Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
5,838
Reaction score
1,519
The Eglinton West LRT is planned to go to Pearson Airport, as part of the transit plans announced this week. Finch West LRT could be extended to Pearson as well, at a later date.
This and a B-D extension to 427 (Honeydale) and a 427 BRT should be sufficient.
 

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
5,838
Reaction score
1,519
Unless the LRT is lightning fast west of Mount Dennis, I honestly wonder how many people are going to ride it via the planned convoluted route via Renforth/Commerce. I suspect a branch via (under) the Hydro Corridor at Eglinton-Martin Grove direct to YYZ will be proposed at some point. (Such a branch could also be the northern phase of a link to Kipling)
That's why it's proposed to be fully grade-separated with only stops at major roads.
 

sixrings

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
4,254
Reaction score
1,338
This and a B-D extension to 427 (Honeydale) and a 427 BRT should be sufficient.
I thought B-D extension west had to go to SQ1 because Vaughan got a subway and Mississaugas feelings were hurt and now they think they deserve a subway to.
 

smallspy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
2,829
Unless the LRT is lightning fast west of Mount Dennis, I honestly wonder how many people are going to ride it via the planned convoluted route via Renforth/Commerce. I suspect a branch via (under) the Hydro Corridor at Eglinton-Martin Grove direct to YYZ will be proposed at some point. (Such a branch could also be the northern phase of a link to Kipling)
As someone who lives near one of the future stations and who needs to fly not infrequently, I would gladly take a longer one-seat ride right to the airport rather than needing to lug my bags up and down stairs at transfer points.

Dan
 

Reecemartin

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2016
Messages
1,523
Reaction score
1,060
The distinction that I make between and RER and subway (or metro if you like) is stop spacing (and by extension total line length). An RER cannot have the kind of close stop spacing that a subway does while also providing long range service to suburban centres. Witness TTC's Line 1 where it would a rider travelling from VMC station to Union about 45 minutes to complete that ~20 Km trip. In the same time frame a GO rider could get to union from Oakville GO (on an all stop run) a ~30 Km trip.

A true RER with EMU's would have even greater acceleration ability and higher speeds than GO currently does, and that would stretch the trip distance probably to 40 or 50 Km
Nothing prevents RER from having dense stop spacing in the centre and wider outside, especially with electrification. We're adding a lot of stops in Toronto already.
It will become a regular "GO" service, but not with the trains GO uses today.

GO will be running single level EMUs in a few years on a few lines, I imagine they will use them here.
This is purely a guess, its unknown what the bidders will put forward train wise. That being said I am seeing a lot of stuff such as the new Paris RER trains using mixed trains with alternating single and double-decker cars https://www.railwaygazette.com/traction-and-rolling-stock/paris-rer-ng-design-unveiled/46600.article. You also would want to have high platforms though which might be too much to ask.

Unless the LRT is lightning fast west of Mount Dennis, I honestly wonder how many people are going to ride it via the planned convoluted route via Renforth/Commerce. I suspect a branch via (under) the Hydro Corridor at Eglinton-Martin Grove direct to YYZ will be proposed at some point. (Such a branch could also be the northern phase of a link to Kipling)
Yeah this is one of the reasons I think GS this line actually makes sense, airport travellers have luggage and perhaps even more so than regular travellers want a quick and reliable trip. Plus it means that both the UPX and the EWLRT link the rest of the grade-separated subway to Person in a grade-separated way.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
10,592
Reaction score
5,407
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
Just when you though Metrolinx could not screw things up more... If they can't fine those not paying why bother with ticket inspectors etc. It's only 'tax payers money'! See: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/11/13/didnt-pay-to-ride-the-up-express-metrolinx-isnt-allowed-to-fine-you-for-evading-fares.html

Since the Union Pearson Express opened in 2015, Metrolinx hasn’t fined a single customer on the airport rail link for fare evasion.

That’s not because people who take UP Express are extraordinarily law-abiding. In fact, Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency that operates the service, estimates riders who skip out on paying their fare for the airport train cost it about $400,000 annually in lost revenue.

The dearth of tickets is instead a result of a legal loophole Metrolinx has known about for years but has yet to close: the UP Express has never been covered by the agency’s bylaws, which means the organization has no authority to impose rules specific to the service and fine riders who break them.


Metrolinx hasn’t publicized the loophole, but the agency’s lack of bylaw authority over the UP Express was revealed in internal documents the Star obtained through a freedom of information request.

The documents included a summary of a review conducted in April 2018 that flagged multiple challenges to collecting fares on the UP Express, and warned riders were taking advantage of them.

“One customer stated that he did not purchase, nor did he intend to purchase a fare,” the summary said.
 

Streety McCarface

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
1,674
Reaction score
1,394
Just when you though Metrolinx could not screw things up more... If they can't fine those not paying why bother with ticket inspectors etc. It's only 'tax payers money'! See: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/11/13/didnt-pay-to-ride-the-up-express-metrolinx-isnt-allowed-to-fine-you-for-evading-fares.html

Since the Union Pearson Express opened in 2015, Metrolinx hasn’t fined a single customer on the airport rail link for fare evasion.

