Jump to content

York Region Transit \ Viva


YRT-Guy
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, tommike said:

no they not if they not run a e bus all day? then it not real test? it show that e buses cant run ib real bus timed and also all the buses run mostly with anyone im the north.

They're slowly working the busses up in use; operating longer schedules on lengthier routes at a gradual pace.

You also have to consider that they only have 1 charging station available at Newmarket Terminal. The bus schedules have to be timed so they have a chance to recharge when necessary while not holding up the other electric fleet if they need charging. At 6 minutes (correct me if I'm wrong) per bus to charge, it adds up if multiple busses need charging around the same time.

This is all a learning curve for YRT, to quote them:

We are working towards purchasing more electric buses in the future, but this will take time, further testing and research, and budget approvals. The electric bus trial will allow us the opportunity to gain more knowledge and experience on electric bus technology, which will inform research and decisions on the purchase of additional electric buses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think before they decide whether to buy more of those buses they need to work on improving service as it is in the northern part of York Region. Currently the infrequent bus frequencies are frustrating for trying to get to anywhere. To properly run a transit system schedules should be designed so that buses not necessarily connect but at least run on a regular frequency. So buses that run every 10 minutes or better, buses that run every 10 minutes, buses running every 15 minutes, buses every 20 minutes, buses every 30 minutes or hourly. Routes that run on headways of 18 or 34, or 42 makes it really hard to plan a trip. You have a bus running every 36 minutes and you need to connect to a bus that runs every 53 minutes, could mean really long waits between buses. I have long advocated and even talked with planners at YRT about changing schedules to run at better times. Currently there are certain routes that run on very odd frequencies. Part of that is they have tried to push the VIVA buses to run with the bulk of riders, but the problem is feeder buses have such poor frequency. One of the reasons I was told that routes are like that, is because they are trying to serve as many areas as possible but sometimes that means expanding the route without adding buses. For example, the route 1 was extended from Markham-Stouffville hospital to Copper Creek Walmart, and they reduced the frequency instead of adding a bus. Ridership has suffered even before the pandemic because of these infrequent services. I am hoping in the next few years as there is more demand and more GO transit service running through the region that bus service to connect to the trains gets more frequent. I would love to see the implementation of the new VIVA service also as well as extending the Blue to East Gwillimbury. Once those changes happen then hopefully they can start improving the local bus routes. 

Once all that is done then we can talk about potentially buying more electric buses and adding more charging stations. No sense adding charging stations and new buses when they keep making cuts and alienating riders. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, brianc1981 said:

I think before they decide whether to buy more of those buses they need to work on improving service as it is in the northern part of York Region. Currently the infrequent bus frequencies are frustrating for trying to get to anywhere. To properly run a transit system schedules should be designed so that buses not necessarily connect but at least run on a regular frequency. So buses that run every 10 minutes or better, buses that run every 10 minutes, buses running every 15 minutes, buses every 20 minutes, buses every 30 minutes or hourly. Routes that run on headways of 18 or 34, or 42 makes it really hard to plan a trip. You have a bus running every 36 minutes and you need to connect to a bus that runs every 53 minutes, could mean really long waits between buses. I have long advocated and even talked with planners at YRT about changing schedules to run at better times. Currently there are certain routes that run on very odd frequencies. Part of that is they have tried to push the VIVA buses to run with the bulk of riders, but the problem is feeder buses have such poor frequency. One of the reasons I was told that routes are like that, is because they are trying to serve as many areas as possible but sometimes that means expanding the route without adding buses. For example, the route 1 was extended from Markham-Stouffville hospital to Copper Creek Walmart, and they reduced the frequency instead of adding a bus. Ridership has suffered even before the pandemic because of these infrequent services. I am hoping in the next few years as there is more demand and more GO transit service running through the region that bus service to connect to the trains gets more frequent. I would love to see the implementation of the new VIVA service also as well as extending the Blue to East Gwillimbury. Once those changes happen then hopefully they can start improving the local bus routes. 

Once all that is done then we can talk about potentially buying more electric buses and adding more charging stations. No sense adding charging stations and new buses when they keep making cuts and alienating riders. 

