Regional and Intercity Bus\Rail Transportation

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Regarding subsidies, there is a value in getting the furthest commuters off the roads. So, either we pay subsidies for transit or for road use.

As I said before, eliminating subsidies can never be perfect. We can waste a lot of money on trying to charge extra to non-residents for little long-term benefit.

That is where I was trying to go in post #108. In a perfect world we wouldn't subsidize the transportation costs of non-resident commuters, but trying to achieve that is kind of like playing "Whac-A-Mole" and the new mole that pops up may be worse than the one you whacked down, so lets find a mole that we can live with.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is where I was trying to go in post #108. In a perfect world we wouldn't subsidize the transportation costs of non-resident commuters, but trying to achieve that is kind of like playing "Whac-A-Mole" and the new mole that pops up may be worse than the one you whacked down, so lets find a mole that we can live with.

Great analogy. If they use OC, then we subsidize their transit use. If we disallow that or double the price, then they switch to driving and we subsidize their extra use of city roads instead. How do we avoid subsidies without draconian measures?

Say we decide to impose tolls on every road coming into the city. There is a cost to administer that (and somebody has to pay for that too) and even city residents are hurt every time they leave the city and want to come home. Who really wants that? Will rural Ottawans be pleased when they cross the boundary to visit family or friends, shop or go to a hockey tournament that happens to be in the neighbouring town? Has any city ever done such a thing other than congestion charges in the city centre which is usually limited to very large cities where there is an excellent transit alternative. Yes, there are toll roads but will they be effective or just drive people onto non-tolled roads.

[Dengler Avenue]

I have a crazy idea (so it’s up to you all whether or not to take it seriously).

If exurban commuters don’t mind a much longer commute, we can encourage them to ride bicycles to LRT stations (or even straight to work). I just checked: it takes 88 minutes one way to bike from Vars to Canadian Science and Technilogy Museum.

Obviously this won’t work if
(1) they’re taking buses instead of LRT;
(2) they’re coming from the lower end of Highway 416*;
(3) the weather’s very bad,
(4) drivers in the area are generally hostile to cyclists**.

*Heck even Carleton Place is pushing it.
**It’s really bad in GTA, but I don’t know about NRC.

Plus, I don’t know how to even encourage such behavioural change.

[shawkr]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Lrt's friend created a new thread for this suburban/exurban discussion.... will move some posts there later

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...82#post8398682

Some news from the Russell Council meeting - they are going to meet with Rockland and try to negotiate with the City. Also there are discussions with Amazon and the City about increasing service along the 417 - could be implications for more park and riders from Russell/Carlsbad Springs as well.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Thank you, and the Amazon project is going to create reverse commuters. Since most jobs are not high paying, many will need transit. In time, there will also be increased demand for housing out there.

I really hope this doesn't happen. The raison d'etre of public transit is that it is difficult for decentralized commuters/employers/retailers/etc. to organize large-scale "car-pooling". So a central authority steps in, and operates a bus route that serves many origins and destinations.

But when it comes to single-destination routes, the collective action problem disappears. There is no need for public transportation networks to step in here. If a need exists, then Amazon can operate a Blair-to-Amazon (e.g.) route itself, with frequency and capacity tailored to Amazon's shift schedule.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by shawkr

I really hope this doesn't happen. The raison d'etre of public transit is that it is difficult for decentralized commuters/employers/retailers/etc. to organize large-scale "car-pooling". So a central authority steps in, and operates a bus route that serves many origins and destinations.

But when it comes to single-destination routes, the collective action problem disappears. There is no need for public transportation networks to step in here. If a need exists, then Amazon can operate a Blair-to-Amazon (e.g.) route itself, with frequency and capacity tailored to Amazon's shift schedule.

Back in the day, Nortel would pay OC Transpo to provide frequent service to the Carling campus. There is no reason Amazon couldn't do the same and tell Transpo what schedule they want.

