GTHA Transit Fare Integration

[cplchanb]

Good questions. Since the LRTs we're building will have surface-stop style fare collection (tap on when boarding, little way to control tap-offs, unless there's a fare penalty, like GO) I can see LRTs going on the flat fare system. I'm also a little hesitant about subways too, because the Yonge and Bloor-Danforth sections were built to replace overcrowded surface routes. Unlike most cities, the subways are very integrated with our buses. Elsewhere, they run almost as separate systems.

I guess your latter part of the response hearkens this figure of speech: just because its been done for a long time doesnt mean its been done correctly.

As I mentioned above, TTC riders have enjoyed for decades the result of fare management ineptitude and have rather taken this rather for granted. Now that reality has hit them
many are kicking and screaming citing potentially high fares, when in reality it shouldve been like this at the start or at least the cost model shouldve been like this.
Toronto politicians have always touted the city as "world class", but in order to have world class status they need to have world class transit that includes costing at "world class"
standards.

 

[ShonTron]

Paris has flat Metro fares (and zoned Regional Rail, fares integrated with the Metro, LRTs, and buses). Same with New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Mexico City, and many others. So the fare structure, on its own, has nothing to do with how "World Class" we are.

I'm aware of the pros and cons of all the different fare schemes; I'm just hoping that whatever we get is fair and benefits the most number of current and potential riders.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The fare structure has nothing to do with being "world class" but I think you can't build a regional system as complex as theirs with our current system - namely a flat fare for the largest system and a series of little fiefdoms (including the local systems and GO in that) - that are increasingly seeing cross-border travel, each with their own goals, fare recovery ratios etc.

The flat fare was perfect for Toronto in the Metro era. And, as you say, for how crowded routes became subways with buses feeding into them. But whether we're talking about timed transfers or fare-by-distance or any of the other "innovations" that could and should be used in the GTA, it should be clear to even the biggest TTC fans that you can't stand by the status quo anymore.

I also hope that we get is fair and benfits the most people. Everything is a trade-off and despite my antipathy towards how the TTC has been run for the past generation, I have no desire to see them treated unfairly (e.g. swallowing costs of unfair co-fare agreements) but I also think they need to get their heads out of the sand and lead the way as the centre of a huge region instead of taking the attitude that only 416ers are their "customers." On paper, Metrolinx are the ones whose job it is do that and I'm hoping they find a way through the morass.

 

[cplchanb]

The fare structure has nothing to do with being "world class" but I think you can't build a regional system as complex as theirs with our current system - namely a flat fare for the largest system and a series of little fiefdoms (including the local systems and GO in that) - that are increasingly seeing cross-border travel, each with their own goals, fare recovery ratios etc.

The flat fare was perfect for Toronto in the Metro era. And, as you say, for how crowded routes became subways with buses feeding into them. But whether we're talking about timed transfers or fare-by-distance or any of the other "innovations" that could and should be used in the GTA, it should be clear to even the biggest TTC fans that you can't stand by the status quo anymore.

I also hope that we get is fair and benfits the most people. Everything is a trade-off and despite my antipathy towards how the TTC has been run for the past generation, I have no desire to see them treated unfairly (e.g. swallowing costs of unfair co-fare agreements) but I also think they need to get their heads out of the sand and lead the way as the centre of a huge region instead of taking the attitude that only 416ers are their "customers." On paper, Metrolinx are the ones whose job it is do that and I'm hoping they find a way through the morass.

a good rational argument. i agree that alone, the fare structure does not constitute "world class", but it most definitely has helped in a way to define the operations of a "world class" transit which has to count for something.

 

[muller877]

Almost every major subway in the world has a zone-based fare system (I don't think there's any system based on distance - fare zones are just a way of approximating the distances), but it's rare for local buses to use zone-based fares because that penalizes long trips, which is undesirable because (like AoD pointed out) nobody would willfully extend their trip by 30+ minutes to save a dollar or two. If you're making a long trip on local buses/streetcars, it's generally because you have no other choice - you don't have the means to drive and you don't have a rapid transit option.

MTR, Sydney, BART,

I guess these are not "major" subways?

