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 - KevinL - 01-21-2022

(01-21-2022, 07:11 PM)Acitta Wrote:
(01-21-2022, 01:42 PM)KevinL Wrote: The remaining platforms at the UW terminal will fully open on Monday and GRT routes will be spaced among them. No word yet on when the GO buses move over.
I notice that GRT has two bus routes stopping there with the same numbers as the two GO transit routes.

That's true for the 30, but not the 25 - GRT has no such route number. GRT's 30 is the new ring-road only route, so hopefully it won't be confused.


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-22-2022

(01-21-2022, 09:27 PM)KevinL Wrote:
(01-21-2022, 07:11 PM)Acitta Wrote: I notice that GRT has two bus routes stopping there with the same numbers as the two GO transit routes.

That's true for the 30, but not the 25 - GRT has no such route number. GRT's 30 is the new ring-road only route, so hopefully it won't be confused.

Well, even if it does, you'll get back pretty quick.

Still, given it's a new route, that seems like an unforced error...in fact, given that it's a special service, I'm kind of surprised it didn't get a 9x route number.


RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 01-28-2022

I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote: I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690

I never understood this, I wouldn't think they'd have much lower cost of operation, maintenance and depreciation should be basically the same, operator is the same, maybe it uses a little less fuel, and less land to store.

I'm not sure what the benefit is, since there's also a significant logistics cost of managing multiple sizes of bus.


RE: Grand River Transit - ac3r - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote: I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690

Makes sense to me. Some routes don't need full sized buses, particularly the 27. At most that route gets 5 passengers...but usually no more than 3 per bus. Such routes also do indeed have to make awkward turns - often driving over curbs which destroys the suspension as well as forces buses (including the 27) to add time on a route so they can take streets that offer more turning radius. I think it's useful.


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:01 PM)ac3r Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote: I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690

Makes sense to me. Some routes don't need full sized buses, particularly the 27. At most that route gets 5 passengers...but usually no more than 3 per bus. Such routes also do indeed have to make awkward turns - often driving over curbs which destroys the suspension as well as forces buses (including the 27) to add time on a route so they can take streets that offer more turning radius. I think it's useful.

Again, sizing a route to the number of passengers is of no value unless it costs significantly less to operate the smaller buses which I don't think it does. 3 passengers don't care if they are on a smaller bus or not.

As for tighter turns, I have no idea where that is, our region and cities have spent 60 years eliminating turns that a 45 foot bus can't navigate, but I suppose there might be a few that haven't been enlarged yet.


RE: Grand River Transit - the_conestoga_guy - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 03:23 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote: I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690

I never understood this, I wouldn't think they'd have much lower cost of operation, maintenance and depreciation should be basically the same, operator is the same, maybe it uses a little less fuel, and less land to store.

I'm not sure what the benefit is, since there's also a significant logistics cost of managing multiple sizes of bus.

Not to sound overly optimistic about KW's Vision Zero plans, but would the tighter turning radius that these shorter buses can make allow the Region to modify some residential intersections with tighter corners/shorter crossing distances? 

The operational costs of these buses is likely similar to the standard buses. But if the capital cost is less, than the savings should allow for some extra buses if larger orders are made. This video from RM Transit has stuck with me, specifically the idea of having different buses be "different tools in the tool chest." 

Also, I hope that these buses are outfitted with bike racks. The bus in the promo photo doesn't have one.


RE: Grand River Transit - ac3r - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:10 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 04:01 PM)ac3r Wrote: Makes sense to me. Some routes don't need full sized buses, particularly the 27. At most that route gets 5 passengers...but usually no more than 3 per bus. Such routes also do indeed have to make awkward turns - often driving over curbs which destroys the suspension as well as forces buses (including the 27) to add time on a route so they can take streets that offer more turning radius. I think it's useful.

Again, sizing a route to the number of passengers is of no value unless it costs significantly less to operate the smaller buses which I don't think it does.  3 passengers don't care if they are on a smaller bus or not.

As for tighter turns, I have no idea where that is, our region and cities have spent 60 years eliminating turns that a 45 foot bus can't navigate, but I suppose there might be a few that haven't been enlarged yet.

