Transit Funding Facts [2 of 4]

As planners try to cope, the results are felt by users in circuitous routings with longer travel times, the cancellation of certain trips and routes in order to re-allocate these service hours elsewhere, complicated route interlines and an inability to provide transit service to qualifying newly developed areas. Such a situation tends to deter transit use rather than promote it. As a result, Edmontonians are using less transit than they were twenty years ago. See Graph D.

This situation needs to be reversed in order for transit to become truly attractive to a broader group of people. It can only be reversed if the number of transit operating hours allocated in each civic budget is increased dramatically in the years to come. Better operating funding means more frequent service, more direct service and more new service, all of which are fundamental to attracting and maintaining ridership.

Transit ridership and capital investment are also closely related. Significant capital investments in transit - seen in such things as operating infrastructure extensions for LRT and trolleybus, new vehicles, new shelters and improved transit facilities - also show a positive impact on ridership within a time frame of one to two years. See Graph E.

Although slightly greater capital investments have been realized in recent years, the annual capital investment in public transit still lags significantly behind the investment in roadways. See Graph F.

The full size version of a graph can
be seen by clicking on the thumbnail.