 

Part of the issue is the divisions don’t necessarily “speak with each other” as they’re all separate contractors. The region is so fixated on not running a deficit that the bottom line of meeting or excelling service expectations is missed. All they need to do is have it so passengers wait 10 minutes for a transfer to either route instead of the mentality of buses meeting at an intersection at that moment or not meeting at all with the frequencies you mentioned. 

for example routes 85 and 90 were designed to meet at 16th Ave, however because YRT headways are complete insanity you would have the 85 running extremely late towards 16th Ave ( yet too much time going opposite way) whereas the 90 would often run right on time SB causing a missed connection and a long wait, or no bus at all for the night 

Last 85EB is 11:44 

last 90SB is 11:37

until the planners make an effort to communicate the needs of riders and fix the schedule YRTs ridership will drop and headway issues won’t get fixed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ZümmyZüm said:

Part of the issue is the divisions don’t necessarily “speak with each other” as they’re all separate contractors. The region is so fixated on not running a deficit that the bottom line of meeting or excelling service expectations is missed. All they need to do is have it so passengers wait 10 minutes for a transfer to either route instead of the mentality of buses meeting at an intersection at that moment or not meeting at all with the frequencies you mentioned. 

for example routes 85 and 90 were designed to meet at 16th Ave, however because YRT headways are complete insanity you would have the 85 running extremely late towards 16th Ave ( yet too much time going opposite way) whereas the 90 would often run right on time SB causing a missed connection and a long wait, or no bus at all for the night 

Last 85EB is 11:44 

last 90SB is 11:37

until the planners make an effort to communicate the needs of riders and fix the schedule YRTs ridership will drop and headway issues won’t get fixed 

It's not the fact that there are 4 different divisions operating the service in York Region. The Region is the one that dictates service levels throughout the system, the divisions simply allocate the staff and equipment to make it happen.

 

And it's not the planners, either. They are told to do something within a certain set of parameters - one of the largest being budget - and "make it fit."

 

The issue is the Region itself. They're the ones that need to open up the purse strings.

 

Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ZümmyZüm said:

Part of the issue is the divisions don’t necessarily “speak with each other” as they’re all separate contractors. The region is so fixated on not running a deficit that the bottom line of meeting or excelling service expectations is missed. All they need to do is have it so passengers wait 10 minutes for a transfer to either route instead of the mentality of buses meeting at an intersection at that moment or not meeting at all with the frequencies you mentioned. 

for example routes 85 and 90 were designed to meet at 16th Ave, however because YRT headways are complete insanity you would have the 85 running extremely late towards 16th Ave ( yet too much time going opposite way) whereas the 90 would often run right on time SB causing a missed connection and a long wait, or no bus at all for the night 

Last 85EB is 11:44 

last 90SB is 11:37

until the planners make an effort to communicate the needs of riders and fix the schedule YRTs ridership will drop and headway issues won’t get fixed 

Another example of YRT planning insanity, the N/B afternoon schedules on 91 and 91A. The trips are timed so loosely, that the bus has to depart Finch Terminal at least 4-5 minutes behind schedule, just to avoid running ahead. For example, the 5:09 pm N/B trip of 91A, gives 17 minutes from Finch to Steeles/Bayview (all that is really needed is 12 at most), and then 8 minutes from Steeles/Bayview to John/Bayview (when 4 is the maximum that is needed). Constantly having to hold at John Street for several minutes and the passengers getting angry because the bus is not moving.... Meanwhile, on 99, with the reopening of all the businesses, it has gotten so congested on Yonge Street around 16th, it is almost impossible to be on time. The traffic signal timing along the section of the VIVA rapidway just makes it worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To further prove my point about service with weird frequencies, here is a summary of service changes coming up. 

Route 57 - Mulock

Weekdays:

Schedules will be adjusted:

Morning rush hour frequency - approximately every 65 minutes

Midday frequency - approximately every 63 minutes

Afternoon rush hour frequency - approximately every 67 minutes

Evening frequency - approximately every 63 minutes

and then there is this one

Route 98 - Yonge

Weekdays:

Schedules will be adjusted:

Midday frequency - approximately every 53 minutes

Afternoon rush hour frequency - approximately every 53 minutes

Early evening frequency - approximately every 48 minutes

Things like this are why its so hard to plan a trip on buses especially in the north end. One route operates at a 63 minute frequency and another one operates every 53 minutes, that means if I am on the 57 and I need to transfer to the 98 I could potentially be waiting for up to 53 minutes. I get that sometimes buses cannot wait at every intersection to meet buses coming through, but if there were better frequencies than the connections would be better at major transfer points. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just reading about the 2021 to 2025 business plan. File attached for record keeping purposes.

Reading the section regarding ridership targets. Here is the breakdown for total boardings/hour:

  • Viva, base and express routes: 35 passengers/hour
  • Local routes: 25 passengers/hour
  • Go shuttles and community routes: 15 passengers/hour
  • Mobility-On-Request Conventional: 5 passengers/hour

Regarding local routes, 25 passenger boardings/hour is a pretty high figure even during peak periods. Unless servicing a trip generator like retail or school can achieve the figure a bit easier. Outside of peak periods would be a bit more difficult to achieve such volume leading to how some routes are being converted to mobility-on-request. Having to book in advance with a start and end destination via phone or mobile app. 

