News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Fare by distance should be implemented in conjunction with low income fares. Wealthier people don't always live downtown (see St Jamestown and Regent Park) and regional commuters aren't always wealthier. Many wealthier regional commuters have the ability to drive to a subway station to avoid a double fare, while many poor people don't have this option.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The fare-by-distance proposal would be of great benefit to wealthier transit riders within Old Toronto. Their commutes are shorter, thus their fares would be lower.

The fare integration proposals would also disproportionately benefit regional commuters, who are of substantially higher average income, since we'd be subsidizing their transfers onto other systems. And remember, these wealthier than average regional commuters are already the most subsidized transit users in the region by a long shot. GO's subsidy per rider is somewhere in the ballpark of $8/rider, compared to just $0.70 on the TTC. I'm not particularly interested in subsidizing these riders more than we already are.
Click to expand...
its amazing. You put less of a strain on roads and environment by taking transit and living within walking distance of services and remaining in the city when others were fleeing to the suburbs especially in the 80's and people said Toronto was dying and you are penalized by living in the city
 
LNahid2000 said:
Fare by distance should be implemented in conjunction with low income fares. Wealthier people don't always live downtown (see St Jamestown and Regent Park) and regional commuters aren't always wealthier. Many wealthier regional commuters have the ability to drive to a subway station to avoid a double fare, while many poor people don't have this option.
Click to expand...
I think many parking lots at TTC stations are disappearing. On Yonge, York Mills parking is disappearing for condos as have lots at Wilson station. Eglinton West parking lot will be gone.That leaves stations north of the 401 with parking lots - starting with Sheppard and Finch - but for how much longer.
 
Palma said:
I think many parking lots at TTC stations are disappearing. On Yonge, York Mills parking is disappearing for condos as have lots at Wilson station. Eglinton West parking lot will be gone.That leaves stations north of the 401 with parking lots - starting with Sheppard and Finch - but for how much longer.
Click to expand...
Most regional commuters would be using parking lots at terminal stations, which are still massive.
 
Palma said:
its amazing. You put less of a strain on roads and environment by taking transit and living within walking distance of services and remaining in the city when others were fleeing to the suburbs especially in the 80's and people said Toronto was dying and you are penalized by living in the city
Click to expand...

Subsidizing sprawl is costly. We need to spend a ton of money to service relitavely few people. If the goal of our transit system is to move as many people as possible, RER isn't even half as cost effective the the Sheppard Subway, to put that all in perspective.

And don't get me wrong, I support the RER plan. I'm just fustrated about how much we're spending to move so few people.
 
Setting up the fare system to solve income disparity is a sure path to disaster. Let the wider tax and income support systems deal with the income disparity issues. Transit fares should be set up to maximize recovery, promote certain modes of usage, or reduce time spent on the system, reward loyalty, etc.

And if you hate sprawl, then fare by distance is eminently commendable because it makes the cost of sprawl obvious to distant homebuyers. I live in Scarborough. I'd pay more under such a scheme. And I'd still support it. Even if it's not in my direct personal interest.

Fare by distance, though, has to go hand in hand with higher parking charges or congestion charges in the core. You can't make transit more expensive for long trips and leave the auto scene untouched. It'll simply promote a shift to cars.

I can understand the concern about subsidizing transfers. But I don't see how else to promote integration between GO and the other systems. GO in effect, is the subway network for York, Peel, Durham, etc. We don't pay to transfer on to the subway.

Also, it's my understanding that the transfer discount is there to promote using local feeder services. Otherwise, GO would have to build larger lots as many would choose to drive to the GO stations.

Personally, I still think that there should be fare by modes. Let the subway and GO network run on fare by distance, and let buses and streetcars and LRTs run on flat fares. When you transfer, you get credited the base fare and pay the differential depending on where you get off.
 
Last edited:
kEiThZ said:
Personally, I still think that there should be fare by modes. Let the subway and GO network run on fare by distance, and let buses and streetcars and LRTs run on flat fares. When you transfer, you get credited the base fare and pay the differential depending on where you get off.
Click to expand...

So why would LRT (Crosstown) to Yonge be flat fare vs for example Bloor Subway to Yonge?
 
W. K. Lis said:
At the Joint Metrolinx-TTC meeting (6PM) on Wednesday, April 27th, they'll be discussing Fare Integration. See report at this link.
Click to expand...
The timeline in there is pretty notable:

April-May 2016: Optimisation and evaluation of concepts
May-June 2016: Consultation with public, municipal officials and
elected officials concerning evaluation findings
June 2016: Technical update to Metrolinx Board meeting
July-August 2016: Complete business case analysis and evaluation to
determine preferred option

Fare structure findings, reflecting input from the GTHA municipalities, including the TTC Board, will be presented to the Metrolinx Board in fall, 2016 for consideration as advice to the Ministry of Transportation


Other tidbits:

Early estimates suggest that a discounted or free transfer between GO and TTC at current GO fares may generate between 0.7 and 2 million new transit trips annually at current transit service levels

Early estimates suggest that a discounted or free cross-boundary fare may result in 3-6 million new cross-boundary transit trips yearly

Fares for SmartTrack/RER must :
– Be competitive so that customers will treat SmartTrack/RER as comparable to a subway service
– Be integrated between GO and TTC to facilitate transfers of customers between TTC and SmartTrack/RER.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The fare-by-distance proposal would be of great benefit to wealthier transit riders within Old Toronto. Their commutes are shorter, thus their fares would be lower.

The fare integration proposals would also disproportionately benefit regional commuters, who are of substantially higher average income, since we'd be subsidizing their transfers onto other systems. And remember, these wealthier than average regional commuters are already the most subsidized transit users in the region by a long shot. GO's subsidy per rider is somewhere in the ballpark of $8/rider, compared to just $0.70 on the TTC. I'm not particularly interested in subsidizing these riders more than we already are.
Click to expand...

Where did you get this $8 per ride fantasy? GO had about 65M riders last year. Metrolinx received an operating subsidy of $190M of which $65 was for Presto and $20M was for UP and around $10M for Metrolinx (the last number is the only guess...the rest are from the f/s). That's $1.50 per ride. And from the RER reports we know they are making money on some lines (and subsidizing others).

Per km that makes GO much less dependant on subsidies than the TTC.

You honestly believe that people take 2 buses and pay 2 fares right now because they are wealthy? Look at the crowds at Kipling or Finch waiting for a Mississauga or York Region bus and tell me that they are wealthier than average. If you have seen a GO train crowd getting on/off most are middle class.

You are assuming the status quo gives the right benefit. Maybe we are disproportionally NOW benefiting the wrong person.
 
Markster said:
The timeline in there is pretty notable:
Click to expand...
Hamilton, which uses Presto, is noted as being fearful of fare integration because HSR buses has the lowest bus fares in Ontario:

Regional Transit Plan Provokes Fear In Hamilton

I'm quite interested in fare integration but I understand the local fears -- given the low incomes in many parts and the low bus fares here ($2.15 on Presto).

I am interested to know how the City/Metrolinx will handle this.
 
muller877 said:
You honestly believe that people take 2 buses and pay 2 fares right now because they are wealthy? Look at the crowds at Kipling or Finch waiting for a Mississauga or York Region bus and tell me that they are wealthier than average. If you have seen a GO train crowd getting on/off most are middle class.
Click to expand...

The study examined the incomes of GO riders, not riders crossing Steeles at the north.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top