GTHA Transit Fare Integration

[ssiguy2]

Zones are a good idea but only work well when there are very few transit agencies. Toronto has a ridiculous amount of transit agencies. The reason it works well in Vancouver is because we only have one transit agency greatly helped by the fact that most of the boundaries are clearly defined by physical barriers such as water. It's easy to know you are crossing a boundary when you cross a bridge. Transit agencies in the GTAH act like fiefdoms and zones are not optional with such parochial systems.

The very worst idea, by a long shot, is paying by the type of service except commuter rail {not RER} which is easily distinguishable by both types of trains and service provided. If you want to bring rapid transit expansion to a screeching halt then that's the best way to do it. Ridership on the subways/RT would plunge while ridership on streetcars/buses would soar beyond their abiity to provide service. If you think bunching is a problem with buses/streetcars now just wait if they were to bring in extra fares for subway/RT. People would actually fight to STOP expansion of the subway system as they know it would increase their fares and yet reduce their bus service. People will ALWAYS gravitate to the cheaper service as shown by the lousy ridership levels of GO within Toronto itself even though GO for suburbanites getting down/crosstown is much faster. Most transit users, especially those further from downtown are very price sensitive..............they can't afford to live downtown where the service is best and yet still can't afford a car.

 

[ssiguy2]

I do disagree with the idea that it is politically unpalatable. Huge numbers of users {especially outside the City} cross some transit boundary as there are so many small systems, that suburbanites {including the more high income 905 GO users who will probably vote for provincial PCs} would find their trips potentially cheaper and definitely easier to pay and negotiate.

The best thing Metrolinx could do is make sure that their preferred option is presented WELL before the provincial election to put all three parties on the hot seat as to whether they would support it or not. I think most people regardless of their political persuasion would see fare by distance as "fair" which is the exact opposite of what tolls are which the Libs & PC have written off...........they are the same toll whether you are on the freeway for 1 km or 20. Denying fare by distance would actually back up the idea that flat fares {whether tolls or transit} are unfair.

RER could easily surpass current subway ridership {which is the case in many world cities outside NA} if it is fare by distance but if they charge extra for it then it will be unsuccessful and not worth the money or time that has/is going to be put into it.

 

[11th]

I think fare zone are the way to go.

Except, you're allowed to cross a boundary once for the base fare (equivalent of a TTC fare today).

.....

You'd be allowed to go from Mississauga to Brampton or Etobicoke for 1 fare. Or from North York to Vaughan. Or from Ajax to Scarborough. Or however you want to draw the lines. (And of course, they'd go well beyond where I stopped drawing them). They're basically concentric rings around downtown Toronto, each divided internally as needed.

And you'd pretty well be able to travel within Toronto, with the exception of Etobicoke to Scarborough (but that could be tweaked).

For something like Vaughan to downtown Toronto, you'd be looking at crossing 2 fare boundaries, so you'd pay a base fare plus some surcharge. Maybe 1.5 fares total, or 1.3 or something like that. Not a double fare.

Some bugs to iron out, as I just whipped this up on the fly, but I think it's the most fair and convenient, clear way to implement a sort of fare by distance across all agencies.

Etobicoke, North York and Scarborough are in the best zones in this case. If this will have influence on where new office space are constructed, I am all for it. (I know it's wishful thinking, but one can dream..)

 

[W. K. Lis]

From the TTC website, at this link:

1974

• Yonge Subway extended north to Finch Station.
• TTC service suspended during 23-day strike.

1973

• Yonge Subway extended north to York Mills Station.
• Zone fares eliminated on TTC services within Metro Toronto.
• Sunday/Holiday Pass is introduced, valid for family or group travel.
• GO Transit dial-a-bus service begins in North York, and operates until 1976. Service provided under contract by TTC using mini-buses.

1972

• Streetcar abandonment programme is canceled, and work begins to rebuild and retain the streetcar network.

1970

• Last year that fare revenues meet TTC operating expenses.
• Senior citizen fares introduced.
• TTC service suspended during 12-day strike.
• GO Transit regional bus service begins. Most service operated under contract by Gray Coach Lines, until 1989.

Because the subway was extended north into North York, and under Zone 1, they had a good reason to eliminate zone fares. A return to zone fares would not be acceptable today.

 

[nfitz]

Because the subway was extended north into North York, and under Zone 1, they had a good reason to eliminate zone fares. A return to zone fares would not be acceptable today.

And yet the subway already extended into Zone 2 in Etobicoke and Scarborough since the 1960s.

