Park & Ride

Posted on August 12, 2008 at 12:11 am by Sameer Vasta

Park & Ride

It’s 8:03am and you’ve just pulled up across the street from the south parking lot at Kipling TTC Station after dropping off your wife at work in Brampton and your kids at the day care in Mississauga. The north lot is always full by 7:30am, but you’re banking on the south lot to still have some spots left.

It doesn’t; the lot has been full since 7:45am, and now you’re stuck driving into downtown Toronto for work. Again.

This isn’t an isolated incident: commuter parking lots (adjacent to GO and TTC stations) do not have enough space to accommodate the multitude of commuters that are looking to leave their cars and take public transit to work every day.

Recently, I got a few friends together to find out just how hard it is to get parking at transit hubs in and around Toronto. The results are sad, but expected:

  • Kipling Station (GO, TTC): Lots full at 7:48am.
  • Etobicoke North Station (GO): Lots full at 7:39am.
  • Cooksville Station (GO): Lots full at 8:06am.
  • Finch Station (GO, TTC): Lots full at 8:42am.

Cars that try and squeeze into the lots — particularly those that try and take up the spots occupied by snowbanks in the winter — are actively ticketed by the lot attendants, and privately-owned lots surrounding these commuter lots often charge in excess of $25 to park for the work day.

The problem of inadequate commuter parking doesn’t seem like a pressing concern until you realize that it directly correlates to congestion issues in the Toronto core. With fewer options to park at transit hubs, more people are forced to drive into the core for work.

Instead of encouraging drivers from across the GTA to leave their cars at GO Transit and TTC stations, we are in fact penalizing them from doing so (unless they arrive earlier and earlier or are willing to bear exorbitant costs) and incentivizing driving into Toronto over taking transit.

What can be done? The obvious solution is to build more parking lots, but the current infrastructure and planning may not allow for such expansion in most places. Another solution would be to create satellite lots with rapid connections to major transit hubs (Kipling, Downsview, Finch, Kennedy, etc.) through either regular shuttles or light rail extensions.

The best option, however, is to eliminate the concentration of cars at transit hubs by making such hubs more prevalent and easier to access. Instead of funneling commuters from around the Greater Toronto Area to three or four key stations, we should be looking at creating a multitude of transit access points across Toronto.

The planned Toronto Transit City Plan should help alleviate crowding at current hubs, but care needs to be put into the plan so that adequate parking facilities can be created at each of the terminal points.

They may not be pretty, but those expanses of concrete with painted yellow lines and rows of cars are key to making a truly sustainable regional transportation plan where people are able to switch between modes of transportation quickly and easily.

Tags: , , , , ,

31 Comments »

  1. I hate the f**king TTC. Worst transit system I’ve ever used with any frequency, and I’m an STM system using Montreal.

    If space is a concern for parking, then a multi-level lot should be built.

    GravatarComment by Ry-Tron — August 12, 2008 @ 4:13 pm

  2. The main lot at Pickering GO Station is a total write-off by 8:00am. I really pity the folks that have to be at work by 9am, since not only are you getting into some fairly aggressive battles for parking in that main lot in the early morning, but you’re also standing on the train since it’s so full.

    I regularly just take the 9am train in, and take the near 10 minute walk from the back lot since at least I know I’ll be guaranteed a seat. It’s brutal in the winter, but it’s part of the deal when you live in the ‘burbs.

    I think the main solution is to make municipal public transit a lot more accessible – there’s a bus that I could take in the morning to the GO Station which would save me all the trouble of parking lots. However, they only accept change (or a costly monthly pass), so it’s a huge pain for me to have to rustle up enough quarters to pay the fare.

    We come back to the main issue – the lack of a regional, electronic, pay-per-use (or monthly fee) transit pass that will work across *all* systems. The convenience and usability of such a card would solve all my problems.

    GravatarComment by Adam — August 12, 2008 @ 5:09 pm

  3. Out here in the 905, one of the main issues I’ve seen is the lack of feeder bus services into the GO stations. Adding GO shuttles that travel deep into neighbourhoods is a great way of eliminating the need to drive to the station, but a Toronto Star article just before Metronauts Hamilton spoke about how this wasn’t a viable alternative for people who need to do shopping or pick up the kids after work. Of course, one of the solutions to that issue might be to build mobility hubs at the GO stations with daycare and grocery stores. Milton GO station is one example of this concept.

