Intercity Bus Services

[ShonTron]

^Some excellent posts in terms of quality of discussion. @Northern Light might have some valuable input here too.
This is a relevant point, it came up on the Peterborough to Oshawa run a few days back with an intoxicated woman complaining 'how badly she had to to' for a good hour.

But I've been on GO buses where they have stopped at gas stations/donut shops for a passenger to use the rest room. It may be an awkward issue, as on the routes in Northern Ontario rest room stops are few and far between. Off the top of my head, without thinking this through in detail, could towing a 'relief trailer' be the answer? (Needless to say, the vehicle would have to come to a stop).

Same trailer could also have more space for luggage and/or cargo, as 'bus express' used to do.

The best thing to do is just schedule a rest stop into the run, at a business that doesn't mind passengers using their washrooms, especially a coffee shop or a fast food restaurant. They aren't plentiful in the North - but Atikokan is about halfway on the four hour drive between Fort Frances and Thunder Bay. There's probably the opportunity for a washroom break of a few minutes at the Esso station there. Greyhound has rest stops in their schedules, Kasper would just have to have those more frequently.

 

[steveintoronto]

^ I wonder how Kasper is dealing with this already? It is an essential point, especially for persons aging and/or with health issues.

It's been a while since I've noticed a bus towing a parcel trailer, but Greyhound still shows Google hits for them and BPX (Bus Parcel Express). Could/would Kasper also pick that up? (pun not intended)

And interestingly, this hit also showed:
Freight on Transit Handbook - Metrolinx

I'm intrigued still on the idea of a dry chemical toilet in the corner of a towed trailer.

More later, must run to catch GO out of town to cycle medium distance (approx 50 kms). I'm hopelessly addicted...

 

[Northern Light]

^Some excellent posts in terms of quality of discussion. @Northern Light might have some valuable input here too.

Not sure what you're thinking I might contribute here, I think there has been a great discussion already.

But, I'll throw in some info for folks and a couple of quick thoughts.

First, a map of farmland by classification for Ontario (Class 1 is best)

So, as discussed, once can see the bulk of ideal farmland is located in south-western, south-central and south-eastern Ontario; though there are more pockets that one might think in the north; and depending on what one is producing, lower class level is not always a barrier. (cranberries and blueberries both thrive in Shield territory under PH conditions that would offend most crops.

I couldn't find a map that shows it, but there is actually also a decent farming area an hour outside Thunder Bay, though, its relatively small as compared to the south.

Worth noting here, is that at UT we can have a good discussion not only about the present, but about the future.

Here's a map of projected agricultural yield changes by 2080 based on current climate change models.

Note rising yield throughout Ontario (mostly due to extending growing season, rather than change in land classification.

Note also a fairly substantial decline in production in Florida, Georgia, and other areas of the south-east, the veritable obliteration of production in areas like Texas.

Curiously, the model does not show a decline in California, which surprises me given acute water shortages there, and declining aquifers.

****

In respect of the sub-thread on agricultural production, the issue is primarily focused on an area which remains moderately well served by intercity transportation, by North American standards.

I think changes in the south-west will continue to support greater urbanization; the issue here is minimizing the sprawl variety, and building urbanity in a sustainable fashion, this, over time will support better intercity transportation choices if we don't muck it up.

I will discuss the north in a subsequent post.

 

[Northern Light]

In respect of Northern Ontario, as noted in the post above, agriculture is not a crucial issue.

So when considering sustainable transportation, and by way of that, the urban-development pattern, we need not give serious consideration to that.

In respect of mining and logging, there are substantial activities in the north, of course. These do require 'urban nodes' of some kind, but most of the activity, outside of the nickel operations in/around Sudbury are well removed from urban areas, and likely always will be. The amount of subsidy that goes into logging roads, and into rail spurs that serve remote mining operations is not immaterial, but not related directly to intercity transportation of people.

