TTC Fare Zones (Possible solution to offset Capital and/or Operating costs)?

[DavidH]

At $3 cash fares and a single fare taking forever to get across this city, who in their right mind would support a zone fare system when the travel time and transfers are a nightmare for so many? I have friends who have gone back to their cars again because of the sheer time involved in getting around with transit.

Ah, but the present system means that short-distance riders subsidize long-distance riders. If you're going to argue costs, shouldn't those short-distance riders get a break by having the long-distance riders cover a fairer proportion of the costs they generate?

A properly implemented zone/by distance system will mean some riders will get a DECREASE in trip cost.

Further, it's very likely that any reformation of the payment calculation mechanisms will come about as part of a larger fare integration across the entire GTA, meaning that the people travelling a short distance across a municipal boundary will stop paying double what people making a long trip within Toronto pay.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Re: tkip - I love the argument that before we can do anything that would generate additional revenue for the TTC we first have to spend billions of dollars on the TTC. I do get what you're saying, but it keeps us stuck.

As far as the low income argument is concerned, I think there are probably better ways to level the playing field - simplest would be increasing the transit tax credit available for low-income riders.

 

[DavidH]

As far as the low income argument is concerned, I think there are probably better ways to level the playing field - simplest would be increasing the transit tax credit available for low-income riders.

Agreed completely. Let's price transit appropriately without regard to income level, and then use other measures to assist low-income riders. Let's not keep messed-up fare structures in an attempt to bring social policy into the operation of a transit system. If you ride 20 km on the TTC, it's only fair and reasonable that you should pay more than someone who rides 1 km.

Even simply making the transit tax credit a *refundable* credit would go a long way, although the chances of the federal government doing that are exactly zero.

 

[sixrings]

how about forcing all torontonians to buy a metropass. Sure a lot of people would be buying one and never using it. On the other hand it would make a ton of money for the ttc and then they could expand and expand and expand. I dont like paying high property taxes but Id gladly pay another 200 or 250 a month so that I get two metropasses and that the system is financed properly...... Again I dont understand why we cant just toll roads?????

 

[Chuck]

As far as the low income argument is concerned, I think there are probably better ways to level the playing field - simplest would be increasing the transit tax credit available for low-income riders.

Don't mean to sound harsh, but what about the rest of us who actually provide the tax base to operate the transit system, lose enough of our pay checks as it is due to subsidies like these, and simply want to be treated fairly?

 

[GraphicMatt]

Don't mean to sound harsh, but what about the rest of us who actually provide the tax base to operate the transit system, lose enough of our pay checks as it is due to subsidies like these, and simply want to be treated fairly?

This will lead us right off topic because essentially you're arguing against progressive tax policy. Should we have a flat income tax rate for everyone too, to be more fair?

 

[Chuck]

I'm not at all against progressive taxation, I simply don't think that this is a reasonable subsidy given that inexpensive housing can also be found in the inner city where fares would be lower.

I am not low income, but none the less may be moving this year as my rent increase will make my rent border line unaffordable. If transit fares go up for a justifiable cause (ie, to better reflect the cost of providing the service), and this forces some people to move to an area where fares are lower, it certainly wouldn't be the first time that someone of any income level had to move in order to lower their cost of living.

The only reason why I am taking this stance is that inexpensive housing is available in the inner city too. Any fare increase should be phased in to lessen the burden as well.

 

[W. K. Lis]

When the HRT subway was extended into Zone 2 by 1968, it was a Zone 1 route. The passengers from Zone 2 buses that terminated at the subway were had to pay another fare to get into the Zone 1 HRT subway. That lasted until 1973. After that, both Zone 1 and 2 were merged under a single fare.

There is now construction to extend the Spadina HRT subway into Vaughan. Guess what? Above Steeles Avenue, it is another fare. Passengers on Vaughan or York Region buses will be paying another fare to enter the HRT subway in Vaughan territory (unless they are lucky enough to walk to a station). The same scenario that occurred between 1968 and 1973. How long will that last? Will there be pressure for a single fare after a few years?

Will there be arguments for Toronto to annex Vaughan or York Region?

 

[GraphicMatt]

I'm not at all against progressive taxation, I simply don't think that this is a reasonable subsidy given that inexpensive housing can also be found in the inner city where fares would be lower.

I am not low income, but none the less may be moving this year as my rent increase will make my rent border line unaffordable. If transit fares go up for a justifiable cause (ie, to better reflect the cost of providing the service), and this forces some people to move to an area where fares are lower, it certainly wouldn't be the first time that someone of any income level had to move in order to lower their cost of living.

The only reason why I am taking this stance is that inexpensive housing is available in the inner city too. Any fare increase should be phased in to lessen the burden as well.

Okay, I get what you're saying now - though I'm a little confused at your rent increase. Unless you're moving somewhere new, your rent is only allowed to go up 2% this year.

Also: is there are a lot of inexpensive housing available in the core? For families? And TCHC doesn't count because the wait list is crazy.

