Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 163
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds
5.6Transit Agencies
Transit agencies across North America are teaming up with car-sharing
operators as a means to provide station access, and increase ridership and
overall mobility. Most often these transit agencies provide marketing assis-
tance or car-sharing parking at rail stations. Transit agencies that provide rail
service have often proved the most logical partners for car-sharing operators.
However, there are several examples of bus-based agencies as well, notably
King County Metro in the Seattle region.
Goals and Benefits
Two core goals of transit agencies are often to increase ridership and rev-
enue. Car-sharing can help achieve both of these, agencies perceive, as well
as contribute to broader objectives of reducing automobile use and improv-
ing mobility.
Some transit agencies focus on car-sharing as a station access strategy, in
order to help expand the market for transit, manage customer parking,
and bridge the "last mile" between the rail station and a passenger's final
destination. For example, Metro North in New York considers that car-shar-
ing vehicles at remote stations allow it to tap a market formerly not served.
The agency can increase the sale of tickets, because people would formerly
have had to rent a car or take a cab to these locations. Instead of using a
car to make a 100-mile trip, passengers take Metro North most of the way
and complete the trip by car-sharing. Another means to boost ridership is
through using car-sharing to increase pass sales.
Some agencies see car-sharing as a means to bring about broader changes
in travel behavior. The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Author-
ity (SEPTA), for example, considers car-sharing as an adjunct to public
transportation a way for households to purchase fewer cars, rely more on
public transportation, and use a car only when needed. "We believe that
car-sharing puts people on transit," SEPTA staff says.
Car-sharing also fits into the broader "mobility management" function of
transit agencies (Murray et al., 1997). Metro North, the Washington Metro-
politan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) and Seattle's King County Metro
all view car-sharing within this framework.
King County Metro has used its car-sharing partnership to attract private
capital to public transportation in order to address urban mobility. As Metro
Page
5-29
OCR for page 164
Chapter 5 · The Role of Partners
staff states: "The amount of money we have brought to the table [for car-
sharing] is small compared to the amount of private capital that we have
leveraged." Transit passes also have added value since Metro included a
car-sharing incentive with the purchase of a FlexPass.
Finding a Partner
Most commonly a partnership is initiated through the car-sharing operator
approaching the transit agency. However, some agencies such as SEPTA and
WMATA point out that car-sharing was already on the agenda, meaning
that operators found a receptive audience.
Some transit agencies, such as King County Metro in the Seattle region and
Metro North in New York, have been more proactive in developing the
partnership. King County staff had been following car-sharing in Europe,
particularly the integration with transit. The agency issued an RFP in Spring
1999, and the program was launched in January 2000.
Types of Support
Transit agencies provide types of support similar to that provided by lo-
cal governments. However, the scope of their involvement is usually less,
given that they have fewer functions than cities and counties. Marketing
and parking are the main contributions, although some agencies provide
other types of support as well.
Marketing
Transit agencies can provide operators with access to a range of marketing
channels. Since transit riders are usually the core market for car-sharing
operators (Chapter 3), this can be an effective means of targeting promo-
tional efforts.
Marketing is mainly provided on transit agency websites and through ad-
vertisements and brochures on buses and trains and in stations. WMATA
in Washington DC and TriMet in the Portland region are two agencies that
provide information about car-sharing and links to providers on their web-
sites. WMATA; BART and Muni in the San Francisco Bay Area; and Metro
North in New York are examples of agencies that have provided advertis-
ing space (Exhibits 5-18 and 5-19). The common message delivered is that
car-sharing is a great complement to transit. Website information can be an
ongoing activity, while most agencies tend to focus advertising in the start-
up phase of the car-sharing program.
Page
September 2005
5-30
OCR for page 165
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds
Exhibit 5-18 BART and City CarShare conducted extensive Exhibit 5-19 The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
marketing in the initial stages of the partnership. promotes car-sharing on its website
As with local governments, the most effective marketing is often integrated
with broader Transportation Demand Management pro-
grams, particularly for agencies that have TDM responsibili-
ties. For example, King County Metro views the "insertion"
of car-sharing into its Commute Trip Reduction program as
one of the most effective ways in which it supports car-shar-
ing. In one effort, Metro partnered with Washington State
Ferries, Kitsap Transit and Flexcar to establish 26 Commute
Boards for ferry commuters on 11 of their ferries and at their
terminals. The display board is complemented by brochures
(Exhibit 5-20), and in the initial phases Flexcar representatives
rode the ferries to advertise the availability of car-sharing at
ferry terminals. Metro funded a promotion package offering
free car-sharing membership and a $25 usage credit. Four
hundred commuters signed up this way.
Several transit agencies also bring brochures and the car-shar-
ing operator's marketing material to transportation fairs and
events. Los Angeles Metro and Flexcar, for instance, conduct
joint marketing at different events. Metro has also paid for
the production of "take-ones" timetable-sized brochures
about car-sharing.
Integration into employer outreach efforts can be another
Exhibit 5-20 King County Metro and
strategy for transit agencies. In Portland, OR TriMet provides partners promote car-sharing to ferry
Flexcar with access to its employer database, which can be commuters.
