[Northern Light]

Though I cannot see Toronto being 'brave' enough to try this, CNN has an interesting piece on US Cities experimenting with free transit. https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/08/business/free-buses-us-public-transit/index.html

I don't think it would make sense in the Toronto context in the near-term.

I think first, if it were successful in encouraging additional uptake, its not just replacing the fare revenue its the cost, and ability of increasing service to meet a spike in demand.

Second, U.S. cities generally perceive transit as a welfare service, and I tend to think completely free fares could serve to reinforce that image.

I am for streamlined and lower fares; and there are savings from going full 'free' (fare gates are no longer needed, fare boxes, fare processing costs, transfers all become moot); and fare enforcement can become non-existent. But that would nowhere near offset the cost.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Though I cannot see Toronto being 'brave' enough to try this, CNN has an interesting piece on US Cities experimenting with free transit. https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/08/business/free-buses-us-public-transit/index.html

What we might conceivably try is free transit outside peak hours to boost usage when capacity is underutilized.

AoD

 

[Amare]

I dont see the point in offering free transit in Toronto. We're different compared to most American cities where in that most of the cities there are addicted to car use and service levels in a lot of cities there are pretty laughable to even consider them a viable option.

It's been proven in Toronto that if you offer reliable and frequent service, people will come and use that service and ultimately ridership will grow.

If we were to do free transit, it would only make sense to target lower income groups as it would help them move throughout the city and make trips more financially accessible. Asides from that it's just wasted money in my books.

 

[cplchanb]

I dont see the point in offering free transit in Toronto. We're different compared to most American cities where in that most of the cities there are addicted to car use and service levels in a lot of cities there are pretty laughable to even consider them a viable option.

It's been proven in Toronto that if you offer reliable and frequent service, people will come and use that service and ultimately ridership will grow.

If we were to do free transit, it would only make sense to target lower income groups as it would help them move throughout the city and make trips more financially accessible. Asides from that it's just wasted money in my books.

Yup there's no point going free if it isn't a convenient replacement for car point to point travel. You dont need it to be free to draw up numbers. As many have said before, making inconvenient transitfree will only dichotimise the gulf between the rich and poor and cement the stereotype that a bus is only for the poor and the crazies.

 

[ARG1]

Though I cannot see Toronto being 'brave' enough to try this, CNN has an interesting piece on US Cities experimenting with free transit. https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/08/business/free-buses-us-public-transit/index.html

There is nothing brave about implementing free transit. We've had many discussions about this during the last provincial election when policies like buck a ride were going around, but in general there are 2 issues.

1) Free transit is more often than not a desperate attempt to get ridership - something US cities are horrible at. Cities like LA pour billions of dollars in what is frankly bad transit that doesn't get ridership, so lowering the cost is a way to try and generate demand to let the transit get used more.

2) In cities where lack of ridership isn't a problem (like most major Canadian Cities), this makes less sense since we already have massive capacity problems. We've been failing to build the DRL for how long now? And prepandemic the Yonge subway was at its breaking point. Now imagine if we made the fares $1 or even free, our entire network will just explode. The same applies to GO which already has a staffing shortage, the last thing we need is more sardine cans in this city.

 

[Northern Light]

I dont see the point in offering free transit in Toronto. We're different compared to most American cities where in that most of the cities there are addicted to car use and service levels in a lot of cities there are pretty laughable to even consider them a viable option.

It's been proven in Toronto that if you offer reliable and frequent service, people will come and use that service and ultimately ridership will grow.

This part I agree with.

If we were to do free transit, it would only make sense to target lower income groups as it would help them move throughout the city and make trips more financially accessible. Asides from that it's just wasted money in my books.

I don't agree with targeted fare concessions.

I think they:

a) make the fare process and distribution system more complex, more difficult to enforce and more expensive.

b) the concession fares targeted by income require the City to know your income. It has no means, currently, to know that directly, meaning you have now have to submit proof of income, bring ID, sign an attestation, probably during office hours M-F....
Sounds painful, and unlikely to reach those who need it.

My take on an ideal, but not a first priority for new funds (service and capital needs first)

Return to 3 and under is free (essentially, if you are in a stroller or one someone's lap and not in a teenage PDA) LOL

One price 4-130 years old

But slash that price to $2.50 per ride, with a 38 ride per month cap. That's $95 per month which is $30 less than the current low-income pass, and far less than the seniors/student passes.

No cash fares, ever. But Presto Cards themselves are free, subject to pre-loading at least one fare.

3-ride per day cap (unlimited free rides thereafter)

Its simple, its easy to understand, it makes enforcement straight-forward, there's only one fare media other than paying open-payment style; there's no need to know someone's age, or to guess at same.

This reduces monthly costs substantially for:

Teens in school
University Students
Adults
Seniors.

It increases costs for families with children 12 and under, but only at the margins.

If you were a 2 adult family with 2 kids, age 10, you face net new costs of $190 per month for the kids ( if they ride daily); but you save $126 for the 2 adults. For a net negative of $64

But if your 2 adults, 1 child under 13, you come out ahead.

