Waterloo Region Connected
Grand River Transit - Printable Version

+- 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)



RE: Grand River Transit - jamincan - 03-16-2018

Regarding route 30:
Quote:New route travelling clockwise on the University of Waterloo Ring Road starting and ending at the University of Waterloo transit terminal. Buses enter the transit terminal as Route 19 and depart as Route 9.
This is incomprehensible to me. My best guess is that the sequence will basically be as follows: 19 UW -> 30 -> 9 Market - 9 UW - 19 Conestoga. But why not just number the 30 as 9 Market?


RE: Grand River Transit - trainspotter139 - 03-16-2018

(03-16-2018, 07:01 PM)jamincan Wrote: Regarding route 30:
Quote:New route travelling clockwise on the University of Waterloo Ring Road starting and ending at the University of Waterloo transit terminal. Buses enter the transit terminal as Route 19 and depart as Route 9.
This is incomprehensible to me. My best guess is that the sequence will basically be as follows: 19 UW -> 30 -> 9 Market - 9 UW - 19 Conestoga. But why not just number the 30 as 9 Market?

19 Hazel to UW -> 30 Ring Road -> 9 Lakeshore to Conestoga Mall -> 9 Lakeshore to UW -> 13 Laurelwood to The Boardwalk -> 13 Laurelwood to UW -> 19 Hazel to A/Benjamin or B/Kumpf. is the most likely rotation


RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 03-16-2018

It seems the idea is most people would transfer at the UW terminal from other routes or the Ion, so the 30 is the local campus shuttle. It just happens to interline with those two routes.


RE: Grand River Transit - D40LF - 03-16-2018

(03-16-2018, 03:46 PM)timc Wrote: I don't understand the unwillingness to connect a bus route to ION at Waterloo Park. Do they think it will be overused?

On the other hand, I'm glad I've become a winter cyclist, because this new transit plan pretty much ruins any hopes of me commuting by transit. I used to have the ability to travel from home to work with only one transfer, but if I want to commute in the future, I will need to transfer twice, or take a 5-10 minute walk between buses.

That Ring Road route seems odd to me.
I don't understand the unwillingness to connect a bus route to ION at Waterloo Park. Do they think it will be overused?

On the other hand, I'm glad I've purchased a car, because this new transit plan pretty much ruins any hopes of me commuting by transit. I used to have the ability to travel from home to work with only one transfer at the same bus stop, but if I want to commute in the future, I will need to take a 5-10 minute walk between buses.

That Ring Road route seems odd to me.

- D40LF, Beechwood West resident


RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 03-17-2018

Logically, buses would send people to the UW stop, not Seagram, since UW is a much higher origin/destination node than Seagram.


RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 03-17-2018

Is there a reason why some 200 iXpress buses go up/down Charles and others go on Joseph? Just driver preference? I can't seem to find rhyme or reason, but personal experience says that Joseph is much faster as it only has two lights vs. Charles/Victoria which has five.

Also, the railing at the end of bus island platform on Charles at Water was damaged very recently.


RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 03-17-2018

On a route like the 200, the driver can go however they like so long as they don't miss a stop.


RE: Grand River Transit - timc - 03-17-2018

(03-17-2018, 12:53 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: Logically, buses would send people to the UW stop, not Seagram, since UW is a much higher origin/destination node than Seagram.

Seagram would be a good transfer point, and a logical stop for WLU students.

Edit: I also just think that every ION station should have a GRT connection. Doesn't that make for a better network?


RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 03-17-2018

(03-17-2018, 04:50 PM)timc Wrote:
(03-17-2018, 12:53 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: Logically, buses would send people to the UW stop, not Seagram, since UW is a much higher origin/destination node than Seagram.

Seagram would be a good transfer point, and a logical stop for WLU students.

Edit: I also just think that every ION station should have a GRT connection. Doesn't that make for a better network?

Not if it doesn’t make sense. Even in Toronto, there are a few subway stations with no surface-vehicle transfers.

Having said that, diverting a bus on University down to the Seagram stop seems like a reasonable alternative to going to the UW station. And either is better than just staying on University and not connecting.


RE: Grand River Transit - timio - 03-17-2018

The largest issue with routing down Seagram is the need to upgrade to a full set of lights at Seagram / Albert to ensure the EB buses can turn left onto Albert without much delay. Some would argue this is needed even without transit taking that route, but I'm sure there's likely a good argument against having two sets of lights that close on Albert.


RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 03-17-2018

PDF map of the proposed changes


RE: Grand River Transit - yige_t - 03-17-2018

I made a quick post-LRT Frequent Transit Diagram, showing every route operating at least every 15 minutes (either all-day or peak-only).

https://www.dropbox.com/s/04ifrk9k38hqjpn/Waterloo_Frequent_Transit.png?dl=0


RE: Grand River Transit - KevinT - 03-18-2018

(03-16-2018, 06:11 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: Someone on Facebook is already demanding the region alter the Doon South route because they don't want buses in the area  Rolleyes

We had a presence in the consults and online survey, one voice won't change it back.


RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 03-18-2018

(03-17-2018, 11:28 PM)yige_t Wrote: I made a quick post-LRT Frequent Transit Diagram, showing every route operating at least every 15 minutes (either all-day or peak-only).

https://www.dropbox.com/s/04ifrk9k38hqjpn/Waterloo_Frequent_Transit.png?dl=0

Great work, amazing!


RE: Grand River Transit - dunkalunk - 03-18-2018

Well it's good that they're connecting Route 16 to Mill Station, sort of, and that they've extended it to uptown, and that they've increased frequency on the northern section to match existing route 8 frequency on Belmont, there's no reason that the route North of Ottawa Street and south of Ottawa Street need to be the same Route.