network changes

Feedback extended on bus network changes

    by: Robyn Ironside
    From: The Courier-Mail
    March 12, 2013 3:41PM

THE final feedback period for southeast Queensland's bus network review has been extended by Transport Minister Scott Emerson in response to demand from commuters trying to comprehend the overhaul.

The review findings were released last Thursday and include the removal of 111 routes and changes to many others in an effort to make the network more efficient and cost effective.

Commuters were invited to respond in a two-week timeframe that started on Monday.

But on Tuesday Mr Emerson announced bus users will get four weeks to provide their thoughts, in order "to ensure improvements to the network are fully understood''.

"We've already had 40,000 website visits since the report was made public last Thursday and 1700 comments were received in the first 24 hours," Mr Emerson said.

"This is a very important phase in our plan to build a better bus network, deliver better fares and given the level of feedback I'm prepared to take additional time to ensure everyone has the chance to have a say."

He ordered the review last year after figures showed patronage falling on 13 of the region's 16 bus operators, as well as rising costs forcing up fares by 15 per cent a year.

The Rail Tram and Bus Union and Brisbane City Council Opposition have condemned the review as putting "profits before passengers'' because of the focus on reducing the $580 million cost to taxpayers.

Some commuters have also expressed their concern, posting signs on bus stops which are earmarked to go under the review.

At St Lucia, signs highlight the axing of the 411 service due to "duplication'' and urge commuters to contact Translink or Mr Emerson to complain.

Others have complained the review "dumps'' commuters on to trains, but the changes have been defended by  commuter group Back on Track.

Spokesman Gavin Seipelt said the 444 from Indooroopilly to the CBD would be replaced by the S500, and include Indooroopilly train station on its route.

"The key point is that the bus currently takes 25-minutes at best, usually longer to travel between Indooroopilly and the CBD.  But express trains from Indooroopilly take just eight minutes to do the same journey,'' Mr Seipelt said.

"Trains at Indooroopilly arrive every six minutes in peak hour.  This is twice or triple the speed of the bus.''

Feedback on the review can be lodged via the Translink website at www.translink.com.au.

[achiruel]

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/route-changes-throw-tourists-veterans-under-a-bus-council-20130312-2fypc.html

Brisbane City Council listed seven specific problems it want addressed immediately.

1 Greenslopes Hospital route 172. The route will be removed and war veterans will have to walk 700 metres to get a different bus.
Transport Minister Scott Emerson late Tuesday night said he would fix this problem.

TransLink should just come to some arrangement with Greenslopes Hospital regarding their free shuttle bus to the busway station.  I don't agree with redirecting S400 to the hospital as then Deshon St loses any service.

2. The Fig Tree Pocket to City services taking tourists direct to Lone Pine sanctuary is proposed to be a transfer at Indooroopilly station.

So what? People from most cities around the world that run decent public transport systems are used to transfers.

3. The direct service 444 route from Moggill to the City will be replaced by a "reduced frequency" service that will run to the University of Queensland. CBD passengers will be dropped at Indooroopilly station.

See above.  RBoT has already issued a press release that illustrates the benefits of this connection, which I 100% agree with.

4. Changes to the 100 BUZ route mean passengers from Forest Lake and Mt Ommaney will have fewer services to the Princess Alexandra Hospital and to Mater Hill.

What they actually meant was fewer direct services.  Mater Hill and the PA are still serviced by high-frequency routes.

5. The BUZ Route 120 from Garden City to the City will be less frequent.

This one I disagree with, the 120 BUZ should be retained IMO.  Even if late night (after 9pm) frequency is reduced - providing patronage warrants it.  Perhaps the tail of this and #23 could be altered to serve different catchments, e.g. via McCullough St.

6. The council wants to know why the 192 university buses will be removed from Dornock Terrace at Highgate Hill.

Clearly the 192 excessively duplicates the CityGlider between the CBD and West End Ferry.  Perhaps it could run West End Ferry-UQ only? From the timetable it seems maximum travel time to be 12 minutes so one bus should be able to run a 30 minute service on this short route.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Route changes throw tourists, veterans under a bus: council

Date March 13, 2013 - 1:00AM
Tony Moore

Brisbane City Council wants to know why the state government wants war veterans to walk 700 metres uphill from Greenslopes Hospital to catch a bus and to cancel tourist buses to popular tourist destination Lone Pine under its bus route review.

