News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.2K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 381     0 

Metrolinx: Other Items (catch all)

^You still miss the point. People who don't drive shouldn't subsidize those who do. The cost of parking should be recovered from those who use it. "User Pay".

If parking is so cheap, then let private enterprise do it. Problem solved.

all gas tax money that supports GO transit can be taken away
You sound like Ford. GO Transit doesn't receive gas tax money. Municipalities do, to offset the cost of roads and municipal transit systems if that's their wish.

Enhanced Gas Tax Program
January 27, 2017 9:25 A.M.
Ministry of Transportation

About Ontario's gas tax program

For every litre of gasoline sold, Ontario currently provides two cents to municipalities to help fund local public transit improvements. Since the program began in 2004, Ontario has committed more than $3.7 billion to municipalities across the province.

Municipalities qualify for gas tax funding if they contribute financially to public transit services themselves. This year, 99 municipalities will receive funding -- the most ever since the program began. The share that each municipality receives is determined by a formula of 70 per cent ridership and 30 per cent population.
[...]
https://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2017/01/enhanced-gas-tax-program.html
 
Last edited:
^You still miss the point. People who don't drive shouldn't subsidize those who do. The cost of parking should be recovered from those who use it. "User Pay"....

Which means ending the subsidy car drivers receive when they park their vehicles in shopping mall parking lots. It's subsidized from the leases which the stores pay, and customers pay for those leases from the goods or services they pay for, even if they don't drive to and from the shopping mall.
 
^ I'm avoiding the 'moral anti-car' argument, since it muddies the debate. For parking, the point can be made on cost alone. It's not cheap. If a business wishes to attract customers with free parking, that's their wont, as long as it complies with zoning and local bylaws. With GO Transit, it's a very different argument. It's the *non-using customer* paying for the user. What next for GO Transit? Free lunch if you live outside the city? Live too far from prepared food source? Don't worry! Our city riding customers will buy your lunch for you.

GO Transit should and does provide transportation as a public good. Let the private sector provide the parking, and reflect the true costs of doing so. And for lunch. Free parking is not a good business model.

Shopping mall customers have the opportunity to shop elsewhere where lower prices reflect the fact that free parking isn't provided. Do airports provide free parking? Guaranteed, those that do (if any) charge more, and recover the costs from everyone who uses them, whether they use parking or not.
 
Last edited:
Out of curiosity, what about parking spaces in more rural areas (ie Breslau, Kirby, Bloomington, Gormley, Barrie South, etc)? Should those be paid despite not taking away prime land?

Not prime?

That land is often 'class 1' or 'class 2' agricultural land, some of the very best in the world.

There are far better uses it for it than car storage.

That said, I have no problem offering parking at these stations, as a necessary evil/trade off.

But completely free, in the longer term is too much to ask.

Even in these areas there can be 'less' parking over time.

Alternatively, we could store cars more efficiently in these locations (ruin less land) but going vertical will cost $$$, and its drivers who should bare that cost.

I have no problem accepting that rates need to be kept more modest in these areas, relative to what one might charge close to downtown Toronto.

I don't believe anyone was advocating $20 per day parking.

Rather, a phased-in approach that charges $2-$5 per day for most spots, $6-$10 for reserved spots close to the station building would be reasonable, over time, with at least
a partial, off-setting reduction in the cost of the train trip itself.

Further, rural options for alternate means of getting to a station should be in place.

That may mean 'uber' as public transit; or elaborate pick-up/drop-off facilities, or rural rush-hour only taxis amongst other things.

It should also mean safe cycling conditions, and cycle parking at stations.

No, this won't attract a majority or even a large percentage of would-be riders, but if as a choice it attracts 5% that's 5% fewer parking spots, and 5% less car traffic which I still see as a laudable outcome.
 
I don't have figures to hand but I suspect land acquisition, planning, drainage provision and construction, plus lighting, repair and snow clearance, is anything but "nothing".

Found this handy-dandy chart courtesy of the Canadian Parking Association. The price references are for the GTA.

Hospitals_Numbers-e1454285568745.gif



This is from an article on the cost of hospital parking, which can be found here: http://canadianparking.ca/the-high-cost-of-hospital-parking/
 
Noting the above cost estimates, and assuming you had to recover the cost over 250 nominal work days per year, $5.40 per space, per day is the break-even number.
 
Metrolinx is late to the debate, albeit better late for the debate than late for work. For urbanites, the change was 'in the works' over a decade ago. Here's from six years ago at the Globe: (and even then, the talk was the change showed "six to eight years ago.")
MONIKA WARZECHA
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, Jul. 12, 2012 4:00PM EDT

In her waterfront condo, Lianne Hannaway regularly sees “parking wanted” signs pinned up in the garage. After working in Paris, Ms. Hannaway returned to Toronto and, in 2010, moved into a one-bedroom condo. Inspired by the transit-oriented lifestyle in Europe, she decided against a vehicle since she could walk or take transit to work.

