Welcome Guest!
In 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:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 4.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Grand River Transit
As someone who is often the beneficiary of the currently over-generous transfers and operators (last week, I got to get off the bus, attend a 60 minute meeting that was held just off my route, and then get back on the bus to carry on without another fare- that's not what the transfer is "supposed" to allow you to do), I have to agree that the current practice isn't ideal.

You're not meant to be able to conduct round-trips with a transfer. The longest routes in the system aren't more than 90 minutes long. If you took a bus to Ainslie from Conestoga Mall, you'd still be able to use a transfer to get on a Cambridge local to your final destination. Ninety minutes (or perhaps a tiny bit more, given what riders are accustomed to now) should be enough.
Reply


Agreed. In addition to the loss of revenue, it makes ridership numbers look lower as that return trip is not counted as a new passenger.
Reply
(07-31-2017, 07:23 AM)MidTowner Wrote: As someone who is often the beneficiary of the currently over-generous transfers and operators (last week, I got to get off the bus, attend a 60 minute meeting that was held just off my route, and then get back on the bus to carry on without another fare- that's not what the transfer is "supposed" to allow you to do), I have to agree that the current practice isn't ideal.

You're not meant to be able to conduct round-trips with a transfer. The longest routes in the system aren't more than 90 minutes long. If you took a bus to Ainslie from Conestoga Mall, you'd still be able to use a transfer to get on a Cambridge local to your final destination. Ninety minutes (or perhaps a tiny bit more, given what riders are accustomed to now) should be enough.

Says who? One of the advertised benefits of the timed transfer, at least in some place, is precisely that one can do a number of small trips on one fare. Also it’s just sensible — in Toronto you have the ridiculous situation where technically I’m in violation if I pop into the corner store at my transfer point.

My point is that right now the transfer is de facto closer to a 2 hour transfer already, so let’s stick to that number. Or maybe advertise 90 but make it actually be 105. I don’t know exactly. For sure making the new ones 90 is, de facto, a reduction in transfer time. Although arguably 99 is not, if the operators adjust their existing transfers every 15 minutes and stick to the exactly 90 minutes. Except they don’t.

Here’s another idea: stick to the strict 90 or 99 minutes, but ease up on the fare increases for a few years.
Reply
(07-31-2017, 07:23 AM)MidTowner Wrote: The longest routes in the system aren't more than 90 minutes long. If you took a bus to Ainslie from Conestoga Mall, you'd still be able to use a transfer to get on a Cambridge local to your final destination. Ninety minutes (or perhaps a tiny bit more, given what riders are accustomed to now) should be enough.

What if you were going to Ainslie from Elmira? That would in fact be further than from Conestoga Mall by 20-30 minutes. Should anyone taking such a routing have to pay for two fares on a one-way trip?
Reply
(07-31-2017, 08:52 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: Says who? One of the advertised benefits of the timed transfer, at least in some place, is precisely that one can do a number of small trips on one fare. Also it’s just sensible — in Toronto you have the ridiculous situation where technically I’m in violation if I pop into the corner store at my transfer point.

My point is that right now the transfer is de facto closer to a 2 hour transfer already, so let’s stick to that number. Or maybe advertise 90 but make it actually be 105. I don’t know exactly. For sure making the new ones 90 is, de facto, a reduction in transfer time. Although arguably 99 is not, if the operators adjust their existing transfers every 15 minutes and stick to the exactly 90 minutes. Except they don’t.

Here’s another idea: stick to the strict 90 or 99 minutes, but ease up on the fare increases for a few years.

This is exactly my impression, and in fact, usually the way I use transfers.  The way I see it, is you bought 90 (or 120 minutes) of access onto the transit system, similar to booking a car share or car rental.  

Toronto's transfer situation is ridiculous.  I don't know why the TTC has made things so difficult for people.

I was surprised that there are routes where you would need two fares to take.  But man, that 200 route takes a long time end to end.
Reply
I stand corrected, Elmira Guy! I forgot about the services to the townships (sorry), so it's true that it does take longer than 90 minutes to get across the system.

Toronto's transfer system is too much, but it doesn't seem to me that the way I currently use transfers makes a lot of sense, either. Should I really be able to go do an errand, and come home on the same fare?

It's what everyone is used to, though, so I agree that there's no reason to impose a 90-minute hard deadline. The situation right now is too generous, though: I've had drivers rip me transfers of over two hours.
Reply
(07-31-2017, 08:52 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: Says who? One of the advertised benefits of the timed transfer, at least in some place, is precisely that one can do a number of small trips on one fare. Also it’s just sensible — in Toronto you have the ridiculous situation where technically I’m in violation if I pop into the corner store at my transfer point.

