SEQ Bus Review - Log of Affected Routes

[#Metro]

I thought I'd give feedback in a log rather than click on every single bus route on the TL website. Maybe it can be linked to a MR later as bulk feedback.

I'm only really interested in Brisbane City Routes, as that's my local area. Though I would like to see a basic CFN for Ipswich, even if it is just two bus routes in Ipswich.

Some things to note - 'at large comments'
1. We need a CFN map. CFN map tells everyone where decent service is, and tells developers where to build. Infrastructure maps by mode simply tell everyone where the concrete is, not the services.

2. Get rid of pre-paid buses. Under a 100% electronic ticketing environment, there is no need for pre-paid buses. Electronic ticketing was meant to supercede paper, not run 2 systems to do the 1 job.

3. All door boarding. Like a tram. Or a Train.

4. Too many rockets. Can there be simpler rockets? Fewer but more frequent? Centenary Suburbs only needs 4 or 5 bus routes (2 all day BUZ + 2 supporting rockets in peak plus a rail feeder), not the 9 it currently has. CHOP!!

Here I go:

77 - DUMP. Or send over the Story Bridge.

104 Consider sending to University of Queensland. Lots of potential demand there. Pax for onward destinations can connect with 109 or perhaps this bus can just include UQ as a diversion. Add UQ as a destination before cutting frequency. Potential uni student patronage in Fairfield and Yeronga.

124/125 Don't really think that Ips road needs a bus to Sunnybank. Anyways perhaps more of a common corridor would be good here.

161 Terminate at Mt. Gravatt is supported

174/175 See if there is scope for just ONE BUZ down Logan Road.

196 Good to see this route doing well. TOO MANY BUS STOPS TOO CLOSE makes it slow as! Cut some bus stops, esp outside St. Itas school and Fairfield Park. There are like 3 stops for Fairfield Park! There are three stops in Browning Street! Extension to Yeronga is strongly supported and will allow that horrible time wasting loop to be CUT from Yeronga on the 105.

198 CUT!! Totally redundant route.

203 Route 203 should go down Logan Road like the 204 does now. NOT down Ipswich Road and then O'Keefe street. BUZ 100 and Buranda bus and rail stations plus PA busway cover that area already now.

210 should be considered for extension to Metroplex. This will allow the 590/599 to be re-routed to serve Cleveland Line Rail at Murrarie

220/227 One of these routes down Wynnum Road should seriously be considered for BUZification to form a CFN arterial.

230/235 A common corridor where both routes overlap and combine to travel down Oxford Street is required. BUZ both routes, however the Riding Road service is probably more important of the two.

310 Sandgate Road should be considered for a BUZification to form a CFN arterial. Route 315 would seem OK also for this purpose, however with the opening of Kippa-Ring rail, that may change significantly, so BUZ 310 seems more appropriate.

350 Routes running on main arterial corridors in this area should be considered for CFN BUZification (also 359 Albany Creek etc).

369 Northern crosstown - new route, don't touch it until it has had a proper 12 months to settle and to see if opening of N. Busway and Ferny Grove Line upgrades have an impact. CFN map will also help. As this route is one based on transfer, frequency reduction will destroy network effect - prefer reduced span (i.e. cut early morning services) over reduced frequency.

379 Consider splitting this route into two. The Gap side of the route can be combined with 385 to provide more services, and the Grange section can be it's own route.

402 Cut all Saturday services. Make the weekday services a rocket between Toowong and UQ omitting all intermediate stops- this will directly relieve loads on the 412 without having to add more services to 412. Most people on 412 jump off at Toowong anyway. The route 601 in Melbourne (Huntingdale - Monash Uni) does this, 4 minute frequency between a train station and a much smaller uni than UQ, no reason why it can't work at Toowong.

411 Consider adding extra services to get more frequency than half hourly/ 20 minutes cycle; Potential for incorporating 470 and running via Milton Road to UQ. Potential for Toowong termination in the same way as 402 currently. There are plenty of routes that go down Coro Drive already and do the all stops (i.e. 443 and 445). Maybe only extend to the CBD in peak times?

416 CUT!! Already runs past the front door of a train station, very few services, duplicates everything down Coronation Drive already. Free up a bus in peak hour by dumping this route!

417 Coverage route to a pocket area that will probably always have low demand. Instead of cutting frequency on weekends etc, cut this route to terminate at Toowong in a similar way as the 402 does now. May need some tweaking to the route to do this. This would save the whole duplication section on Coronation Drive and allow for more frequent services on weekends/greater span for residents (say, 2-hourly frequency on weekends).