That’s not because people who take UP Express are extraordinarily law-abiding. In fact, Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency that operates the service, estimates riders who skip out on paying their fare for the airport train cost it about $400,000 annually in lost revenue.

The dearth of tickets is instead a result of a legal loophole Metrolinx has known about for years but has yet to close: the UP Express has never been covered by the agency’s bylaws, which means the organization has no authority to impose rules specific to the service and fine riders who break them.


Metrolinx hasn’t publicized the loophole, but the agency’s lack of bylaw authority over the UP Express was revealed in internal documents the Star obtained through a freedom of information request.

The documents included a summary of a review conducted in April 2018 that flagged multiple challenges to collecting fares on the UP Express, and warned riders were taking advantage of them.

“One customer stated that he did not purchase, nor did he intend to purchase a fare,” the summary said.
Every time I've been on the UPX, there have been conductors checking every single person's fare. Also, 400K Annually is a lot, but to put it in perspective, it's about a grand a day, so, one passenger out of like 100 actually fare evades. 1% fare evasion isn't that horrible
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
15,575
Reaction score
4,465
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
Every time I've been on the UPX, there have been conductors checking every single person's fare. Also, 400K Annually is a lot, but to put it in perspective, it's about a grand a day, so, one passenger out of like 100 actually fare evades. 1% fare evasion isn't that horrible
May not be fined for fare evasion, but could be arrested for trespassing.
 

mdrejhon

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 25, 2014
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
2,570
Location
Hamilton
May not be fined for fare evasion, but could be arrested for trespassing.
First. Up front. I'm a car owner, home owner. But I have something very blunt to say:

I disagree -- sometimes fare evasion isn't intentional. There are many students charged $400 that rightfully SHOULD HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED MORE THAN A FREAKING PARKING TICKET

Sometimes it is intentional

* Sure, there are car drivers that pull into parking spots and intentionally don't pay
* Sure, there are transit users that board bus / subway and intentionally don't pay

But there's also

Sometimes it is unintentional
* Sure, there's honest drivers who was stuck on the dentist chair too long got a parking fine
* Sure, there's honest transit users who tried to pay (even attempt twice using 2 methods) and got fined for fare evasion

The fining system in Canada is stupendously stupid in its The fining sytsem is very pro-car anti-transit practice where an accidental mistake with TTC transit costs $400 and an accidental mistake with my Hyundai Elantra costs only $18.00 parking fine in Hamilton.

Accidental mistake with TTC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $425.00
Accidental mistake with GO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100.00
Accidental mistake with car in Toronto . . . . . . . $53.00
Accidental mistake with car in Hamilton . . . . . . $18.00

See the problem? Why do we fine transit mistakes massively bigger than car mistakes?
Even SPEEDING TICKETS (speed kills) are cheaper than many transit fines that exist in GTHA.
Ponder that for a moment.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Sometimes I think the invention of the phrase "fare evasion" is discriminatory and classist, where a poor student who had intention to pay (but had a bad Presto card) gets the short stick, while a car driver like me gets fine a paltry $18 fine for overstaying at a parking meter. Stupid pro-car anti-transit distortions in our fining systems here in this country. Sometimes the invention of the phrase "fare evasion" implies a lot; that it's always intentional evasion.

Should we call accidental unpaid parking meters "parking evasion"?
Even though some of them are accidental overays too, rather than intentional parking without paying..
Make the car phrase as loaded as the transit phrase, eh? Perhaps, yes...

Solution:
(1)
Equallize the parking fines with transit fines. Less discriminatory car-vs-transit;
(2) Or tolerate the accidental nonpayments (determining intent can be hard, so always err on not-guilty and just tolerate the extra taxpayer expense while improving the fare-collecting reliablity);

One or the other. It's not healthy for society to have neither.

Even Calgary and Hamilton has some free transit routes (#99 Waterfront bus in Hamilton, and C-Train Downtown Segment in Calgary). THAT cost taxpayers money too. This costs taxpayer money and we tolerate it. If we simply renamed "Fare Evasion" into "Fare Overdue" then it would be less shameful to those people who have tried to pay fare but failed for one reason or another, but got fined anyway. You've heard of free transit in some parts of Europe. But we have some here too! Maybe we cannot afford free transit, but we can at least afford a 1% free transit to cover those accidental non-payments, elderly, students, etc. Why not? It ends up becoming an accepted cost of doing business. Increase fare compliance through other means than stupendously car-generous-anti-transit fines!!! Hire more enforcement jobs, plus other remedies. And don't punish for broken Presto machines. Be fair.
We lose a lot more revenues from parking cheats than transit cheats. Why do we tolerate this more as a taxpayer? Honestly, is this not unfair? Ask your heart.

