News   Jun 13, 2024
 194     0 
News   Jun 13, 2024
 387     3 
News   Jun 12, 2024
 2.6K     3 

GTHA Transit Fare Integration

I also like Chicago's model which would be relatively easy to implement. You pay one fare to board any train or bus and then you pay a small fee (it was 30 cents I think when I lived there) for each subsequent transfer, up to 3 transfers.

This hurts people who need to transfer more, but it doesn't have the complexity of zones and distances.
 
I disagree: using that logic, we should legislate that all groceries of a given type (say cheese) cost same per pound, and all clothing articles (say shirts) cost same per item, so that the rich gain no advantage over the poor.

No. You can easily live without expensive cheese and shirts, because these are luxuries. Public transit is not a luxury. If you want a more expensive and faster mode of transport, it's called the taxi.

Ultimately a London model would confine the poor to a smaller radius. London may not have big problems since Red Ken threw wads of cash at the bus system, but transit ridership in general would be higher if Tube and rail fares weren't outrageous.
 
Here's how Beijing does it: the flat fare for anywhere in the metro system is 2 Yuan (like 30 cents). Before 2007 it was 3 Yuan for the two urban lines and a surcharge for transferring to two elevated suburban lines. To transfer from the metro to the bus costs a 0.40 Yuan, or 7 cents.

If you're only taking the bus you have to count the number of stops you will pass before the trip, and tell the ticket collector on board, who will charge you a few pennies. Obviously it's hard for foreigners.

The metro system used to have paper tickets that look a bit like like small TTC transfers, which are ripped up by ticket-rippers by the turnstiles, but now they only use magnetic cards and Smartcards.

The Airport Rail line will be premium fare, and lo-and-behold will use our unloved ICTS.
 
I like the London model. All GO services, the subway, and LRT in fully isolated ROW (no level crossing at intersections) should run from stations which have turnstiles you "sign in" and "out of". Making people pay by distances on non-express vehicles seems like a double punishment... they get poor service taking far too long to go a distance and then charging more for the disservice. Going from Square One to Pickering on GO is worth fare by distance. Going on MT, transferring to TTC surface routes all the way to Pickering, and switching to Durham transit isn't something you should pay more for even if it costed more to deliver the service. The punishment of riding on a bus that long should be payment.
 
some other ideas for fares from London that help balance out some of the potential social issues

-with oyster card a daily cap... ie if you end up taking enough buses the system will automatically give you the day pass rate.... on the trains these caps are lower for people in workfare programmes and children

-free travel for those under 16 on buses, heavily discounted fares for 16-18, (free if they are in school and they live in London), and workfare people

-discounted fares for those receiving income support (part time job, low income,

-charging less at off peak times (or charging more during peak hours ;) )

-disabled people get free service through a pass funded by their local borough

-seniors gets free travel after the AM peak through a similar initiative

-people receiving income support get discounted fares


also, for those 16-18 kids I mentioned, they have a behaviour code they need to follow in order to have their card/discounts (anti-chav policy :) )

Behaviour Code

If you are using an Oyster photocard with free bus and tram travel concession on one of our services, it may be withdrawn if you:

* Do not follow TfL`s Behaviour Code or
* Commit a crime on one of our vehicles

The Behaviour Code states that:

When on London's public transport network or premises, you should always act sensibly and treat others as you would like to be treated.

Your travel concession may be withdrawn if we believe that you have behaved in an antisocial way.

Antisocial behaviour includes, but is not limited to:

* Putting your safety or the safety of others at risk
* Use of offensive or threatening language
* Behaving offensively, bullying or threatening others
* Smoking
* Playing music out loud
* Damaging or defacing an Oyster photocard
* Letting anyone else use your Oyster photocard
* Committing any crime on, or in connection with, London's public transport network, in particular, but not limited to:

- Physical or verbal assault
- Unlawfully carrying a weapon
- Criminal damage or trespass on London's public transport network or premises
- Theft, robbery or burglary
- Misusing controlled drugs
 
Rainforest

No. You can easily live without expensive cheese and shirts, because these are luxuries. Public transit is not a luxury. If you want a more expensive and faster mode of transport, it's called the taxi.

Ultimately a London model would confine the poor to a smaller radius. London may not have big problems since Red Ken threw wads of cash at the bus system, but transit ridership in general would be higher if Tube and rail fares weren't outrageous.

I see. However, this is mostly a concern for those who need to take same trip every day, to the workplace and school. So, if they get good discounts, they won't have problems using trains / subway.

Btw, fare-by-distance or fare-by-time would have this issue as well. Only flat fare eliminates it completely.
 
Rainforest

also, for those 16-18 kids I mentioned, they have a behaviour code they need to follow in order to have their card/discounts (anti-chav policy :) )

Btw, doesn't having a special behavioral code for kids constitute age-based discrimination?

The actions mentioned in that code should not be tolerated from adults, either. So, why single the kids out.
 
Btw, doesn't having a special behavioral code for kids constitute age-based discrimination?

The actions mentioned in that code should not be tolerated from adults, either. So, why single the kids out.
I agree. I'm seventeen, and I never cause a problem for the bus driver or passengers. Why should I be singled out as a problem?