427/428 Make it run down one road. I don't understand the whole splitting the two routes apart and then coming together again near Clarence Road in Indooroopilly. Doesn't make a lot of sense currently.

Centenary Suburbs - see Gazza's good feedback on the forum about this. Only 2 BUZ services are required to cover the Centenary suburbs, cut all the rockets down to just two and cut the rail loop into a rail feeder from Mt Ommaney. See here---> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7931.msg91688#msg91688

47X series - 470/475 can be subject to random changes at North Quay Island. Something more consistent would be better IMHO.

475 - Can this be run via a busway station? In at Wooloongabba (may require intersection modification) and terminate at Park Road or Stones Corner turnarounds? Terminating the route at Buranda Shopping Centre might have worked when there was a tram and trolleybus depot on that site in the 1960's but not for 2013...

476 - DUMP. Funds can be incorporated into running more 475's.

599/598/590 - Break up the Great Circle line into discrete, steam-ironed component routes. They can all be marketed as Great Circle Line services (in the same way the Blue Line in Canberra is made up of a bundle of different bus routes overlapping). Increase the frequency to 15 minutes (like Melbourne SmartBus) and extend the span from 6 am to say 9 pm or 10 pm. Probably doesn't need full BUZ, but close to. 590 should be absorbed into the GCL and run via Murrarie. Alterations to 210 Cannon Hill to serve Metroplex are probably required for this to happen.


Maroon CityGlider - dump this route! Bulimba needs a BulimbaGlider. If anyone catches the Maroon CityGlider, they'll probably be cannibalised from other services - a net no change.

[Gazza]

402 Cut all Saturday services. Make the weekday services a rocket between Toowong and UQ omitting all intermediate stops- this will directly relieve loads on the 412 without having to add more services to 412. Most people on 412 jump off at Toowong anyway. The route 601 in Melbourne (Huntingdale - Monash Uni) does this, 4 minute frequency between a train station and a much smaller uni than UQ, no reason why it can't work at Toowong.

Would love it if all the UQ students on here (Golli, looking at you!) can give feedback on the 402 via the review.
Completley braindead that the 402 is supposed to be a load relieving shortworking, yet it is less attractive than the 412 by being slower with stupid extra stops.

Either
-Run express Toowong-UQ
-Stop white stops only, and rip out the yellow ones.

I'd love it to run express, but people regularly get left behind on the intermediate Sir Fred Schonell drive stops anyway, so it seems mean to not be helping them with the 402.

Would accept either option, just not the current arrangement!

[#Metro]

Would love it if all the UQ students on here (Golli, looking at you!) can give feedback on the 402 via the review.
Completley braindead that the 402 is supposed to be a load relieving shortworking, yet it is less attractive than the 412 by being slower with stupid extra stops.

+1

I'm leaning towards the 601 Monash Shuttle type setup. One pickup, rocket to uni, drop off. Go back...
This will mean that people won't be left behind for full 412s.

[Gazza]

I suppose the other advantage of a non stop route is lower running costs due to the speed.

[somebody]

Either
-Run express Toowong-UQ
-Stop white stops only, and rip out the yellow ones.

I'd love it to run express, but people regularly get left behind on the intermediate Sir Fred Schonell drive stops anyway, so it seems mean to not be helping them with the 402.

Suddenly seen the light then.

[Gazza]

Suddenly seen the light then.

What do you mean? I don't think I've ever supported the 402 as an 'all stops'.

[somebody]

^ You've said it shouldn't be non stop though.

[#Metro]

Please put discussion in the other 'SEQ Bus Review' thread. This is a Bulk Feedback LOG.

[Golliwog]

402 Cut all Saturday services. Make the weekday services a rocket between Toowong and UQ omitting all intermediate stops- this will directly relieve loads on the 412 without having to add more services to 412. Most people on 412 jump off at Toowong anyway. The route 601 in Melbourne (Huntingdale - Monash Uni) does this, 4 minute frequency between a train station and a much smaller uni than UQ, no reason why it can't work at Toowong.

Would love it if all the UQ students on here (Golli, looking at you!) can give feedback on the 402 via the review.
Completley braindead that the 402 is supposed to be a load relieving shortworking, yet it is less attractive than the 412 by being slower with stupid extra stops.

Either
-Run express Toowong-UQ
-Stop white stops only, and rip out the yellow ones.