Phrase stigma: We don't call it "parking evasion" when car drivers are accidentally in an expired parking spot.
Anyway, we don't call parking overdues "Parking Evasion", don't we??? So, I consider the loss revenue a cost of doing business, though we should strive to reduce the number on both ends. Call it "1% partial free transit allowance" for missed fares that includes a generous allowance for fare mistakes. Some fare inspectors are nice and understanding, but not all of them. Likewise, some parking enforcement are nice and understanding, but not all of them. Nonwithstanding it, there's the phrase stigma imbalance of the gentle "parking fine" phrase and the heavier stigma of "fare evasion" phrase. Very discriminatory especially when unintentional! Sometimes the shaming phrase "fare evasion" is like saying a four letter word to a nice honest student who just failed in their 2 attempts to pay the fare. What's going on is sometimes patently unfair from what I've seen happen to my fellow friends. It's such a travesty how the fine system mistreats them. Big headshake.

So, now why do we call it "parking fine" and not "fined for parking evasion"? Such a phrase-loadedness imbalance. We have genuine fare evaders and parking evaders, but we also have much more innocuous situations, ranging from a malfunctioning fare machine that later cascaded into a fare evasion fine.

Yes, the loophole (Metrolinx being unable to enforce on UP) should be fixed. But that's beside the point.....!

For those saying "Arrest?" I will assume they're being sarcastic in jest. You probably were, but others may naively agree we need to arrest lack of fare payment. But that's like demanding to arrest car drivers who just happens to have a car in an expired parking spot. Yes, the real fare evaders may have hardened the fare enforcement, but there's a lot of throw-babies-with-bathwater situations in these things. We have to solve the problem nontheless to increase fare payment compliance through other means than a car-vs-transit fining inbalance such as this. Besides, we lose way more taxpayer money from real parking evaders than from real fare evaders (am I being harsh yet? ;))

And I'm a home owner (4-bedroom detached), car owner (I drive a 2011 Elantra Touring GLS), and I am not a poor student. But I relate to their plight including some personal friends.
 
Last edited:

TheTigerMaster

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
12,428
Reaction score
4,436
Location
Best Toronto

Between this, the Presto AG report, and their mishandling of the Crosstown LRT payouts, this agency has very serious accountability issues. And by that, I mean the agency is totally unaccountable. Metrolinx treats every aspect of their operation as some kind is state secret. This needs to stop. It’s anyone’s guess how much internal rot and incompetence within the organization is yet to be discovered. This needs to change
 

smallspy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
2,829
Just when you though Metrolinx could not screw things up more... If they can't fine those not paying why bother with ticket inspectors etc. It's only 'tax payers money'! See: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/11/13/didnt-pay-to-ride-the-up-express-metrolinx-isnt-allowed-to-fine-you-for-evading-fares.html

Since the Union Pearson Express opened in 2015, Metrolinx hasn’t fined a single customer on the airport rail link for fare evasion.

That’s not because people who take UP Express are extraordinarily law-abiding. In fact, Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency that operates the service, estimates riders who skip out on paying their fare for the airport train cost it about $400,000 annually in lost revenue.

The dearth of tickets is instead a result of a legal loophole Metrolinx has known about for years but has yet to close: the UP Express has never been covered by the agency’s bylaws, which means the organization has no authority to impose rules specific to the service and fine riders who break them.


Metrolinx hasn’t publicized the loophole, but the agency’s lack of bylaw authority over the UP Express was revealed in internal documents the Star obtained through a freedom of information request.

The documents included a summary of a review conducted in April 2018 that flagged multiple challenges to collecting fares on the UP Express, and warned riders were taking advantage of them.

“One customer stated that he did not purchase, nor did he intend to purchase a fare,” the summary said.
As much as it pains me to defend Metrolinx.....

In this case, what they have been doing is charging the offenders with tresspassing, rather than riding without a fare. I believe that the penalty is lower.

And it happens on a daily basis.

Dan
 

TheTigerMaster

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
12,428
Reaction score
4,436
Location
Best Toronto
As much as it pains me to defend Metrolinx.....

In this case, what they have been doing is charging the offenders with tresspassing, rather than riding without a fare. I believe that the penalty is lower.

And it happens on a daily basis.

Dan
This trespassing charge is the Criminal Code violation, right? I’m surprised that would be a lower penalty than a simple administrative fine.
 

vic

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
959
Reaction score
567
Location
Junction Triangle
When you get "caught" not paying a fare on UP Express, you have the chance to buy a ticket at a somewhat inflated price from the on-board staff - "Tickets purchased on-board are subject to an additional on-board payment fee of $2.(credit card only)". It's not like you get fined right away. I wonder how much this works in to the stats.
 

jcam

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
480
Reaction score
235
Having recently done a jurisdictional scan on fare evasion rates, 2% is roughly the common target for metro-mode transit, and that's usually at properties that have station gates. 2% for a non-gate rail agency is pretty good.
 

Top