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) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
|
RE: Grand River Transit - dunkalunk - 07-29-2017 There will be a Weber Street Route; 18, running from University to Fairway which will supplant the current ixpress. Unfortunately, this roots and many other improvements to the core network are tied to the opening of ION, which at this point I'd wager will be September next year . RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 07-29-2017 (07-28-2017, 05:51 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(07-28-2017, 05:34 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: 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. I guess that answers my question in the affirmative. Depending on the nature and duration of commissioning activities, I agree that running bus service on those lanes might be impractical. However, I do have a couple of contrary thoughts as well: 1) There is no reason why the buses should be unable to communicate with LRT control. Buses and LRT are part of the same system so they should all be able to communicate together. 2) If the LRT had street-running segments, commissioning activities would have to minimize periods of unavailability of the street-running segments for other traffic. Using the LRT lanes as bus lanes is essentially using them as street-running segments, but with much less other traffic and with all other traffic in communication with transit control. 3) Although my original idea was that the 200 would simply run in the LRT lanes, except right at GRT to reach the bus stop (since buses don’t have left-side doors to use the LRT platform), an alternate idea would be for them to use the LRT for one block at a time when needed to pass congestion, whether it is general traffic or a 7 bus. This could be coordinated with commissioning activities by contacting LRT control by radio. So I’m not convinced it’s definitely impossible, but I would have to know more about what is involved in remaining work on the LRT system to be able to really figure it out. RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 07-29-2017 @ijmorlan You make good points. I too think it is possible. I was perhaps too abrupt I just thought it was very oversimplified to say it was equivalent to running ems and fire vehicles on the rapidway. The real question though is what are the benefits. If they only want to stop at GRH then unless King was substantially faster (which, with the lights and without priority I doubt it) then what does it buy you. Perhaps the public perception that the transit lanes are in use even now although on the flip side the impression that buses would have been fine. Either way, I don't think it's worth the effort even if I kind of fancy the idea. RE: Grand River Transit - Elmira Guy - 07-30-2017 Just looking at the EasyGO fare card information site, and after seeing this, it made me wonder; "A 90-minute transfer is automatically loaded on your card when you pay your fare. If you transfer to another bus within 90 minutes, the farebox will read your transfer." Currently you can use multiple buses within the 90 minutes allotted to the transfer. Will this continue to be the case with the incoming fare card? I find the above info a little ambiguous. RE: Grand River Transit - mpd618 - 07-30-2017 (07-30-2017, 12:04 AM)Elmira Guy Wrote: Currently you can use multiple buses within the 90 minutes allotted to the transfer. Will this continue to be the case with the incoming fare card? I find the above info a little ambiguous. It should still be a 90-minute timed transfer, regardless of the number of buses. RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 07-30-2017 (07-30-2017, 12:04 AM)Elmira Guy Wrote: Just looking at the EasyGO fare card information site, and after seeing this, it made me wonder; That's exactly what they're saying, it's just the language isn't so clear. In essence: -When you first tap in, the fare is deducted from your card; at the same time, a 'transfer' condition is set with a 90-minute limit. -Next time you tap, that 'transfer' condition will be read if it is still present, and no fare will be deducted. RE: Grand River Transit - Canard - 07-30-2017 So you can transfer as much as you like, so long as your last transfer occurs 89 minutes and 59 seconds from the initial tap? Ie, your total journey time on one fare is 89m59s+Last Ride Time? RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 07-30-2017 (07-30-2017, 09:58 AM)Canard Wrote: So you can transfer as much as you like, so long as your last transfer occurs 89 minutes and 59 seconds from the initial tap? Ie, your total journey time on one fare is 89m59s+Last Ride Time? Correct. That's how it's worked for years with the paper transfers, for the record; this just takes the human operator out of the equation. RE: Grand River Transit - Elmira Guy - 07-30-2017 Cheers KevinL and mpd618. I assumed this would be the case but wanted some confirmation. I also hope that the fare cards are readily available at more places than the two terminals (I know they said some PR crew will also be handing them out). I'm looking forward to this system being launched. RE: Grand River Transit - timio - 07-30-2017 The only bad part about transfers being built into the card is the lack of being able to score extra time on the transfer based on when the operator updates the sharp edge. But as an occasional rider, I'm looking forward to not having to trudge over to the store to buy tickets. RE: Grand River Transit - chutten - 07-30-2017 FWIW, the printed transfers from the new machines are giving us 99 minute transfers instead of 90. So I guess we get a few extra minutes without the generosity of operators? :) RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 07-30-2017 (07-30-2017, 09:12 PM)chutten Wrote: FWIW, the printed transfers from the new machines are giving us 99 minute transfers instead of 90. So I guess we get a few extra minutes without the generosity of operators? Or most likely, you get even more generosity, at least with paper transfers with a printed time. RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 07-31-2017 (07-30-2017, 10:15 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(07-30-2017, 09:12 PM)chutten Wrote: FWIW, the printed transfers from the new machines are giving us 99 minute transfers instead of 90. So I guess we get a few extra minutes without the generosity of operators? I figure they should change the official number from 90 to 120 (2 hours) in order to match up better with actual existing practice. There is no reason to be stingy with the transfer period. RE: Grand River Transit - Canard - 07-31-2017 (07-31-2017, 06:45 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: I figure they should change the official number from 90 to 120 (2 hours) in order to match up better with actual existing practice. There is no reason to be stingy with the transfer period. Of course there is. It opens it up to abuse and it's a loss of revenue. Is anyone's route between two points actually 2h+Last Trip Time? If yes, then absolutely it needs to be adjusted (and that's absolutely horrible). RE: Grand River Transit - timio - 07-31-2017 (07-31-2017, 07:04 AM)Canard Wrote:(07-31-2017, 06:45 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: I figure they should change the official number from 90 to 120 (2 hours) in order to match up better with actual existing practice. There is no reason to be stingy with the transfer period. This is the current struggle with Toronto as they fade out the "trial" 2-hour transfer on St. Clair instead of expanding it to all routes. Rather than having a straight forward system, they've decided to leave transfer rules as is, make Presto accommodate their transfer rules (which aren't very straight-forward at times), and not lose the $20 million in revenue per year that having a timed transfer system wide would cost them, despite the heaps of good will it would give them from travellers. |