May 26, 2020, 06:23:51 am

Network design attempt #2

Started by Busfanatic101, July 19, 2019, 09:47:38 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Busfanatic101

July 19, 2019, 09:47:38 pm Last Edit: July 19, 2019, 09:49:33 pm by Busfanatic101
I have taken my Dec 2017 version and made quite a few changes.
A combination of elements I had before, elements taken from network 19, and completely new ideas.
Last time I had quite a few comments about lost services or convenience when my proposal was compared to the network in place at the time (Network 16) due to an increase in transfers. Now that network 19 has moved to the 'hub and spoke' model (which I support when done right) I like to think that my modified proposal will be an improvement (still not perfect though I admit) compared to what is in place now.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XjBdMQj8jnEJFzO73Ewtnf2Mhmg73oP5&usp=sharing
Click on lines or in the legend for rough proposed frequencies
Anyway again I'd be interested in thoughts, opinions, and comments.

Sylvan Loves Buses

Working from the bottom up.

74/75 - I think a full cut due to the limited number of spot available on the outer edge of Oxley would cause a fuss. It does already look like a long route, but to cover as much as possible to keep as many people happy, extend to Wheeler Cres and do what the 72/73 currently do in Oxley.
78 - I like what you've imagined here, covers south Tuggeranong very well.
R5 - Not sure everyone would be happy about the lack of Russel and City, my issue is the lack of accessibility in Wanniassa, this and the R4 don't have enough coverage (at least in my opinion) of the area.

R6 - I see you read my earlier post about Tuggeranong people wanting a Kingston service, this would be perfect, although I don't feel it needs to be a rapid, especially for the areas of Tuggeranong it covers, Hume and the Prison. Also, my affiliation with Symonston is not with the GEO science building, I was complaining for users of the 80/88 not just cause I got off there for alternative means of walking to the Harmonie German Club, the users of those previous network routes were actually coming from the Therapeutic Goods Administration building and some from the Trailer Park on Narrabundah Lane - still wouldn't need the frequency, but there are people there who did need the bus and no longer have it.
76/77 - Basically the old 71 with a 66 attachment. Mum was telling me yesterday how on the news residents of Tuggeranong have been complaining about the new network how they didn't want it to change - something I've been telling people too, this Woden extension is one thing Network '19 lacks.

R4 - Woah, please not Erindale again. The whole point of the corridors at least in my mind is that it is always suppose to be the quickest means of travel. The formerly Weekend 300 then changed to 900 cut the convenience of quick travel from Tuggeranong to Woden was a pain in the but from the beginning in 2005. A nice idea at first, but a great deal of hell to follow in the years to follow. 15mins is what it generally takes to get from Woden to Tuggeranong, with Erindale it adds an extra 10 minutes at the very least. Keep the full Athllon Drive section, and maybe have this part as another route, cause it would get used, but too many people wouldn't like the Erindale part when there's an obvious quicker path to Tuggeranong.
70 - The fear I had about the proposal of Network '19 was the backing and forth-ing of the routes, and ideal solution, but too many of those ares that would be cut would mean more walking, and the route its self would bee too long. Also the full strip of Livingston would be appreciated by users more than the P&R stop.

