Abstract
This analysis seeks to understand the relative efficacy of two classes of policies intended to increase the ridership and productivity of public transit service. One seeks to improve transit effectiveness by freezing transit service in the older parts of metropolitan areas, such as the CBD and surrounding dense neighborhoods, where growth is to be directed. The other seeks to connect employment and population, wherever it locates, as directly as possible by transit routes. The case study compares transit performance in two regions that pursue these two service approaches. The analysis shows that the transit system that seeks to serve all jobs carries almost 400 percent more ridership per capita than does the transit system that seeks to serve primarily CBD jobs, while each bus mile operated in the dispersed transit system carries about 35 percent more passengers than each bus mile in the CBD-focused transit system.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
