Consultants from Jared Walker & Associates briefed the Asheville City Council July 24 on the city’s Comprehensive Operational Assessment (COA), a study intended to test how existing transit resources can be allocated to meet local goals.

The consultant emphasized a core tradeoff: a ridership-focused network concentrates service on dense, walkable corridors with high-frequency lines to maximize trips per cost; a coverage-focused network spreads limited service across more neighborhoods but at lower frequency. Consultant Ricky Engeta said, “Frequency always comes first,” explaining that wait times, transfers and reliability are primary drivers of usefulness and of ridership.

Why it matters: Council and staff discussed equity and economic goals, including connections to living-wage employers, airport service and new housing. Council members emphasized geographic equity and historic underinvestment in neighborhoods and asked the study to consider living-wage job access, future housing sites and tourism-related travel. Assistant Director of Transportation Jessica Morris said the process would include stakeholder groups and public engagement; the consultants described a four-week public engagement period beginning about September and said they would return to council with conceptual alternatives. Ricky Engeta told council staff would ask for direction on balance between ridership and coverage and said he expected council to provide a policy direction on November 11.

Study details and next steps: The COA team will produce two conceptual networks using current operating resources—one leaning toward ridership and one toward coverage—show those alternatives alongside the current network, and solicit public input. The engagement will feed a draft plan and then a later public review. The consultant said the study will measure access (for example, jobs reachable within a commute time threshold) rather than make precise ridership forecasts because ridership is sensitive to many external factors.

Funding, fares and alternatives: Council members asked whether increased ridership could unlock additional grants and how fare policy (including fare-free options) and alternative services such as microtransit would fit into the choices. The consultant answered that microtransit (demand-responsive service) is principally a coverage tool and does not generate high productivity per driver; fare-free systems require dedicated funding and trade off against service improvements. Staff said they would include financial context in later phases so council can weigh tradeoffs alongside funding choices.

Ending: The consultant and transit staff said they will return with conceptual alternatives and public engagement results; council will be asked to give policy direction that will shape the draft plan.