Toronto Bike Share

[vic]

My selfish expansion desire is for "downtown" Mississauga. I don't bike commute out to here much anymore, but when I do, it's awesome having my bike available for lunch/errands. If Mississauga ever gets a Bike Share system, it would make sense to be partnered with Bike Share Toronto.

 

[amnesiajune]

If Mississauga ever gets a Bike Share system, it would make sense to be partnered with Bike Share Toronto.

Why? Nobody's ever going to use their 30 minutes to bike that far out.

 

[janschot]

Why? Nobody's ever going to use their 30 minutes to bike that far out.

Jersey City uses the same bike share system as New York City's. Coverage areas don't have to be contiguous for it to make sense to share a system. People can bike to a transit station, travel, and then bike at the other end. I used to do this in New York myself.

 

[Fred.S]

I would hope any new bike share system would just be Presto-compatible, which should cover most people if transit is involved. Ideally a per-ride fee, unless you add a bike share pass to your card beforehand (in the same way you would add a monthly transit pass online). Hamilton's system is Presto-compatible, but I think only if you link the card to your account, or put a pass on it.

Then the system/tech wouldn't matter. Though I do like PBSC/Bixi bikes.

 

[amnesiajune]

Jersey City uses the same bike share system as New York City's. Coverage areas don't have to be contiguous for it to make sense to share a system.

New York's bike share is a private, for-profit company. Ours is owned by TPA, a municipal government agency. If a private bike share wants to operate in multiple cities it's their prerogative (Dropbike operates in Toronto, Montreal and Kingston), but Toronto Bike Share belongs in Mississauga about as much as Green P lots do.

 

[Admiral Beez]

My selfish expansion desire is for "downtown" Mississauga. I don't bike commute out to here much anymore, but when I do, it's awesome having my bike available for lunch/errands. If Mississauga ever gets a Bike Share system, it would make sense to be partnered with Bike Share Toronto.

My vote for Mississauga Bikeshare is a station at Port Credit GoStation and Hurontario and South Service Road, lol. That'll get me pretty close to work.

New York's bike share is a private, for-profit company. Ours is owned by TPA, a municipal government agency. If a private bike share wants to operate in multiple cities it's their prerogative (Dropbike operates in Toronto, Montreal and Kingston), but Toronto Bike Share belongs in Mississauga about as much as Green P lots do.

I'd be fine buying a separate membership for Mississauga bikeshare. Ideally we want them all linked with Presto cards.

 

[Admiral Beez]

How will there be riders in an area with no coverage?

I assume they started in an area with coverage, for example downtown, and then inadvertently rode into a non-covered area, such anywhere east of Jones and south of the Danforth, i.e. a huge swath of the city.

 

[Megaton327]

I assume they started in an area with coverage, for example downtown, and then inadvertently rode into a non-covered area, such anywhere east of Jones and south of the Danforth, i.e. a huge swath of the city.

I don't think you read the post chain I was replying to in that comment. The previous post said "What are we covering if no riders?". As in, someone was questioning why Bikeshare should expand into areas of the city with no bikeshare riders. I was pointing out that of course there are no riders in an area of the city bikeshare is expanding to, how will there be riders with no coverage.

 

[vic]

Yes, exactly. This would be for the days when I'm already in Mississauga (via transit) and want to bike to somewhere else nearby. Not for commuting. Using Presto as a single card for all transportation needs would frankly be amazing.

Side story: In Santiago, Chile, there's a bit of an opposite problem. There's a large bike share program that covers various neighbourhoods - http://www.bikesantiago.cl/. But, one neighbourhood (Providencia) has its own system. So if you're cycling from the Vitacura Neighbourhood to downtown on an orange BikeSantiago bike, you pass through a different system's zone of green bikes. D'oh.....

 

[LNahid2000]

New York's bike share is a private, for-profit company. Ours is owned by TPA, a municipal government agency. If a private bike share wants to operate in multiple cities it's their prerogative (Dropbike operates in Toronto, Montreal and Kingston), but Toronto Bike Share belongs in Mississauga about as much as Green P lots do.

Metro Bike Share in Los Angeles has bikes in multiple cities (Pasadena and Santa Monica) even though neither are part of Los Angeles proper. I don't see why it couldn't work the same way here, especially since Bike Share Toronto expansion has primarily been funded by Metrolinx and the federal government.