The areas that Greyhound will leave behind (west of Sudbury) include significant and viable communities, notably T-Bay, but also the Sault, Wawa, Kenora, Atikoken, Ft. Francis, and areas up near Dryden as well.

The notion that these communities should or would be removed in the forseeable future is not credible.

While there are intermediate smaller places that may be removable, the notion that affects the need for inter-city transport is simply incorrect.

Suppose your in Atikoken or Ft. Francis, or Kenora, each have hospitals, but none offer trauma capabilities, none have MRI or PET Scan machines, none offer Radiation therapy for Cancer.

None of the above offer university level education either.

So people in each of these communities must travel to either T-Bay or Winnipeg in order to access these services.

There is a need to have connections in place, particularly for non-emergent transport.

At some level, there is room to discuss bringing those services to the people; MRI for instance will be added in Kenora once the hospital is rebuilt, probably in about 5 years time.

But you won't be able to extend radiation therapy, advanced surgical care, advanced trauma care, or university services into every modest sized town.

Connections are crucial.

We can not, and should not connect everywhere to everywhere by public transport, or imagine providing deluxe service, where any at all is a luxury.

But there is a need to have some base service level connecting major centres, and key nodes.

Given that the bulk of infrastructure to do so is already in place (roads, gas stations etc for buses, and for that matter, tracks for trains), the operating subsidies for reasonable service levels are not really all that high.

They may appear high on a per person basis, but in absolute terms, they are insignificant in a province the size of Ontario.

By all means, we should plot future development towards creating more critical mass nodes, such that we can lower the per passenger subsidies for places in remote areas.

We can also consider smarter use of technologies in order to generate the same.

In time, buses will be driver-less, we're awhile away from that now, but we can contemplate right-sized fleets, both smaller and larger, the right mix of shorter travel times while connecting key spots, and train travel that uses modern DMU tech that minimizes crew needs, with very strategic rail investments to lift travel speeds at key points, and offer both more convenient and functional service levels while lowering longer term subsidies at the same time.

There are a few nearly-abandoned mining towns we could 'buy out'; and some urbanization trends we could build on; but for the most part, the basic route structure of service in the North won't change, and such investments won't materially affect the economics in question.

The issue here is one of thinking comprehensively, and when weighing costs, thinking about the cost of highway expansion as the alternative to service investment, and how cheap that is not, given the vast distances involved.

 

[PinkLucy]

It depends where in the North you are referring to agriculture. People tend to forget “the little clay belt” area around Earlton

 

[lenaitch]

The best thing to do is just schedule a rest stop into the run, at a business that doesn't mind passengers using their washrooms, especially a coffee shop or a fast food restaurant. They aren't plentiful in the North - but Atikokan is about halfway on the four hour drive between Fort Frances and Thunder Bay. There's probably the opportunity for a washroom break of a few minutes at the Esso station there. Greyhound has rest stops in their schedules, Kasper would just have to have those more frequently.

Intercity line runs already include rest stops. I think the point is smaller buses not having onboard toilet facilities for those who simply can't wait. In the far north, commercial facilities can be an hour or more apart.

^ I wonder how Kasper is dealing with this already? It is an essential point, especially for persons aging and/or with health issues.

It's been a while since I've noticed a bus towing a parcel trailer, but Greyhound still shows Google hits for them and BPX (Bus Parcel Express). Could/would Kasper also pick that up? (pun not intended)

And interestingly, this hit also showed:
Freight on Transit Handbook - Metrolinx

I'm intrigued still on the idea of a dry chemical toilet in the corner of a towed trailer.

More later, must run to catch GO out of town to cycle medium distance (approx 50 kms). I'm hopelessly addicted...

Both Greyhound and ONTC offer BPX service. Greyhound is still hauling trailers, although I think the presence or absence of a trailer is more reflective of the volume on a particular run - ONTC doesn't haul trailers. I supposed whether Kasper wants to provide this service will be a business decision. I have to believe it involves licencing.

