# Fewer stops, faster transit

By [Brandon Donnelly](https://brandondonnelly.com) · 2026-03-03

transit, surface-transit, light-rail, mobility, stop-spacing, urbanism

---

"The problem with buses," [writes](https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-united-states-needs-fewer-bus-stops/) transportation planner Nithin Vejendla in _Work in Progress_, "is that they are slow." The same thing could also be said about other surface transit routes like Toronto's streetcars, including some of our [new lines](https://brandondonnelly.com/why-torontos-finch-west-lrt-sucks). Now, there are lots of ways to speed up surface routes. Dedicated lanes and signal priority are two obvious ones. But an even simpler one is to just get rid of some stops!

North American cities tend to be plagued by too many transit stops. I think we do it because more stops sounds better than fewer stops. It creates the illusion of servicing more people. But too many stops can make [routes painfully slow](https://brandondonnelly.com/the-ontario-line-is-happening), by increasing dwell times. According to Nithin, buses in the US spend about 20% of their time just stopping and then starting again. Obviously the more stops you have, the worse this downtime gets.

Here's the average spacing between bus stops for various US cities taken from the above article:

![](https://storage.googleapis.com/papyrus_images/b02e0a637f9a09dadfb5db318d339ba91acfcd4fd95a03a40a799baa183ed03a.png)

If I convert some of these numbers into the system of measurement used by the rest of the planet, you'll find the following average stop spacings:

*   172 m in Philadelphia
    
*   205 m in Chicago
    
*   210 m in San Francisco
    
*   240 m in New York
    
*   260 m in Miami
    
*   350 m in Seattle
    
*   425 m in Las Vegas
    

European cities tend to have wider stop spacing, somewhere closer to 300–450 m. And as a further point of comparison, AI tells me that the current average streetcar stop spacing in Toronto is about 250 m, but that the official target for both streetcars and local buses is between 300–400 m. This is better. 400 m is a 5-minute walk. And if you're on the transit corridor, it means you'll never have to walk more than 200 m, or 2-3 minutes, to the next stop.

Consolidating stops has been shown not to have a meaningful impact on coverage area, but the benefits are significant. To give just one example, Los Angeles saw its operating speeds increase by 29% and its ridership grow by 33% on the Wilshire/Whittier Metro Rapid corridor by doing exactly this. So, if you're looking for a way to speed up your surface routes, one starting point would be to just do less.

* * *

_Cover photo by_ [_Renato_](https://unsplash.com/@cvzzn?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText) _on_ [_Unsplash_](https://unsplash.com/photos/a-city-street-filled-with-traffic-and-tall-buildings-ryHycQm9vQs?utm_source=unsplash&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=creditCopyText)

---

*Originally published on [Brandon Donnelly](https://brandondonnelly.com/fewer-stops-faster-transit)*