One parent, one child 12 and under is net negative $32

If you offer a pre-authorized, auto-reload of the monthly max, every month for year at a savings $5 a month you narrow it further. (in the 2+2 scenario, you reduce the net negative to $44)

You could just keep 12 and under is free, but I like the simplicity of zero concession fares. Getting the everyone else fare low enough to wipe out any difference for those with 2 young kids would be prohibitive.

 

[Coolibop]

One price 4-130 years old

As someone who plans on living forever, I look forward to my free transit at 131!

 

[ARG1]

I think they:

b) the concession fares targeted by income require the City to know your income. It has no means, currently, to know that directly, meaning you have now have to submit proof of income, bring ID, sign an attestation, probably during office hours M-F....
Sounds painful, and unlikely to reach those who need it.

Unless the city isn't allowed to have access to them, we have tax day where you legally have to declare your income, so I don't think obtaining this information is (or at least should) be difficult. This is of course assuming we have competent and efficient bureaucracy which knowing Canada, we don't.

 

[Jonny5]

Unless the city isn't allowed to have access to them, we have tax day where you legally have to declare your income, so I don't think obtaining this information is (or at least should) be difficult. This is of course assuming we have competent and efficient bureaucracy which knowing Canada, we don't.

There's also a documented issue that a lot of low or no income earners don't file tax returns, even when they may actually be entitled to net positive cash benefits.
There are reports it's over 10% of all income earners.

According to her paper, non-filers are more likely to be male, young and single. And although there were non-filers across all income groups, they were most heavily concentrated in lower income brackets.
"It's a real problem in terms of people missing out on some of those cash benefits," Robson said.

It also has implications for the integrity of programs, she said, given that many programs use tax filings to verify eligibility.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canadians-taxes-filing-money-owed-1.6688986

 

[Northern Light]

Unless the city isn't allowed to have access to them, we have tax day where you legally have to declare your income, so I don't think obtaining this information is (or at least should) be difficult. This is of course assuming we have competent and efficient bureaucracy which knowing Canada, we don't.

Currently, I don't believe the CRA is authorized to share that information with municipal governments, though it is authorized to share it with the provinces.

I could stand to be corrected on this point.

But I still think its demeaning, it asks someone to identify as poor and request a special deal.

That is necessary for social assistance (unless we move to basic/guaranteed income); but in most other cases I prefer universality.

I think social assistance shows you what happens to narrowly targeted programs; (below inflation increases for decades, eroding the value of the payments by about 1/2); because since most of us don't benefit
we don't see/experience the program or really care about it.

Universal programs have better quality control because of wide adoption by the middle and upper-middle income set.

 

[drum118]

Is still not clear to me why 512 streetcars will be suspended for years.

Does KQQR Ring A Bell?

I thought that the new way of laying streetcar track was designed to make it last longer. It may be different here as it is not on grade (mostly) but it was last done in 2007 so should really not need replacement now. Of course, it is possible that 'all' they are doing is the top layer plus waterproofing etc. I note we almost ended up with Sanscon again, just missed that bullet - though I have never heard of Duron!

All of TTC new track system is to see 15-25 years, with switches and curves about 15-20 years. That if a full dug out to form a new base was done. Not all intersections have been rebuilt to the new standards that I am aware in the last 10 years. Not all ties are steel ties for the switches.

Curves are a mix bag depending on the radius with the smallest seeing more ware and tear.

A lot of straight has been replaced due to the ARLV's been hard on them as well the new fleet within 5-10 years after been replaced.. Traffic has also done a number on the tracks and top coat as well.

St Clair West first rebuilt in the early 2000's had a lot of issues to the point the Ministry of Larbour shut the site down until the issues where found that were causing problems for anyone working on the site. There is no real base for the tracks in the station area.

A few years after that, the OS was rebuilt again that saw the end to poles being use on 512.

 

[nfitz]

Does KQQR Ring A Bell?

I don't see how KQQR impacts 512. Nor do I see any major work planned that would stop the entire 512 service.

 

[drum118]

I don't see how KQQR impacts 512. Nor do I see any major work planned that would stop the entire 512 service.

timeline

 

[turbanplanner]

I don't think it would make sense in the Toronto context in the near-term.

I think first, if it were successful in encouraging additional uptake, its not just replacing the fare revenue its the cost, and ability of increasing service to meet a spike in demand.

Second, U.S. cities generally perceive transit as a welfare service, and I tend to think completely free fares could serve to reinforce that image.

I am for streamlined and lower fares; and there are savings from going full 'free' (fare gates are no longer needed, fare boxes, fare processing costs, transfers all become moot); and fare enforcement can become non-existent. But that would nowhere near offset the cost.

I think a lot of people also miss that if ridership goes up due to "free" service, it's going to hit the most expensive modes (bus service) the most since there will be a lot more demand for short trips and frequency will have to be upped.

 

[DSC]

timeline

????? There is certainly MX work planned on the rail bridge but that should hardly stop ALL 512 service and I also see no connection between St Clair and KQQR unless Sanscon are somehow involved.