Northern Light
Superstar
It was nice out? and They've only had the full expansion in place for about 2 weeks.
|
|
|
- Thread starter kettal
- Start date
It was nice out? and They've only had the full expansion in place for about 2 weeks.
Northern Light
Superstar
In a report to the Toronto Parking Authority Board, the idea of extending the base time for Bikeshare to 45 minutes, from 30 is not recommended by staff.
The argument has to do with a combination of trip time analysis (which I would argue supports longer trips, but I digress); and a look at pricing for annual membership in systems that support longer times (yet largely ignores Montreal in the comparison).
Sigh..
Report here:
The argument has to do with a combination of trip time analysis (which I would argue supports longer trips, but I digress); and a look at pricing for annual membership in systems that support longer times (yet largely ignores Montreal in the comparison).
Sigh..
Report here:
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Progress can be slow some times...
I was popping on the BikeShare map and realized they had the most random of stations at Eglinton and Leslie now. Wild.
I was popping on the BikeShare map and realized they had the most random of stations at Eglinton and Leslie now. Wild.
Northern Light
Superstar
That's an asinine location, at least currently. There's no other stations for a considerable distance on Eglinton, nor any others in the valley within a 30 minute trip. (next one down is Pottery Road).
It would be fine if it were somehow connected to other stations, but it isn't. Such a waste.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I can only think that they are just readying their infrastructure for post-Crosstown world and that there was a lack of bureaucratic red tape to proceed with that location as opposed to others at this point in time.
Maybe they are also seeing something that is not obvious. Come to think of it, there have been times when I or a friend have been caught at Sunnybrook Park without a bike, while the rest of the friend group were on bikes. More options is never bad, and ideally we will want to see the system expanded across Eglinton one day.
Regardless, seems a little early for that station.
Maybe they are also seeing something that is not obvious. Come to think of it, there have been times when I or a friend have been caught at Sunnybrook Park without a bike, while the rest of the friend group were on bikes. More options is never bad, and ideally we will want to see the system expanded across Eglinton one day.
Regardless, seems a little early for that station.
rbt
Senior Member
Yeah. I'm looking at those casual user numbers and find myself wanting conversion rates to memberships for those who go over the 30 minute limit versus those who do not. Getting stuck with $4 extra because you spent a few minutes looking for a bike stand would piss off a few customers; there's a pretty clear scramble between 25 minutes and 35 minutes for casuals.
Perhaps advertising 30 minutes but granting 35 minutes would be financially advantageous (sell more memberships). Give a notice somehow that they received a short extension gratis.
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
TRONto
Active Member
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Yes.
Behind the scenes, it is easier to stake claims for land early than later. The patchwork of stations will probably be properly infilled later with additional stations. Those spots may have been what was cheaply/freely available that could be locked-down with long-term contracts. Basically becoming a "staking claim" stage. Metaphorically, a land rush, in a manner of speaking.
Imagine having to pay costs (say, $150/month paid to a parking lot owner) for land for a bikeshare station -- versus getting free rent for a station at $0/month for 10 years thanks to a progressive business offering their siding space for a station (who just only wants a free bikeshare membership and the bonus "convenience" in return). Especially in a part of city where goverment isn't yet ready to approve sidewalk space or street parking takeovers yet.
Bikeshare fleets have to do strategic cost decisions like that -- especially in low-traffic peripheral areas -- which sometimes leads to stations in patchwork or asinine areas (at least initially).
It'll probably infill nicely later by the time Crosstown runs.
Last edited:
amnesiajune
Senior Member
It's about a 20 minute bike ride downhill and 25 minutes uphill.
Anyhow, the appeal of this probably is to get some revenue from people who park there, then ride down and often back up, paying for at least a day pass. It's not meant to connect with the rest of Eglinton because of the hills -- bike share systems all over the world struggle to get people to ride uphill. This is also why the Bike Share system east of Pape is split into a network of stations at the lower end of the big hills and another network along Danforth.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I notice the new stations are still being dropped in the grass like these.I do wish Bikeshare would stop putting their stations on the grass. Twice now picking up bikes on a dark morning I've stepped in dog sh#t trying to extricate a bike from the dock. This morning, 6:30am I'm getting bike at Queen and Berkeley and spat goes the dog crap - so apologies if the brand new men's room in the lower concourse at Union smelled like a dog's rear this morning - that was me washing off my boot. Same happened last year at Sumach and Carlton. Multiple other times getting or dropping off bikes during nighttime I've been lucky enough to see and avoid the mess beforehand.
So, please no more of these...
DSC
Superstar
Though on grass is not great it is better than NO station and I bet it is both more costly and more 'administratively burdensome" to put down a concrete pad. (and then removing it if/when you relocate the bikes.
Northern Light
Superstar
facepalming_brooklynite
Active Member
It seems like the fault is not with Bikeshare but with the dog owners, (and with the lack of by-law enforcement in this city that has taught many dog owners to let their dogs run wild wherever they feel like it)
DSC
Superstar
TPA is about to award a 5-year contract to manage Bike Share - same vendor as now. See: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2020.PA12.1
Summary | ||||||||||||||||||||
Number of Bids: Four (4) Description: The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to select a qualified company to partner with Toronto Parking Authority (TPA) for the operation and administration of the Bike Share Toronto system. Through a competitive bid process, TPA selected and contracted with Ward O'Farrell Consultants Inc., a Government of Ontario Vendor of Record consulting firm specializing in preparing, writing, and managing government procurement RFPs. In total, 19 organizations were invited to submit responses to the RFP through direct contact to known suppliers or through contacting two transportation and bike share associations: the North American City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and the North American Bike Share Association (NABSA). TPA received four (4) proposals in total: Shift Transit Inc. (incumbent), CycleHop LLC, Bicycle Transit Systems, and Bewegen Technologies Inc. All of these companies currently manage bike share programs in North America. Attachment 2. Table 2 - Summary of Bids Received for RFP Number 20190821 Including Bid Price and Score
| ||||||||||||||||||||