On-demand transit expansions in US cities offer lessons for flexible transport planning

Transport agencies in three US metropolitan areas have expanded on-demand transit services into new zones, extending flexible bus operations to areas that have historically been difficult to serve with fixed-route services. The developments, reported by Mass Transit and summarised by Planetizen, offer practical case studies for cities such as London that are exploring demand-responsive transport as a tool for improving mobility in lower-density suburbs and outer boroughs.

Cincinnati Metro expands MetroNow inside city limits

For the first time, Cincinnati Metro’s on-demand service, MetroNow, has begun operating within Cincinnati city limits. The expansion extends the service into Bond Hill, Roselawn and surrounding communities in Hamilton County, providing riders with connections to twelve fixed transit routes. MetroNow buses began serving the new zone on 30 August.

The move marks a shift for the service, which had previously operated primarily in suburban areas outside the city core. By linking on-demand trips to the fixed-route network, Cincinnati Metro aims to improve first-mile-last-mile connectivity for residents who live beyond walking distance of a bus stop. The new zone covers a mix of residential neighbourhoods and commercial corridors, areas where traditional bus routes have often run infrequently or required long transfers.

Key facts

SMART expands flex service in Metro Detroit

Southeast Michigan’s Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation, known as SMART, has announced it is expanding SMART Flex into northern Macomb County. The expansion is part of SMART’s broader SMARTer Mobility plan, which aims to grow the on-demand service from five zones today to eleven across Metro Detroit.

SMART Flex operates as a curb-to-curb shared ride service within defined zones, with passengers booking trips through a mobile app or by phone. The expansion into northern Macomb County targets communities that have low population density and limited fixed-route bus coverage. SMART has positioned the service as a cost-effective alternative to conventional bus routes in areas where ridership does not justify frequent scheduled services.

Utah Transit Authority adds a 77-square-mile zone

The Utah Transit Authority, in partnership with the Utah Department of Transportation and Utah County, has added a new North Utah County zone to its UTA On Demand service. The zone covers 77 square miles and provides access to the Lehi Primary Children’s Hospital and the Eagle Mountain Senior Center.

Sixteen vans will operate in the new zone, eight of which are wheelchair accessible. The scale of the zone is notable: at 77 square miles, it is roughly the size of the London Borough of Hillingdon. The service is designed to complement fixed-route bus and light rail connections, rather than replace them, by offering flexible trips in areas where a conventional bus route would be impractical.

What these expansions mean for London’s demand-responsive transport planning

Transport for London has already experimented with demand-responsive services, most notably through the Dial-a-Ride scheme for passengers with disabilities and through several smaller on-demand pilot projects in outer London. The US expansions offer several points of comparison for London planners and borough transport officers.

First, the US agencies are using on-demand transit primarily as a feeder service to fixed-route networks, not as a standalone replacement. Cincinnati Metro explicitly links MetroNow zones to twelve fixed bus routes. This approach mirrors TfL’s interest in using flexible services to improve access to tube, rail and bus interchange points in areas such as Havering, Bromley and Hillingdon, where low-density housing patterns make conventional bus routes expensive to run.

Second, the scale of zone coverage varies widely. UTA’s new zone is vast at 77 square miles, while SMART Flex zones are smaller and focused on specific suburban corridors. London’s outer boroughs range from roughly 15 to 40 square miles, meaning a single on-demand zone could feasibly cover an entire borough or a cluster of neighbourhoods. TfL’s 2021 on-demand pilot in Sutton, which used minibooks to serve a small residential area, was far more constrained in scope.

Third, the US agencies are not aiming for high ridership in absolute terms. On-demand transit in low-density areas typically carries fewer passengers per vehicle hour than fixed-route buses, but it can serve trips that would otherwise be impossible by public transport. For London, where car ownership rates in outer boroughs are significantly higher than in inner London, demand-responsive services could help reduce car dependence for short trips to shops, medical appointments and transport hubs.

Caveats and limitations for the London context

The US models are not directly transferable. American transit agencies operate under different funding structures, regulatory environments and land-use patterns. Cincinnati, Detroit and Salt Lake City have lower population densities and higher car ownership rates than most of London. The cost per passenger trip for on-demand services can be high, and none of the three agencies has published detailed operating cost data for the new zones.

TfL’s financial constraints also limit the scope for large-scale on-demand pilots. The agency is under pressure to reduce operating costs and has focused investment on core bus and rail services. Any expansion of demand-responsive transport in London would likely require borough co-funding or central government grants.

Nevertheless, the US expansions provide useful evidence that on-demand transit can be scaled to cover larger zones and connect to fixed-route networks. For London planners reviewing the role of flexible transport in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, the Cincinnati, SMART and UTA cases offer real-world data on zone design, vehicle mix and accessibility requirements.

What to watch next

Londoners and transport professionals should monitor TfL’s next bus service consultation cycle, expected later this year, for any reference to demand-responsive pilots in outer boroughs. The London Assembly’s transport committee has previously called for a more systematic evaluation of on-demand services. If TfL proceeds with a larger pilot, the US examples may inform decisions on zone size, booking systems and wheelchair accessibility standards.

Source: Planetizen News, “Three agencies expanding on-demand transit,” https://www.planetizen.com/news/2026/09/138329-three-agencies-expanding-demand-transit