Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
Transit

Without Transit, American Cities Would Take Up 37 Percent More Space

Even if you never set foot on a bus or a train, chances are transit is saving you time and money. The most obvious reason is that transit keeps cars off the road, but the full explanation is both less intuitive and more profound: Transit shrinks distances between destinations, putting everything within closer reach.

A new study published by the Transportation Research Board quantifies the spatial impact of transit in new ways [PDF]. Without transit, the researchers found, American cities would take up 37 percent more space.

Transit-oriented development in Portland's Pearl District. Photo: Smartgrowth.org
Transit-oriented development in Portland's Pearl District. Photo: Smartgrowth.org
Transit-oriented development in Portland's Pearl District. Photo: Smartgrowth.org

The research team from New York, San Francisco, and Salt Lake City modeled not just how many driving miles are directly averted by people riding transit, but how the availability of transit affects the way we build cities.

By allowing urban areas to be built more compactly, the "land use effect" of transit reduces driving much more than the substitution of car trips with transit trips. Total miles driven in American cities would be 8 percent higher without the land use effect of transit, the researchers concluded, compared to 2 percent higher if you forced everyone who rides transit to drive.

On average, the study found, the "land use effect" of transit is four times greater than the "ridership effect," or the substitution of car trips with transit trips. But the land use effect of transit varies a great deal across urban areas, the study found. In places like Greenville, South Carolina, it's responsible for reducing driving 3 percent. In San Francisco and New York City, it's 18 and 19 percent, respectively.

The authors suggest their model can help assess the effect of transit investments on travel behavior with greater sophistication. For example, adding a rail station to a neighborhood without one increased the density of jobs and residences by 9 percent within a one-mile radius, the study found. That would reduce driving about 2 percent for all the households across the area.

In addition to new infrastructure, increasing the frequency of transit service reduces traffic too. The researchers estimate that a 1 percent increase in transit frequency across a region would be expected to bring about a 0.045 percent decrease in miles driven. And a 1 percent increase in route density -- a measure of how many transit lines service a given area -- would be expected to produce a 0.047 percent reduction in traffic.

The report includes a "Land Use Benefit Calculator" [XLS] to help determine the total environmental benefits of transit projects.

Hat tip to Green City Blue Lake

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Elise Stefanik Wants to Be NY Governor — Yet Says Nothing About Transit

Her campaign launch suggest her intent to use transit as a political pawn to stoke fear.

November 10, 2025

The False ‘Trolley Problem’ At the Heart of the Autonomous Vehicle Debate

Waymo said it has a "plan" for when one of the company's cars kills someone. But we should be planning for a world when no car kills anyone — autonomous or not.

November 10, 2025

Monday’s Headlines Did Their Civic Duty

Around 80 percent of local transportation referendums passed muster with voters last week.

November 10, 2025

Transit Funding in Pennsylvania Can’t Wait

State and Federal leaders must act to keep our transit safe and in service.

November 10, 2025

Friday Video: The Utopia of London’s Low-Traffic Neighborhoods

Streetsfilms follows an urban planner around the “low-traffic neighborhood” of St. Peter’s in the London borough of Islington.

November 7, 2025

Friday’s Headlines Got Lucky

Crash data doesn't nearly capture the near misses cyclists have to endure.

November 7, 2025
See all posts