R7 - Cut back along the rest of Athllon, turn onto Drakeford from there reinstating the bus stop I assume was used in the 80's outside the new Hungry Jacks, stop outside the Church on Dudley Street and YOU'LL HAVE MY VOTE!!!
60-64 - I would prefer that to what we have now.
R10 - Woah that's a very long route. I don't think that frequency would be possible to achieve with the current fleet, nor do I think it would really be necessary, but it's a nice idea.
53 - I like the idea of using Manuka as a Terminus, but I do think people utilise this route as a means of getting to the City from their residents too.
51 - I like that.
54/55 - Woah, you're gonna have a lot of mad people in the Narrabundah area if you exclude Stuart Street, Kootara Cres, Matina street and Goyder Street. You might want to re-think that.
R2 - Yes please.
R3 - From the City, yes please.
50, 52, 100 - Yep, yep and yep.
47 - If you include the Hospital then yes.
40, 44/45 - Like what you're going for.
42/43 - Think these could just be separate routes. Think there's just a little lacking in the east Evatt area.
41 - Not sure how north Latham will feel but ok.
I wouldn't mind a route around Emu Bank and Joynton Smith Drive just as a little something so the walk isn't so bad. I can't really see which of yours would fit though.
R9 - Hall maybe?
20 - Ahem, Vicars Street please.
Also, I feel the other end of Antill Street is left out. The terminus there is a turn-around, wouldn't be too much to ask for the 50 would it? (obviously if it's not a stag/artic route).
24/25 - Another I feel should just be 2 separate routes. Also the Cockington Green and the Dinosaur Museum are tourist attractions, basically the whole of Gold Creek Village shouldn't be left out. Maybe you meant that, but I would put a little COC styled loop for that.

Oh that's it, well that's my feedback for you. Any that I didn't mention I have little to no issues with.

Northside

I'm not entirely sure who this network is designed to benefit, apart from some bus enthusiasts who get to sit on long-winding bus routes all over Canberra.

1. Whole suburbs have had their buses removed: Evatt, Oxley, Narrabundah, most of Fyshwick, Duntroon). Yet oddly others have had routes added, where I would have thought there'd be little demand - ie a 10 min service to Geoscience Australia.
2. You've removed key links or made them significantly longer: Woden to Tuggeranong, Airport to City, Belconnen to Dickson.
3. You've made both local and rapid routes terminate awkwardly just out of reach of the city - R6 and most of inner south to Manuka, R10 and R3 to Russell. Many inner suburbs now have no direct link to the city, and are forced to backtrack and change buses. Ie Curtin and Red Hill lose a direct route yet Stirling now gets a rapid route into the city??
4. Combining of routes has made some routes like a zig zag through a suburb. Routes should be as straight as possible.
5. Because of 4, some routes now take weird back streets that really aren't designed for buses, or have right turns onto main roads, which can be difficult to traverse in peak times. (including one in Moncrieff which is literally a no right-turn and a back street in Harrison running parallel to, but 50m from Flemington Rd for some reason, then past the middle of nowhere out the back of EPIC just so it can join a route at Watson).
6. Some routes have really weird frequencies, ie 40 or 45 minutes. Those frequencies are useless for planning purposes, and most passengers just give up trying. Having a 60 minute frequency is more preferable to 40 mins because at least it's regular and consistent.

If you thought the press was bad for the current network, this proposal would send twitter into meltdown! Anyway, I'm not trying to have a go, I just don't understand the logic behind some of the decisions.


Sylvan Loves Buses

July 26, 2019, 06:52:37 pm #3 Last Edit: July 26, 2019, 06:53:23 pm by Sylvan Loves Buses
Quote from: Northside on July 26, 2019, 05:50:37 pmRoutes should be as straight as possible.

Direct rapids sure and zig-zaging is bad, but I don't think routes should be too straight, gotta allow for some shorter walking distances for certain suburbs - Kambah being one of the ridiculous however.

Have to agree with the frequency part. I didn't actually look at those the first time through, but some of them are a little silly. Such as, how is 7.5 minutes supposed to be written in on a timetable? They're confusing enough when they're not evenly spread out over periods of 5/10/15/etc minute gaps.

Also, I'll take my vote back with the R7 if it's a rapid. Stirling and practically no stops for Kambah that would actually be used cause most would rather go to Woden, yeah no. Nice idea though.

Busfanatic101

Quote from: Sylvan Loves Buses on July 20, 2019, 02:26:16 amWorking from the bottom up.

74/75 - I think a full cut due to the limited number of spot available on the outer edge of Oxley would cause a fuss. It does already look like a long route, but to cover as much as possible to keep as many people happy, extend to Wheeler Cres and do what the 72/73 currently do in Oxley.
R4 will add a stop on Erindale dr at the underpass, and likewise add stops on taverner for 74/75. It skips oxley for speed but also to service the people that live across drakeford dr on Lake Tuggers. The R4 frequency compensates.