Lots of buses are forced to jump curbs, primarily due to vehicle drivers not stopping in the right places. Regarding the 27, the following turn is problematic. Every single time I'm on the 27, it can't make the turn due to drivers pulling up too far (I don't blame them, though, it's on a hill and gets hard to see traffic coming from the left): https://maps.app.goo.gl/sA7BvGj25LvLchNc6

Many other routes also suffer from this problem, especially in Cambridge with their grid street system. But it also occurs on many of the quieter residential routes. Safely turning a 50 foot vehicle is very challenging. You don't want to hop the curb since this damages the vehicle and it's also dangerous to pedestrians who may be waiting at a crosswalk only to suddenly have a giant bus drive over it. This can save the suspension of the vehicle, the concrete curb as well as the grass since it hopefully won't have to drive over that.

Plus, as mentioned, this could allow certain routes to shorten their route time. Currently, since the 27 can't turn off Fairway onto Morgan (here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/3bVEwmvL294hvxiu8) due to how tight it is. It goes down King and then turns down Morgan. Cutting that detour off can shorten each route by at least 2-3 minutes. That's good for commuters.


RE: Grand River Transit - ac3r - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:10 PM)the_conestoga_guy Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 03:23 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I never understood this, I wouldn't think they'd have much lower cost of operation, maintenance and depreciation should be basically the same, operator is the same, maybe it uses a little less fuel, and less land to store.

I'm not sure what the benefit is, since there's also a significant logistics cost of managing multiple sizes of bus.

Not to sound overly optimistic about KW's Vision Zero plans, but would the tighter turning radius that these shorter buses can make allow the Region to modify some residential intersections with tighter corners/shorter crossing distances? 

The operational costs of these buses is likely similar to the standard buses. But if the capital cost is less, than the savings should allow for some extra buses if larger orders are made. This video from RM Transit has stuck with me, specifically the idea of having different buses be "different tools in the tool chest." 

Also, I hope that these buses are outfitted with bike racks. The bus in the promo photo doesn't have one.

GRT stated elsewhere in that Tweet thread that they'll be equipped with bike racks before they start operating in the spring. They're likely not installed yet since they only just got them and are still configuring and testing them.


RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 03:23 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote: I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690

I never understood this, I wouldn't think they'd have much lower cost of operation, maintenance and depreciation should be basically the same, operator is the same, maybe it uses a little less fuel, and less land to store.

I'm not sure what the benefit is, since there's also a significant logistics cost of managing multiple sizes of bus.

They also have a smaller turning radius.


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:10 PM)the_conestoga_guy Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 03:23 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I never understood this, I wouldn't think they'd have much lower cost of operation, maintenance and depreciation should be basically the same, operator is the same, maybe it uses a little less fuel, and less land to store.

I'm not sure what the benefit is, since there's also a significant logistics cost of managing multiple sizes of bus.

Not to sound overly optimistic about KW's Vision Zero plans, but would the tighter turning radius that these shorter buses can make allow the Region to modify some residential intersections with tighter corners/shorter crossing distances? 

The operational costs of these buses is likely similar to the standard buses. But if the capital cost is less, than the savings should allow for some extra buses if larger orders are made. This video from RM Transit has stuck with me, specifically the idea of having different buses be "different tools in the tool chest." 

Also, I hope that these buses are outfitted with bike racks. The bus in the promo photo doesn't have one.

Even KW's VZ plans are building intersections where full size GRT buses can turn on everything but residential street to residential street (rare for a bus route).

This is what's shocking about the Region's intersection designs, they're not designed for anything rational, the expectation is you could turn a full sized tractor trailer on every road except maybe a cul-de-sac, and that you could turn that same vehicle at speed on every arterial.

I have seen RM's video on the topic. But ultimately everything is a trade off. I'd be surprised if this is a trade off which is actually profitable. Maybe there are differences in price that I'm not aware of, but the smaller the margin on savings the bigger the scale you need to offset the increased fixed costs. I guess it would be a good thing if we are at that scale, but I'm still dubious.


