News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1.2K     6 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 884     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.8K     0 

Metrolinx: Presto Fare Card

Voltz said:
I mean voluntary as in riders would not have to tap to exit the station, but at York University riders who had transferred from YRT could tap somewhere at the station, probably beyond the fare gates, to refund the TTC fare they paid when getting on the subway.

This setup would be done instead of having everyone tap out at all stations, which is what they plan to do and is unnecessary.
Click to expand...

So instead of voluntarily to get charged, you mean get charged then voluntarily get refund?
 
Leo_Chan said:
So instead of voluntarily to get charged, you mean get charged then voluntarily get refund?
Click to expand...

Yes, riders who are transferring from YRT would have to tap on and pay a fare when they get on the subway, so if they don't want those YRT riders who are only going to York U to pay a TTC fare then have them tap off somewhere at the station. but don't make it mandatory, as in having to tap to open the gates when exiting, since they would have to make tap outs mandatory at all stations.

They are planning to have mandatory tap outs at all stations, and if these YRT riders are the only reason they need to do it then it's really just unnecessary and too much of a hassle for everyone.
 
Voltz said:
Yes, riders who are transferring from YRT would have to tap on and pay a fare when they get on the subway, so if they don't want those YRT riders who are only going to York U to pay a TTC fare then have them tap off somewhere at the station. but don't make it mandatory, as in having to tap to open the gates when exiting, since they would have to make tap outs mandatory at all stations.

They are planning to have mandatory tap outs at all stations, and if these YRT riders are the only reason they need to do it then it's really just unnecessary and too much of a hassle for everyone.
Click to expand...

Do people travel at higher or lower speeds when leaving a station vs arriving a station? If the number of people using Presto are push their way through the gates when they aren't designed to are high, then the TTC should consider making them faster or replace the gates with faster ones for entry and exit.
 
Voltz said:
They are planning to have mandatory tap outs at all stations, and if these YRT riders are the only reason they need to do it then it's really just unnecessary and too much of a hassle for everyone.
Click to expand...

They're not the only reason. I think the main financial concern for the TTC are the people who enter stations via the bus bays. Downtown stations, which mostly don't have an exit that avoids the gates, makes this method of fare avoidance impractical for many.
 
Juan_Lennon416 said:
I think that is the one area where TTC would have to remind people quite often.
Click to expand...

Not if the gate doesn't open until you tap. In effect, you are trapped in, until you can present proof you paid by tapping your way out. Fine by me.

Juan_Lennon416 said:
For other systems around the world, do you have to tap off as well?
Click to expand...

Even in flat fare metro systems elsewhere, 'tapping off' or swiping your ticket again is an added way to catch fare evaders. It's very, very common.

It has another great feature in these days of big data. The transit agency can determine where and when each trip begins and ends. If that ends stupid debates about 'no one will take it' or 'no on takes it' both here, and at city council, and other provincial talk shops that will be great.

Better data usually results in better decision making and this is a huge example of the need for more data.

The TTC has been guessing how many trips a Metropass user takes for thirty years. This will end. As will the debate about who is coming from where and how many people are combining transit agencies to go from Point A to Point B.
 
Last edited:
TransitBart said:
Not if the gate doesn't open until you tap. In effect, you are trapped in, until you can present proof you paid by tapping your way out. Fine by me.



Even in flat fare metro systems elsewhere, 'tapping off' or swiping your ticket again is an added way to catch fare evaders. It's very, very common.

It has another great feature in these days of big data. The transit agency can determine where and when each trip begins and ends. If that ends stupid debates about 'no one will take it' or 'no on takes it' both here, and at city council, and other provincial talk shops that will be great.

Better data usually results in better decision making and this is a huge example of the need for more data.

The TTC has been guessing how many trips a Metropass user takes for thirty years. This will end. As will the debate about who is coming from where and how many people are combining transit agencies to go from Point A to Point B.
Click to expand...

This data will only be useful if TTC/Metrolinx can figure out how to collect remotely accurate location data of Presto "taps". To this day, that function of Presto is broken on the TTC.

