Jump to content

Grand River Transit


Recommended Posts

It might be becuse there express routes im not totally sure I will ask my contacts

No, it's because we have clowns running GRT.

I mean, take a look at the new 203 iXpress. It's not iXpress. It stops just as many times on Franklin Blvd as the existing 53 and 71, has limited weekday service, and doesn't even operate on weekends.

203 iXpress? Haha, more like 203 iStopAtEveryIntersectionAndCantEvenServeLateNightIndustrialShiftsCorrectly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's because we have clowns running GRT.

I mean, take a look at the new 203 iXpress. It's not iXpress. It stops just as many times on Franklin Blvd as the existing 53 and 71, has limited weekday service, and doesn't even operate on weekends.

203 iXpress? Haha, more like 203 iStopAtEveryIntersectionAndCantEvenServeLateNightIndustrialShiftsCorrectly.

download.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's because we have clowns running GRT.

I do my fair share of complaining about what GRT does and doesn't do, and there's a lot of reasonable criticism of the 203 and the iXpress branding.

But "GRT can't do anything right" as explanation is tired, useless, and counterproductive. It is also wrong, because there is plenty that GRT has done well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is, if this is just a replacement route for the old 53, why bother with the ixpress designation at all? It's clearly a normal-ish route. Driving up Franklin, looking at all the replacement stops, it might as well be given a number in the 70s. Does anyone know about the decision making process behind all this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is, if this is just a replacement route for the old 53, why bother with the ixpress designation at all? It's clearly a normal-ish route. Driving up Franklin, looking at all the replacement stops, it might as well be given a number in the 70s. Does anyone know about the decision making process behind all this?

This is the "mid-region express" that was slated for a few years from now, but which was pushed up using the transit-supportive $1m/year for Cambridge that was part of the phased LRT approval. Apparently the models show a strong unmet demand for travel between Conestoga College and Hespeler, and that's a big part of what the route will do, in addition to connecting up all the Maple Grove industrial employment and giving central Hespeler better connectivity to the transit network in general (without transfers / layovers at the Hespeler Terminal).

I have no idea why they gave it ridiculous stop spacing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...