A transfer is just that - a transfer.

Using it to stop and doddle and do all your errands and get a free ride home is unethical and totally against the concept of the system.
Reply


Only if you let its name inform its purpose. If you look at it as a 'ticket for unfettered travel, 90 minute limit' then it works fine. We only still call it a 'transfer' because we always have.

Note: when these start getting printed at LRT platforms, the name 'transfer' will be less accurate and 'ticket' will, I think, become the norm.
Reply
Although I agree that a transfer exists in order to facilitate a connection, let's be reasonable. What you call a "doddle" might be someone spending money at a business, or attending a meeting, or paying a quick visit to someone.

There are other conceptions of what a transfer is that are valid, too, even if I don't generally agree with them. It's not "unethical" to use a transfer with time left on it that you received for paying a fare.
Reply
For many in the system, it is indeed a transfer from one route to another to aid in a single destination trip.

But we want transit to accommodate different lifestyles. How ridiculous would it be for a parent to pay one fare in the morning to get from home to a child's daycare drop-off, a second fare to get from that daycare to a school drop-off, a third fare to get from the school drop-off to a prescription pick-up or drop-off at a pharmacy, and a fourth fare to get from there to work. That entire journey could very easily play out on a route starting at Cedar in Kitchener and ending at WLU in Waterloo, four fares for that journey, but only one fare for someone going from Elmira to Ainslie. That very quickly disqualifies transit from being a practical use, and is against the idea that at least I hold, that transit should enable people to not need to own or use a car.
Reply
It would be "unethical" for GRT to charge $3.25 for someone taking a 5 minute bus ride and *not* let them turn around and use that ticket for their return trip.

Back in the olden times when the 7 and 200 stopped in Uptown Waterloo, I would regularly get off my iXpress from work, do my shopping at ValuMart, and get on a 7 to take my groceries home. When that stopped being an option, I switched to getting grocery deliveries from WalMart. The economy benefits when you allow brief stops - I know there are plenty of times I've been on a streetcar in Toronto and seen an interesting shop that I'd never disembark to check out because of the strict transfer requirement. Unfortunately what's good for the city economy isn't necessarily good for the bottom line of the transit agency.
Reply
With the ticket machines on the ION platforms, I wonder if some people will wait until the last minute before the train arrives to pay their fare Smile

Hopefully the process will be pretty quick (particularly if you have an EasyGo card).
Reply
For your fare, you get one entry to the system. One use. One ride. Period. Anything beyond that is abuse of the system and is stealing, in my mind.

...UNLESS they say your fare is good for "90 minutes of system use", then sure, I could agree with you.

I got my wrist slapped in Kobe for riding the Portliner in a circle. The faregate wouldn't let me exit when I tried to tap my Suica out at the same station I entered at for my ~40 minute ride. I had to go to the counter and she got all apologetic (Japan!), and then charged me an additional fare (ie, round trip). I smiled. Smile
Reply


(07-31-2017, 09:43 AM)Canard Wrote:
(07-31-2017, 08:52 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: Says who? One of the advertised benefits of the timed transfer, at least in some place, is precisely that one can do a number of small trips on one fare. Also it’s just sensible — in Toronto you have the ridiculous situation where technically I’m in violation if I pop into the corner store at my transfer point.

A transfer is just that - a transfer.

Using it to stop and doddle and do all your errands and get a free ride home is unethical and totally against the concept of the system.

That would be what we are discussing. In at least some jurisdictions, a fare is good for unlimited travel for 90 or 120 or whatever minutes, and part of the purpose of that is precisely and explicitly to allow short round or multi-stage trips to be taken on one fare. I took a quick look around the GRT site just now and while it doesn’t explicitly give this as a feature of the system, it also says absolutely nothing about which trips are legitimate and which are not. So it may be against your concept of the system, but I have not found any evidence that it is against GRT’s concept. I would be interested if you were able to find any.

Also it’s inappropriate to characterize other people’s travel needs as “doddle”.

I should expand a bit on what I said about Toronto: I have heard rumours of drivers denying transfers because they see people come out of a store at the bus stop, when the people were just using the store as a place out of the rain. In other words they didn’t even stop over; they just waited at a convenient place immediately next to the bus stop. I for one would refuse to de-board in such a situation. If the driver really wants to call the transit police I’d be happy to explain the situation to them.
Reply
(07-31-2017, 10:43 AM)Canard Wrote: For your fare, you get one entry to the system. One use. Period. Anything beyond that is abuse of the system and is stealing, in my mind.

Only if that is your system's fare policy, which on GRT has not been the case for some time. Many other GTA systems are the same.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 15 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