The footpath has reopened - Taken today.
Plus still no relief on those bus queues across the bridge.
1 Like
Wasnât the âMetroâ supposed to magically âfixâ the bottleneck and the bus-flavoured jam on the Victoria Bridge during peak hour byâŚ
âRemoves critical inner-city busway bottlenecks of Melbourne Street portal, Cultural Centre, Victoria Bridge, and North Quayâ.
1 Like
I think bcc still hasnt finished relocating all buses start/end spots in the city yet
1 Like
Not going to make 1 ounce of difference. Just too many buses, too frantic, too inefficient. Something has to change!
1 Like
M1 isnât even running yet!
The bus network changes havenât been implemented yet. This will result in fewer services crossing the Victoria Bridge (e.g. 170 renumbered 179 and now terminating at UQ Lakes, 175 merged with 174 and now travelling via Captain Cook Bridge. 184 merged with 185, which now travels via Captain Cook Bridge also.
Work on Cultural Centre Station hasnât finished yet. This will allow Melbourne St routes (61, 192, 196, 199) to be separated from Busway routes in the OB direction.
Adelaide bus tunnel isnât finished, either.
Iâm not a huge advocate of the âMetroâ, but I think we should at least give it a chance to be fully implemented before claiming itâs useless.
5 Likes
If the necessary works were carried out to enable consistent 15 min all-day frequency on the existing rail network, and proper bus access at existing stations, the bus network could be redesigned to divert more buses to the rail network.
BCCâs bus network is simply a response to the poor access and low service levels on the rail network.
A good example is Indooroopilly Station. Train services have been upgraded there over the years, it just needs a good bus interchange or a station relocation.
While it would be expensive to relocate or add a bus interchange there, it would likely be far cheaper than extending a rail line into a new area or a new busway extension.
Quite a lot of buses could be removed from Coronation Drive through this example measure.
Other potential locations include Morningside Station and Coopers Plains.
Leverage is all about getting the maximum impact with minimum effort in the fastest time possible.
3 Likes
As part of the the ongoing Metro Project Council is still to engage to stage 2 of the bus network redesign in collaboration with Translink. The first phase was on preliminary.
Canât have all day 7 day a week train frequency upgrades until efficiencies, human resources. Infrastructure issues and fleet management/short falls are addressed.
Additionally itâs not a good idea to feed all bus services to stations of itâs going to increase or blow out over travel times.
When we were briefed about Bne Metro services, they specifically said that Metro buses canât support a feeder model due to capacity constraints Saying that some services will feed into the southern busway making people transfer, but they assured that there will be time savings during peak with the transfer in place.
The busway just needs extending from UQ to Indooroopilly to speed up EAst west trip as well as to the South from the Western suburbs. It can also provide an alternative and fast er link to South Bank and South Brisbane.
If this occurs one would assume that they could redesign some western services to feed into the Bne Metro at Indooroopilly.
1 Like
Firstly, part of my own thinking is to generally prioritise fixing the current network over new extensions. Fixing up situations like Indooroopilly station etc. fit into that framework.
Blockers will have to be documented and resolved. They arenât actually reasons to avoid change, they are the reasons for change.
How long do members want to continue with a situation on the rail network where basic 15 min all day frequency isnât being delivered?
Perth has already managed to sort this out. Their latest extension, the Morley-Ellenbrook Line opened with 15 minute train service on Day 1.
Secondly, the word all was used in your post. I have highlighted this in bold. Nobody is suggesting that all buses be diverted to rail. It will only make sense for a portion of routes, which is reasonable.
The fact that Brisbane Metro cannot easily support a full feeder and transfer model is a point in Jonnoâs favour. Something does have to change.
1 Like
Simply, It canât be delivered until what I mentioned above are addressed.
Until we get behind efficiencies like DOO and speeding up the procurement of trains by getting more made in Korea prior to the QTMP plant getting ramped up, there wonât be any frequency upgrades.
Any sane person who has been following this would get behind these solutions
We are not Government nor a union or a transport operator, so we can get behind bold and reasonable initiatives for better PT outcomes.