I've seen thirty year old men pitch a fit over an invalid fare ("What do you mean I can't use a three day old transfer!"), soccer moms curse out other people in front of their children ("You fucking son of a bitch, you think you can fucking swear in front of my kids!"), college students threatening to kill the driver, and everything in between.

Meanwhile, the people my age? The worst I've ever seen was a guy argue over a student ticket, cause he hadn't brought his student ID and the driver was being a hardass about it. Even then, he gave in after a minute or so and just paid in cash, unlike an elderly man I saw once who whipped his invalid transfer at the driver, called her various unsavoury things, and went storming off the bus among a tirade of swears.

In my experience, it's usually not the teenagers who are the problem, seriously.
 
No. You can easily live without expensive cheese and shirts, because these are luxuries. Public transit is not a luxury. If you want a more expensive and faster mode of transport, it's called the taxi.

What is your definition of public transit? Common carrier on a non-reservation basis along fixed routes? Taxis are generally included in my definition of public transportation though I don't have the fixed route requirement.

Do you include Go Transit? Ferries to the Islands? Via RAIL? Greyhound? Air Canada?

IMHO, I think travelling from Hamilton to Oshawa in 90 minutes is a luxury so probably would not include Go Transit as an essential to subsidize service.

Ferries to the islands is an interesting case. Is it a luxury to live on the Toronto Islands or is it something that should be subsidized by the mainland for those that do. It is a common carrier on a fixed route/non-reservation basis.
 
Btw, doesn't having a special behavioral code for kids constitute age-based discrimination?

The actions mentioned in that code should not be tolerated from adults, either. So, why single the kids out.

people under 18 have all sorts of rules that are different...can't vote, smoke, drink, and a similar example in Ontario is that if people age 16-18 drop out of school they lose their drivers' license under certain circumstances and can be fined $1000 for missing school
 
I see. However, this is mostly a concern for those who need to take same trip every day, to the workplace and school. So, if they get good discounts, they won't have problems using trains / subway.
Better yet, cut all those logostics out and treat the entire system to single fare. Have a discount for all minors and seniors.

Btw, fare-by-distance or fare-by-time would have this issue as well. Only flat fare eliminates it completely.
It would resemble the current system of highways: you only pay fuel tax on how far and how long you travel, so you're encouraged to take the fastest way possible regardless where you go. You don't pay more for taking the 400 highways (except the 407, but nobody wants to replicate that experience everywhere), because it would increase congestion on surface streets and increase the average driver's journey times.

Not to mention that in some US systems, this has caused express buses and trains with vocal middle-class riders to receive investment while the inner-city buses the poor depend on are neglected. Having a single-tier system will ensure all modes get adequate funding.

Taxis are generally included in my definition of public transportation though I don't have the fixed route requirement.
Perhaps in parts of the world where the middle class *can* use taxis on a regular basis, but in Canada if you call taxi public transportation they'll laugh at you.

Do you include Go Transit? Ferries to the Islands? Via RAIL? Greyhound? Air Canada?
For someone commuting from Mississauga to Toronto, you shouldn't have to pay more to use Go Transit and get there faster. The ferries to the island could one day be integrated into the Metrolinx area, but it's the 3451st on my priority list. Via Rail is subsidized. Greyhound is public transit, but their fares can be low without government funding; the same can't be said about urban mass transit. Those who fly often are usually well-off, so aviation doesn't count as public transit unless it's a remote northern community you're going to.

IMHO, I think travelling from Hamilton to Oshawa in 90 minutes is a luxury so probably would not include Go Transit as an essential to subsidize service.
Still costs more than to travel from Hamilton to, say, Oakville. The goal of single-tier system is to encourage everyone to take the fastest way possible and not rely on local buses where crowding causes the biggest problems to save a dime.

Ferries to the islands is an interesting case. Is it a luxury to live on the Toronto Islands or is it something that should be subsidized by the mainland for those that do. It is a common carrier on a fixed route/non-reservation basis.
 
people under 18 have all sorts of rules that are different...can't vote, smoke, drink, and a similar example in Ontario is that if people age 16-18 drop out of school they lose their drivers' license under certain circumstances and can be fined $1000 for missing school
So this means that, despite people of all ages causing problems on public transit, only the young ones should be singled out? And people wonder why so many law-abiding teenagers are bitter about how adults treat them?
 
So this means that, despite people of all ages causing problems on public transit, only the young ones should be singled out? And people wonder why so many law-abiding teenagers are bitter about how adults treat them?

I double checked and it actually applies to all people under 18 who have these free travel cards.... (though really it's for teengers since in many cases the youngest users don't need to show a card) basically the thought is that their free pass is a privilege, not a right, and they lose that privilege if they engage in antisocial behaviour.
 
I find it a bit humourous that they use the term "antisocial behavior", but is losing your ticket if you break the law any different from here?

Look, the new mayor of London is a conservative, and youth crime on the transit system was a perceived problem. I don't see what Boris Johnson did as him singling out young people... I see it as pandering to voters and putting a greater emphasis on laws that were already there.
 

Back
Top