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:22 PM)ac3r Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 04:10 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Again, sizing a route to the number of passengers is of no value unless it costs significantly less to operate the smaller buses which I don't think it does.  3 passengers don't care if they are on a smaller bus or not.

As for tighter turns, I have no idea where that is, our region and cities have spent 60 years eliminating turns that a 45 foot bus can't navigate, but I suppose there might be a few that haven't been enlarged yet.

Lots of buses are forced to jump curbs, primarily due to vehicle drivers not stopping in the right places. Regarding the 27, the following turn is problematic. Every single time I'm on the 27, it can't make the turn due to drivers pulling up too far (I don't blame them, though, it's on a hill and gets hard to see traffic coming from the left): https://maps.app.goo.gl/sA7BvGj25LvLchNc6

Many other routes also suffer from this problem, especially in Cambridge with their grid street system. But it also occurs on many of the quieter residential routes. Safely turning a 50 foot vehicle is very challenging. You don't want to hop the curb since this damages the vehicle and it's also dangerous to pedestrians who may be waiting at a crosswalk only to suddenly have a giant bus drive over it. This can save the suspension of the vehicle, the concrete curb as well as the grass since it hopefully won't have to drive over that.

Plus, as mentioned, this could allow certain routes to shorten their route time. Currently, since the 27 can't turn off Fairway onto Morgan (here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/3bVEwmvL294hvxiu8) due to how tight it is. It goes down King and then turns down Morgan. Cutting that detour off can shorten each route by at least 2-3 minutes. That's good for commuters.

I'm sure it is challenging to drive a 50 foot vehicle on our roads. Fortunately our buses are under 40 feet long.

I don't happen to think clipping a curb is a big deal (hell, all our intersections should be raised crosswalks), but a big part of this is the lack of planning around transit routes.


RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 01-28-2022

(01-28-2022, 03:23 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: I'm not sure what the benefit is, since there's also a significant logistics cost of managing multiple sizes of bus.

This reminds me of some loon who was active during the LRT debate who thought an overhaul of the bus system would be more effective. Now as a general statement that could be true (although isn’t as far as I can tell), but this person’s proposal involved (I kid you not) 5 different sizes of buses on a huge number of routes. As far as I can tell they seemed to think that the primary predictor of bus operating costs is the volume of air in the bus not displaced by people.


RE: Grand River Transit - trainspotter139 - 01-29-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:10 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 04:01 PM)ac3r Wrote: Makes sense to me. Some routes don't need full sized buses, particularly the 27. At most that route gets 5 passengers...but usually no more than 3 per bus. Such routes also do indeed have to make awkward turns - often driving over curbs which destroys the suspension as well as forces buses (including the 27) to add time on a route so they can take streets that offer more turning radius. I think it's useful.

Again, sizing a route to the number of passengers is of no value unless it costs significantly less to operate the smaller buses which I don't think it does.  3 passengers don't care if they are on a smaller bus or not.

As for tighter turns, I have no idea where that is, our region and cities have spent 60 years eliminating turns that a 45 foot bus can't navigate, but I suppose there might be a few that haven't been enlarged yet.

Some of the discussion had around this size of bus involve the conversion of BusPlus routes to using this size of bus to alleviate some accessibility concerns while also improving the capacity of the routes as some are quite popular.


RE: Grand River Transit - Bytor - 01-29-2022

(01-28-2022, 04:01 PM)ac3r Wrote:
(01-28-2022, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote: I don't recall hearing about this, but midsize buses have been added to the fleet. They'll first appear on the Chicopee route.

https://twitter.com/GRT_ROW/status/1487068948017266690

Makes sense to me. Some routes don't need full sized buses, particularly the 27. At most that route gets 5 passengers...but usually no more than 3 per bus. Such routes also do indeed have to make awkward turns - often driving over curbs which destroys the suspension as well as forces buses (including the 27) to add time on a route so they can take streets that offer more turning radius. I think it's useful.

In Fall 2020 the 27 had  4,500-5,500 boarding per month, or a weekday average boarding of about 190. That's about 11-12 per hours spread across the day or ~47 per hour if only at peak. Just general transit knowledge plus 30 years of experience tells me there's at least 1 SRO bus during each rush hour, perhaps 2.