News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Buses

[Norman]

I don't think that will work. Buses run between destinations and try to service as many areas inbetween as possible. Why should you need to catch 2 buses to get from the city to Marion Shopping Centre?

They have a similar grid network in Phoenix, Arizona. I had to catch 2 (infrequent) buses between the airport and the city, and another one to the hotel and the transfer point was in the middle of nowhere.

[PeFe]

The issue is that our PT network is still too centralised, based around the outwardly radiating 'spines' from the CBD.

I'd have liked to see more changes to buses, including a greater emphasis on redesigning some to link with railway stations.

That's because Adelaide is a "radial" city.....it's not a grid city, just look at roads that aren't part of the "radial " like Glynburn Road, virtually no shops, no "destinations" like major shopping centres/educational institutions/tourism or hospitals.....so the majerial arterials in the northern suburbs (that run east-west) are mostly residential whilst it's is the reverse in the eastern suburbs.....the radial east west roads have the activity centres and the north south roads are mainly residential. Same for the western and southern suburbs.

I agree with you regarding linking more buses (especially in the outer suburbs) to railway stations, this also relates to the planning around the train stations and increasing their importance in the "local" landscape.

[ml69]

Adelaide bus route numbering is a mess......neither consistent nor simple......some bus routes show "one" number in and out of the city, some bus routes one "into" the city and then another number "out" of the city.

Some routes use letters to indicate they run on a major road then use the same letter for a different major road......

How about we adopt a standard world wide practice of a single number for "one" bus route bus, with different termini to show direction of travel
ie G10 would become Route 182, showing Flinders University as the destination (when travelling south) and Blair Athol when travelling north ( all destos of course "via the city") on this route.

I agree with your suggestion, but I would make a variation.

Adelaide's bus network already divides the city into 6 regions. See https://adelaidemetro.com.au/Timetables-Maps/Network

Those 6 regions are:
- North South
- East West
- Outer North
- Outer North East
- Outer South
- Hills

Why not rename the bus routes according to these regions?

Therefore, route names would become:
- North South: NS1, NS2 etc
- East West: EW1, EW2 etc
- Outer North: ON1, ON2 etc
- Outer North East: NE1, NE2 etc
- Outer South: OS1, OS2 etc
- Hills: HL1, HL2 etc

Outer North and Outer South buses SHOULD NOT travel to the CBD. Rather, they should originate and terminate at major rail interchanges such Marion, new Flinders station, Mawson Lakes, Salisbury etc. The bus/rail transfer should be timed so that the waiting time is no more than 5 mins (they do this really well in Perth on the Joondalup and Mandurah rail lines).

Simple and logical I believe. There might be a handful of routes which cross into different regions/zones, but the above suggestion should be the guiding principle.

[crawf]

- East West: EW1, EW2 etc
- Outer North: ON1, ON2 etc

Yeah, no.

Outer North and Outer South buses SHOULD NOT travel to the CBD. Rather, they should originate and terminate at major rail interchanges such Marion, new Flinders station, Mawson Lakes, Salisbury etc. The bus/rail transfer should be timed so that the waiting time is no more than 5 mins (they do this really well in Perth on the Joondalup and Mandurah rail lines).

This I agree with.

[ml69]

- East West: EW1, EW2 etc
- Outer North: ON1, ON2 etc

Yeah, no.

What is your suggestion to improve the numbering system? Or are you satisfied with how it currently is?

[Norman]

Funnily enough, we already have this numbering system.

100-series: East-West
200-series: North-South
300-series: Inter-suburban
400-series: Outer North
500-series: O-Bahn/North-East
600-series: Inter-suburban
700-series: Outer South
800-series: Hills
900-series: Rural & School Services

[ml69]

Funnily enough, we already have this numbering system.

100-series: East-West
200-series: North-South
300-series: Inter-suburban
400-series: Outer North
500-series: O-Bahn/North-East
600-series: Inter-suburban
700-series: Outer South
800-series: Hills
900-series: Rural & School Services

Not really the case when you look at the Adelaide Metro bus region map (the colour-coded map).

That may have been the original intention, but over time the numbering system has become mixed up and confused. Time to reset the numbering.

[crawf]

- East West: EW1, EW2 etc
- Outer North: ON1, ON2 etc

Yeah, no.

What is your suggestion to improve the numbering system? Or are you satisfied with how it currently is?

Those names are horrible.

I'm honestly not phased with the numbering system. I just look at Google Maps to see what bus I need to catch.

[SBD]

Route 228 is a north-south route between Smithfield Interchange and the Adelaide CBD. Its current route does not intersect the railway at any point other than its northern terminus. I doubt that anybody uses it to travel from one end to the other. Maybe it is used from Elizabeth Downs or Elizabeth East (Google suggests about the same time by bus to the city or by bus to Elizabeth interchange then train), and quite possibly used for journeys that don't terminate in the city either. It would be quite tedious to use the railway to get to/from school at Tyndale (on the old Salisbury CAE site) from Elizabeth East for example.

I don't think we have too many routes parallel to the railways, I'm more concerned at how few there are cross the railways or do any other non-arterial cross suburb links. Out here, 44x are east of the railway and 45x are west of it. A bus journey between Blakeview and Andrews Farm (4 suburbs) requires changing vehicles at Smithfield Interchange. Google actually suggests that walking the whole distance might be quicker!