Modern transit vehicles are able to count the number of passengers on board. That might be a more accurate measurement of transit users, especially since people who didn't tap would also be represented in the data.

In any case, the TTC will continue to accept cash payments even when the Presto rollout is complete. The usage data generated by Presto will be significantly better than the data derived by the Metropass, but it still won't be particularly accurate, since it won't factor in cash users.
 
Last edited:
The benefits of data collection must be weighed against the service quality impacts. For tap-offs on buses, how much are you willing to increase the dwell time at stops in the name of collecting better user data? On crowded buses, it's already difficult for customers to make their way to the doors, let alone removing wallets from their bags/purses/pockets and tapping them on a reader that may or may not be obstructed by other passengers. Are there any other solutions on the market that can accurately collect data without negatively impacting travel times? How about buses/streetcars that can take passenger counts?
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The benefits of data collection must be weighed against the service quality impacts. For tap-offs on buses, how much are you willing to increase the dwell time at stops in the name of collecting better user data? On crowded buses, it's already difficult for customers to make their way to the doors, let alone removing wallets from their bags/purses/pockets and tapping them on a reader that may or may not be obstructed by other passengers. Are there any other solutions on the market that can accurately collect data without negatively impacting travel times? How about buses/streetcars that can take passenger counts?
Click to expand...

The LFLRVs and LRVs take automated passenger counts. I have heard that the newer buses do it, but I'm not 100% sure on that or exactly which ones do/don't. Additionally, better data can be collected just from tap-ons without tap-offs.

I don't believe there are any plans at present to require tap-offs on buses or streetcars. The closest to that would be the addition of faregates in stations at bus/streetcar terminals where it's currently a free-body transfer, so that passengers getting off vehicles would need to tap in to the subway network before boarding trains.
 
The transit guys I talk to tell me that the added data has its uses - but no one should have an illusion that every tap is systematically read nor do they intend to use it all.
Typically routes are constructed based on a sample of data taken over a period of about six weeks in the fall..... which is the heaviest travel period. Reduction in ridership in other periods (eg summer lulls when school is out and many are on vacation) is highly predictable. Past experience, General rules of thumb, and predictive models give very accurate results. In the past, that six-week sample was derived from a combination of farebox data, and manual counts. "Co-op students count just fine and don't cost nearly as much as Presto readers" is the reaction I got from one pro route builder.
It may be interesting to learn that 73% of riders boarding route X outside the R.A.Whomever Collegiate between 14:30 and 16:00 on Fridays transfer to the Subway at Lawrence West Station, and are bound for destination east of Yonge Street.... but what practical use is made of that information?
The "think of the great data" argument is being advanced by a few data-mining empire builders, and by IT vendors, but not necessarily by the Planning Dept of your local transit operation.
- Paul
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
The transit guys I talk to tell me that the added data has its uses - but no one should have an illusion that every tap is systematically read nor do they intend to use it all.
Typically routes are constructed based on a sample of data taken over a period of about six weeks in the fall..... which is the heaviest travel period. Reduction in ridership in other periods (eg summer lulls when school is out and many are on vacation) is highly predictable. Past experience, General rules of thumb, and predictive models give very accurate results. In the past, that six-week sample was derived from a combination of farebox data, and manual counts. "Co-op students count just fine and don't cost nearly as much as Presto readers" is the reaction I got from one pro route builder.
It may be interesting to learn that 73% of riders boarding route X outside the R.A.Whomever Collegiate between 14:30 and 16:00 on Fridays transfer to the Subway at Lawrence West Station, and are bound for destination east of Yonge Street.... but what practical use is made of that information?
The "think of the great data" argument is being advanced by a few data-mining empire builders, and by IT vendors, but not necessarily by the Planning Dept of your local transit operation.
- Paul
Click to expand...
You are certainly correct that you can simply have too much information to be able to analyse it properly (or easily) but when the TTC has automatic passenger counts on all routes and we are all tapping on and off they will be able to move from the very occasional manual surveys they have relied on up to now and they will get far better data on such things as how often pass users actually use the system. The analysis could, and should, be automated so that there could be frequent route ridership reports and service can then be adjusted to take account of trends.