I'm either intrigued, amused or frightened by the concept of a toilet-on-a-trailer. Current bus facilities are simply a seat over a holding tank, which obviously wouldn't work on a trailer. I think the larger issue would be the 'on-demand' starting and stopping as well as the liability issues of having passengers wandering around on the shoulder. But with a little work you could be on your way to the patent office!

Not sure what you're thinking I might contribute here, I think there has been a great discussion already.

But, I'll throw in some info for folks and a couple of quick thoughts.

First, a map of farmland by classification for Ontario (Class 1 is best)

So, as discussed, once can see the bulk of ideal farmland is located in south-western, south-central and south-eastern Ontario; though there are more pockets that one might think in the north; and depending on what one is producing, lower class level is not always a barrier. (cranberries and blueberries both thrive in Shield territory under PH conditions that would offend most crops.

I couldn't find a map that shows it, but there is actually also a decent farming area an hour outside Thunder Bay, though, its relatively small as compared to the south.

Worth noting here, is that at UT we can have a good discussion not only about the present, but about the future.

Here's a map of projected agricultural yield changes by 2080 based on current climate change models.

Note rising yield throughout Ontario (mostly due to extending growing season, rather than change in land classification.

Note also a fairly substantial decline in production in Florida, Georgia, and other areas of the south-east, the veritable obliteration of production in areas like Texas.

Curiously, the model does not show a decline in California, which surprises me given acute water shortages there, and declining aquifers.

****

In respect of the sub-thread on agricultural production, the issue is primarily focused on an area which remains moderately well served by intercity transportation, by North American standards.

I think changes in the south-west will continue to support greater urbanization; the issue here is minimizing the sprawl variety, and building urbanity in a sustainable fashion, this, over time will support better intercity transportation choices if we don't muck it up.

I will discuss the north in a subsequent post.

It is interesting that all of Canada is shown as a monolithic area of benefit. Changes in mean temperatures may allow for a long growing season but soil quality (or the plain lack of soil), acidity, etc. will not result in greater yields of basic grain crops that feed the masses. I have read other studies that show that the currently-productive area know as the 'Palliser Triangle' in the southern prairies may simply become too hot and dry to be productive. Remember as well that climate change (for those who believe in it) is driven by more energy in the atmosphere, which means more unstable weather patterns. In recent history, violent hail storms have wrecked havoc on greenhouse in S/W Ontario. I'm certainly not linking you to this line of thinking, but think those who put a net positive spin on climate change are trying to put lipstick on a pig.

 

[steveintoronto]

It's late and I'm too tired to comment in detail, did 100 km+ cycling today, exquisite, but this is an excellent article germane to Kaspar and the demise of "Caribou" bus lines:
https://www.northernontariobusiness...sportation/this-caribou-is-now-extinct-819422

Toilets! No chemical toilet in a trailer necessary after-all: (This outdoes even GO's double deckers!)

Details:
Ref: 3897 Mileage: Delivery only
Chassis: Mercedes Benz 516 Body: Noone
Capacity: 19 seats MOT: New-IVA


Description:
ORDER NOW

THE COMPETITIVELY PRICED COACHBUILT SPRINTER THAT GIVES YOU MORE.

The Turas 500 is available with up to 19 seats and can be specified to suit your individual requirements.

This Mercedes-Benz Sprinter based model is available with a range of options including new executive tables, fridge, wi-fi and multi media installations. We also have 9 and 13 seat VIP models available to order and can now incorporate a floor mounted toilet/washroom into your custom built design. All models come with full saloon air conditioning, dark tint double glazing, blown air saloon heating and under-floor lockers as standard to complement the large luggage capacity.
[...]
http://www.ministomidis.com/range/noones/3897_Turas500.html

Quite a few competitors provide toilets in mini-buses, and for more utilitarian models than the above.

