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 - danbrotherston - 06-01-2017

(06-01-2017, 04:00 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote: GRT raising fares on July 1:

http://www.grt.ca/en/fares-passes/fares.aspx

*sigh*....another round of well above inflation increases.  

Don't they usually have a big council meeting on this?


RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 06-01-2017

I would support a 100% fare reduction. Radical, I know. It would add an average of $250/household to the property tax bill, but people would ride transit for free. Dramatically increase ridership, and thus reduce pressure on regional (and city) road capacity.

Would any politician dare to propose this?


RE: Grand River Transit - timc - 06-01-2017

I don't understand how free transit would work. Wouldn't the buses be horribly overcrowded?


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 06-01-2017

(06-01-2017, 05:24 PM)timc Wrote: I don't understand how free transit would work. Wouldn't the buses be horribly overcrowded?

That just means services could be expanded.

I don't actually agree with free transit though.  It should be subsidized heavily for low income individuals, however, the real question with respect to transit is how best to spend money.

If you took that same 250 dollar per household tax bill and instead invested it in enhanced service rather than free transit, would that gain more ridership?  There's a good chance it would.

I think it is more important that rates remain stable and tied to inflation than that they be any particular price.  Also, and perhaps more importantly, that driving is *also* priced in some way (easiest way being parking).


RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 06-01-2017

(06-01-2017, 06:13 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: If you took that same 250 dollar per household tax bill and instead invested it in enhanced service rather than free transit, would that gain more ridership? There's a good chance it would.

I do agree that it would gain substantial ridership.  $250 would provide a 50% increase in the regional transit budget; the free-transit-equivalent (see below) $150 would add about 30% to the transit budget.  There doesn't appear to be a lot of appetite for increasing the transit budget, though.  (The free-transit is a whole different beast, and might also be unacceptable.)

NOTE: Free transit would cost about $150/household, not $250.  My apologies for sloppy math in the earlier post.  ($32M passenger revenue vs $54M regional subsidy.

I didn't see any data how these numbers will be impacted by the LRT when it starts operating.


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 06-01-2017

(06-01-2017, 07:18 PM)tomh009 Wrote:
(06-01-2017, 06:13 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: If you took that same 250 dollar per household tax bill and instead invested it in enhanced service rather than free transit, would that gain more ridership? There's a good chance it would.

I do agree that it would gain substantial ridership.  $250 would provide a 50% increase in the regional transit budget; the free-transit-equivalent (see below) $150 would add about 30% to the transit budget.  There doesn't appear to be a lot of appetite for increasing the transit budget, though.  (The free-transit is a whole different beast, and might also be unacceptable.)

NOTE: Free transit would cost about $150/household, not $250.  My apologies for sloppy math in the earlier post.  ($32M passenger revenue vs $54M regional subsidy.

I didn't see any data how these numbers will be impacted by the LRT when it starts operating.

I'm not sure about that, hasn't the transit budget been increasing pretty steadily?  Service hours certainly have.

The real problem I see is there seem to be some individuals who are seeking to reduce the subsidy rate, and have argued for increasing fares to reach that, which of course, doesn't work very well, it only drives away ridership, and disadvantage those who need the system.

I of course would be willing to negotiate my position on this issue in return for similar provisions for roadways paying for themselves. [/snark]


RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 06-01-2017

We need to rethink transportation, and what is free and how other things should be paid for. (Motor) vehicle fees/taxes based on mileage driven would be an excellent start, but they would need to be part of a complete strategy.


RE: Grand River Transit - MidTowner - 06-02-2017

I don't think I'm in favour of free-to-the-user transit. As it is, plenty of people don't have respect for the system and the others using it. On my way home yesterday, an average of about twenty-five people had to be subjected to a couple of gentlemen talking exceedingly loudly, every fourth or fifth word being the 'f' word. I can imagine how much less respect they and similar people would have if their fellow passengers weren't even paying anything for the privilege of riding. (I don't know if my idea that paying for things encourages people to show more respect for them is correct, but I've read things suggesting it is in some cases.)