Almost three hours at Tuesday night's Brisbane City Council meeting was spent debating problems with the proposed new bus routes, released last week by Transport Minister Scott Emerson.

These two issues, acknowledged by Mr Emerson as genuine problems, topped the council's list of concerns.

Deputy Mayor Adrian Schrinner said he also believed changes to Redlands buses – which would now stop at Carindale Shopping Centre under the amendments– would mean commuters would instead drive to Carindale, park in suburban streets, and then catch the shorter bus trip to Brisbane City.

"At the moment, people can catch a bus all the way into the City," Cr Schrinner said.

"The most popular bus route is the 250 and according to the Translink bus review report that carries 37 per cent of all Veolia passengers," he said.

"That is one route carrying 37 per cent of all passengers on Veolia buses.

"In the future it will terminate at Carindale, so you are effectively dumping all those passengers at Carindale ... and then they will have to transfer onto a BCC bus."

Cr Schrinner said he believed many people would deterred by the inconvenience and would simply drive into Carindale.

His concerns were echoed by Cr Fiona King (Marchant Ward), who feared the same thing would happen at Chermside Shopping Centre.

However a spokesman for Mr Emerson said alternatives had to be found to stop an increasing number of buses running over the Victoria Bridge, identified as Brisbane's public transport achilles heel by Fairfax Media in November 2011.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/victoria-bridge-our-weakest-link-say-transport-experts-20111128-1o1up.html

Egged on by Labor Council Opposition Leader Milton Dick, Brisbane City Council finally raised its concerns about the bus network which it contributes $70 million to each year.

Brisbane City Council listed seven specific problems it want addressed immediately.

1 Greenslopes Hospital route 172. The route will be removed and war veterans will have to walk 700 metres to get a different bus.

Transport Minister Scott Emerson late Tuesday night said he would fix this problem.

2. The Fig Tree Pocket to City services taking tourists direct to Lone Pine sanctuary is proposed to be a transfer at Indooroopilly station.

3. The direct service 444 route from Moggill to the City will be replaced by a "reduced frequency" service that will run to the University of Queensland. CBD passengers will be dropped at Indooroopilly station.

4. Changes to the 100 BUZ route mean passengers from Forest Lake and Mt Ommaney will have fewer services to the Princess Alexandra Hospital and to Mater Hill.

5. The BUZ Route 120 from Garden City to the City will be less frequent.

6. The council wants to know why the 192 university buses will be removed from Dornock Terrace at Highgate Hill.

Transport Minister Scott Emerson on Monday extended public consultation on the changes for a fortnight and brushed aside criticism, saying he wanted to hear from Brisbane City Council.

"I welcome council's input," Mr Emerson said.

"Access to Greenslopes Hospital is certainly one area I'm keen to fix and other suggestions will be looked at closely with the feedback we receive from passengers."

"We simply can't keep continuing to run an inefficient public transport network."

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/route-changes-throw-tourists-veterans-under-a-bus-council-20130312-2fypc.html

[ozbob]

I hope TransLink actually briefs Councillors properly on the proposed changes.  They obviously haven't got a clue at the moment ...

[#Metro]

"In the future it will terminate at Carindale, so you are effectively dumping all those passengers at Carindale ... and then they will have to transfer onto a BCC bus."

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/route-changes-throw-tourists-veterans-under-a-bus-council-20130312-2fypc.html#ixzz2NMIayVUH

Heaven help us all, with this parochial attitude, passengers outside BCC will need passports to enter the city. Ooh, Redlands commuters mixing with BCC folk on the bus!! Ooh, Logan commuters on BCC buses!! Can't have that!!

Councillors are not transport planners - and it really shows!!

[ozbob]

Wouldn't it be nice if Premier Newman followed up his offer when Lord Mayor, of the state taking over BT ....  get it sorted for once and for all.

Now is the hour!!

[#Metro]

I don't understand cr schrinner, didn't the 250 already get cut back to carindale? And didn't TL use that as an example of how that improved things? Patronage went up 13% I recall from the report.

