Grand River Transit

[Pheidippides]

-Why does the proposed 205 deviate to Borden? Just so it connects to another ion station? It already connects at Mill station; once connected to Ion it is probably easier and faster to take the Ion between stations than the bus anyway. Keeping the 205 on Ottawa will mean fewer turns/faster service/shorter route time. Then you can move the borden stop to King for connections downtown on 7s; even then shops at Eastwood Square get jumped over left between stops.
-I wonder if the proposed stops at Strasburg and Alpine are too close together. Moving a stop closer to Homer-Watson would serve industrial area/Family Centre/F&CS; although I guess if you are continuing on to the Hanson area it does not really matter if you waiting for the new 22 at alpine or homer-Watson
-As i said before i think new UW transit plaza is going to introduce bus delays/schedule adherence with an Ion train crossing every few minutes. Buses will also block the laurel trail while waiting to turn or cross the ion tracks.
-the new 92 seems to be only serving UW/WLU students not the greater community; the only valuable part of that new loop is the section, Columbia-weber-university. The 92 seems redundant with increased frequencies and re-routing of other routes
-i am not not sure about the 8 going via traynor, although with the reduced walkability I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
-what are the ixpress symbols along route seven of the 2018 map supposed to represent?

-someone who edits Google maps please make the parking lot of the Aud something other than green space

[timc]

Wondering if the 12/18, 9/19 will cause confusion for folks, making them think there are transfers/layovers.

The diagram says that 12/18 are interlined. I'm not sure about 9/19.

[MidTowner]

Curious if the new 28 makes Midtown(ers) happier.

No. I’m not really sure what that loop is supposed to do for whom. Better would be if the 4 was a crosstown, continuing along Union and Margaret as now and then continuing east on Guelph to Lancaster or beyond. I admit I’m not sure what would be the best way to serve Belmont Ave in that case, though.

[Markster]

Yes it will, but I can understand why it would be improper to claim that it stopped "at the hub"...I'm pretty sure that is what the main use of the connected circles icon used on subway maps is for.

By that measure, I believe no city buses are planned to stop "at the hub". And neither is LRT. The 204 and the LRT will each have one on-street stop directly in front of the Hub, and one on-street stop across the street from the Hub. The transfer will be shorter than some transfers at Charles St Terminal are. The internal bus bay at the hub is intended for intercity buses.

If the 205 stayed on Ottawa St, then the transfer at Charles to the Borden LRT stop would definitely call for one of those "connected circles".

[Markster]

My comments:

• Overhaul the 202 stops on University Ave between Westmount and Weber.
  • Add King (connection to 7)
    
  • Add Laurel Trail (connection to ION) (Add stop for 12/18, 29, 92 as well)
    
  • Revisit Hazel/Philip vs. Albert
    
• 9 should stay on Hazel, as that is where the ridership is, now that the top end of the route has been split into the 19
  
• 205 Ottawa should stay on Ottawa. I've already written about that here: http://www.tritag.ca/blog/2012/05/18/ott...alignment/ (though... I'm not sure this is entirely a dealbreaker for me.)
  
• I like the removal of the 8/12 duplication on University Ave. Given they were always scheduled within minutes of each other it represented a lot of wasted capacity.
  
• Yay for a Weber-ish bus! Still, my goal for that one is to have it end at Northfield Station in the north.
  

[DHLawrence]

For an express bus, the 203 certainly goes the long way around. They'd almost be better off running the 201 extension to Sportsworld and starting the 203 there.

[tomh009]

Curious if the new 28 makes Midtown(ers) happier.

No. I’m not really sure what that loop is supposed to do for whom. Better would be if the 4 was a crosstown, continuing along Union and Margaret as now and then continuing east on Guelph to Lancaster or beyond. I admit I’m not sure what would be the best way to serve Belmont Ave in that case, though.

Why would Midtowners prefer to take the bus to Lancaster, rather than connecting with the LRT?