 

[Fred.S]

I think fare-by-distance is a great idea. Tap on wherever you enter, and tap-off wherever you leave, regardless of transit agency or vehicle. You then get charged a fare based on the point-to-point distance. You could have a $2 min, and within Toronto, maybe a $6 max (assuming you went across the whole city). Fares would probably go up for the average commuter, but if you roll this out with GO RER (assuming 10 min frequencies, and all the proposed new Toronto stations), then I think it might be politically ok. Of course it has to be marketed properly, such as new maps on Toronto transit vehicles:

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I think fare-by-distance is a great idea. Tap on wherever you enter, and tap-off wherever you leave, regardless of transit agency or vehicle. You then get charged a fare based on the point-to-point distance. You could have a $2 min, and within Toronto, maybe a $6 max (assuming you went across the whole city). Fares would probably go up for the average commuter, but if you roll this out with GO RER (assuming 10 min frequencies, and all the proposed new Toronto stations), then I think it might be politically ok. Of course it has to be marketed properly, such as new maps on Toronto transit vehicles:

View attachment 99036

I think fare by distance should be left to the agency's outside of Toronto and people traveling here should suck it up and pay the full TTC fare. If you choose to use go transit in the city it costs more for a faster service. Just like how the airport Express from Union station costs more than taking the TTC, you are paying for convenience and speed. Local services should be the same price. Cities that change by zone are confusing to tourists. The system in the TTC is fine and doesn't need to change.

 

[amnesiajune]

Because the subway was extended north into North York, and under Zone 1, they had a good reason to eliminate zone fares.

It was just a philosophical debate - some people (mostly from downtown) on Metro thought public transit should be a utility with usage-based costs and no subsidies, others (mostly from the suburbs) thought it should be a public service with a subsidy and flat fare. The latter group won that debate. Another reason why people wanted to eliminate the zone fare system is that it was inefficient, since bus and streetcar routes had to be split at the boundary. So for example, Kingston Road streetcars ran to Birchmount until the 1950s, but then they were cut off at Victoria Park.

Anyways, under the TTC's system the entire subway was one zone. That's why Lawrence, York Mills, Sheppard and Finch have long hallways between the subway and the buses - originally they were going to put fare gates in there for bus passengers to pay their second fare.

 

[Palma]

I think fare by distance should be left to the agency's outside of Toronto and people traveling here should suck it up and pay the full TTC fare. If you choose to use go transit in the city it costs more for a faster service. Just like how the airport Express from Union station costs more than taking the TTC, you are paying for convenience and speed. Local services should be the same price. Cities that change by zone are confusing to tourists. The system in the TTC is fine and doesn't need to change.

well the the system was fine prior to the TTC changing it from zone to flat - due to pressure form councillors in North York. It will be fine when its changed back to zoning or by distance as most modes of transportaion

 

[ssiguy2]

Toronto is much bgger now and with no natural barriers like bridges in Vancouver it will be too difficult for people to know when they have crossed a boundary. Add to this the numerous number of transit agencies and you have a recipe for disaster.

Fare by distance is the way to go but it too will not work unless it includes all transit forms....streetcar/bus/BRT/RT/subway/RER.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I think fare by distance should be left to the agency's outside of Toronto and people traveling here should suck it up and pay the full TTC fare. If you choose to use go transit in the city it costs more for a faster service.

This is not a good reason at all. Comparing the entire TTC - which holds a monopoly on transit in Toronto, from trains stuck in tunnels to buses that come in bunches - to a single express service is hugely illogical. Many people who take transit don't "Choose" and to the extent they do, we WANT people to take transit more. Discouraging that choice is entirely antithetical to our ostensible goals as a society.

Maybe if you run the Louis Vitton outlet in Yorkville you can tell customers to "suck it up" if they want your goods. It's not how you run a transit service in the 3rd biggest city in North America. Jeeze.

Cities that change by zone are confusing to tourists. The system in the TTC is fine and doesn't need to change.

The first part of this is the worst reason ever for setting a fare policy - and untrue. The second sentence is actually absurd, really.

Overall, most of the excuses about why zones won't work are absurd. The only actual reasons they might not work are:
a) people hate change
b) politicians don't want to upset people who hate change and also vote
c) there's no body (not even Metrolinx) with the political capital and/or authority and/or buy in to do "what's right" for the larger region

It's easy to set boundaries. London has zones and:
a) As a tourist it was easy enough to grasp, and to the extent it wasn't it's because Toronto's system is overly simplified
b) the river running through it is a natural boundary that has nothing to do with zones

Any one of us can come with a sensible system. The Old City + Y and EY is Zone 1, Scarb/Etob/NY are Zone 2. Miss/Markham/Vaughan/RH etc. are Zone 3. Done. Or whatever. This isn't rocket science and I know we've all gotten used to our piecemeal, flat fare joke of an antiquated system but the rest of the world figured this stuff out a long time ago.