[ozbob]

Yes,  Council chamber hysteria manifest ...

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

13th March 2013

Re: Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

Greetings,

More reason to get on with network changes, recent Auckland Bus Review; Connections based bus network covers all of Auckland
in frequent bus service. ----> http://www.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/improving-transport/plans-proposals/IntegratedTravel/Documents/rptp/frequent-service.pdf

Failure to upgrade Brisbane's bus network likewise will leave Brisbane city behind competitors overseas.

Best wishes
Robert

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

Media release 13th March 2013



Brisbane City Council and the Bus Review

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport urges Brisbane City Council to provide bipartisan support to allow the Go Network to go ahead.

Why is the current bus network unsustainable?

1. It prioritises transporting air over transporting passengers.

2. Too many routes means too much complexity. For example, 9 different buses go to the Centenary suburbs; They are 450,453,454,455,456,457,458,459 and 452;  None are frequent. Some buses go to Mt Ommaney first, some go via the Centenary Highway, others go via the Western Freeway, or via the Western Freeway but then Coronation Drive, some stop at Indooroopilly, some don't; Some stop at Milton, others don't One goes to the Darra railway station clockwise in the morning, but then anticlockwise in the afternoon.

3. The current bus network is financially unsustainable and being kept afloat by escalating 15% and 20% annual fare increases. Passengers will not wear fare increases of this magnitude. The previous state government lost an election on the back of this very issue.

4. More buses means the CBD is being flooded with buses Brisbane City Council's own Lord Mayors Mass Transit Report 2007 warned that the current direct service paradigm would lead to massive delays and congestion, which it has at Cultural Centre. This is only going to get worse. There is little capacity left in the CBD for yet even more buses to swamp it. Collapse of the entire bus network is now routine during mild congestion and periods of rain.

5. It denies frequent service to outer suburbs of Brisbane. Money is being spent on duplication required to drive air-laden buses all the way to the CBD. That's money better spent on moving real people in Centenary, The Northwest, Yeronga, Bulimba and so forth on frequent all day services.

6. Connection based networks are the status quo in large cities such as Perth, Vancouver, Paris, and Toronto. The Lord Mayor should look at Toronto, where 98% of buses connect to trains, fares are low, services are simple and frequent and fare revenue covers ~ 70% of operations (system-wide). Toronto carried almost 500 million trips last year. Closer to home, Perth, Western Australia runs a similar feeder system to their trains which now carry more patronage than Brisbane's trains do, despite being a smaller city with a lower population. More recently Auckland, NZ is pushing through a similar frequent network reform based on connections, unlocking access to frequent all day service to the entire city. Brisbane is at risk of being left behind.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"We disagree with the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk about his position on bus connections.

Failure to move forward will ultimately lead to:

1. Escalating fare rises of 15% or higher to support a system that carries more air than passengers.

2. Longer commutes due to regular collapse of the bus system during rain or congestion, for example on Coronation Drive.

3. A congested CBD full of bus gridlock and routine failure of the bus system, destroying Brisbane's livability.

4. Harder to attract jobs and employers as other, competing cities such as Auckland, upgrade their bus networks and offer frequent services to the entire area of the city.

5. Inability to provide frequent, simple and reliable service to outer Brisbane suburbs such as Centenary and the Northwest.

We urge the Lord Mayor, Graham Quirk, and his Brisbane City Council colleagues to consider very carefully their opposition to reforms that have been successfully carried out and operated in cities overseas.  Not acting to sort out the bus network to maximise efficiency and connections, and use the other modes optimally is consigning SEQ to more transport failure."

Contact:

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

References:

1. Auckland Bus Network Reforms http://www.humantransit.org/2012/10/auckland-how-network-redesign-can-transform-a-citys-possibilities.html

2. "Networks that are designed to prevent transferring must run massive volumes of half-empty and quarter-empty buses and still have trouble delivering frequencies that make the service worth waiting for.  The waste involved can be colossal, as you can see from the amount of service we were able to redeploy in more useful ways with this redesign."

3. Connections vs complexity http://www.humantransit.org/2010/11/connections-vs-complexity.html

4. Transferring" can be good for you, and good for your city http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

[#Metro]

Maybe I am thinking of another redlands route.

