Accessibility, measuring the ease of reaching potential destinations, is increasingly being considered as an effective indicator to evaluate the performance of transport and land use interactions. Primal accessibility, a generalization of the first accessibility formulation proposed by Hansen (1959), has been widely used in many studies and demonstrated to be a reliable tool for project, program, and policy evaluation. The dual of accessibility, measuring the time required to reach a given number of opportunities, is less often considered but can be used for optimization in location-covering type problems. This paper, hence, clarifies the definitions of primal and dual access, and applies both measures to the Minneapolis - St. Paul metropolitan area for auto and transit to demonstrate their practicality as a metropolitan-level measurement. We explore the correlations and differences between the primal and dual access to better understand the relative strengths of the measures. It is found that, as with primal accessibility, dual accessibility is an efficient approach to evaluate accessibility, which is straightforward to calculate and to explain to policy-makers and the public.