I'd love it to run express, but people regularly get left behind on the intermediate Sir Fred Schonell drive stops anyway, so it seems mean to not be helping them with the 402.

Would accept either option, just not the current arrangement!

I don't agree with the 402 becoming non-stop. But I agree about having it only stop at the same stops as the 412, there are far too many stops along there. I just don't see the point in making it an express when there's so many students and others who live along Sir Fred and use both these routes to get around. It's a usual thing to see locals using either of these routes to get to and from Toowong with a wheely bag and groceries. These are exactly the types of trips we should be encouraging to be done via PT, not discouraging by cutting their frequency because students getting from UQ to Toowong is all that matters.

But Gazza, I'll try and give feedback sometime later on Thursday, too tired now!

[STB]

Trial service - Hinterland Connect    This trial route is proposed to be removed, as it has not met patronage requirements to justify permanent route status.

Well that simply sucks.  That's one bus route I do enjoy taking a trip on if I'm having a lazy day to check out the hinterland, and it's the only bus route available up the range. 

[#Metro]

Well that simply sucks.  That's one bus route I do enjoy taking a trip on if I'm having a lazy day to check out the hinterland, and it's the only bus route available up the range.

I actually think Owner-Driver might be an option for places like this. This is where the agency pays a commuter to drive the bus to work and back, and the driver keeps the bus (or minivan) near their house for the night. It will only provide for peak flow services, but still, better than nothing. This concept is discussed in Human Transit the book.

[#Metro]

Route 601, Melbourne, non-stop. Takes 4-6 minutes to get to the train. 4 minute frequency.
This is what the 402 could be.

(WARNING: Irritating music, mute sound when watching this video)

"
The video shows a complete and unedited trip from Monash to Huntingdale, made on Monday July 18, 2011. Route 601 is a prepaid shuttle service intended to provide a quick link from Monash University to Huntingdale Station. It augments routes 630 and 900 that serve this corridor and other destinations beyond it."

[STB]

Well that simply sucks.  That's one bus route I do enjoy taking a trip on if I'm having a lazy day to check out the hinterland, and it's the only bus route available up the range.

I actually think Owner-Driver might be an option for places like this. This is where the agency pays a commuter to drive the bus to work and back, and the driver keeps the bus (or minivan) near their house for the night. It will only provide for peak flow services, but still, better than nothing. This concept is discussed in Human Transit the book.

That doesn't help tourists/visitors, or those who can't drive.

[#Metro]

That doesn't help tourists/visitors, or those who can't drive.

If tourists want to travel to places far up mountains, they pay a tour operator and pay tour operator prices. So they don't have a problem. Those who can't drive probably would not think about locating to those areas, and owner-driver would at least provide one trip in, one trip out for the day.

[Gazza]

Pretty much spot on there TT....

Providing a bus so people can reach basics like the shops, medical appointments is one thing.

Providing a bus so people can have a day out is not what I'd call a social necessity requiring ongoing subsidy.

Pay a tour operator, get a hire car or a scooter, cycle etc etc.

[kazzac]

BUZ 230,more services on 235 ,and delete 232 also.should be more 227 services too.

[achiruel]

BUZ 230,more services on 235 ,and delete 232 also.should be more 227 services too.

I might be inclined to keep 232 but having it look something more like this:

http://goo.gl/maps/FNLTt

And get 590 out of Metroplex.

Let 232 do the low density feeder work and 590 be a proper trunk route.

230 BUZ I agree, but via Woolloongaba or Story Bridge (231 route)?

235 needs to be 15 peak/30 off-peak.  No more of these stupidly long gaps like 54 minutes between i/b 235 3:50 and 4:44 on weekdays.
Do we really need 5th Avenue dogleg?  And how about rather than going up Apollo Rd, it continues along Lytton Rd into Oxford St and from there follows 230 route to terminus?  It's not really that far for Apollo Rd stops to walk to terminus or Lytton Rd.

227 - BUZ! Or maybe at least 15 peak/30 off and perhaps some night time services after 7pm?

[somebody]

I think we might be unanimous on one thing: get the 590 out of Metroplex.  Serve the railway!

[#Metro]

I suggested a common corridor where BOTH 230 and 235 combine to go down Oxford Street. It's the main road with all the shops, late night dining and cinema; no brainer really.

[kazzac]

I suggested a common corridor where BOTH 230 and 235 combine to go down Oxford Street. It's the main road with all the shops, late night dining and cinema; no brainer really.