[doggo]

270'or some such terminates at carindale now....

[ozbob]

Maybe I am thinking of another redlands route.

Truncation
In February 2012, route 270 (Victoria Point to Carindale via Capalaba), which carries 7% of all patronage in Redlands, was extended from Capalaba to Carindale all day and truncated at Carindale in peak periods, having previously travelled only to Capalaba (off peak) and beyond Carindale to the Brisbane CBD in peak periods. Since then patronage has grown by 13% demonstrating the success of a simple frequent 7-day network across the region.
The success of this truncation signals the opportunity for truncation of other peak commuter routes to be undertaken.

[petey3801]

I am more concerned with getting some basic bus services in wider catchments so that PT can become a more realistic option for the community.  I don't really expect the 524 to be running at midnight to get me home from the razzle dazzle, but a bit better frequency during the day would be nice.  The only way that wider improvements will occur is if there are some savings elsewhere.   Unless they start feeding rail may as well scrap it and put in monorails and sell fairy floss to the waiting pax.

If they keep reacting to every bit of feedback it is going to be completely botched anyway.  So may as well accept that mediocrity is the outcome and sit in Coro drive for 2 hours and enjoy the single seat journey to everywhere ...

Next?

Ok, but 100 in competition with rail feeders, 222 and 88 go completely against that.

So what happens if you live somewhere like Acacia Ridge, where there are no HF routes, anywhere near the place? That's a lot more than a couple hundred meters to walk...

I think what HTG said:

What I think they will do and should be doing is matching services to the secondary services. That way you can catch a train or a Frequent route to an area serviced by the same stop/interchange and then feed into the secondary route to get home rather than the mess we have now which you can see from the new proposed north west, north and north east maps.

For example, the North Shore Line (Sydney)'s nightride service has an on demand taxi from it to cover Wollstonecraft and Waverton.  It doesn't necessarily need to be met by a full sized bus at 10pm.  In certain cases it may well be justified to have the full sized bus.

BTW, Acacia Ridge has its last service (110) leave QSBS at 11:42pm.

I also agree with what HTG said there. That would be a more common sense thing to do. The point I am arguing is TT's point of having all secondary routes stop at 9pm or thereabouts so the high frequency routes could continue to run at 15min frequencies until late at night. I used Acacia Ridge as an example after having a quick look at the proposed HF route map.

[SurfRail]

270'or some such terminates at carindale now....

Yep, 270.

[Gazza]

I dont think the 416 should be scrapped, since the 470 is going too. It is very hilly, and needs coverage. Probably should continue to the city since its a bit close to bother with interchange and lacks expresses...not like Indooroopilly for example.

Instead, extend 416 to the Tatong St bus turnaround which is on the other side of the Western Freeway but run all trips via Toowong Village to give the interchange (Rail & 412)/shopping options. That saves that St Lucia Local loop from having to go there:


http://i.imgur.com/YFoS2mJ.jpg

[nathandavid88]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Route changes throw tourists, veterans under a bus: council

Date March 13, 2013 - 1:00AM
Tony Moore

Brisbane City Council wants to know why the state government wants war veterans to walk 700 metres uphill from Greenslopes Hospital to catch a bus and to cancel tourist buses to popular tourist destination Lone Pine under its bus route review.

Almost three hours at Tuesday night's Brisbane City Council meeting was spent debating problems with the proposed new bus routes, released last week by Transport Minister Scott Emerson.

These two issues, acknowledged by Mr Emerson as genuine problems, topped the council's list of concerns.

Deputy Mayor Adrian Schrinner said he also believed changes to Redlands buses – which would now stop at Carindale Shopping Centre under the amendments– would mean commuters would instead drive to Carindale, park in suburban streets, and then catch the shorter bus trip to Brisbane City.

"At the moment, people can catch a bus all the way into the City," Cr Schrinner said.

"The most popular bus route is the 250 and according to the Translink bus review report that carries 37 per cent of all Veolia passengers," he said.

"That is one route carrying 37 per cent of all passengers on Veolia buses.

"In the future it will terminate at Carindale, so you are effectively dumping all those passengers at Carindale ... and then they will have to transfer onto a BCC bus."

Cr Schrinner said he believed many people would deterred by the inconvenience and would simply drive into Carindale.

