GTHA Transit Fare Integration

[muller877]

I'm just gonna leave this here.


Metrolinx ponders fare integration. Badly. Incompetently.

http://stevemunro.ca/2016/02/06/metrolinx-fare-integration-get-ready-to-pay-more-for-subway-trips/

We all know Steve Munro insists that he status quo is the way to go. And he states it as a fact at the start. By assuming the status quo is the best way for Toronto it's easy to argue that the solutions proposed are all wrong.

I thought the Metrolinx slide deck was very will laid out. I would have added a fourth option. Adding a zoned-based local fare for longer trips (which Steve Munro did raise...BRT, express or longer trips should not be "local").

Looking at Alternative 3 (the one we all expect them to implement) it becomes a very good way to integrate all the transit networks. RER vs GO vs subway for medium length trips (e.g. Kipling) will be the same. And a local bus from Kipling to your destination is a small incremental cost...nothing outrageous like it is now if you take the Mississauga bus.

The province does have to figure out how to cross-subsidize (and I hope they don't use this to gouge the consumer). It may mean that there is a regional property tax levy based on the MPAC assessment and some cities will win and others lose based on the current assessment value going towards transit. And there will be higher costs for longer distances within Toronto (and lower costs for shorter). But I think people would understand it other than a few outspoken advocates. (hey I take the subway for 20 km and you take a streetcar for 2 km. I think we should pay exactly the same fare and it's wrong foe me to pay anything different!)

The next phase (rush hour pricing) will be more interesting.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

My prediction for how this all ends: the status quo will be maintained. There will be a fare discount for people crossing into Toronto, if and only if Metrolinx reimburses Toronto for lost revenue.

 

[jeffreym]

What business does Metrolinx have of telling Toronto how it's going to charge it's users when Queen's Park doesn't even contribute to operating costs directly? Sure, they can have a say with their lines (Crosstown, Finch, etc,) but Toronto decided it wanted a flat fare long ago and the city spends it's money accordingly. That's not to say the that Toronto should never look at alternatives, but why does Metrolinx feel they have the right to tell the city what it should be doing with the TTC?

 

[muller877]

My prediction for how this all ends: the status quo will be maintained. There will be a fare discount for people crossing into Toronto, if and only if Metrolinx reimburses Toronto for lost revenue.

My prediction is the TTC says no. Ontario says yes and overrides the TTC decision. (it created Toronto and can change Toronto though a unilateral law in the Ontario legislature). Or says no funding for Smarttrack/RER unless you agree. Either way Smarttrack/RER is dead unless there is fare integration between GO and TTC.

Will be a fascinating fight. Neighbourhood vs neighbourhood. If I was Ontario I would frame it as this:

Those who live along a subway (mainly affluent and established communities) versus those who live near a railroad track (less established communities or less affluent). Do you give frequent and integrated service to Weston or let those who live in Lawrence Park remain paying virtually nothing?

 

[muller877]

What business does Metrolinx have of telling Toronto how it's going to charge it's users when Queen's Park doesn't even contribute to operating costs directly? Sure, they can have a say with their lines (Crosstown, Finch, etc,) but Toronto decided it wanted a flat fare long ago and the city spends it's money accordingly. That's not to say the that Toronto should never look at alternatives, but why does Metrolinx feel they have the right to tell the city what it should be doing with the TTC?

Ontario created Toronto. It can change Toronto. Ontario created the amalgamated TTC in 1954 and it giveth and can takeith away.

Remember the price differential is not that much between current express routes in Toronto and GO fares.

On average each leg of transit costs around $1.80. With a extra cost for the first leg, assume local transit will cost $2 (and the flat fare for RER/Go will be $3). Then you can add on distance based amount for anything greater. From downtown I don't expect that the max fare within Toronto will be greater than $6 (what people in the Humber Bay area are paying right now and what the cost of a GO ride is). And you can transfer from GO to local and vice versa.

