Welcome Guest!
WIn order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Grand River Transit
GRT has confirmed that once fall service starts September 4, the #7 will run on King Street and the 200 iXpress on Park Street (stops at Park/Green and Uptown Waterloo). Apparently both buses can't run on King St because there isn't enough room for the 200 to pass the 7. http://www.grt.ca/Modules/News/index.asp...37cb4c997b
Reply
My reaction when I read that was a four-letter word I wouldn't use here. I feel like riders in Midtown have been jerked around a lot- for a while, the 200 was stopping on Union, with no stops between Weber and Victoria and King and Union. Then, it was stopping at Weber and Guelph to replace service at that stop when the 4 was detoured (though the two routes have significantly different service). When a number of people complained, service was restored (since the winter) to Weber and Guelph.

Now, service is being shifted 1.5 kilometres west to Park. Plenty of 200 users who live near Weber will not be served by that. I understand the desire to serve the hospital with the 200, but I'm not sure of the logic of moving the 7 a few hundred metres east from Park to King, and the 200 fifteen hundred metres west to Park. Why not leave the 7 on Park, and have the 200 use King? It would build some ridership for Ion, and be minimally disruptive to people who have come to rely on the current detours.
Reply
(07-28-2017, 09:34 AM)goggolor Wrote: GRT has confirmed that once fall service starts September 4, the #7 will run on King Street and the 200 iXpress on Park Street (stops at Park/Green and Uptown Waterloo). Apparently both buses can't run on King St because there isn't enough room for the 200 to pass the 7. http://www.grt.ca/Modules/News/index.asp...37cb4c997b

I’d be more worried about there not being space on Park St. for the 200 to pass all the general traffic, in particular near Glasgow but elsewhere as well.

Anyway, is there any valid reason why the 200 can’t use the LRT right of way?
Reply
Keep in mind that the ideal state is both routes using King St.

The 200 was never intended to serve people who live near Weber.  The Weber/Guelph stop was always an interim measure that GRT was loathe to introduce because they feared (perhaps rightly) that people would grow to expect it to last in perpetuity.

Route 7's absence from King St has been a pain point for a lot of Midtown residents for a long time, and they are better served by the 7 than the 200.
With the 7 off of Park St, I suspect that Park St is a faster route for the 200 than Weber, so that's why the 200 would be moving there. [EDIT] wow huh. Both routes are exactly 4km. Speed is probably a wash.

I just think it's a shame that they can't use the transit reserved lanes on King St to run both buses back where they belong.
Reply
"Route 7's absence from King St has been a pain point for a lot of Midtown residents for a long time, and they are better served by the 7 than the 200."

This is true. An area that had phenomenal transit service in the form of the 7 and 200 suddenly had very poor service, but the impact was more from the 7's disappearance than the 200's.

Weber would certainly be the faster route over Park for the 200. Park will at some hours of the day be slow (Weber never is).

I have to retract my comment about using the 200 to build ridership patterns to support Ion. I do believe that (give people making residential and other decisions the option to use transit now, before Ion is running), but it was a pretty silly thing to say in this context. Park and Green is extremely close to the GRH station, so if King is really out of the question, that's a great place for the 200 to stop. I would say it should stop at Allen, too.
Reply
I think a simple answer would be that the 7 stops at different spots near the hospital, and picks up people at a shorter stop spacing along its length. In combination, this allows for the infirm to more easily get from home to the hospital. If you move the 7 to Weber, there would only be one hospital stop (on the 200), increasing their walk at GRH, and either they have to walk to the closest 200 stop at home (increasing their walk), or they need to transfer between the 7 and the 200 (increasing their trip time from the current 7-only situation, and possibly their walk, though most of the logical transfer points wouldn't add much/any aside from an extra on/off of the bus).
Reply
From GRT's perspective, they're doing their best to restore pre-construction conditions, namely the 7 serving frequent stops on King and the 200 serving an anchor stop at the hospital. This move restores that.

As much as I'd like to see the 200 skip traffic in the LRT lane, I imagine GrandLInq would have far too many issues with that proposal for it to work.
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply
(07-28-2017, 12:42 PM)KevinL Wrote: From GRT's perspective, they're doing their best to restore pre-construction conditions, namely the 7 serving frequent stops on King and the 200 serving an anchor stop at the hospital. This move restores that.

As much as I'd like to see the 200 skip traffic in the LRT lane, I imagine GrandLInq would have far too many issues with that proposal for it to work.

You’re probably right, except that we were promised that emergency services could use the LRT lanes. If that is OK, then it should be OK for a bus to use them, especially temporarily and especially when there are no LRVs running.
Reply
(07-28-2017, 05:34 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(07-28-2017, 12:42 PM)KevinL Wrote: From GRT's perspective, they're doing their best to restore pre-construction conditions, namely the 7 serving frequent stops on King and the 200 serving an anchor stop at the hospital. This move restores that.

As much as I'd like to see the 200 skip traffic in the LRT lane, I imagine GrandLInq would have far too many issues with that proposal for it to work.

You’re probably right, except that we were promised that emergency services could use the LRT lanes. If that is OK, then it should be OK for a bus to use them, especially temporarily and especially when there are no LRVs running.

These are not even remotely similar:

The bus, which has no direct connection with the LRT ops center, will be using the LRT right of way every 4-20 minutes (two ways remember) for a significant distance along the right of way, while Grandlinq is trying to complete the route so crews will be working in the right of way, and then they will be testing LRT trains in the right of way.

Is completely different from an ambulance occasionally using the LRT right of way during operations of the LRT when the right of way is cleared of Grandlinq contractors and other personnel, for a short distance to bypass traffic, when they have a direct communications with the ops center to gain clearance.

And by September, Grandlinq should be testing trains.
Reply
8 is still going to be running on Weber, is it not? Does that not also server Midtown residents living near Weber?
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links