His concerns were echoed by Cr Fiona King (Marchant Ward), who feared the same thing would happen at Chermside Shopping Centre.

However a spokesman for Mr Emerson said alternatives had to be found to stop an increasing number of buses running over the Victoria Bridge, identified as Brisbane's public transport achilles heel by Fairfax Media in November 2011.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/victoria-bridge-our-weakest-link-say-transport-experts-20111128-1o1up.html

Egged on by Labor Council Opposition Leader Milton Dick, Brisbane City Council finally raised its concerns about the bus network which it contributes $70 million to each year.

Brisbane City Council listed seven specific problems it want addressed immediately.

1 Greenslopes Hospital route 172. The route will be removed and war veterans will have to walk 700 metres to get a different bus.

Transport Minister Scott Emerson late Tuesday night said he would fix this problem.

2. The Fig Tree Pocket to City services taking tourists direct to Lone Pine sanctuary is proposed to be a transfer at Indooroopilly station.

3. The direct service 444 route from Moggill to the City will be replaced by a "reduced frequency" service that will run to the University of Queensland. CBD passengers will be dropped at Indooroopilly station.

4. Changes to the 100 BUZ route mean passengers from Forest Lake and Mt Ommaney will have fewer services to the Princess Alexandra Hospital and to Mater Hill.

5. The BUZ Route 120 from Garden City to the City will be less frequent.

6. The council wants to know why the 192 university buses will be removed from Dornock Terrace at Highgate Hill.

Transport Minister Scott Emerson on Monday extended public consultation on the changes for a fortnight and brushed aside criticism, saying he wanted to hear from Brisbane City Council.

"I welcome council's input," Mr Emerson said.

"Access to Greenslopes Hospital is certainly one area I'm keen to fix and other suggestions will be looked at closely with the feedback we receive from passengers."

"We simply can't keep continuing to run an inefficient public transport network."

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/route-changes-throw-tourists-veterans-under-a-bus-council-20130312-2fypc.html

To be honest, based on this article, BCC's objections aren't anywhere near as bad as I was expecting. I was expecting full fire and brimstone from council (I think Cr Dick is still trying his hardest to come up some though). 7 specific issues across all the route changes in the city doesn't really come across as that bad, especially as one is a very real issue IMO (the lack of access to Greenslopes Hospital – and even as it stands currently, access to Greenslopes Hospital isn't all that crash hot anyway I seem to recall), and some of the others like the replacement of the 120 and deletion of services to Dornock Terrace at Highgate Hill are areas that the council MAY have a point with its concerns.

I think we need more information about the new routes to really gauge the effect of some changes like the deletion of the 120. The map showing the 120 change only shows the S404 and S405 as replacements for the service over large portions of the old route near Tarragindi. We don't know the timing and frequency of those services. If they are a 30 min service with alternating timing, that Tarragindi stretch might still have an effective 15 min frequency, leaving only the part near Toohey's Forest with a lesser frequency. We just don't know yet.

[SurfRail]

I dont think the 416 should be scrapped, since the 470 is going too. It is very hilly, and needs coverage. Probably should continue to the city since its a bit close to bother with interchange and lacks expresses...not like Indooroopilly for example.

My original thought was that you could probably design a single route to cover off most elements of the 414, 415, 416, 417, 432 and 470, although not all of them.  I think I was proposing to run UQ-Long Pocket-Indro-West Taringa-West Toowong-Toowong High St.

[ozbob]

Save Toowong Buses

--> http://savetoowongbuses.org/2013/03/13/toowong-ward-local-councillor-peter-matic-fully-supports-retention-of-public-transport-to-west-toowong/

[somebody]

I guess there's no reason to keep my comments off the forum.  Here they are, starting with the negative:

I really dislike the unstated idea of removing the distinction between all stops services and express services which seems to be implicit in the review.  This is sure to result in significant slow downs in the services overall, making them a less attractive alternative to driving and also increasing the operating cost.  The current system sees the majority of people walking to the express stops rather than just using the nearest stop.  The speeds up services while still providing for the less mobile.