This is on top of trying to achieve a cost recovery ratio of 45 percent as a goal. Can't imagine how much fares will increase to achieve that percentage or additional routes that will be reduced to mobility-on-request conventional. Currently the proposed fare hike that was supposed to go this year and in 2020 was postponed due to COVID-19.

2021-2025_YRT_Business_Plan_web.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2021 at 10:55 AM, TransitMotorcoach said:

Another example of YRT planning insanity, the N/B afternoon schedules on 91 and 91A. The trips are timed so loosely, that the bus has to depart Finch Terminal at least 4-5 minutes behind schedule, just to avoid running ahead. For example, the 5:09 pm N/B trip of 91A, gives 17 minutes from Finch to Steeles/Bayview (all that is really needed is 12 at most), and then 8 minutes from Steeles/Bayview to John/Bayview (when 4 is the maximum that is needed). Constantly having to hold at John Street for several minutes and the passengers getting angry because the bus is not moving.... Meanwhile, on 99, with the reopening of all the businesses, it has gotten so congested on Yonge Street around 16th, it is almost impossible to be on time. The traffic signal timing along the section of the VIVA rapidway just makes it worse. 

The Bayview bus would benefit by having better timing of the lights to make a left onto Bayview at Steeles. 

The 99 bus can be faster than VIVA Blue but it only runs once an hour which is a problem. 

What would make sense is to have a Blue bus that runs express from Finch to Richmond Hill terminal, which would cut down on travel times to Newmarket. That trip from Finch should be doable in one hour like when GO used to run the route.  Bringing it back would encourage people to take the bus rather than drive.  You could make it limited express from Finch to Barrie along Yonge Street. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update to the South-East Division contract bid process:

https://york.bidsandtenders.ca/Module/Tenders/en/Tender/Detail/b9421957-1eeb-4680-bbf0-91b648a13a43/#Awarded

After reading the most recently posted Addendum #3, and seeing the narrowed down list of the bidders compared to the Plan Takers, looks like those who currently work for TOK will have to start over with a new contractor once the current VIVA contract ultimately expires, as TOK already has West-North Division, and will not be able to hold a second contract as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TransitMotorcoach said:

Update to the South-East Division contract bid process:

https://york.bidsandtenders.ca/Module/Tenders/en/Tender/Detail/b9421957-1eeb-4680-bbf0-91b648a13a43/#Awarded

After reading the most recently posted Addendum #3, and seeing the narrowed down list of the bidders compared to the Plan Takers, looks like those who currently work for TOK will have to start over with a new contractor once the current VIVA contract ultimately expires, as TOK already has West-North Division, and will not be able to hold a second contract as a result.

In the vast majority of circumstances where contracts are "flipped", employees with the old contractor are able to transfer into the new company, and there are laws protecting the workers from being fired/constructively dismissed due to contract flipping.

This would be the case for both TOK employees working with Viva, and with Miller Transit employees working out of SE (if Miller does not retain the combined SE/BRT contract). Back in 2015, when operation of Viva switched from Transdev to TOK, the majority of Transdev employees were moved over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Shaun said:

I also can't understand why the 20 bus runs so slow, the drivers barely get the bus up to 50kmph. 

 

Excessive run times and pressure to not leave the first stop late from the company, but they won’t fix it because they would then need to add more buses to maintain headways 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ZümmyZüm said:

Excessive run times and pressure to not leave the first stop late from the company, but they won’t fix it because they would then need to add more buses to maintain headways 

So basically run the bus slow enough that nobody will use it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ZümmyZüm said:

Excessive run times and pressure to not leave the first stop late from the company, but they won’t fix it because they would then need to add more buses to maintain headways 

This issue exists on 91 and 91A as well. What I do if I operate a trip with excessive run times is leave the starting point (Finch Terminal or Subrisco for example) 5 minutes behind, and go 40 km/h, hoping that the traffic lights will hold me enough that I would not need to pull over at John Street and still keep going. For us bus operators, it is a lose-lose situation. If we run ahead, we get grief from control centre with a write up, and if we run behind, the control centre dispatchers give us a hard time too. The Region still refuses to fix this, given how they are cheap and don't want to add more buses on the route to maintain the headways but cut down the run times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/14/2021 at 6:02 PM, TransitMotorcoach said:

This issue exists on 91 and 91A as well. What I do if I operate a trip with excessive run times is leave the starting point (Finch Terminal or Subrisco for example) 5 minutes behind, and go 40 km/h, hoping that the traffic lights will hold me enough that I would not need to pull over at John Street and still keep going. For us bus operators, it is a lose-lose situation. If we run ahead, we get grief from control centre with a write up, and if we run behind, the control centre dispatchers give us a hard time too. The Region still refuses to fix this, given how they are cheap and don't want to add more buses on the route to maintain the headways but cut down the run times. 