I agree, good idea AND more services too please, No Maroon Cityglider

[Gazza]

With 235 could you terminate at Morningside and enforce a change to a Wynnum Rd BUZ or the train?

Either that or have 235 Via Busway and 230 via Storey Bridge....No rockets.

Honestly don't understand the pussyfooting on getting this BUZed, or at least to a workable frequency for the core hours. It's such a short route and would be cheap compared to say the 340.

[#Metro]

With 235 could you terminate at Morningside and enforce a change to a Wynnum Rd BUZ or the train?

I doubt this. Train to City is only on a 30 minute cycle. BUZ needs 15 minute services - mismatch in connections. Wouldn't feed 235 into a Wynnum Road BUZ either - judging by the patronage metric on the TL website, this bus does get quite full, and you'd be literally emptying one full bus into another full bus - not much purpose.

[techblitz]

judging by the length of the 340...which turns out is the longest running buz trip out of all buzes (journey time)
how would people feel about a combined bulimba/wynnum buz.This would give it a decent sized trip time and cover a LOT more population and would aldo bode well for all the upcoming development around cannon hill.
That means `wynnum buz via bulimba,cannon hill.

[somebody]

judging by the length of the 340...which turns out is the longest running buz trip out of all buzes (journey time)
how would people feel about a combined bulimba/wynnum buz.This would give it a decent sized trip time and cover a LOT more population and would aldo bode well for all the upcoming development around cannon hill.
That means `wynnum buz via bulimba,cannon hill.

On a route like the N226?  I wouldn't like it.  To indirect for both Wynnum and Thynne Rd.

[STB]

With 235 could you terminate at Morningside and enforce a change to a Wynnum Rd BUZ or the train?

Funnily enough, the 'grandfather' of the modern BT network as it is today (the lead Planner who was there in '97/98), said to me once that he thought that was the best bet himself, a two way loop service between Bulimba and Morningside (linking in with the trains and ferries).

Given traffic conditions though on Wynnum Road, is it actually quicker to transfer onto a ferry or train, than staying on the bus itself to the city?

[techblitz]

the problem with bulimba will always be its geography.It cant expand anywhere accept UP (units/apartments)
As far as i know it is marginally quicker for peak hour commuters to get to the city via the ferry/393 connection than opposed to the current bus routes.This makes it a 50/50 situation.Commuters have 2 options.Thats the way translink see it and they wont budge on putting a buz service in until both the (393/ferry) & 230/235 services reach problem overcrowding.Also having prepaid peak services (which alleviate peak 230/235 capacities will only add to the delay of a long called for buz service.

[ozbob]

Here is a cleaned up PDF of the stage 2 bus review comments ..

click --> here!  PDF 0.2 MB

[#Metro]

202 - Send this bus via the busway and then use the Allen Street portal to get into Annerly Road. Waste of time going around the back of the Convention Centre.

172 Greenslopes - terminate this one at either Stones Corner busway turnaround or at Park Road busway turnaround. It doesn't have to go all the way into the CBD; Or continue to UQ Lakes.

177,178, 183 - truncation to Griffith Uni @ Mt Gravatt is supported. HOWEVER and opportunity exists to extend an amalgamated bus to Griffith Uni Nathan campus and terminate there. Would anchoring to GU Nathan increase patronage?

209 - Wondering if weekend 209 services should be cut. Pax can catch 200 and get a 109 at Mater Hill; Also can catch a 200 and change to a 169 at Buranda and get to UQ. Might have to run more 169s though as not sure if 30 minute frequency on weekends is ideal from the SEB.

471 Use the INB and Milton Road for this bus route rather than Coro Drive, then usual route. Milton already has train station plus is getting a ferry terminal put in. Bend it back to terminate at Toowong Shopping Centre. Passengers for Mt. Coot-Tha get any bus or train to Toowong and then catch a dedicated Mt. Coo-Tha shuttle which services the Botanic Gardens, Stuartholme school and Mt Coo-tha. This will allow the shuttle to be run frequently at low cost plus connections at Toowong while also allowing the Birdwood Tce section to gain more pax and be more useful as well. This new shuttle would also free up the GCL to be steam-ironed hard, and travel in a more direct path to the northern suburbs, no longer having to divert via the Botanic Gardens.

[cartoonbirdhaus]

177,178, 183 - truncation to Griffith Uni @ Mt Gravatt is supported. HOWEVER and opportunity exists to extend an amalgamated bus to Griffith Uni Nathan campus and terminate there. Would anchoring to GU Nathan increase patronage?