Verbatim9, there are some legitimate issues there, and I would encourage you to list these out as bullet points.
That said, a bus interchange at Indooroopilly and redesigning buses to feed that station, would not be subject to the constraints or objections that you mention:
- Train services are already 15 min all day
- Train rollingstock and train staff crewing are not an issue, because the services are already there
- Coronation Drive is often congested and is Priority C ROW, whereas the rail option is Priority A
- Saved bus route service kilometres can be saved and reinvested in boosted bus frequency, a net gain through the reduction in waiting time, which offsets the transfer penalty
2 Likes
You are implying that a feeder model is the best thing since sliced bread when its likely not.
Perthâs model isnât a one sized fits only approach, please use a combination of solutions from around the world that could likely improve the outcomes in Se Qld.
I think you have mentioned Perth over 1000 times over the last year. 
To stop short the only thing we need to borrow from Perth is Driver Only Operations which would alleviate a lot of issues going forward for the trains.
A key part of our work is bringing about 15 minute train and bus frequency.
And the problem with using overseas examples is that they simply are dismissed with âthat wonât work hereâ. Showing that it works and is already operational in a low-density Australian context challenges that view.
We currently have a direct one-seat to the CBD service model. How is the solution doubling down with more of that? As other members have shown, buses are still congesting the Victoria Bridge.
I agree with Jonno that we cannot continue to run all services direct to the CBD as a one-seat journey. BCC acknowledges this in its own documentation. And thatâs why some services are being terminated at busway stations.
3 Likes
Please present evidence that Korean-built trains could be procured prior to QTMP being available.
Regardless, itâs a rubbish argument. Rolling stock is already seriously underutilised during off-peak times. Itâs only during peak that utilisation approaches 100%.
There are certainly infrastructure issues that prevent all-day 15-minute services to all points on the network.
Iâm also hearing unverified reports that the government has halted new traincrew recruitment.
This indicates they have zero interest in service improvement.
1 Like
More of a reason to push for DOO. Upskill guards and others within QR to drivers.
^^Will address QTMP in an appropriate thread
I am just hoping together with platform 3, they will allocate a special bay for metro services only outbound on the main part of platform 2. It may leave less room for regular buses but it would alleviate confusion and running up and down the platform to catch your bus.
The lights arenât bad (have improved slightly), but hereâs hoping that they will include priority approach for buses at the Grey St intersection as announced the other day.
I donât see how better bus-rail integration alone is going to address 25-30 different routes all trying to be individual lines on a handful of corridors. Rail integration is part of line solution. Bus consolidation and trunk routes are an equal part.
1 Like
Improved bus-rail integration at stations such as Indooroopilly station arenât meant to be measures taken alone. A full solution will require other components of course.
I donât think you will get your wish. The new arrangement for CC Platform 2 seems like it wonât allow for services pulling into and away from the platform via the inside lane, the way that they currently do at most stations. Instead, I believe it is intended that SEB services will only funnel down the outside lane in a first in, first out fashion, with the inside lane reserved for the West End services bypassing Platform 2. The markings on the roadway seem to reflect this.
This would negate a separate bay - the M1 & M2 will simply stop where they sit in order of incoming services.
3 Likes
I think the congestion at the moment (Cultural Centre outbound generally but especially PM peak, Buranda inbound in the AM peak) is all a function of the project being still to be completed. Buranda currently has less platform capacity than it did before the work so buses are tailing back to the Juliette St on-ramp or further back, but once finished it will be much improved. The CC outbound platform will also function much better once the West End and terminating services are gone, and once there are fewer terminating services. At the moment, everything jamming into the one platform (including the M2) is straining things.
My concern remains that Mater Hill is too short to accommodate what will be required (especially once M1 starts). The only fix for that is going to be to extend the platforms to the east, but I am not sure if that is practical. I currently have some professional involvement in titling arrangements for some of the nearby buildings and while it would come down to physical / services constraints, any solution is going to involve digging out a lot of stuff. My other concern is that CC Platform 3 is not going to be long enough to accommodate Cityglider artics and everything else through it, even if terminating services are curtailed / eliminated, unless they expect perfect on-time running.
1 Like