Despite going car-free, Ms. Hannaway’s real estate agent Erica Smith suggested she buy a parking spot with the unit. Though it cost roughly $20,000 to $25,000, Ms. Hannaway trusts it’ll pay off in the future. “I think just having the spot, you attract more potential buyers and renters because not everyone’s into this non-car mentality just yet in Toronto.”

As Toronto continues to build up the downtown, the amount of parking stalls allotted to downtown condos has gone down. Though the car-driving urbanite hasn’t exactly become extinct, developers are testing out just how few parking stalls the market will support in the latest condo projects.

“We didn’t start the process of reducing the amount of parking in buildings because of any green initiatives or anything that the city set down,” says Toronto developer Brad Lamb. “It was purely economics. We couldn’t build enough parking for every unit in the building.”

Rising construction and land costs and smaller parcels of land available for development make the prospect of building a multilevel underground parking garage a time-consuming and expensive task for developers.

Industry experts, real estate agents and developers peg declining parking construction to the beginning of the condo boom six to eight years ago. Stephen Ho, an urban site specialist and senior vice-president of Colliers International, has overseen the sale of more than 60 condo and urban land sites in Toronto. While condos built in the 1980s and 1990s tended to have roughly one spot for each unit, he says that number has shrunk. Statistics aren’t available, but Mr. Ho estimates that current ratio downtown is along the lines of 0.5 to 0.6 parking spots a unit.
[...]
Mr. Lamb agrees with Mr. la Fleur to a certain extent, but believes rising oil prices could change all that later on.

“Because driving will become more expensive, it may become the opposite,” he says. “Cars in the future will be reserved for very wealthy people. So, in fact, what may happen is that parking stalls may become superfluous because people can’t afford to drive, or won’t drive.”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rea...species-for-downtown-dwellers/article4410227/

The first presumption to discard is the concept of "free parking". It's far from "free". And those who use it shouldn't expect others to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if maybe they can use a 407 style camera to collect plates and mail parkers a monthly bill. I guess they can have an entrance and exit camera so that the computer can charge parkers and let drop offs go free. Good or bad idea??
 
I wonder if maybe they can use a 407 style camera to collect plates and mail parkers a monthly bill. I guess they can have an entrance and exit camera so that the computer can charge parkers and let drop offs go free. Good or bad idea??
Good idea, one of many possible. Pre-paid is probably the best.
https://www.gtechna.com/blog/the-im...ability-in-modern-parking-management-systems/

There's no shortage of possible ways:
ParkSol parking payment system
Ventek International | Automated Parking & Enforcement Solutions
The Canadian Parking Association – Parking Lots: Making Operations ...
Parking Space Management & Access Technology | SKIDATA
Parking Systems | ATS Traffic
Cashless payment solutions | Q-Park
Pay-by-plate parking - Wikipedia
gtechna: Parking & Traffic Enforcement Software | Ticketing Systems
The Future of Parking Technology | Lowe's Canada
Images for parking lot electronic pay systems

etc, etc, etc....

No shortage of persons with a sense of entitlement to free parking either. They'll look for any excuse. "Think of the line-ups"..."I'll drive downtown instead"..."It will make me wet myself"..."I'll have to kill my dog"...etc, etc, etc.

 
Last edited:
I'm thinking that using this tech can solve the problems with queuing behind the ticket machine
No-one queues to pay for parking in modern parking operations like this would be.

From the Lowe's link above:
The Future of Parking Technology

By Clare Curley

The traditional parking payment system—equipped with entrance gate and attendant— could someday be a thing of the past. Property managers who oversee tenant parking and mixed-use facilities alike are turning to a host of new devices to make their jobs easier and, in some cases, save money.

"Over the last 10 years people are looking more at automated parking solutions," says David Hill, who specializes in large-scale parking operations as the national practice leader of parking solutions for Toronto-based MMM Group Limited. Increasingly, new technology is used to streamline parking systems and reduce the manpower necessary to run a parking facility. The 2011 Emerging Trends in Parking survey by the International Parking Institute (IPI) highlights several recent developments behind this, from electronic payment systems to pay-by-phone parking services.

How big is your parking budget? Is it worth installing new equipment? If your needs are somewhat basic—such as managing only several tenant parking spots—then overhauling your current system may not warrant enough ROI. But for others, a system that provides instantaneous, detailed reporting on parking availability might be well worth the investment.

Virtual parking management
One of the main challenges to managing a parking facility is streamlining your system on a tight budget. Some virtual payment methods are helping people do that. Based in Ottawa, Sandra Smith, executive director of the Canadian Parking Association, explains that online systems are gaining ground because they enable property managers to use existing resources more efficiently.

If you sell some of your spaces to drivers who are unfamiliar with your property and parking facility, then online systems can be especially beneficial. Tracking space availability is difficult, so property managers tend to wait until the beginning of the month to tally spaces, Smith explains. But an online system can alert them to availabilities at any time, removing the need for putting drivers on waiting lists.