 

[gweed123]

The thing that needs to be considered in this is the issue of captive riders vs choice riders. In otherwords, people who ride the TTC because they have no other option (usually people with limited income who can't afford a car, be they on welfare, children, or the elderly), and people who choose to ride the TTC for practical/environmental/social reasons. The optimal fare structure would maximize the number of choice riders, while not disadvantaging captive riders.

After reading through the thread, I've noticed a couple of you are making a fairly flawed assumption: that a decrease in fare cost for people in the inner city would result in a decrease in revenue unless the fares for outer city residents was increased to compensate. This is not necessarily true. The number of people who live relatively close to downtown who walk/bike/cab to work may choose to take the TTC every now and then, and the number of discretionary trips using the TTC in downtown would increase significantly. $3 is a pretty steep price to pay for going 4 subway stops, but if it was only $1.50, more people would seriously consider it a valid option. In this case, the increase in the number of users would help balance out the decrease in revenue per user.

Another thing that could be implemented in order to increase the number of discretionary riders is to implement time-based transfers. Living in Ottawa most of my life, I've had extensive experience with this type of system. I can say that it certainly makes a lot more sense, especially for disrectionary trips. A 5 minute bus ride to the grocery store, 15 minutes inside the store, and a 5 minute bus ride back should not cost you $6 in fares. That's rediculous. The number of trips that are currently being missed because the TTC is dismissed as being too expensive, and people would rather cab or walk, would more than offset the loss of fare revenue as a result of this new system. For most people, the time between the trip to and the trip from would be outside of the transfer time anyway, but it would be a huge convenience for those who do want to use the system in this way.

 

[lead82]

It would be a good idea to add a cheaper fare zone for travel within downtown corridor. Making each trip a $1 would encourage a lot of short trips which may offset the revenue lost. However, the problem is how do we ensure that these are limited to downtown only trips. As soon as a rider gets on the subway, they can just get a transfer and go anywhere the TTC services for a while. There really isn't a good solution to this until all fare media is digitized and one can tap-in/out of the system and charge the appropriate rate. Until this happens, I saw keep the flat fare system.

 

[sixrings]

time based transfers makes a ton of sense.. its used in sauga as well. would be a welcome addition in toronto...

AS chuck pointed out... "Originally Posted by Chuck
Don't mean to sound harsh, but what about the rest of us who actually provide the tax base to operate the transit system, lose enough of our pay checks as it is due to subsidies like these, and simply want to be treated fairly?" This is a fair question to ask... The reality is that the government does alot to subsidize people from community housing. I assume that if we had fares based on distance this would continue and they would see breaks in this categorie as well. However if someone has ever been in the jane and finch neighbourhood (for example) you will notice a ton of nice houses. It once was a italian neighbourhood and alot of these people have never moved. In fact you will see 300-400k houses directly across from community housing. These people whom already had their property value decreased when the community housing was put so close to him again will get screwed when they find out that the community housing is getting tax breaks for transit but they now have to pay even higher fares. The end result is that this will like many other issues cause a rift between two groups. Ultimately, although they live close to eachother, they will avoid each other like the plague. The italians or whomever will be bitter. And the community housing people all though technically surrounded by working people will never actually have real conversations with these people because of the rift and will never get to have working people influence their lives. Instead theyll be stuck with the same people using the same system. Just one example... One could say its extreme. But just like the basketball nets being taken down things like this issolate groups of people. Chuck would be rightly upset and so would many others.

 

[sixrings]

or how about calgary which has a free downtown zone... once you go outside the zone you need POP... that could make sense too... but then wed have a completly different system then our traditional fare box.. POP TTC like Go transit.. Im ok with that. At least we wouldnt Need to have people man TTC booths. We also could take down all the turnbuckles at stations making it easy to go in and out of the subway... No more lining up to funnel through one turnbuckle at rush hour.. .

Plus the POP people could also police our system giving it a security presence. Good idea.. I like... Time based transfers too please..

 

[sjc]

It would be a good idea to add a cheaper fare zone for travel within downtown corridor. Making each trip a $1 would encourage a lot of short trips which may offset the revenue lost. However, the problem is how do we ensure that these are limited to downtown only trips.

If you limited it to the downtown subway, you could make one car on the subway a "local" car. You could pay $1 to have access to that car, but you would have to get off by St. George or Bloor. People coming from the north in those cars would need to get off at Spadina or Rosedale to free them up.

This would also have the benefit of ensuring that one car leaves St. George or Bloor empty going north (allowing space for riders at the next few stops to get on especially in busy times). North of downtown, the southbound local cars will also not contain passengers heading downtown and will be less crowded for local passengers (going to St. Clair or Eglinton from Finch, for example).

However, it might be expensive in some stations to provide separate access to one car. It might be possible doing something like the traffic barriers at Bloor, though.

EDIT: An empty car at Bloor or St. George would also be a handy place to direct passengers transferring off of the Bloor line to head south.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Presto will be here within the next five years - there's no need to start thinking up innovative strategies that work within the current fare system.

That said, there's no way the TTC is going to make any kind of fare change that ultimately decreases farebox revenue (timed transfers or lower fares for downtown travel) at this time. Unless they offset lower short-run fares or timed transfers with higher fares in other places, it'd be fiscally irresponsible.

Now, if the province wants to help out with operating costs again, then things get more possible...