Overall its a win for most people in Toronto. Either as quicker transit or as cheaper transit. I'm looking forward to getting off the subway at Dundas West and hopping on a RER train to Union. Will save me 15 minutes each way. 30 minutes of free time in a day is very important to me and spending more time with my family (or 30 minutes extra at work so I can earn more).

And the province has paid a significant portion of the capital cost of transit throughout the history of Toronto. It's looking at an unprecedented spend on capital that includes integrating GO and the TTC. The TTC and its political masters will fight to keep their own little castle and that must change. And by integrating the systems it also requires integrating fares.

Unless of course the TTC is willing to pay for the operating costs of the RER system within Toronto..but we know they won't.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

My prediction is the TTC says no. Ontario says yes and overrides the TTC decision. (it created Toronto and can change Toronto though a unilateral law in the Ontario legislature). Or says no funding for Smarttrack/RER unless you agree. Either way Smarttrack/RER is dead unless there is fare integration between GO and TTC.

Yeah... that won't happen. Anything that raises fares in the inner suburbs (Scarborough, Etobicoke, North York), won't have area MPPs supporting it.

 

[kEiThZ]

Yeah... that won't happen. Anything that raises fares in the inner suburbs (Scarborough, Etobicoke, North York), won't have area MPPs supporting it.

I've long argued that there's a way around this. Split the TTC. Into the surface and heavy rail network. Surface routes go on a fixed fare. Heavy rail goes fare by distance.

This way, they could theoretically lower fares for those who want to take a bus in their neighbourhood. Imagine the base TTC fare going down to $2. And then charge a distance based top-up on the subway network.

Such a proposal would split the public in the suburbs. Lots of travel inside the suburbs themselves.

 

[gweed123]

I've long argued that there's a way around this. Split the TTC. Into the surface and heavy rail network. Surface routes go on a fixed fare. Heavy rail goes fare by distance.

This way, they could theoretically lower fares for those who want to take a bus in their neighbourhood. Imagine the base TTC fare going down to $2. And then charge a distance based top-up on the subway network.

Such a proposal would split the public in the suburbs. Lots of travel inside the suburbs themselves.

That's pretty much the "hybrid" approach that is being proposed. The local transit system would be flat fare (across the entire region), while rapid transit and regional transit would be zone fares. Theoretically then you could go from Hamilton to Oshawa on a single fare base fare, as long as you took local bus routes the entire way.

I think the Hybrid approach is best, as long as the fare zones are small enough and the increase increments small enough that it doesn't create issues around fare boundaries. Make the fare zones approximately 6km x 6km, and have the increase be about 25¢ per zone. To make relatively short trips equivalent to the flat fare, have the base fare cover 2 zones. So basically, if your trip is under 12km long, you'd be paying the same regardless of if you're on local or rapid transit. Everything beyond that is an extra 25¢ per 6km.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I've long argued that there's a way around this. Split the TTC. Into the surface and heavy rail network. Surface routes go on a fixed fare. Heavy rail goes fare by distance.

This way, they could theoretically lower fares for those who want to take a bus in their neighbourhood. Imagine the base TTC fare going down to $2. And then charge a distance based top-up on the subway network.

Splitting the TTC into two a subway and surface system won't work out economically.
- The bus system is the most expensive part of the TTC network to run (per rider)
- The subway system is the cheapest part of the TTC network to run (per rider)

It's the economics of scale working here. It's cheaper to move 1000 people on one train, than 1000 people on 20 busses. The subway operations subsidizes bus operations.

If the TTC were split into two systems (a surface, and a rail system), we'd probably see something ridiculous like having $4.00 bus fares and $1.00 subway fares. The TTC subway and surface system need to remain a single system for the economics of public transit operations to work out.

This is also why, unless the province suddenly is willing to properly and heavily subsidize TTC operations, the idea of Metrolinx operating Toronto's subway system is a non-starter.

Re

 

[gweed123]

Splitting the TTC into two a subway and surface system won't work out economically.
- The bus system is the most expensive part of the TTC network to run (per rider)
- The subway system is the cheapest part of the TTC network to run (per rider)

It's the economics of scale working here. It's cheaper to move 1000 people on one train, than 1000 people on 20 busses. The subway operations subsidizes bus operations.

