News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.3K     0 

Y

Young Stats

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
48
Reaction score
18
Right now in the GTHA, there are about 11 different transit systems with different fare systems. However, I think Metrolinx proposal to implement a fare by distance policy will result in a disaster, because
1.) It will discourage a lot riders especially among the lower income.
2) It will have a result of a huge ridership loss, thus encourage the use of automobiles in which results in congestion costs, and more CO2 emissions
3.) Transit at one point will become unaffordable. (GO Transit is costing an arm and a leg)

Hypothetically, if the province wants to invest transit infrastructure very seriously, the funding for transit must be uploaded to the province. Then, the province must subsidized 100% to all the transit agencies in Ontario including the GHTA. Eliminating the fare in Ontario especially in the GTHA will solve the cross-border issue, result in a huge ridership increase, and possibly decreasing the amount of parking usage at GO stations. However, what kind of challenges in regards to infrastructure if the elimination of the fare is implemented? What are the limits can public transit in the GTHA can sustain itself (capacity and service level wise) if the elimination of the fare is implemented. Thoughts!
 
No. It would encourage frivolous riding of transit with zero cost required to ride--look at the time that on Family Day the UPX was made free, there was a lineup all the way into the Great Hall at union, several hours long. Nobody will be able to get anywhere in the region in 24 hours.

Also, we can't afford to properly operate and maintain, let alone expand, most of our transit network as-is, so I'm not sure how we would make do if we suddenly lose all of our fare revenue.

And I strongly doubt the ~$0.75 ride-to-GO co-fare is the reason that GO riders park at the station instead of taking local transit, since GO is fairly expensive and its riders are more likely to be able to afford that <$1 fee. People generally park at the GO station because local transit is either infeasible or inefficient in comparison.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
So where do they get their money from by raising taxes if poel don't have to pay a fare.
Click to expand...
The boys on Bay St said almost a decade ago that Transit can be free to the point people will be spending less on taxes than they currently pay to use transit.

Its based on both the square feet of your house/condo/apartment and the property size. The larger they are, more you pay. In the end, it could cost you 50% less than what you and your family pay today to use transit.

This way, everyone has a choice how to travel and when.

The downside to this, Transit will have to be beef up to handle the increase of ridership and that has to take place before you go free transit.

At the same time, developers would have to kick in funds to get their projects approve and we know they will past that cost onto buyers and renters.

Its already a given, if we do nothing about increasing transit and making it cheaper down the road, roads will be gridlock 7/24 to the point everyone looses. We have no more room to build roads and you can only built so much highway before you are back to Sq One.

Fare by distant is the wrong way to go, as you will force drivers to drive to stations that are further away than where you are today, regardless of fuel cost. Low incomers are been force to live further than today due to cost of renting going up since they can't complete with the ones who can afford the higher cost. In some cases, riders just give up using transit and walk, since transit fares are too high today.
 
I don't think "free" public transit is a good idea.

First of all, people need to get rid of this "free" fetish, nothing is free, the question is whether you're paying for something out of pocket or out of taxes.

Secondly, if the province were to implement "free", it would ultimately just end up as a constraint on how the transit system is run, since they wouldn't be allowed to charge fares. Practically, what this would mean is that the province says how much they are willing to pay, and the transit service operates whatever it can with that amount. So if the transit agency wants to improve service but the province doesn't want to pay more in subsidy then the agency doesn't have the option of raising fares to cover the additional operating costs.

At the same time, I don't see a scenario where buses are absolutely jammed with people. Most people who take transit already do so with an unlimited pass, so this wouldn't have a large impact on their behaviour. And many people who take transit (the so-called "captive" riders) do so because it is far cheaper than owning a car. The category of riders that would benefit, occasional riders (people who currently have a marginal cost associated with riding transit and don't own passes) represent ~40% of the TTC's clientel. If they take twice as many rides, there'd be a 40% increase in rides, most of these off-peak.