 

[muller877]

I think we can all agree that local transit (bus) can remain at a flat fare. However higher order transit must be fare by distance to keep it economically viable and reasonable. The only tricky thing would be LRT. Does that constitute to higher order and fare by distance? it sits sort of in between.

The problem with flat local becomes obvious when looking at specific routes. Let's go from King & Bay to Jane & Annette (a couple of good restaurants are nearby). I can either go via the subway (which will take 45 minutes) or take the subway to Dupont and then the 26 bus (50 minutes).

So very little time savings to take the subway. But we should be encouraging people to use it versus a bus which is overcapacity and clogs up the street.

Using MTR as an example, there are flat rate "feeder" routes (short routes to housing estates). Which are discounted even further if you then get on the subway. But longer routes are fare by distance.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I would be hesitant to use MTR as an example of anything given the fairly atypical nature of Hong Kong.

AoD

 

[amnesiajune]

MTR, Sydney, BART,

I guess these are not "major" subways?

Read the first word of what I said again...

 

[kEiThZ]

Good questions. Since the LRTs we're building will have surface-stop style fare collection (tap on when boarding, little way to control tap-offs, unless there's a fare penalty, like GO) I can see LRTs going on the flat fare system. I'm also a little hesitant about subways too, because the Yonge and Bloor-Danforth sections were built to replace overcrowded surface routes. Unlike most cities, the subways are very integrated with our buses. Elsewhere, they run almost as separate systems.

This exactly why I keep saying the system has to be a hybrid. Base fare. Covers all buses and LRTs. And fare by distance on top of base fare for the subway network. Should also let us lower base fare. Or hold it steady for a long time.

For example, $3 base fare and we start out by saying 2 cents per km on the subway. We keep the base fare the same and keep raising the per km charge by 1 cent every year. In 10 years, you still have a $3 base fare which is cheap for local travel. But you've raised the per km charge to 12 cents per km. So now, Scarborough Centre to Union would be about $6. And if someone wants from Union to Bloor? In 2027, that could cost them $3.36. This is the way to get people slowly used to the idea of fare-by-distance without making a drastic change.

This also makes for easy integration. The other regions just use flat fares over their "zones". If you take YRT to the HWY 7 station? Your flat fare goes to YRT. The differential portion goes to the TTC. When you return, your flat fare will go to the TTC. Your differential portion will also go to the TTC. And YRT, won't get anything for that trip. No need to negotiate discounts between services.

 

[amnesiajune]

This also makes for easy integration. The other regions just use flat fares over their "zones". If you take YRT to the HWY 7 station? Your flat fare goes to YRT. The differential portion goes to the TTC. When you return, your flat fare will go to the TTC. Your differential portion will also go to the TTC. And YRT, won't get anything for that trip. No need to negotiate discounts between services.

This is how the 905 currently does fare integration. You can transfer between 905 transit agencies for free within two hours, and the first transit system you take on each trip gets your fare. The only catch is that monthly passes aren't accepted on other systems. I assume that if this was adopted region-wide, it would have to be with a discount-and-cap system like what Go Transit uses.

 

[ssiguy2]

Artificial zone boundaries will not work well, as already exemplified. It would be even worse dividing the TTC area up into different zones. It works effectively in some cities such as Vancouver where bodies of water separate the boundaries. Even where there is no water to cross there are extremely few buses that cross boundaries by more than a block or two. Montreal and Halifax also could make boundaries far easier to implement and , equally importantly, make sense to the travelling public.......remember them?

Fare by distance is fair. Certainly Toronto shouldn't get into charging per km but rather per 10 km figured by Presto ie $2.50 for first 10km, $3.25 for 20km, $4.00 for 30 km etc, etc. It should be used regardless of the technology used. Right now the totally non-integration of the TTC & GO results in poorer service and a grotesque waste of operational funds. You have packed TTC buses going by half empty GO trains during the day. Even though many of those passengers may start/finish their journeys from the same places, GO is simply too expensive for much of the travelling public especially those who are transit dependent.

