News   Jul 12, 2024
 819     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 740     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 311     0 

York Region Transit: Viva service thread

803926_10201102687319790_977880458_n.jpg


A little bit off about having to pay an extra fare when using a TTC bus (only if crossing Steeles, not including York University), but overall I like it. Here's hoping whoever replaces Fisch looks to improve YRT's bottom line through efficiency rather than continued fare hikes.

EDIT: If hard to read, right click/open in new tab/window/CTRL+mouse wheel up
 
Whoever wins the next election in York, I certainly they are more encouraging of transit. The region will soon have the best infrastructure of any Toronto suburb, and it should take advantage of it. They shouldn't be wasting away those bus lanes and subway stations like they are today.
 
Whoever wins the next election in York, I certainly they are more encouraging of transit. The region will soon have the best infrastructure of any Toronto suburb, and it should take advantage of it. They shouldn't be wasting away those bus lanes and subway stations like they are today.

They're also doing a great job of intensifying along their main corridors in order to eventually support that new transit infrastructure. It hasn't really paid off yet, but I think it will. But you're right, they can't keep cutting service and increasing fares forever.
 
The service the TTC provides within York Region is YRT service. Those routes are paid for by YRT. Those routes are not part of TTC system, they are part of the YRT system. They aren't "competing" with YRT, they are YRT. So aren't YRT fares required for TTC-operated routes within York Region? But YRT monthly passes are not allowed? Is that true? It doesn't make sense...

The "service notice" mentions something else important about Steeles: 53 and 60 should be part of the YRT system. That a major gap in York's transit network there. York Region's busiest east-west transit corridor, but no fare integration with the rest of York Region...
 
Why would people in York complain that the TTC runs deep into their territory? A one-seat ride across Steeles is a GOOD thing.

They're right in that there should be a connection along Steeles to Brampton though. It's strange that there isn't.
 
Why would people in York complain that the TTC runs deep into their territory? A one-seat ride across Steeles is a GOOD thing.

They're right in that there should be a connection along Steeles to Brampton though. It's strange that there isn't.

The lack of Presto and confusing transfer and fare setups might be the basis of the complaint. For example, while most YRT services will allow drop offs heading south and pickups heading north on a single fare, the TTC buses require you pay a TTC fare when going south of Steeles regardless. The exception is trips to York University.
 
Why would people in York complain that the TTC runs deep into their territory? A one-seat ride across Steeles is a GOOD thing.

They're right in that there should be a connection along Steeles to Brampton though. It's strange that there isn't.

Which isn't Brampton's fault. The Route 11 was rerouted via Signal Hill/Steinway when 511 Zum Steeles was introduced, which finally provides a connection with the limited-service 60D Steeles West branch. The Steeles bus drops a branch to get to York U, and drops others at Martin Grove, not that far from the Signal Hill/Steinway loop.

Brampton is able to serve more TTC routes - the 96A/B/D/E Wilson, the 36B Finch and the 191 Highway 27 Express ducking down to Humber College, a major trip generator in its own right (and a short walk to the hospital).

There's three loops all close together for the Steeles West bus - at Kipling (60E), Martin Grove (60B) and Signal Hill (60D) I think that all 60B/D/E buses should go to at least Signal Hill/Steinway, perhaps even sending the 60E to Humber College.
 
Last edited:
when I worked for YRT in service planning, we were doing research to see about the viability of a Steeles YRT bus due to the exact reasons the notice outlined, unfortunately the results showed that the majority of people using Steeles currently either got on or off relatively close to Steeles and rarely went northbound afterwards. This is also compounded by the fact that YRT would not be able to match the TTC levels of service on a Steeles route and thus even if it did implement one, most riders would be taken up by the route 60.

If you're going to Brampton you can easily take the 77 or VIVA all the way there from Promenade Mall so it's really not like there's no connectionn to Brampton (and I'm kind of skeptical about how many people are willing to take that lengthy trip to Brampton from York Region on Public Transit). The type of users along the stretch of steeles close to Brampton are mostly commuters and thus, if any service were to be viable it would likely be a few peak hour trips to service them.

YRT is in a pretty tough spot. Not just from a physical aspect with towns and suburban neighbourhoods spread apart, but also from a demographic standpoint. YRT has one of the highest median incomes in the GTA with some of the highest car ownership levels as well. It's really a system that tries to pick up the scraps in an area that is ridiculously big to cover. If you compare the geographical area of any other transit system in Canada, you'll find that YRT is right up there with the amount of area the service has to cover with some of the lowest average densities throughout the Region (due to many rural communities that comprise YR). Along with these issues, there's also the issues of equitability, where we have certain routes in small communities like King City where maybe 1 or 2 people ride the route per day, yet YRT cannot cancel it due to political reasons. It is very much an agency that is influenced more-so than other agencies, because just getting a route of any LOS in York Region is a big deal and so even though YRT is madated to maintain a certain LOS and and farebox revenue levels, good plans are often thwarted by council.