That having been said, I agree with the statement "We need to rethink transportation, and what is free and how other things should be paid for." Right now, it's free for the user to access the road network, provided you have a car. At the municipal level, the amount you contribute to the upkeep of our roads depends on the value of the property you own- whether you're a light user, heavy user, or otherwise.

I think "stable" rates are indeed important. Transportation is a big part of most people's household budgets- not knowing whether that cost will outpace by a factor of two or three isn't a good situation.


RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 06-02-2017

Spotted some new installations downtown...

[Image: Cfx8sd0.jpg]

[Image: Lz4V4AZ.jpg]

Both are at future bus stops adjacent to LRT stations (next to Frederick and across from Queen on Charles, respectively).


RE: Grand River Transit - andrewhann7 - 06-02-2017

(06-01-2017, 05:24 PM)timc Wrote: I don't understand how free transit would work. Wouldn't the buses be horribly overcrowded?

A few years ago YRT was free for around a month, they saw very little to no increase in ridership during that time


RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 06-02-2017

(06-02-2017, 12:58 PM)andrewhann7 Wrote:
(06-01-2017, 05:24 PM)timc Wrote: I don't understand how free transit would work. Wouldn't the buses be horribly overcrowded?

A few years ago YRT was free for around a month, they saw very little to no increase in ridership during that time

Not many people would change their commuting habits for that period, when you know that you will start paying again in a month or two.


RE: Grand River Transit - isUsername - 06-02-2017

(06-02-2017, 12:58 PM)andrewhann7 Wrote:
(06-01-2017, 05:24 PM)timc Wrote: I don't understand how free transit would work. Wouldn't the buses be horribly overcrowded?

A few years ago YRT was free for around a month, they saw very little to no increase in ridership during that time

It takes way more than a month to change people's transportation habits.


RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 06-02-2017

(06-01-2017, 04:14 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Don't they usually have a big council meeting on this?

They did, it was included in the budget consultations this time around instead of being pulled out for its own. 

The recommendation was 3% increase, but I think council requested staff to show what an increase equal to inflation to the bottom line, but ultimately I think they voted for the 3% increase.

http://calendar.regionofwaterloo.ca/Council/Detail/2017-01-11-Budget-Committee/C12017-0111.1.pdf#page=27


Wasn't that free month in York after a prolonged strike?


RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 06-02-2017

(06-02-2017, 05:41 PM)Pheidippides Wrote:
(06-01-2017, 04:14 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Don't they usually have a big council meeting on this?

They did, it was included in the budget consultations this time around instead of being pulled out for its own. 

The recommendation was 3% increase, but I think council requested staff to show what an increase equal to inflation to the bottom line, but ultimately I think they voted for the 3% increase.

http://calendar.regionofwaterloo.ca/Council/Detail/2017-01-11-Budget-Committee/C12017-0111.1.pdf#page=27


Wasn't that free month in York after a prolonged strike?

3% is misleading, it might work out to a 3% increase in fares overall, but the actual increasing amounts, to adult tickets, and adult passes, what I would guess are GRTs largest fare categories are well over 3% (coming in at 3.8% and 4.9% respectively)....it's rather frustrating, for reference inflation was high at 2.1%.

It's not affordable for me but even the optics frustrate me.  I can only imagine what it does for others.


RE: Grand River Transit - yige_t - 06-03-2017

77 Wilmot pilot project will receive another boost from the Province ($50,000 in grants), which will allow GRT to add four additional trips - two from New Hamburg (0630, 1115) and two from The Boardwalk (1030, 1145).

It is interesting to note that 12% of the ridership comes from a Flex Route stop, most coming from the Forrest/Hinck neighbourhood. Staff is proposing to make this leg part of the regular route.

In addition, new low-floor accessible minibuses will enter service on all BusPlus routes in the coming few days.