+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Grand River Transit (/showthread.php?tid=13)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 02-21-2015
I don't mind reasonably sized loops at the end of a route; you have the same stop for arriving and departing, that way. You don't want it getting overly large because then people whose stops are near the start or end of the loop waste a good amount of time on half of every journey.
RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 02-23-2015
Proposed detour plan for route 7 and 200 during Ion construction now posted:
http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/resources/PW/PA2015-0224.pdf (page 72)
RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 02-23-2015
Interesting. The longer route time is expected to add extra service hours, so keeping the existing annual frequency will cost ~$1M more per year just in detour costs, which will be kept down by advancing summer service from late June to end of April. Granted, they will still provide regular frequency during peak annual periods, so the capacity will be there, just not the budget increase.
Also interesting that the 7 is being rerouted for a short distance, basically between the two cores, while the presence of tracks on Charles has the iXpress rerouted from Ottawa to Bridgeport, along Weber, rather than any amount along King. An extra kilometer, round trip, in extra walking for most users.
RE: Grand River Transit - nms - 02-23-2015
I wonder if the Region has given any thought to adding some iXpress stops along the detours. Nothing fancy, but similar to the sign stops currently along Columbia between King and the University campus. When the Ion starts up, the 200 could be re-routed entirely along Weber between Fairview Mall and Uptown Waterloo while bypassing the Charles Street terminal and/or King/Victoria intermodal altogether.
RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 02-23-2015
On one hand, with the widened/underpassed Weber, you might see more reason for folks to want to go to locations on Weber. But if you push for too many resources to be devoted to it, you wind up with self-cannibalizing/overlapping routes. Much of Weber and King are close in proximity, and with the odds of needing a cross-route from either being equal, you are giving two ways for someone to get from A to B, without serving/attracting much new network.
RE: Grand River Transit - BuildingScout - 02-23-2015
(02-23-2015, 09:51 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: Proposed detour plan for route 7 and 200 during Ion construction now posted:
http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalGovernment/resources/PW/PA2015-0224.pdf (page 72)
I think rerouting the iXpress on Weber is a huge mistake. That is too far to be of any benefit to current users.
RE: Grand River Transit - Waterlooer - 02-23-2015
Doesn't the iXpress on Weber really only effect the Grand River Hospital and Ottawa stops though? I don't think it's that big of a deal.
RE: Grand River Transit - neonjoe - 02-23-2015
Depending on how long the detour lasts on the 200 we may actually have an express bus that better serves the Aud (at least temporarily).
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 02-24-2015
(02-23-2015, 08:27 PM)Waterlooer Wrote: Doesn't the iXpress on Weber really only effect the Grand River Hospital and Ottawa stops though? I don't think it's that big of a deal.
Indeed, and the users of the Ottawa stop can catch the 7 at King, and the GRH stop the 7 at Park.
RE: Grand River Transit - dunkalunk - 02-24-2015
I was under the impression regarding Uptown Waterloo that Caroline and King St would not be under construction at the same time. As such, I'm curious why they have Route 7 split between Caroline and Regina instead of just running it on King until King is set to be closed for LRT. The only real complicating factor here is when Waterloo is planning on beginning streetscape construction on King between Erb and University.
RE: Grand River Transit - Markster - 02-24-2015
(02-24-2015, 02:56 AM)dunkalunk Wrote: The only real complicating factor here is when Waterloo is planning on beginning streetscape construction on King between Erb and University.I believe that was planned to happen only after ION construction is complete.
RE: Grand River Transit - MidTowner - 02-24-2015
I feel like the GRH station should have been moved to Weber, rather than asking users of the ixpress there to walk to Park Street. If they are coming from east of King (or even Weber), that is a very significant walk. And Water and King to Bridgeport and King is quite a distance- a stop somewhere in there would be called for, I think. Admittedly there are no really logical trip generators, but the disruption to riders in those neighbourhoods is pretty significant without some stop.
RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 02-24-2015
Moving the stop from King to Park in that area adds as much area as it reduces, only it shifts it ~200m east. Moving it to Weber would still have the same coverage change, only it would disrupt with a move that is ~600-900m on foot.
Also, the iXpress is taking Weber, so you actually see extra coverage with the 7 and iXpress splitting.
RE: Grand River Transit - Markster - 02-24-2015
...assuming there is an iXpress stop added on Weber.
Also, moving the King/Vic iXpress stop to King/Water is a bit ridiculous. That's only 2 blocks away from the Charles St Terminal stop. I'd put it at Victoria/Weber.
RE: Grand River Transit - MidTowner - 02-24-2015
The proposal is for the iXpress station at GRH to be eliminated, not moved. There will be no iXpress stop on Weber- the proposal suggested that users of the iXpress could use the route 7 stop on Park instead, which is of course local service. An entire stop from the iXpress is being eliminated, so it's not true that there is extra coverage (at least between the cores) as a result of the iXpress and 7 taking different routings.
Markster, I agree: the distance between Charles Terminal and King/Water is trivial for an express route, and negligible compared to the distance to the next stop (Bridgeport near King). Victoria/Weber would be much better.