All the planners and schedulers truly loved their job and were always trying to find more efficient ways to improve service, but there are only so many things that can be done before money runs out. Especially since council has asked them to bring the farebox recovery ratio to 50%.
 
Last edited:
There is still a lot of room to improve YRT service though. If YRT could run buses every 15 minutes most of the day on main routes and get rid of the extra fare for taking TTC buses across Steeles that would be a big improvement. York Region traffic can be really bad (particularly along Highway 7 and some of the employment areas nearby) so I think that even higher income people would use it if only the service on routes other than Yonge and Highway 7 were not so infrequent. Service to rural areas does not matter, these areas will always have little or no transit service due to their low population density, but if YRT would improve service frequencies on a dozen or so of its busiest routes (4, 16, 20, 85 and 90 are some of the more obvious candidates), this would put frequent bus service within 1km of most of York Region's urban population.
 
Thanks for that BMO.
I get the sense that council has been pretty supportive of transit, as much as any suburban municipality has, but there are some geographical and demographic constraints that make it awful challenging to get where they want to go. Hopefully intensification and the completion of a real network will help, but I guess it will take a while.

I think Andrewpmk makes a couple of good points but ditching the across-Steeles fare isn't simply YRT's call and I expect it will be eliminated (or at least adjusted) whenever they introduce whatever new fare system comes to the region in the next few years. The rural routes do matter because, as you point out, they will always have little or no transit service and yet YRT must serve them anyway. It's a draw on the system and I suspect that if YRT operated entirely south of the Oak Ridges Moraine and was better integrated with TTC, it would be much easier to hit that recovery ratio. It's almost 2 different systems...
 
This will probably not gain a very positive reception, but if the area covered is really hurting finances, why create a west and east zone, using Thornhill and Richmond Hill (Bathurst to the 404) as a buffer? So if someone is taking transit between Markham and Vaughan, they would have to pay a zone upgrade. The flip side to this is that besides this change, fares would be frozen for the next few years as the regional average catches up.
 
when I worked for YRT in service planning, we were doing research to see about the viability of a Steeles YRT bus due to the exact reasons the notice outlined, unfortunately the results showed that the majority of people using Steeles currently either got on or off relatively close to Steeles and rarely went northbound afterwards. This is also compounded by the fact that YRT would not be able to match the TTC levels of service on a Steeles route and thus even if it did implement one, most riders would be taken up by the route 60.

If you're going to Brampton you can easily take the 77 or VIVA all the way there from Promenade Mall so it's really not like there's no connectionn to Brampton (and I'm kind of skeptical about how many people are willing to take that lengthy trip to Brampton from York Region on Public Transit). The type of users along the stretch of steeles close to Brampton are mostly commuters and thus, if any service were to be viable it would likely be a few peak hour trips to service them.

YRT is in a pretty tough spot. Not just from a physical aspect with towns and suburban neighbourhoods spread apart, but also from a demographic standpoint. YRT has one of the highest median incomes in the GTA with some of the highest car ownership levels as well. It's really a system that tries to pick up the scraps in an area that is ridiculously big to cover. If you compare the geographical area of any other transit system in Canada, you'll find that YRT is right up there with the amount of area the service has to cover with some of the lowest average densities throughout the Region (due to many rural communities that comprise YR). Along with these issues, there's also the issues of equitability, where we have certain routes in small communities like King City where maybe 1 or 2 people ride the route per day, yet YRT cannot cancel it due to political reasons. It is very much an agency that is influenced more-so than other agencies, because just getting a route of any LOS in York Region is a big deal and so even though YRT is madated to maintain a certain LOS and and farebox revenue levels, good plans are often thwarted by council.

All the planners and schedulers truly loved their job and were always trying to find more efficient ways to improve service, but there are only so many things that can be done before money runs out. Especially since council has asked them to bring the farebox recovery ratio to 50%.

At some point they will have to start making decisions. For example, you brought up King, maybe they have to cut that route. Same with East Gwillimbury.
 
I don't use YRT, so this not based on experience, but the main problem I can see looking on a map is Steeles. York Region population is spread along the Steeles corridor, but to travel along Steeles requires an extra fare, so it is not part of their network. Furthermore, crossing Steeles also requires an extra fare. Two fares, just to travel from 14th Avenue to Finch Avenue (or vice versa), for example.

I think YRT will always be of limited use to both York residents unless there are free transfers between TTC and 905 agencies. YRT is of limited use to Toronto residents as well. Let not forget about places like Rexdale, Jane-Finch, Malvern, etc. that are essentially cut off from job opportunities in the 905 just because of the difficulty and the cost of crossing the 416-905 border via transit.

So low fares aren't the problem with YRT. High fares are the problem. Raising fares won't solve anything, just make things worse.
 
YRT bus network like this one could make a lot of sense: The key concept is that all bus routes shown would connect to one of the mobility centres shown, meaning that bus to bus transfers are rarely required.