Today's TorStar, excellent piece by David Collenette:

https://www.thestar.com/opinion.html
Opinion

• 
  OPINION
  Private sector could be a solution for Canada’s bus woes

 

[lenaitch]

Interesting. I wonder if they will see a North American market that makes it worthwhile for them to seek certification. Hopefully this variation of the Sprinter platform would be sufficiently 'worldwide'. Washroom facilities in a commercial (i.e. non VIP) configuration would be interesting given the amount of square area it would consume in a small platform. I assume it would have to meet disability accessibility legislation.

 

[Fritter]

In this era of Bus companies cutting back, I'm curious why Can-Ar Coach's 2 routes in Ontario continue to exist. To me Toronto-Halliburton and Toronto-Port Elgin seem like random low population routes. It would be interesting to me why these two routes survive and other seemingly more populated routes have fallen by the wayside.

 

[crs1026]

It would be interesting to know about demographics, eg number of retirees, families, etc. Port Elgin- Toronto has a pretty solid population base if you take the route as a whole, anchored by the Bruce Power employee and pensioner base - and it’s a tiring and often unpleasant drive especially in winter. There are more people in the Haliburton catchment area than one might think.

I’d turn the question around and ask, how many more undiscovered or unrealised routes might there be out there. I wonder what Can-Ar got right.

- Paul

 

[ShonTron]

It would be interesting to know about demographics, eg number of retirees, families, etc. Port Elgin- Toronto has a pretty solid population base if you take the route as a whole, anchored by the Bruce Power employee and pensioner base - and it’s a tiring and often unpleasant drive especially in winter. There are more people in the Haliburton catchment area than one might think.

I’d turn the question around and ask, how many more undiscovered or unrealised routes might there be out there. I wonder what Can-Ar got right.

- Paul

I usually go up once a year to Port Elgin for a weekend. It is a long drive from Toronto, with very little of it on freeways and most of it on a mix of two-lane highways and county roads (you either go to the end of Highway 410 to Orangeville then take the bypass towards Arthur or continue towards Chatsworth, or get off Highway 401 at Trafalgar Road and head north towards Grand Valley and then up through Harriston).

When I make that drive, I still don't understand why Highway 9 was downloaded between Orangeville and Harriston. It's an important route with inter-regional use.

Apart from Listowel, the Can-Ar route manages to hit every larger town along the way. I really could see - with the right management - a Port Elgin-Kincardine-Wingham-Listowel-Waterloo route working well, and maybe even a Goderich-Clinton-Mitchell-Seaforth-Stratford-Kitchener route too.

 

[Johnny Au]

I would like to see a Goderich-Kincardine-Port Elgin-Owen Sound-Meaford-Collingwood-Wasaga Beach-Barrie route as well.

 

[Garuda]

In this era of Bus companies cutting back, I'm curious why Can-Ar Coach's 2 routes in Ontario continue to exist. To me Toronto-Halliburton and Toronto-Port Elgin seem like random low population routes. It would be interesting to me why these two routes survive and other seemingly more populated routes have fallen by the wayside.

I'm from the Haliburton area so I feel I'm qualified to answer this question.

The bus roughly follows the old Victoria Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Railway that ran Haliburton > Fenelon Falls > Lindsay > Oshawa > Toronto. I believe there was a direct passenger train that ran from Toronto to Haliburton back in the golden age of rail. My grandmother told me stories of taking the train during the depression to look for work in Lindsay. Up until the introduction of decent highways, the railway was the only way to access the Haliburton Highlands.

Once the rails were lifted, the Can-Ar bus service took over. I've taken the route a couple of times when I didn't have a car and found it enjoyable. As the bus leaves Toronto at 5pm, it's great to head to cottage country without having to deal with the traffic after work.

I spoke with a bus driver and he told me that the line carries enough passengers to remain profitable. The majority take the bus from Toronto to Lindsay. I think if GO introduced a bus service to Lindsay, the line would be in danger of closing. But until then, the Can-Ar route will be running. I've noticed many students from Toronto attending Fleming College's Arts school in Haliburton to take the bus and those in the area who do not have the economic means to drive. Travelling east, west, or north is not a thing for those attending doctor's appointments. Toronto and Lindsay are the major destinations. Therefore as @crs1026 said, the catchment for the area is pretty good along the bus route and the highway it travels. The majority of the population is close to Highway 35.

