Greenville outlines transit upgrades: on‑demand pilot, shelters and plan to bring paratransit in‑house
February 23, 2026 | Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
City transit staff and the director of engineering briefed the Greenville City Council on Feb. 23 about multiple transit initiatives: technology upgrades, new shelters funded by an ARPA grant, an on‑demand pilot, and plans to bring paratransit operations in‑house.
Kevin Mulligan and Wood Davidson described upgrades including automated stop announcements and AVL that provide ETA information for riders. The council was shown photos of newly installed shelters and told the bus stop program used passenger counts to prioritize placement. Mulligan said the shelter purchases were funded by an ARPA grant of approximately $650,000; city funds covered concrete pads and installation.
Staff reported on an on‑demand pilot branded Great Plus that began Feb. 18 in a North Greenville zone; staff said more than 100 people have signed up in the first week and that riders can book by app or by phone (329‑4532). The pilot will run about six months as staff analyze ridership and evaluate whether vans can replace some fixed‑route buses.
On paratransit, staff said the county has provided the service but will not renew the contract; the city expects to assume operations July 1. Staff projected operating and capital costs, noting the federal reimbursement rates cited in the meeting (80% operating reimbursement, 85% capital reimbursement). Council discussed the required hours (paratransit must mirror fixed‑route service hours), the potential 4 a.m.–6 a.m. gap the city is evaluating, and the planned purchase of ADA lift‑equipped vans with an estimated full unit cost of $110,000 (city share after 85% reimbursement ~$16,500 per van).
Councilors debated benches with raised dividers at the new stops; some expressed concern that the design constituted hostile architecture and reduced shelter effectiveness, while others said the installations are an improvement over previous infrastructure. Staff said bench dividers are removable and that the city will gather public feedback before making design changes.
No final fare decision was made at the meeting; staff said council previously approved returning to a fare system (fixed‑route and on‑demand $1.25 per trip; paratransit up to $2.50 one‑way) and that fare collection was targeted for a mid‑May resumption.
Kevin Mulligan and Wood Davidson described upgrades including automated stop announcements and AVL that provide ETA information for riders. The council was shown photos of newly installed shelters and told the bus stop program used passenger counts to prioritize placement. Mulligan said the shelter purchases were funded by an ARPA grant of approximately $650,000; city funds covered concrete pads and installation.
Staff reported on an on‑demand pilot branded Great Plus that began Feb. 18 in a North Greenville zone; staff said more than 100 people have signed up in the first week and that riders can book by app or by phone (329‑4532). The pilot will run about six months as staff analyze ridership and evaluate whether vans can replace some fixed‑route buses.
On paratransit, staff said the county has provided the service but will not renew the contract; the city expects to assume operations July 1. Staff projected operating and capital costs, noting the federal reimbursement rates cited in the meeting (80% operating reimbursement, 85% capital reimbursement). Council discussed the required hours (paratransit must mirror fixed‑route service hours), the potential 4 a.m.–6 a.m. gap the city is evaluating, and the planned purchase of ADA lift‑equipped vans with an estimated full unit cost of $110,000 (city share after 85% reimbursement ~$16,500 per van).
Councilors debated benches with raised dividers at the new stops; some expressed concern that the design constituted hostile architecture and reduced shelter effectiveness, while others said the installations are an improvement over previous infrastructure. Staff said bench dividers are removable and that the city will gather public feedback before making design changes.
No final fare decision was made at the meeting; staff said council previously approved returning to a fare system (fixed‑route and on‑demand $1.25 per trip; paratransit up to $2.50 one‑way) and that fare collection was targeted for a mid‑May resumption.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