78 - I like what you've imagined here, covers south Tuggeranong very well.
R5 - Not sure everyone would be happy about the lack of Russel and City, my issue is the lack of accessibility in Wanniassa, this and the R4 don't have enough coverage (at least in my opinion) of the area.
Simple, get R4 and transfer to R2

R6 - I see you read my earlier post about Tuggeranong people wanting a Kingston service, this would be perfect, although I don't feel it needs to be a rapid, especially for the areas of Tuggeranong it covers, Hume and the Prison. Also, my affiliation with Symonston is not with the GEO science building, I was complaining for users of the 80/88 not just cause I got off there for alternative means of walking to the Harmonie German Club, the users of those previous network routes were actually coming from the Therapeutic Goods Administration building and some from the Trailer Park on Narrabundah Lane - still wouldn't need the frequency, but there are people there who did need the bus and no longer have it.
Select services could divert. doesn't need to be all day

76/77 - Basically the old 71 with a 66 attachment. Mum was telling me yesterday how on the news residents of Tuggeranong have been complaining about the new network how they didn't want it to change - something I've been telling people too, this Woden extension is one thing Network '19 lacks.

R4 - Woah, please not Erindale again. The whole point of the corridors at least in my mind is that it is always suppose to be the quickest means of travel. The formerly Weekend 300 then changed to 900 cut the convenience of quick travel from Tuggeranong to Woden was a pain in the but from the beginning in 2005. A nice idea at first, but a great deal of hell to follow in the years to follow. 15mins is what it generally takes to get from Woden to Tuggeranong, with Erindale it adds an extra 10 minutes at the very least. Keep the full Athllon Drive section, and maybe have this part as another route, cause it would get used, but too many people wouldn't like the Erindale part when there's an obvious quicker path to Tuggeranong.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. Tuggeranong is located at the edge of the district. All the Tuggeranong local services go to Tuggeranong, and for most suburbs, travel to Woden is a transfer at erindale which is more central, hence no disadvantage. Its only really the few residents of Bonython and Greenway who will be disadvantaged. Likewise, there are relatively few reasons for anyone north of wanniassa to travel to greenway that they can't do in Woden. The benefit of Erindale as a key transport hub I believe far outways the extra travel time for a small minority.

70 - The fear I had about the proposal of Network '19 was the backing and forth-ing of the routes, and ideal solution, but too many of those ares that would be cut would mean more walking, and the route its self would bee too long. Also the full strip of Livingston would be appreciated by users more than the P&R stop.
fixed


R7 - Cut back along the rest of Athllon, turn onto Drakeford from there reinstating the bus stop I assume was used in the 80's outside the new Hungry Jacks, stop outside the Church on Dudley Street and YOU'LL HAVE MY VOTE!!!
I may not get your vote.

60-64 - I would prefer that to what we have now.
You are entitled to your views

R10 - Woah that's a very long route. I don't think that frequency would be possible to achieve with the current fleet, nor do I think it would really be necessary, but it's a nice idea.
Could split at Woden (although I wanted to stick to the idea of 10 rapids), with slightly higher frequency for the west than the east portion.

53 - I like the idea of using Manuka as a Terminus, but I do think people utilise this route as a means of getting to the City from their residents too.
4min wait for the R2, they can manage. 

51 - I like that.
54/55 - Woah, you're gonna have a lot of mad people in the Narrabundah area if you exclude Stuart Street, Kootara Cres, Matina street and Goyder Street. You might want to re-think that.
I never understood why matina needs a service when its right next to Canberra Av. They'll be glad to get one bus to woden. If not, there's always casualties in a bus network.

R2 - Yes please.
R3 - From the City, yes please.
Can't justify R2 at such high frequencies if we run all these other rapids as well.