[BuildingScout]

-the new 92 seems to be only serving UW/WLU students not the greater community; the only valuable part of that new loop is the section, Columbia-weber-university. The 92 seems redundant with increased frequencies and re-routing of other routes

My guess is that the 92 will be one of the highest usage routes in the entire system. All routes tend to serve the local  community only, i.e. those who live/work along them. So your comment seems to single out students for no good reason, I'm sorry to say.

[BuildingScout]

No branching 7s!

If I remember correctly this was the original intention with the 92 all along. I guess with the introduction of the ION they felt they could finally kibosh the UW routes.

[YKF]

My thoughts on the proposed 2018 service changes:

Route 9: leave the route on Hazel, considering it has the residential density to support the service, vs the employment uses along Albert, north of Columbia.

Route 12: Good on GRT for eliminating the segment east of King St. Not exactly sure how the interlining will work with the 18 (does the bus turn into the 18 once it gets to Philip? King St would make more sense for an interlining location, IMO. Also, I'm a bit worried about removing the local service along Block Line Road and shifting it to Bleams. Block Line has better coverage of residential neighbourhoods.

Route 2: Seems like this route, as a whole is try to do everything by itself. I'd like to see the 23 take over the Franklin Rd/Wilson Ave component and have the 2 terminate at Stanley Park Mall.

Route 22: This route seems geared entirely to captive riders. I'm not a fan of the circuitous loop design proposed by GRT.

I'm still trying to digest all of the proposed changes. I think it looks good overall, I'd just like GRT to re-examine southwest Kitchener, particularly routes 3, 22 and 16.


Also, why end the 205 ixpress at Sunrise Centre, when ending it at Windflower Dr or Prosperity Dr (and using the neighbourhood streets as a loop to turn around) would provide service to the residential community west of Sunrise Centre?

[KevinL]

Route 22: This route seems geared entirely to captive riders. I'm not a fan of the circuitous loop design proposed by GRT.

Yup. This is pretty much completely composed of loopy, smaller-road bits of the current 3, 11, 22, and 78, with some minor tweaks and tucks. It's to avoid having too many people lose their accustomed local service during the overhaul.

I'm not against it, for the record; I just hope schedule timing allows easy transfer to the heavier routes (3, 12, 201, 205).

[tomh009]

Also, why end the 205 ixpress at Sunrise Centre, when ending it at Windflower Dr or Prosperity Dr (and using the neighbourhood streets as a loop to turn around) would provide service to the residential community west of Sunrise Centre?

Likely there is a stop available at Sunrise that allows the bus to stand there until the scheduled departure.  This is usually not possible on neighbourhood streets.

[MidTowner]

No. I’m not really sure what that loop is supposed to do for whom. Better would be if the 4 was a crosstown, continuing along Union and Margaret as now and then continuing east on Guelph to Lancaster or beyond. I admit I’m not sure what would be the best way to serve Belmont Ave in that case, though.

Why would Midtowners prefer to take the bus to Lancaster, rather than connecting with the LRT?

The 4 is intended to connect with Ion at Grand River Hospital, so that's their connection with the LRT (or the 6 or the 18, depending on who specifically we're talking about). But, as proposed, the 4 is proposed to terminate there, rather than connecting the Midtown neighbourhoods on either side of King. I don't see the sense: it could be turned into a crosstown route providing connection to Ion at GRH, and also direct connections between those neighbourhoods.

[tomh009]

Why would Midtowners prefer to take the bus to Lancaster, rather than connecting with the LRT?

The 4 is intended to connect with Ion at Grand River Hospital, so that's their connection with the LRT (or the 6 or the 18, depending on who specifically we're talking about). But, as proposed, the 4 is proposed to terminate there, rather than connecting the Midtown neighbourhoods on either side of King. I don't see the sense: it could be turned into a crosstown route providing connection to Ion at GRH, and also direct connections between those neighbourhoods.

So it is still useful, then?  But it would be better if it connected across to the other side King St?  Do I understand your post correctly?

[DKsan]

A question:

Can buses fit on the embedded ION right-of-way?

I know we probably don't want them to, but could, say, the Ottawa iXpress split at Borden/Ottawa, and use the ION stops?