For small transit systems with tiny farebox recovery ratios, where the cost of selling and enforcing fares is the same order of magnitude as revenue from the farebox, I think it makes sense for them to go "free". But for the TTC, which gets a whopping 2/3rd of its operating budget from the farebox, I don't think this is a good idea to make it free because that would require tripling their subsidy and kneecapping their service in the long run.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the degree of subsidy for transit should be increased, at least to the point where it's on the same scale as the direct and indirect subsidies given to drivers. Especially considering how disproportionately expensive transit passes are in Toronto.

Although, it would be much more economically efficient to just remove subsidies to driving, i.e. eliminate minimum parking requirements, toll expressways to recover maintenance fees, eliminate zoning, etc. than to provide subsidies to transit use.
 
Young Stats said:
Right now in the GTHA, there are about 11 different transit systems with different fare systems. However, I think Metrolinx proposal to implement a fare by distance policy will result in a disaster, because
1.) It will discourage a lot riders especially among the lower income.
2) It will have a result of a huge ridership loss, thus encourage the use of automobiles in which results in congestion costs, and more CO2 emissions
3.) Transit at one point will become unaffordable. (GO Transit is costing an arm and a leg)
Click to expand...
How come most cities(with excellent transit) around the world use fare by distance or a hybrid model with fare by distance for rapid transit and flat fare for local transit then? I am not sure if implementing and enforcing fare for distance for everything will be possible, but the hybrid model is definitely the way to go.
 
jys said:
How come most cities(with excellent transit) around the world use fare by distance or a hybrid model with fare by distance for rapid transit and flat fare for local transit then?
Click to expand...
Because,
1.) Most transit systems around the world were already designed for the use of fare by distance or a hybrid model since public transit was implemented long time ago.
2.) In Canada and the U.S.A. alone, we have the 'automobile' culture. To them (in Canada and the U.S.A), the automobile represents 'personal freedom'. In the rest of the world, the culture was already there in regards to public transit.
 
Young Stats said:
Because,
1.) Most transit systems around the world were already designed for the use of fare by distance or a hybrid model since public transit was implemented long time ago.
2.) In Canada and the U.S.A. alone, we have the 'automobile' culture. To them (in Canada and the U.S.A), the automobile represents 'personal freedom'. In the rest of the world, the culture was already there in regards to public transit.
Click to expand...

1) Toronto had zoned fares in its history. If anything Toronto is going back to the model it had previously.

2) Car culture is irrelevant to fare pricing schemes.
 
The biggest problem with introducing zone fares on the subway but not local transit is that would require stations to be reconfigured to move bus and streetcar loops out of the fare paid zone, and would require turnstiles to be shoehorned in a lot of stations. Currently it's possible to ride the subway without passing through turnstiles if you transfer to/from a bus on both ends of the trip.

It would also mean fundamental changes to the TTC network. Currently the system is set up with free transfers in mind, and thus there are many trips that essentially require use of the subway. The TTC would likely have to introduce new surface routes that duplicate the subway system as an alternative.
 
Last edited:
kEiThZ said:
1) Toronto had zoned fares in its history. If anything Toronto is going back to the model it had previously.
Click to expand...
Tornoto as in the context of the GTHA or just the City of Toronto (To bring back the fare zone between old Toronto and the inner suburbs)?
 
Megaton327 said:
No. It would encourage frivolous riding of transit with zero cost required to ride--look at the time that on Family Day the UPX was made free, there was a lineup all the way into the Great Hall at union, several hours long. Nobody will be able to get anywhere in the region in 24 hours.
Click to expand...

That was because the UPX was a brand new line and people wanted to try it out...
 
I would be open to free or subsidized travel during off-peak times to ease crowding during rush hour. Many cities have introduced these measures and I believe David Soknacki proposed it in the last election.
 
mjl08 said:
I would be open to free or subsidized travel during off-peak times to ease crowding during rush hour. Many cities have introduced these measures and I believe David Soknacki proposed it in the last election.
Click to expand...

I'm a big proponent of that--Soknacki had so many great ideas. I'd personally be more in favour of something like $0.50 for seniors/students/low income adults, and $1.50 for adults, or maybe at the most extreme free for discounted passengers and $1 for adults. This would probably be from 10am-3pm, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top