50, 52, 100 - Yep, yep and yep.
47 - If you include the Hospital then yes.
:/

40, 44/45 - Like what you're going for.
42/43 - Think these could just be separate routes. Think there's just a little lacking in the east Evatt area.
41 - Not sure how north Latham will feel but ok.
I wouldn't mind a route around Emu Bank and Joynton Smith Drive just as a little something so the walk isn't so bad. I can't really see which of yours would fit though.
R9 - Hall maybe? 
Thought about it but would add considerable time. Perhaps select services could divert.

20 - Ahem, Vicars Street please.
Also, I feel the other end of Antill Street is left out. The terminus there is a turn-around, wouldn't be too much to ask for the 50 would it? (obviously if it's not a stag/artic route).
meh

24/25 - Another I feel should just be 2 separate routes. Also the Cockington Green and the Dinosaur Museum are tourist attractions, basically the whole of Gold Creek Village shouldn't be left out. Maybe you meant that, but I would put a little COC styled loop for that.
That's just lazy drawing. It services gold creek.

Oh that's it, well that's my feedback for you. Any that I didn't mention I have little to no issues with.
Quote from: Northside on July 26, 2019, 05:50:37 pmI'm not entirely sure who this network is designed to benefit, apart from some bus enthusiasts who get to sit on long-winding bus routes all over Canberra.

1. Whole suburbs have had their buses removed: Evatt, Oxley, Narrabundah, most of Fyshwick, Duntroon). Yet oddly others have had routes added, where I would have thought there'd be little demand - ie a 10 min service to Geoscience Australia.
I consider those (not sure about evatt) sufficiently covered by high frequency rapids. A trade off of further distance to more frequency is no different to TC.

2. You've removed key links or made them significantly longer: Woden to Tuggeranong, Airport to City, Belconnen to Dickson.
I would not consider Belco-dickson a key link. I've justified W-T in response to Sylvan's post and again, running all services to civic defeats the whole point of R2, which it to free up these bus kilometres.

3. You've made both local and rapid routes terminate awkwardly just out of reach of the city - R6 and most of inner south to Manuka, R10 and R3 to Russell. Many inner suburbs now have no direct link to the city, and are forced to backtrack and change buses. Ie Curtin and Red Hill lose a direct route yet Stirling now gets a rapid route into the city??
Again, R2 is such high frequency for a reason. Stirling is lucky I guess, just like how Wanniassa has always been lucky because it sits between Woden and Erindale.

4. Combining of routes has made some routes like a zig zag through a suburb. Routes should be as straight as possible.
Rapids should be direct. Not local services.

5. Because of 4, some routes now take weird back streets that really aren't designed for buses, or have right turns onto main roads, which can be difficult to traverse in peak times. (including one in Moncrieff which is literally a no right-turn and a back street in Harrison running parallel to, but 50m from Flemington Rd for some reason, then past the middle of nowhere out the back of EPIC just so it can join a route at Watson).
I admit there may be errors and illegal routes, this was done using satellite imagery (without zooming in very far), and there are areas northside I am not familiar with)

6. Some routes have really weird frequencies, ie 40 or 45 minutes. Those frequencies are useless for planning purposes, and most passengers just give up trying. Having a 60 minute frequency is more preferable to 40 mins because at least it's regular and consistent.
Sure, its easy enough to reduce frequencies if that makes you happier. They are all numbers that would work on a 2 hourly cycle etc though. It's not like I'm suggesting 37 minute frequencies.

If you thought the press was bad for the current network, this proposal would send twitter into meltdown! Anyway, I'm not trying to have a go, I just don't understand the logic behind some of the decisions.


Quote from: Sylvan Loves Buses on July 26, 2019, 06:52:37 pmDirect rapids sure and zig-zaging is bad, but I don't think routes should be too straight, gotta allow for some shorter walking distances for certain suburbs - Kambah being one of the ridiculous however.

Have to agree with the frequency part. I didn't actually look at those the first time through, but some of them are a little silly. Such as, how is 7.5 minutes supposed to be written in on a timetable? They're confusing enough when they're not evenly spread out over periods of 5/10/15/etc minute gaps.
2 buses per 15 mins, 8 buses per hour. of course the timetable will be to the nearest minute. 

