Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Pages 6-11

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 6...
... Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework S-6 Figure S-4 Case Study Transit Agencies by Service Area and Agency Type Transit Agency Service Area Agency Type Page Full Fare-Free Area Rapid Transit St. Lucie County, FL Small Urban/Rural 4-7 Cache Valley Transit District Cache Valley, UT Small Urban/Rural 4-9 Corvallis Transit System Corvallis, OR University Community 4-11 DASH Alexandria, VA Urban Local 4-13 GoLine Indian River County, FL Small Urban/Rural 4-15 Greater Richmond Transit Company Greater Richmond, VA Urban Local 4-17 Intercity Transit Thurston County, WA Small Urban/Rural 4-19 Kansas City Area Transportation Authority Greater Kansas City, MO Mid-Sized Regional 4-21 Link Transit Chelan & Douglas Co., WA Small Urban/Rural 4-23 Mountain Line Missoula, MT University Community 4-25 Partial Fare-Free Denver Regional Transportation District Greater Denver, CO Large Urban Regional 4-28 Houston METRO Greater Houston, TX Large Urban Regional 4-30 Iowa City Transit Iowa City, IA University Community 4-32 Los Angeles Metro Los Angeles County, CA Large Urban Regional 4-34 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Greater Boston, MA Large Urban Regional 4-36 Ride On Montgomery County, MD Urban Local 4-38 San Francisco Muni San Francisco, CA Urban Local 4-40 Sandy Area Metro Greater Sandy, OR Small Urban/Rural 4-42 Steamboat Springs Transit Steamboat Springs, CO Resort Community 4-44 Utah Transit Authority Wasatch Front, UT Large Urban Regional 4-46 Not Fare-Free King County Metro King County, WA Large Urban Regional 4-49 Sun Tran Tucson, AZ Mid-Sized Regional 4-51 The Rapid Grand Rapids, MI Mid-Sized Regional 4-53
From page 7...
... Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework 1-1 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents a framework for transit practitioners to evaluate the potential benefits, costs, and trade-offs of implementing fare-free transit. This framework was informed by a transit agency survey and interviews with staff from transit agencies, community organizations, and transit advocacy groups.
From page 8...
... Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework 1-2 Opportunities for Future Research This final chapter proposes opportunities for future research to support transit practitioners' ability to evaluate fare-free transit including impacts of fare-free transit, funding for fare-free transit, and fare collection cost and revenue reporting.
From page 9...
... Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework 1-3 of fare policies and programs that includes discounted fares, this report focuses solely on the evaluation of fare-free transit.
From page 10...
... Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework 1-4 WHY ARE SOME TRANSIT AGENCIES LOOKING AT FARE-FREE TRANSIT? In the US, transit agencies have implemented full and partial fare-free policies and programs for decades.5 Full fare-free policies and programs are seen as tools to increase ridership, improve operating efficiency, save costs, advance accessibility and social equity, and reduce congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.
From page 11...
... Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework 1-5 central to the debate of fare-free transit is whether transit should be treated as a public good or if it is a service that users should pay their "fair share" to use.ii While some transit agencies have had success with fare-free transit, it is not a one-size-fits-all approach for achieving transit agency and community goals. As described above, most transit agencies rely on fare revenues to fund a portion of transit operations.

Key Terms

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.