    I’ve bought a bike to ride to the feeder bus stop closest to my home, and while I can fold it up and legally bring it on the train with me, I’m sure theft is a concern for many – especially at stations which have no departures or activity during the day.

    GravatarComment by Andrae Griffith — August 12, 2008 @ 5:21 pm

  4. Andrae, your feeder hub idea is a brilliant one. Do you know if the Milton GO station is being well received and well used? How do we get other stations to emulate such a concept?

    GravatarComment by Sameer Vasta — August 12, 2008 @ 5:24 pm

  5. Sameer, when and how did you calculate the filling of the lots? (ex. Kipling full at 7:48am)

    I’m about to start using that station (and parking lots) for my morning commute and I want to know how early I have to get there…especially come September…

    Thanks!

    GravatarComment by Adaś — August 15, 2008 @ 10:59 am

  6. Having commuted to the Kipling lot from London 3 times a week, and circled the lot for an hour till something opened up, I know all to well the hazards of not getting there before 6:30am. They should really look at multilevel parking.

    GravatarComment by John Leschinski — August 15, 2008 @ 3:51 pm

  7. Interestingly enough, the rail line which passes by Kipling subway station goes straight into London. There is GO service along this line as far as Milton, and there have been proposals to go all the way to Cambridge. Passenger rail on this line would serve London International Airport, Thamesford, Woodstock (north end of Town), Innerkip, Drumbo & Ayr. Small towns yes, but it small towns on the congested 401.

    GravatarComment by Andrae Griffith — August 15, 2008 @ 10:15 pm

  8. Ya, if the Go Train came to London it would have made things much easier and less expensive hopefully. I thought about taking the VIA but the rates were just ridiculous considering how much less it was by car.

    I also thought about parking in Milton, but by the time I drive all the way to Milton I might as well just drive into Kipling. The 401 was generally pretty clear in the mornings until your past Milton around 7am.

    GravatarComment by John Leschinski — August 15, 2008 @ 10:52 pm

  9. Adaś, we ran our test in early June. I’d imagine it gets even more busy during the school year. Crazy.

    I’ve had some luck at Kipling during the school year until at 8am, but anytime after that, finding a spot is going to be highly unlikely.

    Unless you get there after 11pm. Then sometimes spots start opening up again.

    GravatarComment by Sameer Vasta — August 17, 2008 @ 4:30 pm

  10. Thanks, Sameer. I will test in September and post my findings ;) Very helpful article, BTW.

    GravatarComment by Adaś — August 17, 2008 @ 6:49 pm

  11. [...] new Metronauts blog is live, and last week, I added a post about commuter parking lots and why a lack of parking is causing more congestion in the core: The problem of inadequate [...]

    GravatarPingback by Parked. | Eloquation — August 18, 2008 @ 1:13 pm

  12. Wow, this article has been a long time coming. I used to park at the York Mills parking lot but yes, it also became full early in the day forcing people to either park illegally or just drive downtown. To add to the matter, for the entire month of August the parking lot is completely closed because of renovations to the station. What they need there is a parking garage instead of the lot. Charge $5 and just have more parking! You can’t go wrong.

    What I’m wondering is, has the city just not seen the problem or are they just unable to fix it?

    GravatarComment by Henna — August 18, 2008 @ 3:28 pm

  13. You may be interested to know that parking is heavily subsidised by the TTC to the tune of several million dollars annually. Expanding parking will push this up substantially because parking structures are (a) more expensive and (b) require better security.

    The question the TTC faces is whether it should be in the parking business and whether its funds could be better spent on running more service.

    This is also a challenge for GO because the easy pickings, the parking lots around stations in old industrial areas, are long gone and more capacity is quite expensive. The problem, as some commenters above pointed out, is that the bus service to GO stations doesn’t reach the areas people come from, especially for offpeak and counterpeak travel.

    In another post, we read about REX, but a frequent rail service is useless if it connects to a next-to-non-existing local bus network. A gaping hole in the Metrolinx plans is that local services are not considered part of “the plan” even though without them, Metrolinx cannot achieve its goals.

    Parking in the 905 will be a big debate because the supply of land is small compared to the potential demand. Just imagine if GO started to carry twice or three times the riders it does today in some corridors. Challenging.

    GravatarComment by Steve Munro — August 18, 2008 @ 6:37 pm

  14. Wow, thanks for the context and information Steve. A lot of us that aren’t as closely involved with TTC ops aren’t privy to that kind of info.

