Transit Fantasy Maps

[ksun]

$2 base fare with 15 cents for every km above the first 2km is what I like. Travelling 7km would get you a regular TTC fare but travelling 30km like most GO users do would still get you up to around $6.

Metrolinx is currently considering lower off peak fares to try and reduce peak demand levels.

It will be about $4 to travel from Finch station and $4.5 from Don Mills to King one way. People will scream "unfair" if proposed.
For the future Vaughan Centre, it will be $6 ... not that I think it is excessive since those people saved a quarter of a million of on their mansion but doubt that will happen.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Yes, fares would obviously increase for long distance trips. That's the point. They would decrease for short distance trips as well however.

You could fiddle with it if you want, drop it to $.10 a km and introduce a "bus transfer levy" where whenever you transfer to and from rapid transit you pay $.30 or something, and a "GO premium fare" where you get $.50 tacked on for using GO as well.

 

[ksun]

Yes, fares would obviously increase for long distance trips. That's the point. They would decrease for short distance trips as well however.

I don't disagree with you. I always believe people should pay for the distance they traveled (a fixed portion to cover TTC's fixed cost plus a variable fare based on distance, possibly in buckets). As I argued before, how far people live away from the financial district doesn't have a definite relationship with how much money they make so it is unreasonable to say by charging longer commuters more we are treating the poorer people unfairly. We should let CRA to give the low income folks a big deduction on transit, but not through fare price.

Some have argued that it doesn't cost the TTC anything extra once one gets in the subway - well, that's just an utter lacking of understanding of business and economics. More electric power first comes into mind, and then costs associated with maintaining more stations and tracks. There is definitely incremental cost associated with longer distance.

 

[gweed123]

$2 base fare with 15 cents for every km above the first 2km is what I like. Travelling 7km would get you a regular TTC fare but travelling 30km like most GO users do would still get you up to around $6.

Metrolinx is currently considering lower off peak fares to try and reduce peak demand levels.

But the thing is a lot of trips don't take a straight line. Take the Milton line for example, it goes up and down and meanders quite a bit. Ditto for the Richmond Hill line.

One way to solve this would be "straight line" measuring from the start point to the end point, but that would require a lot of processing power on the fly in order to calculate.

Perhaps keep the two fare zone base far, but introduce a "tap off" option that would discount $1 or something if you travel within your fare zone?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I really don't want people from Etobicoke/Scarborough and North York to have to pay more to get downtown. I want them to have equal access to transit, especially since they pay the same taxes that everyone else in Toronto does. Also this is a horrible way to encourage higher transit usage in the suburbs.

 

[gweed123]

I really don't want people from Etobicoke/Scarborough and North York to have to pay more to get downtown. I want them to have equal access to transit, especially since they pay the same taxes that everyone else in Toronto does. Also this is a horrible way to encourage higher transit usage in the suburbs.

But the flip side is why should someone who lives in/near downtown be paying the same fare for travelling 1/4 of the distance? Asking suburban people to pay an extra dollar or so to get downtown I think isn't an unreasonable demand.

If this is coupled with a reduced fare for only travelling one fare zone, I think we could see a pretty positive shift in transit cost-effectiveness. Long distance suburban riders will be paying something closer to the true cost of that trip, while short range suburban and urban riders will pay less, which may lead to increased transit usage for short hop trips. This could drive up suburban off-peak transit usage, which is by far the biggest drain on the TTC operating budget.

 

[JasonParis]

I really don't want people from Etobicoke/Scarborough and North York to have to pay more to get downtown. I want them to have equal access to transit, especially since they pay the same taxes that everyone else in Toronto does. Also this is a horrible way to encourage higher transit usage in the suburbs.

Yes, but someone in the suburbs taking the TTC a few blocks to do some family shopping shouldn't have to pay the same fare (or more correctly subsidize) the fare of someone going much greater distances. It's the same for those in the city jumping on the streetcar for a few stops. Having everyone pay the same fare may seem fair, but it really isn't.

 

[muller877]

Yes, fares would obviously increase for long distance trips. That's the point. They would decrease for short distance trips as well however.

You could fiddle with it if you want, drop it to $.10 a km and introduce a "bus transfer levy" where whenever you transfer to and from rapid transit you pay $.30 or something, and a "GO premium fare" where you get $.50 tacked on for using GO as well.

If we also included a premium for rush-hour travel (along with the government legislating flexible working hours for office workers) it would significantly reduce the need for added capacity. $0.50 for any travel arriving between 8:00 and 9:30, leaving between 4:00 and 6:30 plus an extra $0.50 for the downtown core during the same hours.

There are billions of capital expenditures wasted because it is not at capacity outside of rush hour. Let's encourage travel outside of rush hour.

 

[dunkalunk]

Yes, but someone in the suburbs taking the TTC a few blocks to do some family shopping shouldn't have to pay the same fare (or more correctly subsidize) the fare of someone going much greater distances. It's the same for those in the city jumping on the streetcar for a few stops. Having everyone pay the same fare may seem fair, but it really isn't.