[PD2/20]

Funnily enough, we already have this numbering system.

100-series: East-West
200-series: North-South
300-series: Inter-suburban
400-series: Outer North
500-series: O-Bahn/North-East
600-series: Inter-suburban
700-series: Outer South
800-series: Hills
900-series: Rural & School Services

There was a systematic organisation to the 100- and 200-series but it didn't split cleanly East-West and North-South as Norman suggests. I attach an image which lists groups of routes that existed when I arrived in Adelaide in 1994 just before Transadelaide was broken up. Most decades of route numbers were allocated to a group of routes in a specific direction from the the CBD. Most routes were through linked across the CBD and changed their number in the city. Some decades 16x, 17x, 20x, 27x, 28x, 29x accommodated two groups of routes which were through linked. Most decades were linked in adjacent pairs eg 14x with 15x. Over time some of the route linkings changed. Eg the J1-J2 replaced the 27x on Sir Donald Bradman and so the 27x on NE Rd were linked with the 23x. Some corridors saw the introduction of the Bxx, Gxx, Hxx and Mxx services which were through linked but retained the one number for the entire journey.

Most of the metropolitan bus systems I have encountered across the world have rather random route numbering systems. Adelaide and Bristol in the UK are the only two I can recall having systematic numbering schemes.

TA_Route_Linking.jpg (79.95 KiB) Viewed 4646 times

[Eurostar]

The bus lane on Anzac Highway was a good idea. The Government should look into replicating it on other roads.

- Port Road between Hindmarsh and RAH
- Dequetteville Terrace between Rundle Road and Brittania Roundabout
- Glen Osmond Road between South Terrace and Greenhill Road

[rubberman]

The bus lane on Anzac Highway was a good idea. The Government should look into replicating it on other roads.

- Port Road between Hindmarsh and RAH
- Dequetteville Terrace between Rundle Road and Brittania Roundabout
- Glen Osmond Road between South Terrace and Greenhill Road

Too bad nobody thought of putting buses on the tram reservation. I think motorists on Port Road should have every right to feel aggrieved if they lost a lane because nobody thought to make the tram reservation bus compatible.

[Westside]

The bus lane on Anzac Highway was a good idea. The Government should look into replicating it on other roads.

- Port Road between Hindmarsh and RAH
- Dequetteville Terrace between Rundle Road and Brittania Roundabout
- Glen Osmond Road between South Terrace and Greenhill Road

Too bad nobody thought of putting buses on the tram reservation. I think motorists on Port Road should have every right to feel aggrieved if they lost a lane because nobody thought to make the tram reservation bus compatible.

Port Rd didn't lose a lane, it just gained a tram lane. Port Rd did lose a thin stretch of parklands, "Won't somebody think of the children!" So no net loss there. Turning it into a tram/bus lane is not hugely difficult - there are just 2 stops that need need reconfiguring. Not simple, but not trivial either - and the expense would have to be justified.

[rubberman]

The bus lane on Anzac Highway was a good idea. The Government should look into replicating it on other roads.

- Port Road between Hindmarsh and RAH
- Dequetteville Terrace between Rundle Road and Brittania Roundabout
- Glen Osmond Road between South Terrace and Greenhill Road

Too bad nobody thought of putting buses on the tram reservation. I think motorists on Port Road should have every right to feel aggrieved if they lost a lane because nobody thought to make the tram reservation bus compatible.

Port Rd didn't lose a lane, it just gained a tram lane. Port Rd did lose a thin stretch of parklands, "Won't somebody think of the children!" So no net loss there. Turning it into a tram/bus lane is not hugely difficult - there are just 2 stops that need need reconfiguring. Not simple, but not trivial either - and the expense would have to be justified.

The point is, it would be quite reasonable for the RAA or motorists to point out that they are going to be asked to lose a lane when a perfectly valid opportunity to make a dedicated bus lane was overlooked.

You are quite right that the Port Road didn't lose a lane. The question is why it should lose a lane to buses in future, when an alternative was recently constructed?

Having said that, if I were the government, I'd put it down to Labor's waste and mismanagement. In that way, if I wanted an extra lane for buses, I'd let the RAA curse Labor. Or if I didn't want a bus lane I'd blame Labor for that.

The reason being that if the stretch RAH - Entertainment Centre was installed in grassed open ballast track, it would have cost about 40% less (which is the usual difference in cost between ballasted and concrete track) and still been able to take the occasional emergency vehicle. However, the previous government used the much more expensive and ugly concrete, but in such a way as to preclude buses. In other words, the previous government used a much more expensive construction method in a way that ensured the advantages of that method couldn't easily be captured.

I personally hope the present government would take Labor to task on what was a very foolish and costly use of the tram corridor. I am not disagreeing with you btw, I think a bus corridor down Port Road as you have designated is an excellent idea. However, it should have been the tram corridor, given the massive excess of money spent on making it concrete, and motorists are justified in asking for someone to be held accountable if they have to lose a lane they didn't have to.

[Nathan]

Out of curiosity, say buses did use the tram corridor on Port Rd, how would they merge across from the left of the road into the middle and vice versa? Same as the messy O-Bahn arrangement on heading toward the tunnel on Hackney Rd?