Probably not, as there's already a half-hourly inter-campus shuttle, free for Griffith students and staff.

[STB]

177,178, 183 - truncation to Griffith Uni @ Mt Gravatt is supported. HOWEVER and opportunity exists to extend an amalgamated bus to Griffith Uni Nathan campus and terminate there. Would anchoring to GU Nathan increase patronage?

Probably not, as there's already a half-hourly inter-campus shuttle, free for Griffith students and staff.

The last I heard via ATDB is that the Griffith Uni shuttle is now running every 15mins.

[#Metro]

Should the P system be scrapped?

There are 49 pre-paid system bus routes, which are (deep breath):

P88, P119, P129, P133, P137, P141, P142, P151, P157, P173,

P176, P179, P189, P201, P205, P157, P173, P176, P179, P189,

P201, P205, P206, P207, P208, P211, P216, P217, P221 P231,

P236, P331, P332, P341, P343, P344, P356, P374, P384, P426,

P443, P455, P456, P456, P457, P458, P459, P462, P546

I haven't included the CityGlider as that's all day, perhaps I should;

The pre-paid system is designed to be redundant - that is if someone has to buy paper ticket, they can catch another bus that mirrors the pre-paid one really closely.

If buses were (a) all door boarding (enforce fares by higher penalties and more Transit Officers) and 100% electronic ticketing (like soon to be Melbourne) with pre-paid cards on board, then there is no reason to have these special buses which are designed to duplicate everything, add extra inconvenience and complexity to the network.

My thoughts are that the P-system should be abolished. The gains in boarding speed can be gained in other ways, and we can MASSIVELY simplify the network and reduce the numbers of bus routes by removing the P-system.

[STB]

Should the P system be scrapped?

There are 49 pre-paid system bus routes, which are (deep breath):

P88, P119, P129, P133, P137, P141, P142, P151, P157, P173,

P176, P179, P189, P201, P205, P157, P173, P176, P179, P189,

P201, P205, P206, P207, P208, P211, P216, P217, P221 P231,

P236, P331, P332, P341, P343, P344, P356, P374, P384, P426,

P443, P455, P456, P456, P457, P458, P459, P462, P546

I haven't included the CityGlider as that's all day, perhaps I should;

The pre-paid system is designed to be redundant - that is if someone has a paper ticket, they can catch another bus that mirrors the pre-paid one really closely.

If buses were (a) all door boarding (enforce fares by higher penalties and more Transit Officers) and 100% electronic ticketing (like soon to be Melbourne) with pre-paid cards on board, then there is no reason to have these special buses which are designed to duplicate everything, add extra inconvenience and complexity to the network.

My thoughts are that the P-system should be abolished.

I once worked with the consultant who created the P services and that was the entire point, that if someone didn't have a Go Card, they could board another non prepaid service at that stop and purchase a paper ticket.  The idea was to speed up the peak only services and let paper ticket users use the all day services.  So, no surprises or new news there TT.

Should P services be retracted?  IMO, no, you'll have non Go Card users buying Go Cards on the buses and slowing down the service, and then depending on how the system works, you might get Go Card users putting $5 on their Go Cards constantly (school kids and teenagers I'm looking at you), which is a bit of an annoyance with the private bus services and slows down the service.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Keep the P system. The 680 is just a shocker in the peak times (should be a Pre Paid route during peak) when everyone wants a top up. North Lakes is just an absolute shocker at that! 315 is looking at going prepaid soon aswell which is good imo.

[somebody]

202 - Send this bus via the busway and then use the Allen Street portal to get into Annerly Road. Waste of time going around the back of the Convention Centre.

Err, shouldn't it use the Cornwall/Juliette St ramps?

172 Greenslopes - terminate this one at either Stones Corner busway turnaround or at Park Road busway turnaround. It doesn't have to go all the way into the CBD; Or continue to UQ Lakes.

An option, but the current route does provide a single seat to PAH and also connect the CBD to Greenslopes Hospital.

Should the P system be scrapped?

It's got a lot of anomalies in it too, e.g. 216/221 are P routes even though the 215/220 aren't running.

Pre paid at busway stations would be enough for me.

[#Metro]

I once worked with the consultant who created the P services and that was the entire point, that if someone didn't have a Go Card, they could board another non prepaid service at that stop and purchase a paper ticket.  The idea was to speed up the peak only services and let paper ticket users use the all day services.  So, no surprises or new news there TT.