Dark Blue = VIVA with BRT lanes
Light Blue = VIVA without BRT lanes
Red = Frequent bus routes
Train Symbol: Mobility hub
Black: GO
Yellow: Subway

Blue would have minimum 10 minute service 20 hours a day, with 30 minutes service for the other 4, between 1am and 5am. Peak frequency would vary, off peak would be increased based on demand presuming that nobody is standing.

Red would be frequent service, requiring 7 minute service 6 hours a day (3 hours for each rush period), and 20 minute off peak service or better. hourly service between 11 and 5.

Mobility hubs (with the exception of Cornell which would have a 407 transitway connection which is unshown) would all have some sort of frequent rail connection.

transfers to any agency, GO or TTC, drops your YRT fare to $0.75. Monthly passes are designed so that charges cease after 40 or so uses and all trips are free.

bc0RE3C.jpg
 
There is still a lot of room to improve YRT service though. If YRT could run buses every 15 minutes most of the day on main routes and get rid of the extra fare for taking TTC buses across Steeles that would be a big improvement. York Region traffic can be really bad (particularly along Highway 7 and some of the employment areas nearby) so I think that even higher income people would use it if only the service on routes other than Yonge and Highway 7 were not so infrequent. Service to rural areas does not matter, these areas will always have little or no transit service due to their low population density, but if YRT would improve service frequencies on a dozen or so of its busiest routes (4, 16, 20, 85 and 90 are some of the more obvious candidates), this would put frequent bus service within 1km of most of York Region's urban population.

A lot of the money is currently going towards service expenditures for VIVA, trying to ramp up service and demand for the Rapidway routes. Based on my time there, I gathered that we'll start to see improved service on connecting routes like the 4, 16, 20, 85 and 90, but for now the emphasis is on the main VIVA network that will provide the backbone for the system going forward. It's often easy to forget that, although the province is paying the capital expenditures for the Viva Rapidways, YRT is assuming the servicing of the route, which includes, security, IT (for the Next bus information and ITS systems), Maintenance, cleaning and the drivers for the buses. The Viva routes alone drain a lot of resources simply through the nature of their being a much larger piece of infrastructure to run (think of it as a subway for York Region). Adding to this, YRT is planning to add two more routes to either replace the 90, 4 and 20 by changing VIVA green to go from Fairview subway station up Don Mills to Major Mac and acroos to York Central Hospital. Also they are planning a VIVA Silver that will go from the Steeles West subway station up Jane St, along Major Mac to Richmond Hill GO Station (providing an overlap between the Green and Silver along Major Mac between Newkirk Rd and York Central Hospital). So that improved service is coming, it's jsut going to take a bit longer.

Thanks for that BMO.
I get the sense that council has been pretty supportive of transit, as much as any suburban municipality has, but there are some geographical and demographic constraints that make it awful challenging to get where they want to go. Hopefully intensification and the completion of a real network will help, but I guess it will take a while.

I think Andrewpmk makes a couple of good points but ditching the across-Steeles fare isn't simply YRT's call and I expect it will be eliminated (or at least adjusted) whenever they introduce whatever new fare system comes to the region in the next few years. The rural routes do matter because, as you point out, they will always have little or no transit service and yet YRT must serve them anyway. It's a draw on the system and I suspect that if YRT operated entirely south of the Oak Ridges Moraine and was better integrated with TTC, it would be much easier to hit that recovery ratio. It's almost 2 different systems...

With regards to the double fare, everyone at YRT acknowledges the issue, I am not the most knowledgeable about the relationship that YRT has with the TTC with regards to TTC routes extending into York Region, but I know that TTC buses are essentially, for all intents and purposes, YRT buses once they cross Steeles. Don't quote me on this, but I believe they have these routes simply because TTC can probably provide the service for cheaper than a third party contractor. Many people might not know this, but YRT does not drive any of their buses, all routes are contracted out to either Miller, TOK or Veolia. In the case of the routes like Dufferin, Weston, etc it coul just happen to be that the TTC was the best deal in terms of a contractor to serve those routes since they already have the buses, and it provides an increased level of convenience to riders if they happen to want to continue South towards Toronto at least they don't have to transfer to a different bus (even though they have to pay a double fare). Adding to this, YRT has substantially less control of the planning of TTC routes that extend into York Region, it must be OK'd by the TTC before being implemented because they can often affect scheduling and frequencies south of Steeles if the route is too long, or if there are issues.

I think the whole fare integration is a non-starter unless the Province steps in. Even the subways going north of Steeles will require users to pay a double fare unless something gets agreed upon before opening day. The TTC is very strict about retaining it's own revenue and does not like to share with YRT (for good reason TBH). If there was fare integration you'd see YRT and TTC lose money considering there's a potential loss of $3-4 per customer that transfers if you completely get rid of that double fare. I think out of all the issues that YRT faces, the fare integration issue is the one that they have the least control over and are less equipped to change.
 

Back
Top