News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

Basically, fare integration pretty much already exists outside of Toronto.

Ideally, I want the exact same thing with Toronto.
But, I can't see that really happening.

First, TTC needs to switch to time-based transfers throughout their system.
Second, it needs to remain flat fare based for the entire TTC system.

The double fare needs to go though. I would support a minor co-fare when transferring to TTC though.


I agree - and, as BMO points out, there are co-fares on some regional routes already.

It's hard to overestimate how big a shift RER will be for GO, since they already have big parking lots and will be offering all-day, two-way service. They need more agreements like that, just for starters.

Napoleon makes good points about the Bay Area too. What it really comes down to is that there is nowhere on earth where the best practice is considered to be integrating every transit agency in the region except the one in the urban centre.

Either we'll keep having a joke, patchwork of a system, or they'll find a (fair, equitable) way to bring TTC onside. I don't see much in between.
 
The first thing they should do is get rid of some of the transit agencies itself. Have only 6 systems.......Ham/Hal/Peel/Tor/YK/Dur and have flat fares within those municipalities.

I'd go even further. I'd have Metrolinx assume responsibility for all transit agencies in the GTHA, and then run them with 7 different divisions: Metrolinx RT (responsible for all rapid transit), Metrolinx Toronto, Metrolinx Durham, Metrolinx York, Metrolinx Peel, Metrolinx Halton, Metrolinx Hamilton. The latter 6 would deal purely with local transit in those areas, but would be managed by Metrolinx. They would in essence become semi-separate entities under the Metrolinx umbrella. I think that's the right balance between local responsiveness and regional cohesiveness.
 
Metrolinx is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Merge all transit agencies into one for each regional municipality ie 6.....Ham/hal/Peel/Tor/YR/Dur.
Then create a zone based system like Vancouver. Everyone pays the same for one zone whether you live in Tor or Bur or Osh. You standard 1 zone far gets you travel by ANY means within your zone whether it's LRT, GO rail/bus, subway, bus, streetcar, bus etc.
As soon as you cross a zone you either pay extra or buy a 2 zone pass. For example, if you are going from Ham to Tor you pay 4 zones because you are travelling thru/on 4 zones {Ham/Hal/Peel/Tor}. If you are going from Osh to Bur you also pay 4 zones because you are travelling thru/on 4 zones {Dur/Tor/Peel/Hal}. The largest zone fare would be 5 from Ham to either Durham or York.

Have the zones increase but not to the extent of a full fare. So, for example, 1 zone would be $130, 2 $160, 3 $190, 4 $220, and 5 $250.
 
Then create a zone based system like Vancouver. Everyone pays the same for one zone whether you live in Tor or Bur or Osh. You standard 1 zone far gets you travel by ANY means within your zone whether it's LRT, GO rail/bus, subway, bus, streetcar, bus etc
Have the zones increase but not to the extent of a full fare. So, for example, 1 zone would be $130, 2 $160, 3 $190, 4 $220, and 5 $250.
This is the common strategy in Europe, especially in Germany. It makes it so simple. Within a zone you can take the S-Bahn (like RER), a subway, a tram, a bus, etc. It's whatever is most convenient. Many places generally allow provisions for some overlap between zones. The only downside is that it requires implementation of either check-in/check-out capabilities at every point in the system or a paper/mobile ticket with POP systemwide.
 
It can certainly be done.

The problem is not fare integration as it's common but rather Metrolinx's willingness to put forth the plan so they continually insist it must reinvent the wheel. Metrolinx is stalling by saying it's a very complicated process but in reality it's neither complicated nor time consuming. They are simply saying this as a delay tactic and nothing more. This is much the same as their endless "studies" into revenue tools...........they know what needs to be done but are succumbing to political pressure not to say it.
 
It can certainly be done.

The problem is not fare integration as it's common but rather Metrolinx's willingness to put forth the plan so they continually insist it must reinvent the wheel. Metrolinx is stalling by saying it's a very complicated process but in reality it's neither complicated nor time consuming. They are simply saying this as a delay tactic and nothing more. This is much the same as their endless "studies" into revenue tools...........they know what needs to be done but are succumbing to political pressure not to say it.

This is probably true, at least in the broad strokes. The real and fundamental issue is politics, no matter how people want to parse it or lay blame.