This route would be like taking the bus to Muskoka, except the transportation lines (highways, railways, all continue to points north).

 

[reaperexpress]

When I was at Highway 407 station last week I was totally surprised to see an Ontario Northland bus pull in and dump half a busload of passengers. Clearly my familiarity with the intercity bus network was out of date, so I decided to create the 2019 intercity bus map (PDF version here):

I haven't been paying much attention to the network so it's possible that some of these changes happened last year rather than this year - the last schedules I saved were from 2016.

Sudbury - North Bay - Ottawa
In the last two years, this corridor has gone from basically no service to actually a fairly reasonable intercity schedule.

At first glance it might not look like much difference, but it's actually a huge improvement once you consider the departure times and the days the services actually operate.

Now that the daily Greyhound trip no longer originates in Winnipeg, the bus times are now actually practical for the Sudbury-Ottawa corridor rather than passing through in the middle of the night.

Ontario Northland has also doubled its own service in the corridor. The North Bay - Ottawa segment now has daily ONTC service rather than only 3 days/week service, and the Sudbury - North Bay segment now has a reasonable schedule every day of the week. In the 2016 schedule, there wasn't a single Ontario Northland trip on Tuesday or Wednesday, leaving only the single Greyhound trip which arrived at 2:20 AM (if it was on time).

Sudbury - Toronto
The only daily Greyhound trip from Sudbury to Toronto now runs non-stop from Sudbury to Pearson Airport. This is probably a good move on Greyhound's part since they don't stand much of a chance against Ontario Northland in the Sudbury-Barrie market, and GO Transit is rapidly taking over the Barrie-Toronto market. But the Sudbury-Pearson market was wide open given that the ONTC offerings involve numerous stops and a transfer to GO at Yorkdale. Unsurprisingly, Greyhound has now cancelled all but one of its commuter trips from Barrie to Toronto, leaving only 3 daily Greyhound trips between Barrie and Toronto, one of which is the trip from Owen Sound to Toronto.

North Bay - Toronto
According to the Ontario Northland PDF schedules, two daily round trips now stop at Highway 407 subway station in addition to Yorkdale. This opens up a lot of possibilities given the considerable GO bus connections at Highway 407 terminal. Most notably, getting off at Highway 407 saves an average of 18 minutes from Barrie (and points north) to Pearson Airport. Both Highway 407 and Yorkdale stations have non-stop GO service to the airport (routes 40 and 34 respectively), but route 40 runs every 30 minutes while route 34 only runs every 60 minutes - thereby saving on average 15 minutes of waiting. Furthermore, the 40 travels via the 407 and 427, which saves about 3 minutes of driving time compared to the route via the 400 and the 401.

There are so many connections at Highway 407 station that I wonder if it would be best to have all ONTC buses stop there, and only a limited number also stop at Yorkdale (currently it's the other way around). You can get pretty much anywhere in the GTHA from 407 station and the 407 GO bus routes tend to be faster and more frequent than their 401 counterparts. And even if someone is specifically going to Yorkdale, the subway connects the two stations faster than the Northland bus anyway. Without a stop at Yorkdale, ONTC buses would have other options for heading downtown such as via the 400 / Black Creek Dr / Parkside Dr rather than meandering through local roads between Yorkdale and downtown.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Anyone know what the largest towns in the province are without any inter-regional transit? I know you can't get to Simcoe without a car or taxi.. are there larger centres without public access? That's the largest I can think of. Any centre of over 10,000 really should have some form of inter-regional transit, no matter how bare bones if you ask me.

Really the entire Highway 3 corridor is full of half-decent sized towns with no public transit access. Does St. Thomas have some sort of bus service to London? It isn't on Reaperexpress's map.