News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.3K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 383     0 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

The end result would be similar though ... those not parking would pay less than those parking.

Sure......but the post I responded to clearly used the words "fare reduction"......that is not the likely outcome of paid parking.
 
Sorry, what?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

The right-of-way that the Milton line uses was first built by the private Credit Valley Railway in the 1870s, which CP later acquired. CP was a private company, though the transcontinental railway was built with the Federal government's assistance, and made back the cost of building it through land grants that it later sold off and a guaranteed monopoly through much of its Prairie route. (Did not get a whole lot of direct subsidy, but plenty of "in-kind" assistance.)

Were there any GO-funded rail expansions of the Galt Sub, apart from the stations themselves, the purchase/upgrade of the inner few miles and the new Milton Yard? I thought there were some track expansion, and perhaps that's what Doady was referring to.
 
Sure......but the post I responded to clearly used the words "fare reduction"......that is not the likely outcome of paid parking.
LOL ... of course not. That's like the folks in Toronto who think that going to a TTC zone system would result in a fare reduction. No ... it would likely just increase fares for outer zones ... leaving the base price the same.
 
LOL ... of course not. That's like the folks in Toronto who think that going to a TTC zone system would result in a fare reduction. No ... it would likely just increase fares for outer zones ... leaving the base price the same.

Agree
 
LOL ... of course not. That's like the folks in Toronto who think that going to a TTC zone system would result in a fare reduction. No ... it would likely just increase fares for outer zones ... leaving the base price the same.

The fare decrease would be over time, as the base fare is spared from future fare hikes.
 
Sure......but the post I responded to clearly used the words "fare reduction"......that is not the likely outcome of paid parking.

So, you want them to boost fares by 50 cents then drop them by 30 cents, instead of making the next increase 20 cents.
 
So, you want them to boost fares by 50 cents then drop them by 30 cents, instead of making the next increase 20 cents.

Can you point out, anywhere, that I said something even remotely close to that? All I did, was respond to a poster who suggested charging for parking would result in fare decreases.....I pointed out that this discussion of parking was as revenue generating tool.....not a fare reduction tool. But, if you feel better by twisting my words to make it sound like a) I said something I didn't and b) was being confrontational....have at it!
 
The fare decrease would be over time, as the base fare is spared from future fare hikes.

But from a PR perspective, it may make sense to do a bit of both. I.e. slightly drop GO fares (just enough to trumpet a fare reduction), and charge for parking. In the end, it would still be a net increase in costs for drivers, and only a marginal decrease for non-drivers. But still, from a PR perspective that would be a better move.
 
But from a PR perspective, it may make sense to do a bit of both. I.e. slightly drop GO fares (just enough to trumpet a fare reduction), and charge for parking. In the end, it would still be a net increase in costs for drivers, and only a marginal decrease for non-drivers. But still, from a PR perspective that would be a better move.
Good point - that would reduce complaints about it being a cash grab.
 
Good point - that would reduce complaints about it being a cash grab.

Yup, even if it was just something as simple as a return to the previous fare rates (before the latest increase). In our sound byte world, very few people will listen/read beyond "drop in fare rates".
 
Word is... Niagara service to return in May with an additional train. Barrie weekend service will be back and 1/2 hour Lakeshore service is to begin in June, if there's enough engineers for it I guess :p (cause right now there's not). But the floodgates have literally opened in terms of hiring CSA and with CSA's moving up to be conductors(dozens in the last couple of months and continuing). Now if only engineer training could speed up, people hired 5 years ago are frustratingly still waiting there turn with no idea when they'll even begin.
 
Can't wait for half hour service on the lakeshore, it will truly start approaching an urban rail line with that rather than commuter rail. Half hour service means you don't have to plan your trip nearly as much as you do now.
 
Word is... Niagara service to return in May with an additional train. Barrie weekend service will be back and 1/2 hour Lakeshore service is to begin in June, if there's enough engineers for it I guess :p (cause right now there's not). But the floodgates have literally opened in terms of hiring CSA and with CSA's moving up to be conductors(dozens in the last couple of months and continuing). Now if only engineer training could speed up, people hired 5 years ago are frustratingly still waiting there turn with no idea when they'll even begin.

Thanks for the update!

I hope there is some way Stouffville can at least get an extra morning and evening train as part of all this. Taking an 8:30ish or 19:00ish bus (they keep adding buses, but it's never enough) on the highway with people standing all the way up the aisle is a danger that should be corrected before Lakeshore gets its white-glove, half-hour service.
 
stouffville has gotten 2 trains to unionville in the last couple of months, but i agree that it could use some more trains. Mind you, almost every line could use some more trains.
 

Back
Top