Electrify
Senior Member
A quick Google search reveals that the area of York is 1776 km2, so you are half right. The document I based my claim on had the service area, service population, and total population. It didn't list the total area for municipalities, which lead me to believe that there was a difference between total area and service area. This appears to be the case with most other systems however, as some of the ones discussed above did differentiate their service area to the municipal area. The numbers are self reported, so this is YRT's fault and not CUTA's.
Still, I did come across some systems which did have higher fares than York's. However, these systems were primarily rural and were more like commuter systems between villages in a township. This is why I suggested that some routes which are rural in nature (50, 58, 61, 9) should charge an extra fare. I'm willing to bet that these lines are far more of a drain on the system than the suburban arterial and local ones, despite less than ideal ridership.
Still, I did come across some systems which did have higher fares than York's. However, these systems were primarily rural and were more like commuter systems between villages in a township. This is why I suggested that some routes which are rural in nature (50, 58, 61, 9) should charge an extra fare. I'm willing to bet that these lines are far more of a drain on the system than the suburban arterial and local ones, despite less than ideal ridership.