It seems that the service between Fortitude Valley and Royal Brisbane Hospital is being removed, as well as the 393 which connects Bowen Hills to Royal Brisbane.  This combination is a terrible feature.  The connection to Fortitude Valley is well used and the S99 proposal will go near Royal Childrens Hospital but not Royal Brisbane.  What should happen is that the 393 should be returned to running to Roma St similar to what it did until 2008 and be increased in frequency.  There is probably no particular reason why one needs to go via Fortitude Valley instead of Bowen Hills but needing to loop around via Roma St will be very annoying and a needless deterrent to public transport use.

Similarly there appears to be a significant downgrade in capacity northwards from Roma St on the Northern Busway in the morning peak.  Even the bus review document states that this is at 79.9% capacity leaving Normanby station, including services bound for Kelvin Grove Rd which no doubt account for a significant portion of the 20.1% unused capacity.  It seems that a reduction of about 16.7% is likely - you don't see the 333 operating more than every 15 minutes counter peak and I expect that will also apply to "frequent route 11".  This is a further reason why the 393 should be returned to servicing Roma St.

I don't like the idea of converting King George Square to a lead stop configuration.  Firstly, I'm not aware of somewhere in the world which has an underground bus station with passengers waiting areas in the vehicle exhaust. Bondi Junction has similar screens to Queen St and King George Square.  Britomart in Auckland has diesel trains underground and people breathing exhaust fumes - reputedly not at all pleasant.  The electrification plans in Auckland will solve this problem.  Secondly, a lead stop configuration for something that is more than 50% longer than the Cultural Centre would be a very unpleasant passenger experience.  Far nicer to be at the place where the bus is going to stop rather than having to predict where it might and move to where it actually goes.  The lead stop configuration also adds to dwell times and reduces productivity.  It's a necessary evil at the Cultural Centre.

I'm confused about what is proposed for Adelaide St.  I really don't see a reason for major changes there - the current system works quite well.  The part which doesn't work well is having some routes bound for Woolloongabba for example on Adelaide St, some on Ann St, some in Queen St bus station and some in King George Square bus station.  Some consolidation could be helpful, but a very long lead stop configuration would be annoying and reduce productivity, similarly to the above.

Pretty disappointing that the easily achievable traffic arrangments at the Cultural Centre, sending West End bound buses into the general traffic lanes and removing phases from the traffic light cycles aren't going to be proceeded with.

I don't know why "rocket" routes like the P119, P137 etc would be removed.  That will certainly necessitate increased buses through the Cultural Centre in spite of the Cultural Centre still experiencing congestion with the changes.

It seems that the mediocre patronage at Griffith University, Nathan campus is to be sacrificed with the removal of the 134, 135, 145 and 155 services.  Universities should have high patronage due to a large portion of captive users but poor services appear to constrain it.  It is disappointing that this is to be made even worse.

* I don't like the frequent route 23 serving Buranda before using the old O'Keefe St portal and exiting onto Ipswich Rd.  The new O'Keefe St portal which the current 77 uses would be superior, particularly in the outbound direction.  Serving the stop on O'Keefe St would allow a short walk to effect an interchange for those that would like to.  Also, no service for Ipswich Rd between Woolloongabba and O'Keefe St appears to be planned.  That's a long distance without a bus stop served at all.

I also dislike frequent 17 for the same reason.  It should be either via the entire length of Logan Rd for coverage, via Cornwall/Juliette Sts or two routes for speed, one doing either thing.

I don't agree with the rationale for moving the current 385 to Waterworks Rd rather than Coopers Camp Rd.  The rationale being that people cannot remember 3 route numbers 379, 380 and 381 to reach the inner part of Waterworks Rd.  I completely disagree with this line of thought; people can remember three consecutive numbers.  That will then mean needing to run inbound along congested Countess St, then Roma St and enter the busway at Turbot St, assuming that move is possible and safe.  This will mean that there is no real benefit to the busway inbound for the 385/Frequent Route 6.  Currently the route via Countess St is 9 minutes slower from Greenlanes Rd to Roma St than the 385.  I also disagree with getting out of the way of the Maroon Glider.  If council insists on funding this to the detriment of the network, Translink shouldn't be helping them.  One might argue that the 385 should serve Settlement Rd and a Waterworks Rd bus serve Payne Rd, but people beyond Settlement Rd would not like this.