    I guess we really need to take a closer look at local buses and local transit networks that connect to these larger hubs!

    GravatarComment by Sameer Vasta — August 18, 2008 @ 8:33 pm

  15. I agree with you, Steve, that local bus services are integral to success, but I disagree that local services are not part of the plan. There have been some interesting ideas floating around, including GO itself setting up these local routes if the municipal systems are unwilling.

    It will all come down to how much control Metrolinx has over other transit agencies. If they takeover the local systems then they will be able to put in local bus routes, but a takeover of the TTC and other opens a can of worms that could be either the slimy variety or the gummy variety – we don’t really know. If they leave the systems as they are, then we must rely on the local systems to make these changes, and they may or may not do so.

    I guess the question that arises from your comment is: How much control over locally-oriented affairs should Metrolinx have?

    GravatarComment by Andrae Griffith — August 18, 2008 @ 9:30 pm

  16. The parking obsession is as problematic as the concept of the highway system; capacity is used up as soon as its built. The paradox is that no matter how much parking (or highway) is built, demand will never be satisfied.

    While it may seem counter intuitive, the solution is probably to reduce parking but at the same time provide a viable alternate somehow. For immediate area, a well served feeder bus route (albeit stretching only to a relatively small radius from the station) is one part of the puzzle; but if people are coming from London, then feeder buses are not going to reach them.

    Talking about extending GO service endlessly risks resulting in the same problem that the TTC faces with the Yonge Line; if Milton trains started in London, nobody would be able to get on by Streetsville; this problem already exists at Dixie (any remaining standing space is usually taken up at Cooksville, but space opens up at Kipling as many transfer to the subway). Of course, one option becomes express travel between, for example, Cambridge and Kipling, while leaving a local line serving all stops from and including Cambridge to and including Kipling, plus Union. However, this requires additional tracks that don’t yet exist.

    Some disincentive needs to be added to those who use the GO lots even though they have access to them by public transit; free feeders to GO stations while charging for parking is one way. An extensive (and perhaps covered) bike path network from GO Stations for, for example, a 3km radius is perhaps another avenue to investigate, as bicycle parking can be done in far less space-consuming ways (they could even be dropped atop the tracks, for example).

    I definately agree with the idea of providing daycare and shopping around GO Stations – that could prove to be an incredible time saver for many people. How far do we take such logic though? Where do we stop? Should we build massive elementary schools in front of GO Stations, too? There are some limits to the feasability of this.

    LRT around the GO network is an important part of the solution; there will be an LRT connecting Port Credit, Cooksville, and Brampton GO Stations, however this LRT should be run by GO; The same applies for Dundas; it will run between Sq.1 and Kipling GO, via Cooksville GO (possibly via Dixie as well, but that is arguably unnecessary, it’s worth debating analyzing though).

    Many options are available to explore, but we have to remember that expanding parking more is a dead-end. Sadly, both the TTC and GO Transit are not yet prepared to accept this idea that any capacity added will be eaten up on opening day and the complaints they have today will continue after expansion is complete – it’s a neverending cycle. Don’t build more parking – if anything, after alternatives are developed and proving successful, reduce parking.

    If we really want to make transit a convenient alternative, a two-pronged strategy needs to be developed: 1; attractive service from the point of origin, and 2; planning that allows multi-stop trips be conveniently hit in a single-line travel trip by feeders in a manner that is good for everybody whether they need to make multiple stops en route or not. Many suburban routes suffer from ridiculously indirect and thereby inconvenient layouts.

    Also part of increasing the attractiveness of the suburban system is developing a system that is just as attractive outside of rush hour. All day train service, preferably more than once an hour, is needed. Trains can be as short as 2- or 3-car consists (drop a low-power engine in the cab cars like they had in GO’s start-up days), as long as they’re frequent. Many people may need or want to leave later for a variety of reasons.

    GravatarComment by Karl Junkin — August 18, 2008 @ 9:49 pm

  17. Perhaps the goal shouldn’t be how to best accommodate people who like to leave two tonnes of metal on valuable land, and instead look for alternatives from them starting up the car at all?

    GravatarComment by Triceratops — August 19, 2008 @ 3:14 am

  18. Alternatives are key, Triceratops. Sadly, right now, those alternatives don’t always exist because of a lack of local transit access or the need to do things before the commute like dropping kids off to school.

