Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:


Pages 191-218

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 191...
... On top of these are other issues that are common to the start-up of a new idea, for which car-sharing is no exception. This section discusses the following barriers and suggests ways of overcoming them by citing the actions of others who have already implemented car-sharing in their community or business: • Finding a partner • Understanding car-sharing • Lack of data • Financial barriers • Regulatory obstacles • Parking issues • Serving low-income participants • Geographic and cultural barriers
From page 192...
... King County Metro in Seattle, Washington was not in a position to operate car-sharing itself and chose to partner with Flexcar to provide the service. Metro staff indicated that the agency's public funds are being used to part
From page 193...
... For example, since King County Metro in Seattle primarily provides transit service, the connection between car-sharing and transit was not obvious to everyone at the agency. Some Metro staff questioned how getting involved with car-sharing would increase the transit agency's ridership, which is its core mission.
From page 194...
... The goal of the facilities staff to maximize revenues for the campus' premium, scarce, high-value parking spaces conflicted with the Climate Initiative's goals. On the other hand, a potential partner may think that car-sharing will, in fact, help reach goals without a full understanding of the types of settings necessary for car-sharing to succeed.
From page 195...
... Even though a pool car costs a department $600 a month, "It's not usually a rational cost decision -- they want their pool cars," according to the transportation staff, because of departments' perceptions of convenience and availability. At the City of Berkeley in California, staff is supportive of the overall concept of replacing fleet vehicles with car-sharing, but more resistant when their own vehicle is targeted.
From page 196...
... When operators present their case to potential partners, many are skeptical about its claims. Because car-sharing is relatively new, a body of data is not readily available to prove its worth to agencies that are being asked to invest in it, either financially or through resources, such as parking spaces.
From page 197...
... King County Metro received a federal JARC grant, which can only be used for low-income participants in the car-sharing program. It also received an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
From page 198...
... In 2005, Chicago was awarded a second CMAQ grant of $419,000 to expand the program with more vehicles, totaling $1 million in federal grant funds for I-GO. The City continues to be involved in monitoring and reporting on the grant to the Federal Transit Administration.
From page 199...
... Suggested Tax Code Changes To ease financial burdens on car-sharing, Arlington County, Virginia staff would like changes in the State's tax code. Currently, vanpool vehicles do not pay state vehicle taxes.
From page 200...
... Minimum parking standards can block developers' incentive to introduce car-sharing in order to reduce parking demand. The following examples illustrate how some partners overcame these regulatory obstacles.
From page 201...
... As a result, Panoramic Interests provides two City CarShare spaces out of 40 total parking spaces in its downtown building, which houses 91 apartments and 10,000 square feet of commercial space. However, some cities have been skeptical about reducing parking requirements.
From page 202...
... For example, Zipcar pays $75 a month per vehicle for parking at some Metro North stations in New York. Metro North, a commuter rail system, considers it to be a gift of public funds if it were to give Zipcar free parking.
From page 203...
... On the other hand, Arlington County, Virginia cites on-street parking as the most important support that they provide. Representatives recognize that there is some revenue loss but say, "Fifty spaces is a drop in the ocean." They state, "We like to think that the car-share use of on-street parking spaces near transit facilities is a necessary and practical piece of the transportation infrastructure that serves world-class transit-oriented development just like sidewalks, crosswalks, taxi stands, and curbside bus stops." Similarly WMATA considers that the small amount of revenue loss from meters in their kiss-and-ride spaces is outweighed by the gain in ridership.
From page 204...
... The funding is not outright, but pays for usage on the car-sharing vehicles. Seattle, King County Metro, and Washington
From page 205...
... For example, the City of Vancouver, Washington partnered with the Vancouver Housing Authority and Flexcar in a pilot program for residents in affordable housing. Ten pilot households in two different developments were to receive free Flexcar accounts, paid by the Housing Authority, and five free car-share hours a month, paid by the three partners.
From page 206...
... Neither did car-sharing programs in suburban Bellevue, Bremerton, and Kitsap, Washington prove to be wholly successful, according to Flexcar. However, as Chapter 3 notes, car-sharing has been successful in some non-urban circumstances, such as at suburban university campuses, apartment buildings, and rural areas with characteristics such as a high degree of personal involvement, good transit, and the availability of local services.
From page 207...
... Further, as discussed earlier, people do not have a true understanding of the cost of auto ownership and tend to consider only the variable costs, such as fuel, when comparing the cost with another travel mode. However, the cost of the auto ownership may become more apparent as fuel prices increase and congestion makes the personal cost of travel time unbearable.
From page 208...
... Lack of sidewalks, cul-de-sacs with no pathways to the main street, and obstacles such as open drainage ditches discourage people from walking and push them into their personal automobile. If these barriers are present, car-sharing members will be unable to easily access car-sharing vehicles and may give up on the idea.
From page 209...
... The champion may come directly from a political voice in the community. Or the champion may actually consist of a group of people who discuss its benefits through word-of-mouth to others in the community and, perhaps, organize a grassroots effort to initiate car-sharing.
From page 210...
... A high-placed staff member in the Market Development group at King County Metro had been following car-sharing in Europe and its integration with transit. The Market Development group had a history of innovation with the political leaders at the County.
From page 211...
... Paul "What Saint Paul and Minneapolis have done to promote sustainable development has been recognized nationally and internationally, and what we can do in the future is even more exciting!
From page 212...
... The carsharing operator, Roaring Fork Valley Vehicles, has received grants from Aspen funded by REMP, which imposes a mitigation fee on new homes that use more energy than the local code permits. Boston.
From page 213...
... Municipalities must provide 20% in matching funds. The policy underlying the guidelines is "developing in ways that are consistent with the Commonwealth's Sustainable Development Principles." Under the guidelines, up to a 25% reduction over the standard parking ratios can be granted.
From page 214...
... With seed money from the grant program, Translink and the carsharing operator were able to try out a program, recover from the failure, and learn from the experience to develop a more targeted approach. When partners share the risk with the car-sharing operator, both have a vested interest in making the program work.
From page 215...
... Similarly, Arlington County, Virginia gave six months of cash subsidies to Flexcar and Zipcar during the Pilot Carshare program for new car-sharing vehicles that were introduced into the community. Subsidies begin at $1,500 per month and decline to $500 per month, with revenue subtracted from the subsidy amount.
From page 216...
... Besides permitting car-share operators to use parking at their stations, transit operators can take a more proactive approach by integrating car-sharing with their fare systems. When transit agencies link with car-sharing operators, the two can give discounts on both car-sharing and transit passes.
From page 217...
... Fleet-sharing memberships give the car-sharing operator a secure source of funding to supplement residential car-sharing, which has more spontaneous usage. Selecting the right Neighborhoods Findings of this research, which included a survey of current car-share members, conclude that the communities most conducive to successful carsharing programs include the following characteristics: • Good transit • Walkability • Lower than average vehicle ownership • Higher than average density and mix of uses This is not to say that neighborhoods without these characteristics cannot support ridesharing.
From page 218...
... 3. Do transit agencies and local government in the community embrace car-sharing with a willingness to provide institutional support?


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.