If you look at Steve Munro's excellent transit site you will see many examples of how his route analyses show beyond a shadow of doubt that even the TTC's current data can be used to prove or disprove the saga of 'reliability'. (His data clearly shows that poor or non-existent TTC route management is far more to blame for streetcar and bus convoys than the usual TTC excuse of 'heavy traffic.') (See: https://stevemunro.ca/methodology-for-analysis-of-ttcs-vehicle-tracking-data/ ) The TTC occasionally publishes route figures, the most recent being 2014 where they state "Ridership information is from detailed manual passenger counts that are taken approximately every other year, or from automatic passenger counting equipment on some buses.". See: https://www.ttc.ca/PDF/Transit_Planning/Ridership_and_service_stats_2014.pdf and https://stevemunro.ca/2013/06/16/ttc-route-ridership-and-service-statistics-20042012/
 
Last edited:
I'm still dubious of a system design that may eventually forces tap off's in so many questionable locations.

I get the fare integration considerations, but imposing tap off's solely in the interest of data collection strikes me as putting the system ahead of the customer's convenience.

(Full disclosure - yes, I forgot to tap off UPE again yesterday. My own damn fault, I won't even offer the flimsy explanation. What's a bit frustrating is, I then tapped onto TTC at Union Station. You would think that where a missing GO tap-off is followed by tap-on to another system, it would automatically close out the GO fare calculation. I can't imagine how this feature could be used to evade fares.)

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
I'm still dubious of a system design that may eventually forces tap off's in so many questionable locations.

I get the fare integration considerations, but imposing tap off's solely in the interest of data collection strikes me as putting the system ahead of the customer's convenience.
- Paul
Click to expand...


As discussed above, the tap out feature in the subway is a further way to catch fare-cheats. You may manage to get into the subway without tapping in but then you also have to exit without doing so. I would say that data collection is a side benefit, particularly since I suspect the TTC will not actually analyse it properly!
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
The transit guys I talk to tell me that the added data has its uses - but no one should have an illusion that every tap is systematically read nor do they intend to use it all.
Typically routes are constructed based on a sample of data taken over a period of about six weeks in the fall..... which is the heaviest travel period. Reduction in ridership in other periods (eg summer lulls when school is out and many are on vacation) is highly predictable. Past experience, General rules of thumb, and predictive models give very accurate results. In the past, that six-week sample was derived from a combination of farebox data, and manual counts. "Co-op students count just fine and don't cost nearly as much as Presto readers" is the reaction I got from one pro route builder.
It may be interesting to learn that 73% of riders boarding route X outside the R.A.Whomever Collegiate between 14:30 and 16:00 on Fridays transfer to the Subway at Lawrence West Station, and are bound for destination east of Yonge Street.... but what practical use is made of that information?
The "think of the great data" argument is being advanced by a few data-mining empire builders, and by IT vendors, but not necessarily by the Planning Dept of your local transit operation.
- Paul
Click to expand...
This addresses a much larger point: Intrusion into privacy with no defined cause. I'd posted a number of legal references on the Steve Munro site on Presto Cards, and the TTC's pending (board already approved the idea) demand for photo ID Presto Cards for children and students. Steve Munro dismisses what I post. I think he just doesn't 'get it'. It's not only the thin edge of the wedge, from all I can discern, it's also illegal. Make no mistake, it is legal to request, but not demand *lawfully compliant photo ID*....*with caveats!* I bit my lip from bringing this point up prior, but since poring over the
Photo Card Act, 2008, S.O. 2008, c. 17 - Bill 85
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/S08017

I've come to realize that the Bill contains some very powerful clauses, not the least that you *do not have to produce photo I.D. on demand!* Another is that not doing so, and the card itself cannot be used in a court of law (civil or otherwise) or a tribunal or as evidence therein! Or....and this is the real clincher, and I'm going to get a legal opinion on this (there may not be one yet): That the wording of the Act is not specific to The Ontario Photo ID Card, it applies to *all* uses of photo ID in Ontario as that pertains to all levels of Government.The wording, even if not intended, indicates that.