If the TTC were split into two systems (a surface, and a rail system), we'd probably see something ridiculous like having $4.00 bus fares and $1.00 subway fares. The TTC subway and surface system need to remain a single system for the economics of public transit operations to work out.

This is also why, unless the province suddenly is willing to properly and heavily subsidize TTC operations, the idea of Metrolinx operating Toronto's subway system is a non-starter.

Re

I don't think he was advocating for splitting them as an agency, just as far as fares go. Correct me if I'm wrong though Keithz.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I don't think he was advocating for splitting them as an agency, just as far as fares go. Correct me if I'm wrong though Keithz.

Ahh okay. My bad. In that case it should work out fine. But there's still political risk in telling people in the inner suburbs that they'll have to pay more to use the subway than people elsewhere. I don't expect Metrolinx will open that can of worms.

 

[kEiThZ]

@TheTigerMaster

You are assuming that both components would be separate agencies. They could still be part of the TTC but cross-subsidized as they are today.

Think of it like this:

1) We are constrained by the current fare to cover a typical suburban commute (say Agincourt to Downtown).
2) We want to allow growth in total revenue.

So we start as follows.
1) Base fare $2 flat. Covers all bus routes and access to the subway network.
2) Max subway fare differential from SC to Union set at $1. Say maybe 4 cents per km.

Over time we allow the subway component to rise at a faster rate than the base fare. This actually increases revenue over time. It also improves utilization and increases ridership. It's now cheaper to ride the bus and the subway more frequently.

 

[kEiThZ]

I don't think he was advocating for splitting them as an agency, just as far as fares go. Correct me if I'm wrong though Keithz.

Exactly. Splitting them into separate agencies would involve some serious negotiations with the province on how to cover the higher costs of the surface services.

IMHO, at some point, Metrolinx will have to discuss integration of the subway network with the planned regional network. But that's still a long way off. And it'll have to incorporate serious discussions on revenue sharing with the City to cover the cost of maintaining an adequate level of feeder service.

 

[jeffreym]

Ontario created Toronto. It can change Toronto. Ontario created the amalgamated TTC in 1954 and it giveth and can takeith away.

I understand and don't dispute that the province can do that legally if they really wanted, but I don't think the province would override council directly (e.g. rewrite the city's budget after council's passed it).

If you disagree with that, well, that'd be unprecedented as far as I know. If you look at programs like Presto which the province forced down the city's throat they managed that by 'persuading' the city to go along with their plans (iirc they threatened the city's transit funding for the Transit City lines and such). While an alternative to Presto may have been better for the city, that made for a pretty easy decision for council/the TTC board. There would be basically no political fallout for using Presto while there would be a big snafu if Toronto didn't adopt it.

This is a bit different though. Just wait until people in North York or Scarborough find out that it's going to cost them $4-$6 to get downtown instead of $2.90 (or less if one currently has a Metropass). Try convincing suburban councillors to vote in favour of anything that'd move us closer to that reality. This time there will be political fallout for going along with Metrolinx's plans unless there's a benefit for the vast majority of riders, especially suburban riders (which would almost surely involve an increased subsidy, something that I don't see happening). When people talk about wanting to get rid of the 'double fare' between York Region and Toronto (or Mississauga and Toronto) I don't think they're imagining a scenario where it'd be cheaper to go a few km across the municipal boundary, but it'd be much more expensive to go downtown.

Regardless of whether you think it was a good move or a bad move that Toronto got rid of it's zone system way back when it's important to remember why that happened. Those same pressures are there today, if not even stronger than they were back when the zone system was eliminated because now you'd be 'taking away' something people already have.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Splitting the TTC into two a subway and surface system won't work out economically.
- The bus system is the most expensive part of the TTC network to run (per rider)
- The subway system is the cheapest part of the TTC network to run (per rider)...

Re

Except for the 4 Sheppard subway. The ridership on some streetcar and bus routes make more money than on this line.