I think in a 100% electronic ticketing environment with all door boarding, there is no need to run two 49 bus routes which are essentially the same. Does it save time? The time gained by pax on the bus could be gained in other ways, plus with paper retracted most would have swipe cards...

[Golliwog]

If anything, I'd expand the P system. It'd help get people off paper tickets. Just do it in corridors and go route by route. Make it harder and harder to keep using paper. Then, get rid of the P system because that's when it becomes redundant. It's not redundant when there are other non pre-paid options, it's redundant when the only options are prepaid options.

[#Metro]

If anything, I'd expand the P system. It'd help get people off paper tickets. Just do it in corridors and go route by route. Make it harder and harder to keep using paper. Then, get rid of the P system because that's when it becomes redundant. It's not redundant when there are other non pre-paid options, it's redundant when the only options are prepaid options.

I just can't believe that we still have paper. Wasn't the whole idea of card to get 100% RID of paper? The second thing is the P system doesn't really have an incentive to switch ... because they're additional to the normal buses... if you really really wanted to push people off paper, you'd just give them pre-paid ONLY, with NO alternatives.

Err, shouldn't it use the Cornwall/Juliette St ramps?

Not sure what you're talking about here. 202 does use Annerly road, correct? Allen St portal is the portal near mater hill right?

An option, but the current route does provide a single seat to PAH and also connect the CBD to Greenslopes Hospital.

This is a description of the status quo, not really an argument for or against it. Truncating the 172 at Park Road interchange (or making it extend to UQ Lakes) would still allow people to get off at PA Hospital, indeed probably easier with the nice new busway station there. I don't really see why it needs to go to the CBD if it is a coverage route. It stops performing coverage functions when it joins the busway.

[Golliwog]

If anything, I'd expand the P system. It'd help get people off paper tickets. Just do it in corridors and go route by route. Make it harder and harder to keep using paper. Then, get rid of the P system because that's when it becomes redundant. It's not redundant when there are other non pre-paid options, it's redundant when the only options are prepaid options.

I just can't believe that we still have paper. Wasn't the whole idea of card to get 100% RID of paper? The second thing is the P system doesn't really have an incentive to switch ... because they're additional to the normal buses... if you really really wanted to push people off paper, you'd just give them pre-paid ONLY, with NO alternatives.

Did you read my comment? That's basically what I'm saying. There does need to be a bigger and better rollout of go card infrastructure outside the CBD though, hence why you'd do it incrementally. Say you start in The Gap area (i.e. inbound corridor from there). Start off approaching various shops, etc in the area that aren't go card retailers to become retailers. Start making existing normal routes into prepaid only routes. Do it progressively until they're all prepaid (i.e. you've gotten rid of paper tickets!). While you're making them prepaid look at merging the pre-existing pre-paid route into one of the others routes so you don't have duplicate routes (So which ever 38x route the P384 route most closely copies, turn the P384 runs into that when that route becomes prepaid).

Edit: Fixed /quote

[somebody]

Err, shouldn't it use the Cornwall/Juliette St ramps?

Not sure what you're talking about here. 202 does use Annerly road, correct? Allen St portal is the portal near mater hill right?

Yes it does, but it shouldn't.  It's one of the failings of the bus review to not remove the Annerley Rd route from the 202.

An option, but the current route does provide a single seat to PAH and also connect the CBD to Greenslopes Hospital.

This is a description of the status quo, not really an argument for or against it. Truncating the 172 at Park Road interchange (or making it extend to UQ Lakes) would still allow people to get off at PA Hospital, indeed probably easier with the nice new busway station there. I don't really see why it needs to go to the CBD if it is a coverage route. It stops performing coverage functions when it joins the busway.

Why would you go to Park Rd?  I could see W'Gabba.  Even that means a reduction in frequency at City Gardens.

Far bigger issues on the system than fretting about the 172.

[somebody]

Regarding Pre-Paid, Auckland have these rules on top ups:

Top Up Fees

Please note there is a 25 cent fee on the following top-up transactions:

    Top up of HOP Money at Ticket Offices in Britomart, Newmarket, New Lynn and Papakura
    Top up of HOP Money at AT Customer Service Centres at Britomart, Newmarket, New Lynn and AUT City Campus
    Top up of HOP Money at Ticket & Top-Up machines
    One-off Top-Up online

There are no fees on the following top-up transactions:

    Monthly Passes
    Auto Top-Up online

All the names locations are train stations except "AUT City Campus".

The system hasn't extended to buses yet.

I don't agree with the fee on top ups at Ticket machines.