Protecting Transit Coverage in Buncombe County

Good evening commissioners.

My name is Gino, and tonight I ask that you please reconsider your plans for the redesign of our public transportation network.

Right now, Asheville is moving towards a ridership model for our transit system. But with our hills and our scattered communities, adopting a ridership model will hurt the very people transit is supposed to help. This is the opinion of Jarrett Walker, the city’s own transit consultant.

In Human Transit, Walker writes that a ridership model depends on four key points: density, walkability, linearity, and proximity. Of these prerequisites, Asheville meets none. We are not dense; our homes and businesses are spread across hills and valleys. We are not walkable; steep grades and long distances keep people from the bus stops. We lack linearity; our streets twist and climb so buses cannot run straight, effective routes. And we lack proximity; many destinations sit far from the major roads that the buses can actually use. Without these conditions, a ridership-first system is destined to fail.

And we know what that failure looks like. When Pierce County in Washington—an area with land and demographics like ours—switched to a ridership-first design, the consequences soon came. Within a year, their paratransit and ADA services were overwhelmed. Costs shot up, demand exploded, and people were turned away.

Today, Mountain Mobility is already strained, picking up seniors two to three hours late. How then will Mountain Mobility absorb the needs of Leicester, Fairview, Arden, Swannanoa? When those transit lifelines are cut, when coverage is cut, those people do not go away.

That is why Asheville needs a coverage model—a service that goes where people live. The choice before you is not one between efficiency and inefficiency. It’s a choice about our city’s values.

Above all other priorities, value our people. From there, all decisions become clear. Thank you.