Also, I'll take my vote back with the R7 if it's a rapid. Stirling and practically no stops for Kambah that would actually be used cause most would rather go to Woden, yeah no. Nice idea though.
R7 is for travel from tuggeranong to cooleman and civic, with the option for kambah residents to transfer. I've returned you a direct connection to woden or the option to switch to R5 with the 70.

Northside

Quote from: Busfanatic101 on July 26, 2019, 10:17:41 pmWhole suburbs have had their buses removed: Evatt, Oxley, Narrabundah, most of Fyshwick, Duntroon). Yet oddly others have had routes added, where I would have thought there'd be little demand - ie a 10 min service to Geoscience Australia.
I consider those (not sure about evatt) sufficiently covered by high frequency rapids. A trade off of further distance to more frequency is no different to TC.

Yeah, but TC didn't leave whole suburbs out. For example, in Narrabundah some houses are 1.5km away from a stop now. The shops are now almost 1km away from a stop. How's that convenient for anyone? Then, if they manage to get to the stop it sends them in the wrong direction for 3km, through COC and Fyshwick, down the Monaro and dumps them at Russell. Only to have them transfer to another Rapid to continue on to the city.  Or the alternative, which is a rapid with a 45 minute frequency to again take them to Manuka to have to change again. Tell me where TC have done something like that?

Then, in complete contrast in Harrison, you send the 20 rat running through the backstreets, some of which are barely wide enough to fit two cars, let alone allow buses to pass. What is about a 10 min detour each way from Anthony Rolfe Ave to service an area that is still within 800m of a light rail stop and 500m away from the main road which already has a decent bus service. Why not keep that route as it is and use the miles elsewhere? It just doesn't make any sense. Further along route 20 it detours along Kings Canyon St, which is a back street running perpendicular to Flemington Rd. Why? Who's catching a bus along there when they have a 500m walk to the light rail? Anyone on the 20 hoping to transfer at Well Station Rd now has an extra 50m walk for no reason or they have to sit through a bus going over tight roundabouts and speed humps to get to the Nullarbor tram stop.

I suggest you actually come and have a drive or a bus ride around some of the areas and actually see for yourself where your routes go. That may help you make some adjustments.

Busfanatic101

Quote from: Northside on July 26, 2019, 10:55:19 pmYeah, but TC didn't leave whole suburbs out. For example, in Narrabundah some houses are 1.5km away from a stop now. The shops are now almost 1km away from a stop. How's that convenient for anyone? Then, if they manage to get to the stop it sends them in the wrong direction for 3km, through COC and Fyshwick, down the Monaro and dumps them at Russell. Only to have them transfer to another Rapid to continue on to the city.  Or the alternative, which is a rapid with a 45 minute frequency to again take them to Manuka to have to change again. Tell me where TC have done something like that?
Skirting oxley is like 500m max to a bus stop. Much better than Macarthur which has never had a service. Narrabundah, the furthest houses are 1km. Those living in east narrabundah are <500m from the shops there, and the rest of bundah has a connection to Manuka. I don't see the problem. If they want to go to civic get the 6 to Manuka. 



Quote from: Northside on July 26, 2019, 10:55:19 pmThen, in complete contrast in Harrison, you send the 20 rat running through the backstreets, some of which are barely wide enough to fit two cars, let alone allow buses to pass. What is about a 10 min detour each way from Anthony Rolfe Ave to service an area that is still within 800m of a light rail stop and 500m away from the main road which already has a decent bus service. Why not keep that route as it is and use the miles elsewhere? It just doesn't make any sense. Further along route 20 it detours along Kings Canyon St, which is a back street running perpendicular to Flemington Rd. Why? Who's catching a bus along there when they have a 500m walk to the light rail? Anyone on the 20 hoping to transfer at Well Station Rd now has an extra 50m walk for no reason or they have to sit through a bus going over tight roundabouts and speed humps to get to the Nullarbor tram stop.
Sure cut that bit if you like, but its a 1.3k walk to light rail from parts of there.