I really disagree with the 375/S111 Bardon service being excluded from King George Square.  That is the sort of mediocrity that this review should have fixed, then the Caxton St services will have a common stop at King George Square.  It will also prevent the slow route via Herschel St on the inbound.

There is no reason to keep the 470's Teneriffe Ferry service that I can see with the Blue Glider.  Running down Lamington St to the Powerhouse should be investigated, and this could be tagged on to S101 just as easily as the S111.  This should be combined with frequent route 5 running direct along Brunswick St and frequent route 4 running along the riverbank.  An RBH-Valley-New Farm service would be logical along the current 199 route through New Farm in my opinion.

Removing the 135 and 131 will mean that Hellawell Rd is unserviced.  The comment states people will have to walk 600m.  I make it 900m from Hellawell/Jackon Rds along Jackson Rd and 1400m along Hellawell Rd   This is pretty disappointing.

I would question whether frequent route 26 Mt Ommaney via Indooroopilly can be attractive relative to a car.  Going via Indooroopilly as compared to the Western Freeway is heaps slower and I feel that a route via the Western Freeway is needed, except for people who are actually going to Indooroopilly of course.

Jindalee feeder service requires a long trip at a 90 degree angle to the direction to the city to reach rail line and then the city.  This will not be attractive either.

I don't like frequent route 16 much - it will be too slow going via the Stanley Bridge.  I think people on Cavendish Rd between Chatsworth Rd and Holland Rd should have been able to expect a via Cornwall/Juliette Sts service out of this upgrade.  I like a 174 service via Cornwall/Juliette Sts to cover Newnham Rd and the via Stanley Bridge route covering Ham Rd, but I guess that point can easily be argued.

I like the Moggill to UQ service, #500, but this should follow the current 432 route and stopping pattern between Indooroopilly and UQ.  Also, there should not be a downgrade in the frequency through Kenmore in particular.

Why is the 344 to remain?  That's a poor performing peak only route while profitable routes like the 374 are being removed.

Why aren't we selling go cards on buses and pulling paper with this review?

Why is the 120 to be removed from the frequent network?  For nearly it's entire route it's the only viable service and performs quite well.

Why isn't there a UQ-Toowong non stop service, as with Melbourne's 601 to Monash and Sydney's 891/895 to UNSW?

118 is to be made even less useful, why keep it running then?

Why is the 150 planned to stay as one, too long route, famous for unreliability?  I do like the connection to Sunnybank Hills shops though, that will allow interchange to the 130/140 services.  This may mitigate the previous point to some degree.

For all the compromises made to reduce the number of routes, it seems that three quarters are to remain.  It seems a pretty poor trade to me.

I don't like frequent route 8 much - 15 minute weekend frequency feeding 30 weekend train services seems daft. It's also something of a deviation.  I would have thought that the goal of serving the Brookside shopping centre would be left to a secondary route.

Frequent route 7 doubles up the 390 along Samford Rd west of Wardell St.  Seems to be overkill also along a train line.

I don't like the removal of the 411.  It's a major deviation to go via Taringa (with a walk), Indooroopilly or UQ.

Frequent route 11 seems to take in the 330, 333, 370 and part of the 340.  Not sure how this will cover the stops involved without being insanely slow.

I do like the frequent service 23 and feeders for Inala/Forest Lake, as against a BUZ 100.  The inner part of Beaudesert Rd is underserved and high patronage, which could be grown.

I also like frequent route 10.  Picks up the 325, 379 and part of the 335 services.

Frequent routes 12 and 15 are also an improvement and needed.

I support the removal of the 10 minute peak frequency standard from the "frequent service" standard.  That will remove confusion and increase operational practicalities regarding turn around times, particularly at Queen St bus station.  This will allow such things as the 119 and 120 to leave from the same stop in Queen St bus station as they used to.  This is actually one of the best aspects of the review.

--end--
Agree with me or not, that is what I think.

[ozbob]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Simon. 

I starting to wonder if the whole exercise (the proposed changes) is a sophisticated game of double bluff?  Ambit plan ....

Every time I think of Sherwood road with all the buses going backwards and forwards to the (new) depot but not a bus for passengers along that corridor I wonder a bit ...