I realize this takes us off-topic, so I won't list the clauses and the astounding inferences, but encourage others to read it carefully, and we'll discuss this further in another forum.

On one hand, I don't mind tapping off, on the other hand, Paul is right. It's imposition of a *rule* that is not necessary in a legal sense. It has nothing to do with fare collection in a legal sense, the claims of some other posters besides. It's purely an attempt (as far as I can tell) to gather information for which there is no legislated basis. If a fare is required for the stretch into York Region, I can understand it. For a destination where an extra fare is not due on top of the fare paid initially, it shouldn't be. Voluntary? Yes. Required? No.

We have to be very careful when 'obeying' the Big Hand of Info Demand. It's a balancing act, and already, you can and are tracked purely by having your cell phone or smartphone on. At what point do they start tracking your bowel movements and sexual gratification? I'm not being alarmist. I'm sure the Privacy Commissioner also has concerns on demands by 'the system' when it is in fact not required by the legislation.

Edit to Add: A sample of the issues I raise above:

From the TTC website:
[...]
Photo ID PRESTO cards (Child – 10-12, Youth, Post-secondary)




    • Photo ID PRESTO cards will be introduced.
    • Details on timing are still being confirmed and we will let you know when they will be available. [...]
Click to expand...

From the Photo Card Act:
[...]
Definitions
(9) In this section,

“public body” means,

(a) any ministry, agency, board, commission, official or other body of the Government of Ontario,

(b) any municipality in Ontario,

(c) a local board, as defined in the Municipal Affairs Act, and any authority, board, commission, corporation, office or organization of persons some or all of whose members, directors or officers are appointed or chosen by or under the authority of the council of a municipality in Ontario, or

(d) a prescribed person or entity; (“organisme public”)

“related government” means,

(a) the Government of Canada and the Crown in right of Canada, and any ministry, agency, board, commission or official of either of them, or

(b) the government of any other province or territory of Canada and the Crown in right of any other province of Canada, and any ministry, agency, board, commission or official of any of them. (“gouvernement lié”)
[...]
Voluntary use of photo card
9. (1) The holder of a photo card may, in his or her discretion, present it in any transaction or circumstance, including any transaction or circumstance where the holder wishes to identify himself or herself.

No requirement to have or use photo card
(2) However, a photo card is issued solely for the convenience of the holder of the photo card and there is no requirement under this or any other Act that an individual obtain or carry a photo card or that a photo card be presented or accepted.
[...]
Purposes for collection and disclosure of information
(5) The only purposes for which information may be collected or disclosed under this section are the following:

1. To verify the accuracy of any information provided under this Act by an applicant for or holder of a photo card.

2. To verify the authenticity of any document provided under this Act by an applicant for or holder of a photo card.

3. To detect a false statement in any document provided under this Act by any person.

4. To detect or prevent the improper use of a photo card.

5. To detect or prevent the improper issuance or renewalof a photo card, including by conducting an audit or review of any issuance, renewal orcancellation of a photo card or the conduct of any person or entity involved in issuing, renewing orcancellinga photo card.

6. To provide the Canada Border Services Agency or the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, or the successor to either of them, with information and records regarding the issuance, renewal or cancellation of an enhanced photo card or a combined photo card.

7. To provide a public body or related government with the information that the Minister believes is necessary to assist it with a purpose similar to a purpose set out in paragraph 1, 2, 3 or 4 if the holder of a photo card has presented his or her photo card in order to obtain a benefit or service under a legislatively authorized program or service administered or provided by that public body or related government.

Deemed compliance with privacy legislation
(6) Any disclosure of informationunder this section is deemed to be in compliance with clause 42 (1) (e) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and clause 32 (e) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Notice under privacy legislation
(7) Any collection by a public body of personal information, as defined in the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, disclosed to the public body under this section is exempt from the application of subsection 39 (2) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and subsection 29 (2) of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
[...]
Click to expand...
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/S08017

To be continued in a more apt forum...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top