Quote from: Northside on July 26, 2019, 10:55:19 pmFurther along route 20 it detours along Kings Canyon St, which is a back street running perpendicular to Flemington Rd. Why? Who's catching a bus along there when they have a 500m walk to the light rail? Anyone on the 20 hoping to transfer at Well Station Rd now has an extra 50m walk for no reason or they have to sit through a bus going over tight roundabouts and speed humps to get to the Nullarbor tram stop.
I can run that along Flemington if you like. Its for people to transfer to light rail.

Bus 503

Please rethink the route 21.
Public transport should go to where commuters want to go. No commuters from Palmerston want to go to Kaleen or Dickson. They want to go to their nearest town centre, Gungahlin. Simarlarly, commmuters in Kaleen/Giralang want to go to their nearest town centres, Dickson or Belconnen. It is pointless to run the 21 to Palmerston, as no one from Kaleen/Giralang wants to go there. These residents either want to go to Dickson or Belconnen. You've made them waste time by going through Kaleen in a circuitous routing and then made them waste more time by transferring onto the R8. Buses have always serviced Belconnen from Kaleen, and this is change for the sake of change.

Also, by combining the 30/31, the 21 can't follow an efficient routing through Kaleen. The 21's routing will add on extra time and drive people away from public transport by doing loops and going back and forth.
I'd advise you to have a look at the  current 30/31 arrangement. It services all of Kaleen and Giralang fairly well, so commuters are happy with it.

Have you done a streetview of Spigl Street? Will buses be OK going through the windy section?

I'm not sure how I feel about the 21's diversion through North Lyneham. Perhaps North Lyneham could go without a service, because I don't think you'd be picking up many passengers there.

Sylvan Loves Buses

(including every other instance)
Quote from: Busfanatic101 on July 26, 2019, 10:17:41 pmSimple, get R4 and transfer to R2
Sure, but not everyone wants to transfer between multiple buses to get somewhere specific - and less likely for a major centre. The current network has made this point very clear for Tuggeranong Valley residents such as yourself, TC wants you to connect from one bus to another just to get somewhere, where it was only the 1 bus originally - A really annoying part of the network where many Tuggeranong residents are saying they only needed to change Northbourne, where our area was fine as it was.
Thank goodness they changed the R4 from the proposal to go all the way to Belconnen instead of terminating at the City.

Also my problem with Erindale has always been that to me it doesn't make much effort to make its self appear as a major centre area. The shop its self is as big a your local supermarket - like Lanyon MP, but you don't see them calling that the 'Southpoint do you'... the other shops are located away from the central point of the area - and you have to walk to get there, there's never been another bus stop in place to access the other shops. Yes it's the central section of the valley, but it ain't the 'town centre', not in my eyes - it's always been a dump, just like Gungahlin was 20 years ago - oh wait no, it still is lel.


Also you can put open/close quotes anywhere, really clears things up when you do that. Check preview if you think you've made a mistake while doing so.

Busfanatic101

Quote from: Bus 503 on July 27, 2019, 10:19:35 amPlease rethink the route 21.
Public transport should go to where commuters want to go. No commuters from Palmerston want to go to Kaleen or Dickson. They want to go to their nearest town centre, Gungahlin. Simarlarly, commmuters in Kaleen/Giralang want to go to their nearest town centres, Dickson or Belconnen. It is pointless to run the 21 to Palmerston, as no one from Kaleen/Giralang wants to go there. These residents either want to go to Dickson or Belconnen. You've made them waste time by going through Kaleen in a circuitous routing and then made them waste more time by transferring onto the R8. Buses have always serviced Belconnen from Kaleen, and this is change for the sake of change.

Also, by combining the 30/31, the 21 can't follow an efficient routing through Kaleen. The 21's routing will add on extra time and drive people away from public transport by doing loops and going back and forth.
I'd advise you to have a look at the  current 30/31 arrangement. It services all of Kaleen and Giralang fairly well, so commuters are happy with it.