And obviously no one is going to use Bike Share to commute between the cities since they're 25km from each other for Los Angeles' system. The point is to take transit and then use bike share for the last mile, which I think is Metrolinx's vision and why they are funding Bike Share Toronto.

 

[amnesiajune]

Metro Bike Share in Los Angeles has bikes in multiple cities (Pasadena and Santa Monica) even though neither are part of Los Angeles proper.

Metro Bike Share is run by Los Angeles County. Not the city of Los Angeles.

The point is to take transit and then use bike share for the last mile, which I think is Metrolinx's vision and why they are funding Bike Share Toronto.

There's no reason why they can't fund a separate system. Metrolinx already provides funding for Hamilton's separate system. There's just no good reason for Toronto's municipal government to be running bike share services in another municipality, especially when it would require a small operating subsidy from TPA.

And I don't think anyone buys the "last mile" argument. Not when you need to buy a long-term membership or pricey day pass and all of the bikes are in the part of the city with the best transit coverage. Bike Share is meant to work as an alternative to transit, because in the core it's often just as fast (or faster) to bike as it is to take a bus/streetcar, and the cost per trip is lower with the bikes than the TTC.

 

[LNahid2000]

Metro Bike Share is run by Los Angeles County. Not the city of Los Angeles.



There's no reason why they can't fund a separate system. Metrolinx already provides funding for Hamilton's separate system. There's just no good reason for Toronto's municipal government to be running bike share services in another municipality, especially when it would require a small operating subsidy from TPA.

And I don't think anyone buys the "last mile" argument. Not when you need to buy a long-term membership or pricey day pass and all of the bikes are in the part of the city with the best transit coverage. Bike Share is meant to work as an alternative to transit, because in the core it's often just as fast (or faster) to bike as it is to take a bus/streetcar, and the cost per trip is lower with the bikes than the TTC.

I think there are advantages to having a single bike share system for one region since one could use GO between Toronto and Hamilton for example, and use Bike Share for the last mile on both sides without having to buy multiple bike share memberships. The system doesn't have to stay under TPA forever. I wouldn't be surprised if it was moved to Metrolinx ownership one day since they have publicly stated that they want more Bike Share at transit stations.

And I know quite a few people who use Bike Share as a last mile solution. One of the major uses of bike share is for GO Transit commuters arriving at Union Station and then taking bike share to their destination. I've also often used the subway to get somewhere, but then using Bike Share to complete my trip rather than waiting for a slow bus or streetcar. A bike share membership is only $90/year making it well worth it even if you only use it a few times a month.

 

[ADRM]

And I don't think anyone buys the "last mile" argument. Not when you need to buy a long-term membership or pricey day pass and all of the bikes are in the part of the city with the best transit coverage. Bike Share is meant to work as an alternative to transit, because in the core it's often just as fast (or faster) to bike as it is to take a bus/streetcar, and the cost per trip is lower with the bikes than the TTC.

I certainly buy the last mile argument, both because I witness that very behaviour and practice it myself. Perhaps it's applied too liberally in some circumstances in reference to locations where it's less feasible or desirable, but I think it's much too categorical to dismiss it entirely.

Toronto may have the best transit coverage in the region, but it still kinda sucks for lots of places throughout the city proper.

 

[Avenue]

It's a problematic buzzword to throw around because in the case of Bikeshare in Toronto, TTC stops are far more frequent than Bikeshare stations - as in for people who have already taken transit into the city, there's no logical case for transferring to bikeshare OR for bikeshare to be "intended for last mile" since public transit will more precisely get you to your address. It's an alternative and more affordable mode of transportation with positive externalities such as health and low carbon emission. Let's leave it at that.

 

[LNahid2000]

It's a problematic buzzword to throw around because in the case of bikeshare in Toronto, TTC stops are far more frequent than Bikeshare stations - as in for people who have already taken transit into the city, there's no logical case for bikeshare to be intended for last mile since public transit will more precisely get you to your address. It's an alternative and more affordable mode of transportation with positive externalities such as health and low carbon emission. Let's leave it at that.

1. People don't only use the TTC to take transit into the city
2. Even if TTC stops are closer together than Bike Share stops, if your trip includes a bus or multiple surface transfers after the subway, bike share is going to be faster.