Contraflow bus service (especially when point to point like this) is one of the few cases where OC Transpo is cheaper than a private operator. The buses are dead heading in that direction anyway, so it doesn't cost much extra to have people on board and make an extra stop.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I think you are expecting perfect separation at cross-jurisdictional boundaries which is not possible. Do you think that TTC buses on Steeles Avenue require proof of residence to prove that they are Toronto taxpayers in order to board the bus?

We can extend this further by eliminating free transfers between STO and OC because riders are being subsidized by the other municipality.

1) TTC charges extra fares north of Steeles.

2) The TTC doesn't offer discounts based on residency. They offer discounts based on status (student, senior, etc.)

What is being argued for here is nothing like the TTC. The equivalent analogy would be saying that someone from Newmarket should get a discounted TTC pass because they have to buy a YRT/VIVA pass already.

Try suggesting that in Toronto and see how much people laugh at at you. Yet, strangely this idea is perfectly acceptable in Ottawa.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

That is a good question. Can somebody answer that?

(edit) I just read the TTC monthly pass rules. There is no residency requirement mentioned. I don't believe they exist for OC Transpo either.

I don't know of any major city that has a residency requirement for a pass unless it's with some kind of designated category.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Regarding subsidies, there is a value in getting the furthest commuters off the roads. So, either we pay subsidies for transit or for road use.

And you say you care about sprawl....

No. The congestion is not on some rural road where the furthest commuters are. The congestion is in the core where that road space is at a premium. So priority should be given to getting those people off the road.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As I said before, eliminating subsidies can never be perfect. We can waste a lot of money on trying to charge extra to non-residents for little long-term benefit.

The first step to eliminating subsidies is to stop arguing for more of them. Stop with the nonsense about discounted passes. Stop with the advocacy for rail to villages whose idea of quaint is Tim Hortons.

I will never understand why people keeping pushing for these folks to get breaks. They are already rewarded with larger homes, more land and smaller mortgages than anybody in the city will ever have. But now they need to get a break on their commute too?

I would sooner give Ottawa taxpayers vouchers for free transit passes than give a rural resident a penny off.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

But think, what about tourists? Do we want to charge tourists double to eliminate a subsidy? I think we have to be very careful before we go down that path.

How exactly are tourists subsidized? Tourists don't tend to buy any pass but a day pass or family weekend pass. And tourists aren't generally riding transit during peak in peak direction. Tourists also rarely stay in the suburbs and aren't taking up a seat for an hour on the way in.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I really don’t see how these issues can be discussed separately. One’s view on whether Ottawa should be providing highly discounted transit to exurban and rural commuters depends on one’s view of exurban commuting. If anything this thread should be renamed “exurban transportation issues”

Absolutely agree. This is an attempt to bifurcate the discussion so that they can have no criticism of the underlying idea.

How many major cities offer transit discounts to rural residents coming in from outside their city boundaries? It'd be interesting to see if there are such examples elsewhere. Cause I don't know of any.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Back in the day, Nortel would pay OC Transpo to provide frequent service to the Carling campus. There is no reason Amazon couldn't do the same and tell Transpo what schedule they want.

Contraflow bus service (especially when point to point like this) is one of the few cases where OC Transpo is cheaper than a private operator. The buses are dead heading in that direction anyway, so it doesn't cost much extra to have people on board and make an extra stop.

This is common in many places. And sometimes, it's simply the major employer agree to cut costs incurred over and above ridership. But it's Amazon, they'll bully their way out and get OC Transpo to pay.

[shawkr]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Back in the day, Nortel would pay OC Transpo to provide frequent service to the Carling campus. There is no reason Amazon couldn't do the same and tell Transpo what schedule they want.

Contraflow bus service (especially when point to point like this) is one of the few cases where OC Transpo is cheaper than a private operator. The buses are dead heading in that direction anyway, so it doesn't cost much extra to have people on board and make an extra stop.