I see the fare zone question is part of a larger issue. Is transit primarily a means of transportation or a public service?

 

[rbt]

Yes, but someone in the suburbs taking the TTC a few blocks to do some family shopping shouldn't have to pay the same fare (or more correctly subsidize) the fare of someone going much greater distances.

Why not? In many places they take up the same amount of space and incurr the same cost to provide the seat or standing room whether a person uses that room or not.

Someone taking the subway from College to Rosedale requires the exact same amount of train space at Finch as a person riding from King to Finch. Why? That peak point space taken by the College rider also goes around the entire route empty to Finch. If it is not available at Finch, that person doesn't get in at College. Branching service and early-turnbacks help a bit but not much.

Lower fares work well on very high churn routes because that single seat can serve a number of people. When the short trip occurs at peak point (downtown or any bus route within 2km of Yonge), it incurs the full cost of providing the service.


If I created a zoning system for Toronto with my business hat on, zone 1 (downtown) would have a premium charge to account for the cost of carrying around all the empty seats through much of the rest of the city. Trips starting and ending outside of downtown, provided they do not go through downtown, would be low even if of abnormally high length.

A 2km trip within downtown might cost the same as a 40km trip across Steeles. However, a trip from Steeles to downtown would be higher than both. Call it fare by congestion * distance.

 

[muller877]

I really don't want people from Etobicoke/Scarborough and North York to have to pay more to get downtown. I want them to have equal access to transit, especially since they pay the same taxes that everyone else in Toronto does. Also this is a horrible way to encourage higher transit usage in the suburbs.

I would love to take the subway 1 or 2 stops outside of the downtown or a bus the same distance to do some shopping. But due to the cost, I will get my keys and drive to the destination (or to a big box store which has lots of parking).

Having a cheaper rate anywhere in Toronto will allow the small business along the various retail strips to thrive by encouraging the local community to visit the neighbourhood without needing parking nearby.

(and where there are capacity issues there should be a surcharge which would level the playing field between the downtown and 'burbs)

 

[BurlOak]

Wouldn't it be nice if Tim Horton's gave free coffer after the 44th cup every month. Maybe TTC/Transit fares should decrease the more it is used per month, but never to $0.00 per trip.

 

[ksun]

I see the fare zone question is part of a larger issue. Is transit primarily a means of transportation or a public service?

Being a public service doesn't mean you don't need to pay according to usage.
Via is also public service and does it cost the same to travel to Montreal as to Vancouver?

In implementing a flat rate, you are forcing short distance riders to subsidize long distance ones. Is that fair in your mind? The money has to come from someone's pockets.

There are billions of capital expenditures wasted because it is not at capacity outside of rush hour. Let's encourage travel outside of rush hour.
unfortunately TTC is too stupid to realize this.

The subways are running very frequently even during off peak hours, and they are almost always 80% empty. If you lower the fare, more people will take it, and there is no incremental cost associated with more riders. But TTC only knows lower fare = lower revenue, without understanding demand is not set in stone and many people will ride more in response to lower fare.

Someone taking the subway from College to Rosedale requires the exact same amount of train space at Finch as a person riding from King to Finch.

Here goes this insane logic again.
You do know trains have to run on electricity right? And you do know longer tracks require more maintenance? It is not just the space but all the related cost associated with longer distance.

 

[dunkalunk]

The discussion about fare zones is definitely worth having, but since this is a fantasy map thread, here's a fantasy map of combined GGH Transit agencies.

A lot of duplicated service could easily be eliminated and intra-system transfers simplified if agencies were combined to run under the same banner/fare structure by amalgamating agencies. Mississauga-Brampton and Hamilton-Burlington would probably have the greatest impact in terms of service efficiency. It would also be wonderful to see a lot of the service duplicated by MiWay in Toronto streamlined.

Regarding fare zones; while having them in the TTC would be nice, if the TTCs mandate were to be expanded to cover York or Peel, they'd be necessary.

 

[rbt]

You do know trains have to run on electricity right? And you do know longer tracks require more maintenance? It is not just the space but all the related cost associated with longer distance.

And I'm sure you realize a system which existed entirely south of Bloor, West of Spadina, and East of Jarvis would not be successful.

A certain amount of infrastructure is required to provide service people will use. Beyond that, the level of infrastructure is normally built, staffed, and maintained for the peak point ridership.

Trains run from Finch to Downsview with 2 minute frequencies because Wellesley to Bloor requires 2 minute frequencies. Drop ridership at that point by 10% and TTC could pull 10% of the trains off the line without impacting customer comfort; including savings in staffing, electricity, track wear and tear, and even capital items like train automation for higher frequencies. That 10% of train cars is nearly $100M without considering yards, maintenance, or storage. Peak point matters, particularly if a large number of short trips puts increased strain on it.

Long distance has a cost, but not nearly as much as the capital investment required for peak point/period capacity.


I just want to point out that it's not as straight forward as you might want and that there can be a substantial cost to a short trip at a highly congested point.