Route M61 - proposed changes to bus stops

[Glen]

RMS has announced proposed changes to bus stops on Route M61 between Castle Hill and the M2.

Some stops will be removed and others relocated.

The most puzzling idea is to remove the northbound stop at Stockland Mall, Baulkham Hills, which the report says typically has 432 users per day.

The northbound stop at Baulkham Hills TAFE is also going to be moved away from the present location at the TAFE gate and be relocated 80m north. It has 372 users per day.

http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/projects/sydn ... index.html

[Glen]

The REF on the RMS web site refers to justification for the relocation of the Baulkham Hills TAFE stop as:

"the position of bus stop on the approach to the Edward Street intersection is currently less desirable as buses may not benefit from PTIPS (which extends green time when a bus is approaching traffic signals)."

Does anybody know if PTIPS is currently or planned to be in use on Route M61 / Old Northern Road?

[lunchbox]

Glen, my summation of many of the "bus improvement" plans is that they are flawed. To start with, they're done by RMS. I think they should have been conducted by TfNSW, an agency with less of a history of making things ever easier for motor vehicle drivers. Also, some (all?) of the analysis seems to have been done by "consultants' to RMS. If they happened to do any on-site research, I'll bet they did it by car, and not by riding on the bus.
There were massive objections to the 389 proposals in the Eastern Suburbs. I'm informed that none of those stop closures have proceeded. I wonder why?
The moral here is, question EVERYTHING....and insist on before-and-after audits.

[VivalaBuses]

Rather than being cynical and ignorant, how about reading the actual REF? I've quoted the relevant paragraphs from the document which address your false assertions:

To start with, they're done by RMS. I think they should have been conducted by TfNSW, an agency with less of a history of making things ever easier for motor vehicle drivers.

The proponent of the stop rationalisation is clearly stated as TfNSW. RMS is simply delivering this project for TfNSW.

Transport for NSW is a lead agency in the Transport cluster with responsibility for setting the strategic direction and guiding an extended network of public and private service delivery agencies to provide improved transport outcomes. Roads and Maritime Services (Roads and Maritime) is the delivery agency providing agreed outcomes across the road and maritime networks within the context of an integrated transport strategy. Roads and Maritime delivers projects and programs to reliably and safely improve the movement of people and goods by various transport modes, including through the road and freight network, NSW waterways, the public transport network and active transport such as cycling and pedestrian networks.

Transport for NSW, in partnership with Roads and Maritime, is proposing to improve the reliability of buses by making changes to bus stops along the corridor between Castle Hill and the M2 Motorway (the proposal).

Also, some (all?) of the analysis seems to have been done by "consultants' to RMS. If they happened to do any on-site research, I'll bet they did it by car, and not by riding on the bus.

So what if it's done by consultants? As for the research part

Stage 1 - Field investigation / site observations
- Inspect bus routes by riding the buses during peak periods to understand the bus route operation and identify operational issues

FWIW, I agree with most of the proposals in the document.

[Glen]

FWIW, I agree with most of the proposals in the document.

Some interesting points there, thank you.

Out of curiosity may I ask which proposals you do not agree with?

[VivalaBuses]

Mainly the movement of the northbound TAFE stop. That stop not only serves the TAFE, but also students from the high school behind the TAFE. The current location requires no roads to be crossed, so from a safety standpoint it is much more superior to the proposed.

The other is the northbound stop opp. Raemont Lane (2153206) where nothing has been proposed. I've noticed when multiple buses are stopped there can occasionally be some significant tailback towards Baulko Junction. A possible solution to this would be to move the stop slightly forward, say 30m (~2 bus-lengths), which would also help to slightly reduce the impact of the Stockland Mall stop removal.

[Glen]

Mainly the movement of the northbound TAFE stop. That stop not only serves the TAFE, but also students from the high school behind the TAFE. The current location requires no roads to be crossed, so from a safety standpoint it is much more superior to the proposed.

Yes, I agree with you there.

The other is the northbound stop opp. Raemont Lane (2153206) where nothing has been proposed. I've noticed when multiple buses are stopped there can occasionally be some significant tailback towards Baulko Junction. A possible solution to this would be to move the stop slightly forward, say 30m (~2 bus-lengths), which would also help to slightly reduce the impact of the Stockland Mall stop removal.

That's a good point, although I also think it is rather foolish to take away the northbound stop at Stockland, given its high usage especially by older persons shopping, even though the two stops are quite close together.

Elsewhere bus operators fight to get stops outside shops, and here RMS (on behalf of TfNSW) wants to take it away!

[burrumbus]

Agreed Glen.That change makes no sense.Stop p[lacement is so important in attracting amd more importantly retaining patronage.

[iamthouth]

The changes that proceeded will be implemented mid April.

[Glen]

That's right ........ and I'm very pleased to say that they do NOT include the original silly proposals to:

- remove the northbound stop at Stockland Mall, Baulkham Hills, which the report says typically has 432 users per day.

- move the northbound stop at Baulkham Hills TAFE away from the present location at the TAFE gate, which has 372 users per day.

Common sense prevailed !

[swtt]

If you read through the other "Bus Priority" program projects, it's just all about removal of bus stops and nothing about bus priority

The worst part is, most of the proposed changes are actually knocked back due to the consultations.


$$$$$$$$ spent in producing glossy reports etc. with very few bus stops relocated/removed.

[Tonymercury]

If you read through the other "Bus Priority" program projects, it's just all about removal of bus stops and nothing about bus priority :

'Bus Priority Program' seems to be one of the great misnomers of NSW transport, seemingly a fertile area for much things.