 

[amnesiajune]

Artificial zone boundaries will not work well, as already exemplified. It would be even worse dividing the TTC area up into different zones. It works effectively in some cities such as Vancouver where bodies of water separate the boundaries. Even where there is no water to cross there are extremely few buses that cross boundaries by more than a block or two. Montreal and Halifax also could make boundaries far easier to implement and , equally importantly, make sense to the travelling public.......remember them?

I think some cities let you travel through multiple zones on the same fare, and that sort of system could work well in Toronto. Divide the city into three zones - one for the area between Victoria Park, Eglinton, Keele/Weston and the lake, and the rest of the city split along Yonge Street - and only charge extra for trips that enter a third (or fourth, fifth, sixth, etc.) zone. The 905 regional municipalities can be split into two or three zones each.

In effect, that means that there's a flat rate within Toronto, and no extra charge for short trips that cross between Toronto and the 905.

 

[MisterF]

Your post makes a lot of assumptions one we don't know yet what the frequency of these extra go train/ RER/ Smart track stations will be and all we have is some random study that showed pole would use it if it cost the same as the TTC. We have no idea what fare could be charged by any organization by that point all I'm saying is that if it goes by fare by distance like Go transit currently does or Zones whatever you want to call it people in Toronto will say it's too expensive to use all the time if they nedd to get downton. Thta's the point I keep trying to make. Alos Go trasit/RER ?SNart Track areen't going serve every single place in Toronto poe want to go.

It's not assumptions, it's a hypothetical scenario. While it was roughly based on a handful of potential trips that could be made once RER is done and fares are integrated, it was strictly off the top of my head and had a hypothetical fare structure and service frequency. That being said, let's look at the kind of service there would be at the new East Harbour station at the Unilever site. The Lakeshore East and Stouffville lines currently use that route, both of which are being electrified and upgraded to RER. Additionally, Smarttrack is proposed as an enhancement of RER on the Stouffville line. So while Stouffville line trains currently run express through that part of the city, it's reasonable to assume that some form of train on that line will stop at the new station. Two lines with 15 minute service means an average headway of 7.5 minutes. We don't know that this will happen but something along those lines is a reasonable expectation.

With that kind of service, do you really think that people won't take the faster way if it's the same price? Another example, this time a real one: the UP Express goes from Union to Bloor in only 7 minutes and Weston in 13 minutes. The same TTC ride literally takes 3-4 times as long. Of course people would switch. I already know people who have despite the cost.

I wouild but they're the ones that make that stupid argumnet all the time. I lunp them in with vegatrains that constenlty want to tell poel that eat meat that they are evil and should stop it becuse they are helping kill the plant becuse of it. Dopn't try and tell pople waht they should andshould not do with ther lives, let pole make ther own choices.

I'll decline taking the bait on this, thanks.

 

[aquateam]

So I know this isn't directly related to how fare integration would work within the GTA, but I just wanted to give an example of how convenient (and cheap) paying for transit fares within the GTA *should* be:

I have an Opus card (for the Montreal area.) I've signed up for a service (Opus à l'année) where I get billed automatically each month for a renewed transit pass, and the card automatically tops up (no new card every month.) So it's like the Metropass Discount Plan but I don't need to get a new pass every month. It costs $80/month and the last month is free:

In addition to a month free, by signing up for Bixi I get $20 off the price of the Bixi membership and $40 off the price of my Opus membership:

I just got this email yesterday, letting me know that I'm getting $5/month discounted for my opus card:

So a year's worth of transit costs $819 instead of $1608 for a year of discounted TTC metropasses.

I also have a number of zone 2 AMT passes stored on the same card: a "pack" of 6 cost $18.

The same card I can use for accessing protected bike parking or for passes for other agencies. They've also introduced paying for bixi with the card, which I don't need because I already have a fob key for Bixi.

There is something similar called Opus+ for people who commute from outside the island of Montreal and need a co-fare but it's similar. The technology might be a lot simpler (stored pass instead of stored value) and the STM has had some cock-ups with the card too, but for regular users who don't travel outside their monthly pass zones often, it is very convenient and affordable.

 

[Adjei]

Commuters to get a half price discount to transfer to TTC from GO and UP Express and vice versa:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tr...sit-users-to-get-half-price-fares-on-ttc.html