highlights: • Greensboro Transit Agency stops have basic amenities but lack active transportation connectivity. • Ridership is more strongly associated with physical stop amenities than active mobility amenities. • Transportation disadvantaged outskirt areas of the city show the lowest amenity scores compared to their more centrally located counterparts. • Two created indices provide a replicable index for transit planning in small to mid-sized US cities. abstract: Bus stop amenities are vital to transit infrastructure but are often overlooked, especially in medium and small cities. This study addresses that gap by examining the equity of amenities at Greensboro Transit Agency (GTA) bus stops in Greensboro, NC. We developed two intuitive amenity indexes. The Level of Stop Amenity (LSA) index is used to identify the physical amenities available to riders at bus stops, while the Mobility Level of Stop Amenity (MLSA) index extends this analysis to include active mobility connections. These indices are related to socio-demographic data and NCDOT disadvantage indices. Findings indicate that GTA provides basic amenities at the majority of bus stops with average LSA (4.16) and MLSA (13.15) scores, yet key features like shelters, benches, and bike parking are lacking at many stops. No significant inequities were found in the overall distribution of physical bus stop amenities, though shortcomings may exist in disadvantaged communities on the city outskirts. MLSA scores show mixed significant negative relationships with equity indices at the system level, and spatial regression modeling indicate MLSA scores are lower for block groups with higher Black populations underscoring the need for enhancing bus stop amenities with bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, especially in underserved communities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tovar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: