News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 6.8K     0 
More low income/seniors/subsidized users? More youth and students? More fare evasion? Less full cost monthly passes? And now ARC likely shifting some monthly users to $60-80/month vs $100?

Or other causes as well?
why don't they mention the scared off real and potential riders who will not take the risk.

All on the city, the bylaws are there, blame the city.

Overstating the fare evasion is a neat trick, WHAT is the real number???
 
This is the End of the Line

ETS was involved with this report about funding.

Edmonton: Page 88-90
IMG_0235.jpeg
 
This is the End of the Line

ETS was involved with this report about funding.

Edmonton: Page 88-90
View attachment 600839
and where are the professional provided numbers of "actual fare avoiders" VS "scared off riders".

You have no idea of how many have been scared off of transit, yet you have this facination about fare avoiders, which you once again fail to provide professionally derived numbers for...
 
Yeah, i
why don't they mention the scared off real and potential riders who will not take the risk.

All on the city, the bylaws are there, blame the city.

Overstating the fare evasion is a neat trick, WHAT is the real number???
Yeah, I know dozens of uni students who literally already pay for upass who choose to drive and pay for parking. Not to mention the fox drive congestion they experience and added gas costs…

If we can’t keep uni students on transit, we ain’t doing it right.
 
and where are the professional provided numbers of "actual fare avoiders" VS "scared off riders".

You have no idea of how many have been scared off of transit, yet you have this facination about fare avoiders, which you once again fail to provide professionally derived numbers for...
What? I wasn't even thinking about fare evasion…

"If the Edmonton Transit Service does not have sufficient operating revenue to fund transit service and continues to be limited within existing operating and capital funding constraints, the City will not be able to expand or improve the network to accommodate near term population growth. This means service reductions for Light Rail Transit, and no Bus Rapid Transit network.
 
Last edited:
I read somewhere that LRT ridership breached pre-pandemic levels in September, I'm not sure if I read that correctly, so don't quote me on that.
Yes and by pre-pandemic they mean 2019 levels, which weren't as high as 2014 levels. Our population has also grown by 15% since just 2019 so as a mode share, public transit is actually decreasing. The only thing actually increasing in terms of mode share is travel by vehicle - which of course just leads to more congestion and costs to city.
 
Traffic counts are actually stable due to increases in working from home, delivery service replacing shopping, and approved active transportation infrastructure.
 

Back
Top