    GravatarComment by Sameer Vasta — August 19, 2008 @ 7:25 am

  19. If these lots were charged at an optimal rate (to balance use and revenue), we could:

    - Reinvest the money into the system, for example into local feeder routes and/or
    - Reduce the price of metropasses for those who do not use the lots

    We could also develop the lots as “transit-oriented development”.

    GravatarComment by Anton — August 19, 2008 @ 8:06 am

  20. Responding to the question about Metrolinx controlling local systems:

    Debates on this subject obscure the more important issue: what quality of transit should we have and who is going to pay for it? We can argue for months about Metrolinx would do a better job than, say, Brampton Transit, but if at the end of the day Metrolinx doesn’t think local service exists as anything beyond a peak feeder to GO Transit, then they won’t spend the money it.

    If Queen’s Park doesn’t want to increase its contribution for local operations, then it doesn’t make much sense for a quasi-provincial agency to take over service that would have to be funded locally.

    Regarding transit oriented development:

    The problem here is that there is a lag time between saying “we want a hub here” and that hub actually being built and populated. Meanwhile, transit systems worry about paying for all the extra service they are expected to provide at this proto-hub, and they don’t make it as attractive as it might be possibly leading to car-oriented uses at the “transit” hub.

    We will never get transit oriented development unless we are prepared to encourage it by building and operating service before the development is completed. In some contexts this would be call an investment, but because of the way transit is funded and measured, running good service to a field is usually called a waste of taxpayers’ money.

    Before someone jumps in asking about the VCC subway, I don’t object to running good service to VCC, but have always argued that a subway extension is not the right answer for this location. But that’s a completely different thread.

    Finally, I recently learned that if parking lots were subjected to the same standard as bus service (cost per passenger, marginal cost per new passenger, marginal loss per passenger if a lot were closed), parking would never be approved as a “transit route”. Remember this the next time the TTC tells you a service does not meet their financial criteria. (If and when I get my hands on the figures, I will publish them on my own blog.)

    GravatarComment by Steve Munro — August 19, 2008 @ 8:52 am

  21. [...] The drawbacks are a little harder to find, but they are there. Retailers in the core are bound to complain about a reduction in customers, fraudsters are bound to develop number plate clones, and a swarm of cars are bound to congregate at commuter hubs that can’t accommodate them. [...]

    GravatarPingback by Metronauts » Congested? Maybe you need a charge. — August 19, 2008 @ 9:12 am

  22. What kind of world are we living in where all children have to be driven to school? I walked to school every day. It’s no wonder kids are so lazy.

    GravatarComment by Triceratops — August 19, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

  23. [...] new Metronauts blog is live, and last week, I added a post about commuter parking lots and why a lack of parking is causing more congestion in the core: The problem of inadequate [...]

    GravatarPingback by Parked. | i tell stories — August 19, 2008 @ 11:01 pm

  24. Looking forward to seeing those figures on your blog Steve. Thanks to all of you (who know much more about parking than I do!) for chiming in.

    GravatarComment by Sameer Vasta — August 21, 2008 @ 9:47 am

  25. Should there not be a limit on the size of the parking lots at Go Transit? I made a post on my bog http://busdriverofdurham.blogspot.com/2008/07/go-transit-steals-drt-passengers.html about an expansion of the parking at Whitby Station. Over 3,000 parking spots seems to be too much especially when there is already public transit in place to take passengers to the Go for 65 cents.

    GravatarComment by Andy — August 24, 2008 @ 6:37 am

  26. [...] seems as though the TTC may be reading your comments. At least [...]

    GravatarPingback by Metronauts » Pulling Parking Perks — August 26, 2008 @ 9:27 am

  27. Is hill harper gay
    http://iggy-pop-gay.com/map-of-gay-world/|Map of gay world

    GravatarComment by big fat gay — December 16, 2008 @ 8:18 am

  28. sourcearticle.info has a similiar post if anyone’s interested

    GravatarComment by Jenny — December 23, 2008 @ 5:32 am

  29. There’s some more information here if anyone’s interested

    GravatarComment by Jenny — December 23, 2008 @ 5:32 am

  30. hi
    0mw4ufg15gtzdcl6
    good luck

    GravatarComment by Gretchen Mathews — January 8, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

  31. hi
    0mw4ufg15gtzdcl6
    good luck

    GravatarComment by Alfonzo Bond — January 10, 2009 @ 6:10 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

"));