Have you done a streetview of Spigl Street? Will buses be OK going through the windy section?

I'm not sure how I feel about the 21's diversion through North Lyneham. Perhaps North Lyneham could go without a service, because I don't think you'd be picking up many passengers there.
21 is not designed to be ridden out in its entirety. There are numerous connection points to R8 for this reason. Kaleen can transfer to R8 for Belco/Gungahlin. Palmerston can transfer to R8 for Belco. 21 connects Kaleen to Dickson and Palmerston to Gungahlin.

Kaleen and Giralang really don't warrant 2 bus services, that's more inefficient in my opinion. Added time for the current routing should be minimal, and any time added due to transfers would in many cases be made up for by other savings (eg. Kaleen people transferring on Baldwin without needing to loop through Giralang.)

Spigl street is not a minor street, if the traffic control device poses problems then they should rework it. I think buses can manage though, its not dissimilar to a section on Hilder St or navigating the roundabouts in Wanniassa. 

Quote from: Sylvan Loves Buses on July 28, 2019, 10:59:48 am(including every other instance)Sure, but not everyone wants to transfer between multiple buses to get somewhere specific - and less likely for a major centre. The current network has made this point very clear for Tuggeranong Valley residents such as yourself, TC wants you to connect from one bus to another just to get somewhere, where it was only the 1 bus originally - A really annoying part of the network where many Tuggeranong residents are saying they only needed to change Northbourne, where our area was fine as it was.
Thank goodness they changed the R4 from the proposal to go all the way to Belconnen instead of terminating at the City.

Also my problem with Erindale has always been that to me it doesn't make much effort to make its self appear as a major centre area. The shop its self is as big a your local supermarket - like Lanyon MP, but you don't see them calling that the 'Southpoint do you'... the other shops are located away from the central point of the area - and you have to walk to get there, there's never been another bus stop in place to access the other shops. Yes it's the central section of the valley, but it ain't the 'town centre', not in my eyes - it's always been a dump, just like Gungahlin was 20 years ago - oh wait no, it still is lel.


Also you can put open/close quotes anywhere, really clears things up when you do that. Check preview if you think you've made a mistake while doing so.
Yes I agree people don't want to change buses but I do support the hub-spoke notion of TC if they would only implement it properly with better transfer timings etc. That is uniform across the ACT in my proposal. If anything its more fair as it is no longer primarily Tuggeranong that has to change buses to get to Woden. No more stupid articles about north vs south.

Oh dear you need to walk to the shops? The entirety of Erindale can be accessed within 250m from the nearest bus stop. Tuggeranong is about 350m despite more stops. I don't see what walking distance has to do with making itself appear as a major centre though. In Tuggeranong, the major group centres are Lanyon, Calwell, Chisholm, Erindale, Wanniassa Shops and Kambah Village. Then you have the local centres - Gowrie shops, Fadden shops, the shops near United Kambah, etc. In my view it's not all about size. If greenway was located where Chisholm is, I can't imagine Kambah residents wanting to come via there before going to Woden. Greenway is on the fringe which is bad planning but that isn't going to change and for the rest of Tuggeranong, it only makes sense to use erindale. Also keep in mind that in various planning documents, the rapid lines were Woden - Athllon - sulwood - erindale Dr - Erindale Centre - Erindale Dr to Tuggeranong. The erindale master plan not long before they just refurbished the erindale stops had a new major bus station in the middle of the southern carpark of the main shops. These provide additional justification for sending R4 though Erindale.


Take a look at page 7 and 20 in particular of the ACT transport policy. You'll be disappointed to see Kambah, Livingston Av areas aren't part of the main rapid corridor.
https://www.transport.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/1237013/TransportForCanberra_Policy.pdf


And the erindale master plan
https://www.planning.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/895033/2012_-_Erindale_master_plan_-_Web.pdf
Erindale is viewed as a complementary set to Greenway, the shops are set to expand along with the bus station and other plans.