By Vicki Meath, Executive Director of Just Economics
_______________________________________
In June of 2025, I was offered the opportunity to serve on the Core Design Team for Asheville Transit’s Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) because of Just Economics’ long history of working alongside both transit riders and drivers to improve public transportation in our community.
Just Economics was originally opposed to undertaking this study. The City of Asheville already has a 2018 Transit Master Plan that has never been fully implemented, and we believed that existing plan deserved greater investment before taking on this study. That said, I appreciated the consultants’ approach throughout the process and have great respect for the consultant team based on the experiences of other transit advocates around the country, and I appreciate the work they did within the constraints they were given.
Throughout the COA process, Just Economics’ staff focused on making sure that the voice of riders was included and valued.
My participation on the Core Design Team should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the Draft Network Plan. Just Economics has intentionally taken neither a position in support of nor in opposition to the proposal. Instead, we have focused on listening to the people who rely on transit every day.
The public has spoken clearly. The survey closed on June 28, and the results show that a majority of both riders and non-riders do not believe the Draft Network Plan would improve transit in our region. Fifty-eight percent of respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed that the proposed network would be better for Asheville—more than twice the 27 percent who agreed or strongly agreed.
While the Draft Network Plan has not earned public support, I believe the COA process was valuable because it revealed several important lessons that should guide the future of transit planning in Asheville.
First, our transit system is working—and it needs greater investment.
Too often we hear that Asheville’s transit system is “broken.” The data tells a different story. Compared with peer transit systems, Asheville serves more riders while requiring lower subsidies per passenger.
During the initial public engagement last fall, Just Economics’ staff spoke directly with riders as they compared two network concepts: a ridership-focused map and a coverage-focused map. Riders consistently favored the coverage map, which closely resembles today’s network. That preference reinforced what many riders have long known: the existing system already serves many of the places people most need to reach.
The public feedback on the Draft Network Plan further reinforced this point. Riders and community organizations raised significant concerns about proposed service reductions, including, but not limited to:
- Eliminating W2 service that connects residents to ABCCM’s Transformation Village and jobs near the Asheville Outlets.
- Removing the S6 deviation to MAHEC, reigniting a battle about equitable access.
- Removing the Social Security Office deviation currently served by the WE2 route.
The consultants and Core Design Team were tasked with designing a better network using the exact same level of resources the system has today. The primary benefit achieved by the Draft Network Plan was increased frequency along several corridors.
Greater frequency is something transit riders have consistently asked for. Through Just Economics’ Better Buses Together campaign, riders have repeatedly emphasized the need for buses that come more often in South Asheville, where the bus currently comes only once every 45 minutes and further down the S3 and S6 the bus only comes once every 90 minutes. The COA data clearly demonstrates that increasing frequency would improve access to jobs, housing, shopping, and essential services.
The public engagement process also made something equally clear: our community does not want higher frequency if it comes at the cost of eliminating service elsewhere.
The lesson is straightforward. Asheville does not have a broken transit system. It has an underfunded one.
Second, transit must become a central part of land use planning.
One of the clearest realizations during the Core Design Retreat was how difficult it is to improve service without reducing access for historically marginalized communities. That challenge is not a failure of transit planning—it is the result of decades of land use decisions that dispersed housing, jobs, and services in ways that make efficient transit difficult.
As Asheville rebuilds following Hurricane Helene and prepares to update the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), we have an opportunity to better align future development with transportation planning. Transit should be considered from the beginning of land use decisions, not after neighborhoods and commercial areas have already been built.
Third, the City and County must become true partners in public transit.
Asheville has made sincere efforts to partner with Buncombe County on transit planning. In fact, City Council originally allocated funding for a joint transit study. When the County withdrew its funding at the last minute, the City was forced to move forward alone, evaluating improvements within a system that extends well beyond city limits.
This arrangement is increasingly unsustainable.
The Asheville transit system serves county residents every day (and every City resident is also a County resident), yet the financial responsibility falls almost entirely on the City. During the Core Design Retreat, it became even more apparent that routes extending outside city limits create significant costs while serving regional transportation needs.
Route 170 through Swannanoa is a prime example. It currently operates only once every two hours despite serving a community that was devastated by Hurricane Helene, still lacks a grocery store, and has an even greater need for reliable transportation. Swannanoa residents deserve better service, but Asheville taxpayers should not bear that responsibility alone.
Similarly, Buncombe County is developing affordable housing at Ferry Road, just beyond the current W2 route, which is proposed for elimination under the Draft Network Plan. Transit advocates have identified an opportunity for the City and County to partner on a connection between the W2 and S6 routes, creating access not only to affordable housing but also to living-wage manufacturing jobs along the Brevard Road corridor.
Regional growth requires regional solutions. The City should continue making every effort to build a true partnership with Buncombe County to create a transit system that serves everyone who depends on it. Equally as important, Buncombe County needs to come to the table with the City and act as a true partner in the future of transit in our region.
Moving Forward
Although the public has clearly rejected the Draft Network Plan, the Comprehensive Operations Analysis was not a wasted effort. It provided valuable data, strengthened our understanding of rider priorities, highlighted opportunities to improve scheduling and transfers, and clarified the investments needed to make our transit system stronger.
My hope is that members of City Council will listen to the community by declining to implement route changes that riders do not support. Instead, I urge you to use what we learned through the COA process to make the investments necessary to build upon a system that is already serving our community well.
Our goal should not be to redesign a working system simply because resources are limited. It should be to invest in the transit system Asheville deserves—one that provides both the coverage riders rely on and the frequency they have long requested. That investment will benefit transit riders, employers, businesses, and our community as a whole.