GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[innsertnamehere]

True.

Though I would like to see, on fares:

1) Simplification. Way too many zones.

2) If your travel by GO is entirely within a zone (likely one Regional Municipality) it should be the same as the local agency fare.

3) Local Agency fares should be harmonized, likely close to the current TTC level but with a 40-ride cap per month.

4) GO should charge for parking but use that money to lower its longer distance fares as well.

I'm not particularly opposed to this - especially a nominal GO parking charge more or less equivalent to an equalish cut in GO fares to offset in order to incentivize alternative modes to stations. I.e. $2/day to park, with an average fare decrease of $1 to offset.

Of course that will be wildly politically unpopular and would most certainly never happen with the current provincial government, but alas, one can wish..

I don't think zone simplification is a particularly pressing issue given the automatic calculation of fares. If anything I think it should go the other way, with distance based fares being adopted across the region regardless of transit service used. Of course that would also be politically untenable.. but alas.

 

[Bojaxs]

I'm not particularly opposed to this - especially a nominal GO parking charge more or less equivalent to an equalish cut in GO fares to offset in order to incentivize alternative modes to stations. I.e. $2/day to park, with an average fare decrease of $1 to offset.

I'm not entirely supportive of paid parking for GO station. Ridership will take a hit, and people will just drive to their destination instead. They'll leave earlier to compensate for traffic. If implemented, parking should remain free during off-peak hours and weekends. I've heard many people say one of the biggest benefits of GO is the free parking versus all the paid parking in DT Toronto.

I don't believe making people pay for parking is the solution to get people to take transit to GO stations. The solution is to increase higher order transit in the suburbs with connections to GO stations. Specifically BRT's. "Normal" city buses are not very enticing to people who already own a car.

In North American culture, there's too much stigma with being seen waiting at a "normal" bus stop. Even if people don't have access to their car, they'll opt for Uber/ Lyft instead of taking the bus. I don't believe that stigma entirely exists with BRT's.

 

[crs1026]

I'm not entirely supportive of paid parking for GO station. Ridership will take a hit, and people will just drive to their destination instead.

Municipal transit people will tell you that every time GO has opened or enlarged a parking garage, ridership on connecting bus routes drops. Free parking is an inappropriate incentive to drive to the GO.

With free transfer between municipal bus and GO, the charge for parking doesn't have to be sky high.

Sure, there will always be people who complain about affordability, but I'm not buying that paid parking at GO will cost anyone their home. More likely, it's the difference in commuting time that is why people drive to GO rather than take transit.

- Paul

 

[innsertnamehere]

I'm not entirely supportive of paid parking for GO station. Ridership will take a hit, and people will just drive to their destination instead. They'll leave earlier to compensate for traffic. If implemented, parking should remain free during off-peak hours and weekends. I've heard many people say one of the biggest benefits of GO is the free parking versus all the paid parking in DT Toronto.

I don't believe making people pay for parking is the solution to get people to take transit to GO stations. The solution is to increase higher order transit in the suburbs with connections to GO stations. Specifically BRT's. "Normal" city buses are not very enticing to people who already own a car.

In North American culture, there's too much stigma with being seen waiting at a "normal" bus stop. Even if people don't have access to their car, they'll opt for Uber/ Lyft instead of taking the bus. I don't believe that stigma entirely exists with BRT's.

thus a nominal charge offset by reduced fares - paying $2 to park at the GO station won't really change the calculus on being cheaper to park at GO stations, especially if your round-trip fare drops from $20 to $18.

Weekday only is fine, as you identified weekends the parking isn't overcapacity so charging isnt' necessary.

The intent would be to create a financial incentive to not drive to the station for daily commuters.

The whole thing may just be a bit moot anyway as post-COVID GO stations generally are not experiencing "filling up" of their parking as much.

I do admit that there may be some kind of phycological barrier even a nominal parking charger would create though. That said, the TTC has always had relatively nominal parking charges at their subway related lots, and they seem to fill up regardless.

 

[Bojaxs]

Municipal transit people will tell you that every time GO has opened or enlarged a parking garage, ridership on connecting bus routes drops. Free parking is an inappropriate incentive to drive to the GO.

With free transfer between municipal bus and GO, the charge for parking doesn't have to be sky high.

Sure, there will always be people who complain about affordability, but I'm not buying that paid parking at GO will cost anyone their home. More likely, it's the difference in commuting time that is why people drive to GO rather than take transit.

- Paul

GO transit does a good job of taking cars off the highway. But it's not responsible for taking cars off of local roads. That the municipalities responsibility.

I guess my argument is; paid parking shouldn't be implemented until municipalities figure out how to improve their buses.

 

[Bojaxs]

paying $2 to park at the GO station won't really change the calculus on being cheaper to park at GO stations, especially if your round-trip fare drops from $20 to $18.

Hypothetical. We don't have any idea how MX would implement paid parking, so I won't argue this.

The whole thing may just be a bit moot anyway as post-COVID GO stations generally are not experiencing "filling up" of their parking as much.

They actually are. A lot of people on the Reddit GO forums complaining about lack of parking at station like Long Branch, etc.

I'm not saying I agree with them, but it's something to consider if GO is losing some ridership because of limited parking at certain stations.

I do admit that there may be some kind of phycological barrier even a nominal parking charger would create though. That said, the TTC has always had relatively nominal parking charges at their subway related lots, and they seem to fill up regardless.

I know Kipling is the exception. It's going to be a tough sell for MX to implement paid parking at GO stations after offering free parking for decades. People will protest. Provincial politicians will offer election promises to take away paid parking at GO stations.