Consider three common factors in virtual management:

  • Less administrative burden: To set up most online payment systems, you simply provide key rates and schedule information to the third-party vendor. This is one of the less expensive advances because it doesn’t connect to any of the hardware on site, Hill says, explaining that the vendor collects the money and remits that back to the property owner.
  • Attracts new customers: For a small transaction fee that is often passed on to the customer, drivers can go online to reserve a space any time, avoiding the hassle of dealing with payment when they reach the site.
  • Oversight necessary: You’ll still need someone to track space availability and payments on your end, but online management can eventually lead to more flexible use of personnel. Instead of someone who sits in place all day, some parking lots now use roving patrols who do multiple tasks—for example, monitoring parking and picking up trash, Hill says.
Cell phones playing a greater role in parking
As more people access the Internet via their cell phones, keep an eye on trends in cell phone parking. Because of their ease of use and accessibility, "pay by phone" systems—whereby drivers secure spots by text messaging or making a call—might be a good option for people who manage short-term itinerant parking, Smith says.

New smart phone apps are helping drivers locate available parking, as well. To stay on the cutting edge—and on people’s smart phones—property managers can either build the app themselves or work with a GPS company. Hill and Smith recommend working with downtown business districts to get on their geolocation lists. An organization trying to gain exposure may even include your location for free, Hill says.

Residential options in technology
For tenant-only parking, your solutions should address a different set of needs. In a residential building, for instance, tenants might use an online tool to update their records, while the manager would log on to keep track of new tenants, visitor registration or licence plate updates, Smith says.

In general, parking facilities are going gateless as a way of cutting expenses and easing the flow of traffic. Residential facilities can do so as well, keeping in mind the need for proper enforcement. "Vehicles can register by licence plate number, or the manager can issue [tenants] decals or hang tags to identify their vehicle," Smith says. Another newer way to monitor vehicles is by placing sensors in the ground beneath each space to alert you when cars come and go.

Just don’t push anything too complicated in a building that primarily serves tenants. "Fancy technology is overkill if you’re dealing with monthly parkers," says Hill, who recommends focusing instead on amenities like improved security.

Proceed with caution
Some property managers might benefit from multiple systems—for instance, adding pay-by-phone options to their existing services. However, Smith urges them to transition slowly to any new system and to communicate the changes to tenants by posting signs throughout the building.

When it comes to new parking technology, be sure the solution meets the challenges you face. The right choice should simplify the parking process for the property’s tenants and customers, as well as your own.
https://www.lowes.ca/articles/the-future-of-parking-technology_a871.html

What I find most interesting is that those bitching about having to pay, and how it causes hangnails, anal retention and runs in their stockings are the ones most avid on using their smart-phones to stir their coffee and control their lives.

That "whine in the transmission"? That's the entitled driver.
 
No-one queues to pay for parking in modern parking operations like this would be.

From the Lowe's link above:

https://www.lowes.ca/articles/the-future-of-parking-technology_a871.html

What I find most interesting is that those bitching about having to pay, and how it causes hangnails, anal retention and runs in their stockings are the ones most avid on using their smart-phones to stir their coffee and control their lives.

That "whine in the transmission"? That's the entitled driver.
How much would it cost to implement this vs traditional gates? I have a feeling ml will find a way to triple the cost regardless whether its through union markups or just incompetent project management
 
How much would it cost to implement this vs traditional gates? I have a feeling ml will find a way to triple the cost regardless whether its through union markups or just incompetent project management
They should outsource it, if not outright lease the land to a private operator. ML shouldn't be in the business of parking. Quite the contrary.
 
Out of curiosity, what about parking spaces in more rural areas (ie Breslau, Kirby, Bloomington, Gormley, Barrie South, etc)? Should those be paid despite not taking away prime land?

To clarify, I'm saying GO should look at using pricing to manage demand before building expensive garages or demolishing buildings. They shouldn't necessarily charge for parking at every station, and definitely shouldn't have a blanket rate at every station.

Surface parking is a lot cheaper to construct, maintain, and is an indication that land values are cheap enough that intensification isn't an option, so in that case I don't think it makes sense to charge for parking (or at least not as much.) Pricing should be a part of GO's toolkit for managing parking demand and for improving non-auto mode share to stations, and should vary from station to station based on demand.

This is an aside, but parking pricing is actually one of the best levers that policy makers have on hand for improving mode share and managing congestion. The reason that Calgary, a sprawling post-war city with an awful climate, is able to have such an impressive public transit mode-share is because they have limited parking supply downtown and they resultingly have some of the highest parking prices in North america.

Right now, the Liberals are projecting that when the Big Move is complete, with everything built and $100 billion dollars of transit projects later, that mode share will be exactly the same. I am convinced that the provincial government could not spend a penny on transit and actually see mode share improve by doing three things:
  1. Prohibiting municipalities from mandating parking and let developers choose how much parking they need
  2. Charging their $0.25/day/parking space "Revenue Tool" for the Big Move
  3. Removing development restrictions near rapid or frequent transit
 

Back
Top