I've said this on other threads but it's not like Hong Kong and London are sending people to Toronto because our fare system is so much smarter than theirs. It isn't. And, per the above, the goal is to ENcourage transit users, not DIScourage them or , even worse, tell them to "suck it up." Maybe instead of "The Better Way" TTC should just go with "Life's not fair - ride the rocket."

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The first part of this is the worst reason ever for setting a fare policy - and untrue. The second sentence is actually absurd, really.

Overall, most of the excuses about why zones won't work are absurd. The only actual reasons they might not work are:
a) people hate change
b) politicians don't want to upset people who hate change and also vote
c) there's no body (not even Metrolinx) with the political capital and/or authority and/or buy in to do "what's right" for the larger region

It's easy to set boundaries. London has zones and:
a) As a tourist it was easy enough to grasp, and to the extent it wasn't it's because Toronto's system is overly simplified
b) the river running through it is a natural boundary that has nothing to do with zones

Any one of us can come with a sensible system. The Old City + Y and EY is Zone 1, Scarb/Etob/NY are Zone 2. Miss/Markham/Vaughan/RH etc. are Zone 3. Done. Or whatever. This isn't rocket science and I know we've all gotten used to our piecemeal, flat fare joke of an antiquated system but the rest of the world figured this stuff out a long time ago.

I've said this on other threads but it's not like Hong Kong and London are sending people to Toronto because our fare system is so much smarter than theirs. It isn't. And, per the above, the goal is to ENcourage transit users, not DIScourage them or , even worse, tell them to "suck it up." Maybe instead of "The Better Way" TTC should just go with "Life's not fair - ride the rocket."

All these systems (flat fare, zoned, distance, hybrid, whatever) works - and each has benefits and drawbacks. To suggest otherwise - particularly a system with more than 500M+ boardings per year as a failure obviously flies against the face of ridership evidence. You maybe encouraging *some* riders to use transit, but make no mistake, unless it's a system without losers (and however you do it, you'd end up with varying degrees of it - e.g. where there is no spare capacity; particularly cost-sensitive populations, etc), you'd also be discouraging others to use transit. It is what you're willing to live with.

AoD

 

[MisterF]

Those 500 million+ riders are using the TTC despite the fare system, not because of it.

With RER on 5 lines (6 if you count UPX separately) and a smartcard system fully adopted in the near future, our current fare system is quickly becoming obsolete. The city has simply outgrown it. A single, unified fare system is needed throughout the GTA that includes RER and subway. To get the full benefit of the billions of dollars being put into out rail lines the trains running on them need to have the same fare system as the trains that run underground. To continue to keep them separate is arbitrary and makes no sense.

Apparently a lot of regional RER-type systems have higher ridership than the subways in their core cities. I could see this happening in Toronto eventually.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Those 500 million+ riders are using the TTC despite the fare system, not because of it.

With RER on 5 lines (6 if you count UPX separately) and a smartcard system fully adopted, our current fare system is quickly becoming obsolete. The city has simply outgrown it. A single, unified fare system is needed throughout the GTA that includes RER and subway. To get the full benefit of the billions of dollars being put into out rail lines the trains running on them need to have the same fare system as the trains that run underground. To continue to keep them separate is arbitrary and makes no sense.

Apparently a lot of regional RER-type systems have higher ridership than the subways in their core cities. I could see this happening in Toronto eventually.

That's not really an answer - what exactly is obsolete? The fact that you can get anywhere within the current City of Toronto on a single fare? Or how the current GO is charging an noncompetitive rate for travel within city limits? And is the answer zone fares for all forms of transit, only subways, or just lowering the RER fare to TTC levels within the City of Toronto?

Also, keep in mind just what the goals of this exercise is - for example, if the argument for changing the fare system is to reduce long-distance auto-usage, why and how would a distance-based fare system further that goal, when we know it tends to favour short or medium distance trips? If the issue is encouraging 905 cross 416 boundary transit travel, perhaps the solution isn't the implementation of zone fares, but some form of subsidy to reduce the sting. GO - even post RER is going to be a downtown to periphery system - how should a municipality wide zone fare be of benefit for people whose origin and designation does not fit that pattern?

AoD

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

That's not really an answer - what exactly is obsolete? The fact that you can get anywhere within the current City of Toronto on a single fare? Or how the current GO is charging an noncompetitive rate for travel within city limits?
AoD

It's the same problem. Transit systems designed in the 50s/60s that have long since outgrown their structures, fare and otherwise.

You're totally right that every system has trade-offs and we've hit the limits of the one we have in place. We can certainly debate the nuances of the various options - and I've said a 905/416 subsidy may be the most palatable if not most sensible solution - but I think you have start by realizing the problem in the first place. Travel and growth patterns are entirely different from when those systems were designed. RER and Presto provide tools to think about all of it differently.