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 - goggolor - 10-06-2016 A surprisingly positive article on the GRT in The Record today (and thankfully, no comments section - has The Record finally dumped comments?): http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/6897259-d-amato-like-a-bright-daffodil-new-bus-stop-emerges-from-king-street-chaos/ The interesting part is at the end, where the writer mentions the new GRT signs on King Street, but says "I'm told that it's there as a marker, and not to expect buses to come back to that part of King Street until next summer". RE: Grand River Transit - nms - 10-07-2016 (10-04-2016, 04:36 PM)KevinL Wrote: This just popped up on Twitter - not sure how the user got it, as I can't find an official source. This was featured in the most recent quarterly (?) Region of Waterloo publication that was distributed to households last week. Our comes with the Record or via Canada Post flyers. There is likely an online version somewhere. RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 10-07-2016 I stumbled across this timelapse video today of the #200 iXpress route as of September 2014. It is good to remember how far much has changed. There are also videos of the 201 and 35 by the same user. RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 10-07-2016 (10-07-2016, 01:51 PM)nms Wrote: This was featured in the most recent quarterly (?) Region of Waterloo publication that was distributed to households last week. Our comes with the Record or via Canada Post flyers. There is likely an online version somewhere. Indeed, I spotted it in my 'Region News' yesterday! RE: Grand River Transit - MacBerry - 10-10-2016 (10-04-2016, 05:27 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: 204 bus shelter spotted in progress at Queen and Homewood: Could this be a "baby LRT station" being cultivated for transplanting in the future? Naw JK RE: Grand River Transit - MidTowner - 10-11-2016 (10-06-2016, 12:56 PM)goggolor Wrote: A surprisingly positive article on the GRT in The Record today (and thankfully, no comments section - has The Record finally dumped comments?): http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/6897259-d-amato-like-a-bright-daffodil-new-bus-stop-emerges-from-king-street-chaos/ I read until the end because you said it was positive, and that was surprising after a few of the first lines were "I enjoy travelling on the bus. Yes, it's slower than taking a car, which can be frustrating. With the construction creating so many detours, there are times when it's actually faster to walk. And in the winter it is very unpleasant to wait in the cold." It's nice that Ms. D'Amato can tolerate taking GRT on a beautiful autumn day, though. I'm glad she doesn't have to all of the time. RE: Grand River Transit - KevinL - 10-14-2016 Reminder: Today is the last day to provide comment on the 2017-2021 Business Plan, if you haven't already. RE: Grand River Transit - yige_t - 10-20-2016 With the Franklin Blvd construction winding down and new sidewalks in place, 203 iXpress stops at Stafford, Raglin and Lindsay will be removed to speed up service. There will also be new stops along Maple Grove at Fountain EB and Boxwood. http://www.grt.ca/en/routesSchedules/resources/Route-203-Stop-Notice.pdf RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 10-20-2016 Story in The Record today about GRT revenues being down $2 million. Between ION construction detours and delays, as well as continued above-inflation price increases, this isn't surprising. Wouldn't be surprised, either, to hear people calling for reductions to schedules, or slowing of investment plans. RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 10-20-2016 As long as the region doesn't kowtow to such demands we'll be fine. RE: Grand River Transit - Viewfromthe42 - 10-20-2016 They've already kowtowed to the all-property-tax-increases-must-be-below-inflation but GRT-increases-must-all-be-multiples-of-inflation, so... RE: Grand River Transit - chutten - 10-20-2016
So I'm having a conversation with GRT on Twitter that started with my now-bog-standard complaint report of a bus zooming past a stop ahead (-2min) of schedule. Half kvetch (to make me feel better) and half data transfer (so GRT knows it happened and that it mattered to some random rider). The GRT Twitter folk get back to me to get correct details (I flubbed the stop # in the original report. Good on 'em for catching that) and then say that the "Best practice is to arrive at the stop 5 mins before the departure time" to avoid this happening again. Usually I commute by bicycle, so I'm familiar with victim-blaming. Blaming a passenger for a bus leaving a stop early is a bit new. They're asking to follow-up in a method that isn't quite as hostile to nuance as Twitter is. We'll see how this goes. (( and this is the service level from which they want to _cut_? What's even be left? )) RE: Grand River Transit - MidTowner - 10-20-2016 I thought they said three minutes, not five. Isn't a bus that reaches a stop two minutes early considered "on time" for GRT's purpose? This is an annoyance, obviously, having to arrive for a bus two (or particularly five) minutes early, especially as the bus itself may well arrive after its scheduled time. But 100% schedule adherence is impossible. Another problem that frequency goes a long way toward solving... RE: Grand River Transit - isUsername - 10-20-2016 (10-20-2016, 02:20 PM)chutten Wrote: So I'm having a conversation with GRT on Twitter that started with my now-bog-standard complaint report of a bus zooming past a stop ahead (-2min) of schedule. Half kvetch (to make me feel better) and half data transfer (so GRT knows it happened and that it mattered to some random rider). I had a similar conversation a few years ago. I asserted that with the introduction of real-time tracking and the driver having the schedule adherence in front of them in real-time, 5 minutes was unreasonable, especially if they're trying to attract choice riders. I was regularly taking the 8 at the time, and it was often 5-10 minutes late. Expecting people to wait 15 minutes for a bus was a surefire way to keep people in their cars. With GRT moving to a grid system, that'll increase the number of transfers. Soon people will spend half their time waiting for the bus than what they actually spend on the bus. RE: Grand River Transit - MidTowner - 10-20-2016 (10-20-2016, 03:00 PM)MidTowner Wrote: I thought they said three minutes, not five. Isn't a bus that reaches a stop two minutes early considered "on time" for GRT's purpose? Now I have to kvetch a little: a few minutes after I wrote this, I went to catch the 200, and it passed by before I made it to the stop, about three minutes early. But, because it's ten minute frequency, I only had to wait in the rain thirteen minutes, not eighteen...or thirty-three. |