100% it’s the same at my workplace, the only difference is if we complain about run times it somewhat will get fixed… a couple signups later but it will happen, from my friends with the YRT I’ve heard their input goes unheard unfortunately which ultimately makes the passengers suffer 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YRT has an unfortunate tendency to overcorrect runtimes... times will be too loose, so they'll cut too much time off so the route is running tight/late. Then to correct it, they'll add more time than necessary so the route is back to excessive running time. And on and on it goes, every few years or so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rivis Road Vivastation has been replaced with University Boulevard with the York University Vivastation setup. Tweet attached:

 

Currently Purple A provides continuous service to the Enterprise branch due to COVID-19 including peak periods. During regular service, Purple A would provide service to Enterprise except peak periods which Pink would cover this section up until Unionville Go Station. Green would connect from Warden/Enterprise to Highway 7/McCowan for those needing to reconnect with Purple going east. 

Right now, the Markham campus isn't planned to open until Fall 2023. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2021 at 10:09 PM, Shaun said:

When is Green going to make a comeback?

We don't know Atm. But Maybe next month should seneca newham open to 100% capacity and should offices reopen to 100% capacity

Honestly the purple really isn't that busy not surprised that both pink and green are temporarily suspended. I have ridden 8201 on the purple A. Not alot of people on the bus. I would say purple would need to get to viva blue ridership levels or maybe higher if they want to bring back suspended routes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, menath said:

We don't know Atm. But Maybe next month should seneca newham open to 100% capacity and should offices reopen to 100% capacity

Honestly the purple really isn't that busy not surprised that both pink and green are temporarily suspended. I have ridden 8201 on the purple A. Not alot of people on the bus. I would say purple would need to get to viva blue ridership levels or maybe higher if they want to bring back suspended routes

Purple never had Blue's ridership levels, and likely never will. Similar to other cities, a portion of lost ridership can be attributed to people afraid to return to transit--some of those people will probably never return, even if offices resume 100 per cent capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, menath said:

We don't know Atm. But Maybe next month should seneca newham open to 100% capacity and should offices reopen to 100% capacity

Honestly the purple really isn't that busy not surprised that both pink and green are temporarily suspended. I have ridden 8201 on the purple A. Not alot of people on the bus. I would say purple would need to get to viva blue ridership levels or maybe higher if they want to bring back suspended routes

I passed by the Aviva office near Birchmount / Enterprise and saw a YRT branded XD40 kneeled and with it's hazard lights on in front of the AVIVA entrance (in their parking lot)

1 hour ago, Waiting for 30 Minutes said:

Purple never had Blue's ridership levels, and likely never will. Similar to other cities, a portion of lost ridership can be attributed to people afraid to return to transit--some of those people will probably never return, even if offices resume 100 per cent capacity.

It honestly depends...

Purple line is essential especially for hospital workers. I for one was on a AG300 on the Purple A line and all the seats were taken with no social distancing what so ever...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gamer Studios said:

I passed by the Aviva office near Birchmount / Enterprise and saw a YRT branded XD40 kneeled and with it's hazard lights on in front of the AVIVA entrance (in their parking lot)

It honestly depends...

Purple line is essential especially for hospital workers. I for one was on a AG300 on the Purple A line and all the seats were taken with no social distancing what so ever...

Yes it depends. Rn Service levels reflect current ridership demand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say the Viva Purple/Purple A schedules and alternating trips are not the greatest with the inconsistent headways depending where you are waiting along the line (especially during rush hour). So I really would like to see green/pink return for at least rush hour service down Enterprise, so you maintain consistent 10-15 minute service across Hwy 7 on the main Purple branch 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, yrt1000 said:

I will say the Viva Purple/Purple A schedules and alternating trips are not the greatest with the inconsistent headways depending where you are waiting along the line (especially during rush hour). So I really would like to see green/pink return for at least rush hour service down Enterprise, so you maintain consistent 10-15 minute service across Hwy 7 on the main Purple branch 

Yea I would like to see pink and green return. The rush hour service prior to this crisis was so much better than the ruhs hour service today

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...