I'm okay with the "OC Transpo as contractor" model.

That's a good point about the counterflow. I guess it depends on how much "flow" there is.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That is where I was trying to go in post #108. In a perfect world we wouldn't subsidize the transportation costs of non-resident commuters, but trying to achieve that is kind of like playing "Whac-A-Mole" and the new mole that pops up may be worse than the one you whacked down, so lets find a mole that we can live with.

There is a mole we can live with.

Let them drive.

Towns of a few thousand people aren't exactly the major source of commuters clogging up our roads. Our own suburbanites are doing that. So why worry about the rurals?

If they think driving isn't great, they'll get their towns to start running service to the LRT stations where they can hop on the LRT, or even a coach straight to the core.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

1) TTC charges extra fares north of Steeles.

2) The TTC doesn't offer discounts based on residency. They offer discounts based on status (student, senior, etc.)

What is being argued for here is nothing like the TTC. The equivalent analogy would be saying that someone from Newmarket should get a discounted TTC pass because they have to buy a YRT/VIVA pass already.

Try suggesting that in Toronto and see how much people laugh at at you. Yet, strangely this idea is perfectly acceptable in Ottawa.

The GTA has multiple discounted fare/pass options and the Province has been pushing fare integration http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regional...n/default.aspx

There is a GTA weekly pass that works on TTC, Mississauga, Brampton and YRT. For example, instead of paying $300 for both TTC and YRT monthly passes, you can pay $252 for the four weeks of the GTA weekly pass.
https://www.ttc.ca/Fares_and_passes/Passes/GTA_pass.jsp

Or you add a small supplement ($0.75-$1.00) to transfer between providers, or have a discount using Presto.

https://www.ttc.ca/Fares_and_passes/...Zone_Fares.jsp
https://www.ttc.ca/Fares_and_passes/...STO_Co-Pay.jsp

Ottawa had a fare supplement plan in place with rural transit providers, but is now saying you need to pay full price with one month notice.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

1) TTC charges extra fares north of Steeles.

2) The TTC doesn't offer discounts based on residency. They offer discounts based on status (student, senior, etc.)

What is being argued for here is nothing like the TTC. The equivalent analogy would be saying that someone from Newmarket should get a discounted TTC pass because they have to buy a YRT/VIVA pass already.

Try suggesting that in Toronto and see how much people laugh at at you. Yet, strangely this idea is perfectly acceptable in Ottawa.

But the TTC does offer a discount for those transferring to/from GO and UP Express, which is more analogous to rural buses in the NCR (https://www.prestocard.ca/en/about/d...ed-double-fare). Granted it is only for PRESTO pay as you go, not passes, but GO doesn’t offer a monthly pass.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

The GTA has multiple discounted fare/pass options and the Province has been pushing fare integration http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regional...n/default.aspx

The GTA is very different from the TTC. The TTC is the big kahuna in that region and they've long refused to offer transfers discounts for the exact reason we are discussing here. It's a subsidy to non-residents.

It's also why fare integration is really stuck there. Because virtually any integration has everybody else benefiting more than Toronto residents who massively fund the TTC through their property taxes. So any fare integration means Queen's Park coming over with its chequebook. And since that's a hard pill for provincial politicians to swallow, it's why they've been having this fare integration discussion for years and it's not really going anywhere.

This should start to sound familiar to Ottawa residents.

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

There is a GTA weekly pass that works on TTC, Mississauga, Brampton and YRT. For example, instead of paying $300 for both TTC and YRT monthly passes, you can pay $252 for the four weeks of the GTA weekly pass.
https://www.ttc.ca/Fares_and_passes/Passes/GTA_pass.jsp

It's not the TTC in this scenario that is entirely eating the discount. And that's the point of that pass. They all agree to offer discounts to enable regional travel. There is nothing analogous to Ottawa here because there's not really a large flow of people all that concerned with traveling to Rockland from Ottawa, by transit. This flow is entirely one-sided. And it's at peak in the peak direction too.