Torontonians automatically assume fare restructuring means stripping their autonomy or stealing their money. On paper, the province is in charge and can do whatever it wants and/or give Metrolinx whatever it power it wants. Practically, Toronto is very protectionist and carries far more riders than all the other transit systems. It's too powerful to just impose upon by fiat.

There are lots of different concepts of what constitutes "equity" and Metrolinx is trying to thread the needle by implementing a system that's fair and that appeases the individual parties, especially TTC. Those two things don't necessarily go hand in hand. (It's also true there was effectively no way to move on this until everyone had Presto and TTC, as per above, stalled on that.)

I like the zone system described above, for sure. I guess then the Qs are where you draw the zones. I'd guess (ballparking) it's roughly like Zone 1=Old City of Toronto 2=Middle Burbs (York/East York etc.) 3=NY, Etob, Scarb, 4=Inner 905 etc. Torontonians seem to think this will automatically be unfair because people in the suburbs will pay more but you have to draw the line somewhere. I figure this should be less of a big deal if the suburban price stays around where it s now (e.g. It's $3 from Finch to Union but $2.50 from Eglinton to Union and $2 from Bloor to Union.) That's a different scenario than if it suddenly stays at $3 if you live in the old city but jumps to $4.50 to get downtown from Finch.

Maybe they're stalling and making a mountain out of a molehill but I don't envy Metrolinx the job.
 
I like to see zones be smaller and 2 zone fare be same price and only slightly more expensive than 1 zone fare. Like $2.50 for 1 zone and $2.75 for 2 zone but $4.00 for 3 zones.

For example if Etobicoke was a zone and East Mississauga was another zone, people could travel between them no problem. If people travel between Etobicoke and West Mississauga (a third zone) then there would there be a significant increase. This way it prevents border communities like Malton and Rexdale and Jane-Finch from being isolated. Even in ssiguy's example the fare/political boundaries still acts as a major barrier, and disadvantage the border communities.

As for merging transit systems, is it really necessary? Mississauga Transit is the third largest municipal transit system in Ontario and has higher ridership than York Region Transit and Durham Region Transit combined. Is it really too small a system? Brampton ridership is equal to York Region as well. Mississauga and Brampton Transit are each both already large enough to provide efficient service.

Ultimately I don't think it really matter much which agencies people use. The important thing is fares and designing routes aren't merely based on arbitrary political boundaries.

I think proper fare integration alone would solve a lot of problems. Imagine if the TTC Steeles buses accepted the same fares as the YRT buses for example. Steeles is the busiest east-west route in York, but right now it is not part of York's system because of the fares. I think that's why York's ridership sucks so bad. But if Steeles becomes part of their system, it would change things a lot. Fare integration would also improve all those bus routes that YRT contracts out to the TTC.
 
I like to see zones be smaller and 2 zone fare be same price and only slightly more expensive than 1 zone fare. Like $2.50 for 1 zone and $2.75 for 2 zone but $4.00 for 3 zones.
I'm rather partial to the idea of making the base fare a 2-zone pass. It helps avoid any inequity involved with living right on a border.

Though, zone systems are hard to implement on buses with electronic fare payment, as TransLink has discovered. I'm not sure what's going to be the solution in the end.
 
Metrolinx is making a mountain out of a molehill.

Merge all transit agencies into one for each regional municipality ie 6.....Ham/hal/Peel/Tor/YR/Dur.
Then create a zone based system like Vancouver. Everyone pays the same for one zone whether you live in Tor or Bur or Osh. You standard 1 zone far gets you travel by ANY means within your zone whether it's LRT, GO rail/bus, subway, bus, streetcar, bus etc.
As soon as you cross a zone you either pay extra or buy a 2 zone pass. For example, if you are going from Ham to Tor you pay 4 zones because you are travelling thru/on 4 zones {Ham/Hal/Peel/Tor}. If you are going from Osh to Bur you also pay 4 zones because you are travelling thru/on 4 zones {Dur/Tor/Peel/Hal}. The largest zone fare would be 5 from Ham to either Durham or York.

Have the zones increase but not to the extent of a full fare. So, for example, 1 zone would be $130, 2 $160, 3 $190, 4 $220, and 5 $250.

you're still going to have the same problems of people on border routes just ignoring Regional transit and getting on a few KMs away in Toronto to avoid an increased fare.
 