 

[reaperexpress]

Yeah as others have noted, they don't need to charge for parking all the time since there's plenty of spare parking capacity on evenings and weekends. In effect it would be a form of peak-period pricing for people who insist on driving to the station, where their off-peak trips are cheaper than their commute trips.

 

[APTA-2048]

GO transit does a good job of taking cars off the highway. But it's not responsible for taking cars off of local roads. That the municipalities responsibility.

I guess my argument is; paid parking shouldn't be implemented until municipalities figure out how to improve their buses.

This is the biggest reason why there will be a lot of push back. Transit access at some GO Stations is just terrible. Some trips in Durham, for example, add an extra 20-30 minutes to the commute depending on where you live. Service every 30 minutes at rush hour also means there’s no flexibility to someone’s schedule.

 

[Northern Light]

This is the biggest reason why there will be a lot of push back. Transit access at some GO Stations is just terrible. Some trips in Durham, for example, add an extra 20-30 minutes to the commute depending on where you live. Service every 30 minutes at rush hour also means there’s no flexibility to someone’s schedule.

Right, but even for the driver, I'm suggesting cost-neutrality. If you pay $4 to park, you save $4 on your GO trip, more or less.

The end result is to reward those who take transit, as they end up saving $4 while the driver pays exactly the same as they are now, just differently.

 

[ARG1]

Municipal transit people will tell you that every time GO has opened or enlarged a parking garage, ridership on connecting bus routes drops. Free parking is an inappropriate incentive to drive to the GO.

With free transfer between municipal bus and GO, the charge for parking doesn't have to be sky high.

Sure, there will always be people who complain about affordability, but I'm not buying that paid parking at GO will cost anyone their home. More likely, it's the difference in commuting time that is why people drive to GO rather than take transit.

- Paul

I'd shed a tear, but local bus services to GO (especially in York Region) have consistently been basically unusable unless you happen to live on the street the GO station. You're not exactly going to find people who live on Elgin Mills/Teston or Highway 7 taking the bus to Maple/Rutherford respectively by bus.

 

[reaperexpress]

I'd shed a tear, but local bus services to GO (especially in York Region) have consistently been basically unusable unless you happen to live on the street the GO station. You're not exactly going to find people who live on Elgin Mills/Teston or Highway 7 taking the bus to Maple/Rutherford respectively by bus.

That's a self-fulfilling prophecy. They don't run good bus service to the station because everyone drives there. Everyone drives there because the bus service sucks and parking is free. Charging for parking helps break out of that feedback loop. But regardless of paid parking, the biggest culprit is YRT who runs basically no bus service timed to meet GO trains, despite GO stations being a place where a bunch of suburbanites all want to go at the same time (when the train is scheduled). So you could attract decent ridership even with YRT's horrible frequencies.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Hypothetical. We don't have any idea how MX would implement paid parking, so I won't argue this.

They actually are. A lot of people on the Reddit GO forums complaining about lack of parking at station like Long Branch, etc.

I'm not saying I agree with them, but it's something to consider if GO is losing some ridership because of limited parking at certain stations.


I know Kipling is the exception. It's going to be a tough sell for MX to implement paid parking at GO stations after offering free parking for decades. People will protest. Provincial politicians will offer election promises to take away paid parking at GO stations.

Stations like Long Branch and Mimico are already effectively paid parking through the reserved space program. From what I recall Long Branch only has something like 50 unreserved parking spaces. It's not a surprise they are over capacity. They should definitely switch to full paid parking though.

It's the suburban stations with thousands of spaces that aren't having capacity issues any more. Prior to the pandemic Metrolinx was about to tender a 900-space expansion of Aldershot's lot, and it has been on indefinite hold since as the existing lot still isn't filling up. And Aldershot was normally way over capacity in 2019.

 

[Sunnyside]

Stations like Long Branch and Mimico are already effectively paid parking through the reserved space program. From what I recall Long Branch only has something like 50 unreserved parking spaces. It's not a surprise they are over capacity. They should definitely switch to full paid parking though.

It's the suburban stations with thousands of spaces that aren't having capacity issues any more. Prior to the pandemic Metrolinx was about to tender a 900-space expansion of Aldershot's lot, and it has been on indefinite hold since as the existing lot still isn't filling up. And Aldershot was normally way over capacity in 2019.

That’s a surprising example. Didn’t think Aldershot was down that much. Did they consider a garage?

Aldershot is effectively ‘Hamilton North’. Perhaps it would be well-suited for BRT or express buses coming from Waterdown and along York/Plains to deal with local users. But, there is a lot of traffic well outside any sort of transit catchment that uses it heavily, too. So you certainly can’t cut parking.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Aldershot is busy because it's more or less the terminus station for Lakeshore West, and thus captures drivers coming from further outside of the LSW's traditional catchment area. It's a hugely important station for parking as a result, and would likely always have substantial parking demand as a lot of it's ridership comes from areas outside where public transit can easily serve.

It has not been contemplated for a garage as Metrolinx owns enough land around the station to add something like 900 spaces in a surface lot still.

Most of that parking is on the south side of the corridor, which is not as convenient however. I think Metrolinx would be better off building a garage on the north side of the corridor and redeveloping the south lots personally, but that's not the current plan.

The pattern of reduced parking demand is present at most stations from my understanding, though it has shrunk over the last 2 years with return to office, but most stations which were operating over capacity pre-pandemic are still not doing so, at least from my understanding.

 

[ShonTron]

The south side of Aldershot Station is indeed good residential development land. I wonder what the cost-benefit would be of building the garage (which are very expensive to build) and developing the south side with some medium density TOD.