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Or you add a small supplement ($0.75-$1.00) to transfer between providers, or have a discount using Presto.

What you charge is irrelevant. As long as a discount is offered, somebody is making up the difference. And some of us would like that to not be the Ottawa taxpayer. And the other side don't pay taxes in Ottawa or don't care.

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Ottawa had a fare supplement plan in place with rural transit providers, but is now saying you need to pay full price with one month notice.

And there's nothing wrong with that. Why do these folks feel so entitled to discounts the rest of us don't get? Why can't I, as an Ottawa resident who also funds OC Transpo through my property taxes, pay what they are paying for that pass?

Tell them to suck it up and accept their more expensive commutes as the tradeoff for their "peace and quiet".

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

And there's nothing wrong with that. Why do these folks feel so entitled to discounts the rest of us don't get? Why can't I, as an Ottawa resident who also funds OC Transpo through my property taxes, pay what they are paying for that pass?

So instead of calling (for example) it a $1.50 discount, call it a $2.00 supplement (normal fare is $3.50) and you are happy?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

But the TTC does offer a discount for those transferring to/from GO and UP Express, which is more analogous to rural buses in the NCR (https://www.prestocard.ca/en/about/d...ed-double-fare). Granted it is only for PRESTO pay as you go, not passes, but GO doesn’t offer a monthly pass.

I remember being in Toronto when this was implemented. And initially it was extremely limited. Effectively to only transfers at Union. Since expanded to a handful of other stations. And the TTC's rationale was quite specific. GO transferees at Union at counter-peak. So they aren't a problem.

And if I'm not mistaken there was also some provincial involvement and money shuffled to make that happen.The UP discount is part of the same deal with GO/Metrolinx. Also, offering discounts for airport bound commuters so they don't drive or cab is a pretty specific goal that is in the city's interest.

Again though, there's no comparable analogy to Ottawa. There's no regional service in Ottawa. OC Transpo co-operating with CRT is like TTC co-operating with MiWay or YRT or DRT. And you'll notice how strict the TTC is on those fronts.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

So instead of calling (for example) it a $1.50 discount, call it a $2.00 supplement (normal fare is $3.50) and you are happy?

No. This is an individual traveling at peak, taking up space from an Ottawa resident and taxpayer and paying $2 for that ride compared to the Ottawa resident who is paying $3.50 for that trip.

Let me put it this way, why should somebody get a discount for OC Transpo based on the mode of travel on which they enter the network?

If you walk to an LRT station? No discount.

Bike to an LRT station? No discount.

Drive to an LRT station? No discount.

But if you arrive on a CRT bus at that station, you get a discount. Why?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I remember being in Toronto when this was implemented. And initially it was extremely limited. Effectively to only transfers at Union. Since expanded to a handful of other stations. And the TTC's rationale was quite specific. GO transferees at Union at counter-peak. So they aren't a problem.

No reason OC Transpo couldn’t have the same rule and only allow transfers at Parlement or other downtown stationary something like that.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by roger1818

No reason OC Transpo couldn’t have the same rule and only allow transfers at Parlement or other downtown stationary something like that.

That might be something I could get behind.

I would bet money though that the rural bus services would absolutely detest this idea because it wouldn't be faster than the LRT during peak traffic, and the cost of their services would rise if they had to drive all the way to the absolute downtown core.

[Truenorth00]

Let's be clear. I am not opposed to integration. I think they should get dedicated bus bays at major transfer stations like Blair, St-Laurent, Baseline and Lincoln Fields.

But I see no need to go beyond that and offer them discounted fares and passes. At that point we are doing what their town councils should be doing. If they are so worried about the price of that commute, why aren't their town councils subsidizing their services more and bringing the fares of their services down? Why is it that OC Transpo has to offer discounts?