As for merging transit systems, is it really necessary? Mississauga Transit is the third largest municipal transit system in Ontario and has higher ridership than York Region Transit and Durham Region Transit combined. Is it really too small a system? Brampton ridership is equal to York Region as well. Mississauga and Brampton Transit are each both already large enough to provide efficient service.

Ultimately I don't think it really matter much which agencies people use. The important thing is fares and designing routes aren't merely based on arbitrary political boundaries.

I think proper fare integration alone would solve a lot of problems. Imagine if the TTC Steeles buses accepted the same fares as the YRT buses for example. Steeles is the busiest east-west route in York, but right now it is not part of York's system because of the fares. I think that's why York's ridership sucks so bad. But if Steeles becomes part of their system, it would change things a lot. Fare integration would also improve all those bus routes that YRT contracts out to the TTC.

I think you're right and people could not care less what agencies they use to get from A to B. Aside from GO which has a bit of a "bigger seats, more comfortable ride" vibe, I think transit agencies (especially TTC) have very little sense of how little they mean to people. If I'm waiting at a stop to go to point B, I could care less whether it's a TTC bus or a YRT bus or a Zum bus or whatever.

I'm curious if there's anywhere else in the GTA in the same league as Steeles Avenue, where these problems come to a head. I'm guessing not, because of the contgiuous development over such a long border, not to mention the proximity of Finch Station (and Downsview). But I've always lived pretty close to Steeles and the inability to deal with the distortions it causes are just fascinating. Maybe that makes the fare integration problem seem bigger than it is, but I figure that as long as you have people in Thornhill paying a double fare or biking or walking 20 minutes to avoid that fare and get on a TTC bus instead of a much easier YRT bus, you have a problem that exists at a network level.

It's possible that full-on integration isn't required but I think it will be in some form. I'm not familiar with that many transit systems on our scale but when I think about obvious World Class(TM) systems like Paris, London and New York, they're all integrated under a single authority operating multiple systems.

I don't know if TTC thinks we've figured out something they haven't, but I'm pretty sure no one has slides about the GTA in their Powerpoint presentation about regional transit best practices.

John Tory has been talking about how eye-opening his trip to London was and how he wants our system to be more like theirs. Well, IMHO, the two biggest lessons to be learned there are:
1) They have far more revenue sources, including a downtown congestion charge
2) They have a single authority whose power far transcends and exceeds that of the City of London, proper

If the Mayor of Toronto is willing to start charging drivers to fund transit, and to put Toronto's transit operations in the hands of a body with a far wider mandate, while still recognizing the primacy of the central city, that trip will be worth every dollar taxpayers paid, and more.

But I'm skeptical...
 
Last edited:
I'd go even further. I'd have Metrolinx assume responsibility for all transit agencies in the GTHA, and then run them with 7 different divisions: Metrolinx RT (responsible for all rapid transit), Metrolinx Toronto, Metrolinx Durham, Metrolinx York, Metrolinx Peel, Metrolinx Halton, Metrolinx Hamilton. The latter 6 would deal purely with local transit in those areas, but would be managed by Metrolinx. They would in essence become semi-separate entities under the Metrolinx umbrella. I think that's the right balance between local responsiveness and regional cohesiveness.
Peel-Halton could be combined too. Then you'd have Metrolinx Toronto, Metrolinx Hamilton, Metrolinx GTA West, Metrolinx GTA North and Metrolinx GTA East. Also, responsibility may not ultimately be required, but at least coordination/marketing powers. For instance, Tfl in London is actually many different agencies, but few actually realize that as the experience is seamless.
 
Peel-Halton could be combined too. Then you'd have Metrolinx Toronto, Metrolinx Hamilton, Metrolinx GTA West, Metrolinx GTA North and Metrolinx GTA East. Also, responsibility may not ultimately be required, but at least coordination/marketing powers. For instance, Tfl in London is actually many different agencies, but few actually realize that as the experience is seamless.

That's a good idea. I just went by the upper tier municipal boundaries because some of the regions have regional transit agencies already, so that's less work. But yes, Halton + Peel does make sense, since neither have regional transit agencies.
 
That's a good idea. I just went by the upper tier municipal boundaries because some of the regions have regional transit agencies already, so that's less work. But yes, Halton + Peel does make sense, since neither have regional transit agencies.

There are huge differences in needs not just Toronto vs the rest of the GTA bus also within these regions that are proposed. Why would we lump Toronto and Mississauga as separate entities but include Oakville and Caledon in the same?
 

Back
Top