Page
5-31
OCR for page 166
Chapter 5 · The Role of Partners
used to find employers who may be interested in car-sharing. Especially
small companies downtown, who cannot afford to buy their own company
vehicles, have proven very interested in Flexcar when approached. Commute
Trip Reduction staff at King County Metro, meanwhile, generates sales leads
for Flexcar. The agency also views car-sharing as a means to further sales
of its FlexPass a discounted transit pass that employers can purchase on
behalf of all their employees. It frequently offers promotional incentives to
tie the two products Flexcar and FlexPass together.
Parking provision can also be seen as a means of marketing, in that it
maximizes the visibility of the car-sharing service. This is discussed in the
section below.
Administration
Most transit agencies do not provide any administrative support to their
car-sharing partners. However, Los Angeles Metro provides office space
for car-sharing organizations, as a form of in-kind support which may be
particularly valuable in the start-up phase.
The most in-depth example of administrative support comes from King
County Metro in the Seattle region. A large part of its initial assistance was
provided in the form of a full-time staff member to provide marketing and
outreach support and serve as a liaison between Metro and Flexcar. This
was intended to create an in-depth partnership, rather than simply a vendor
relationship. Metro also provides office space, again as a means to strengthen
the partnership by having Flexcar and its Commute Trip Reduction staff
together on the same floor. Flexcar staff believes that the shared space makes
for a "very synergistic relationship."
Parking
Parking is considered to be the main support that transit agencies provide
to car-sharing organizations. Several agencies, such as WMATA and SEPTA,
offer their most visible parking spaces, such as kiss-and-ride spaces and
others that are located close to the station.
As with local governments, transit agencies differ in whether they charge
a car-sharing operator for parking and face several of the same conflicts.
WMATA and Translink in Vancouver, BC provide spaces for free, as an in-
kind contribution. Others, such as SEPTA and Metro North, charge the same
rate as for other users. BART initially provided parking free of charge, but
subsequently began to charge City CarShare the regular rate for reserved
spaces.
Page
September 2005
5-32
OCR for page 167
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds
Transit agencies also face challenges when determining whether to allo-
cate spaces at stations where parking is at a premium. WMATA avoided
this problem by providing midday parking spaces in its kiss-and-ride lots,
which are not fully utilized, while park-and-ride lots are filled to capacity
every day. The kiss-and-ride spaces are also the most visible and closest to
the station, so this is a win-win situation for the car-sharing providers and
WMATA. SEPTA suggests to PhillyCarShare that they should avoid request-
ing parking at stations that regularly experience 100% occupancy. BART, on
the other hand, has allocated scarce commuter spaces at four of its stations,
including Rockridge (Exhibit 5-21), although it requested an evaluation of
the overall impact on ridership (see Chapter 7).
Exhibit 5-21 Car-sharing parking at BART's Rockridge station in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Financial
Most financial support comes from local government, as described in the
previous section of this chapter. Transit agencies rarely provide direct fi-
nancial support for car-sharing; where they do, it usually comes from grants
and external funding rather than operating budgets. Staff at Metro North
feels strongly that, as a public agency, they cannot finance any of the costs
of a privately owned car-sharing project from general funds. WMATA staff
adds that there are too many competing uses of scarce grant funds, making
financial support for car-sharing "hard to justify."
One exception is TriMet in Portland, which has received a CMAQ grant of
approximately $100,000 a year to subsidize vanpooling. Flexcar is one of the
Page
5-33
OCR for page 168
Chapter 5 · The Role of Partners
partners for this program, through its Flexvan program (discussed further
in Section 5.7).
Another is King County Metro, which tries to insert car-sharing into more
general grants for demand management programs. This approach helps
protect car-sharing from claims that scarce grant funding is going to a
private company. Metro has also received two specific grants. The first
was from the EPA, which funded the difference in purchase costs between
hybrid vehicles and regular sedans. The grant also paid for outreach such
as bus advertisements and radio spots that promoted the clean air value of
using hybrids for car-sharing. The second was a JARC program earmark
of $500,000, which is matched by the State of Washington, for low-income
car-sharing (see Chapter 6). King County has recently received another $4
million in JARC funds and Washington State funds to provide mobility to
job seekers in its low-income program.
Transit Integration
As noted earlier, a number of transit agencies assist in marketing and allow
car-sharing vehicles to be parked in visible locations close to the station.
Discounts are another method of linking the two modes of transportation.
Most commonly, transit pass holders are eligible for discounted car-shar-
ing memberships, although there are European and Canadian examples of
transit discounts for car-sharing members. Smartcards and station cars are
two other means of integrating car-sharing and transit. All of these strategies
are discussed in turn below.
Car-Sharing Discounts
King County Metro in Seattle offers $35 worth of car-sharing use when its
FlexPass employer transit pass holders join Flexcar. As well as a promo-
tional incentive, Metro sees this program as a means to financially support
car-sharing without providing direct subsidies; the incentives go to the end
user, rather than directly to Flexcar. It uses the discounts as an introductory
promotion to encourage members to both join and try the service out, with-
out risking any longer-term financial incentives for driving. The discounts
do not involve an additional outlay for Metro; instead of a direct subsidy,
the agency purchases usage on Flexcar vehicles, which it then distributes
as promotional incentives.
The Toronto Transportation Commission (TTC) offered a $100 discount on
Page
September 2005
5-34
OCR for page 169
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds
AutoShare's membership fee for transit riders who subscribed to the TTC's
Metropass Discount Plan. Pass holders were also sent a subway map that
showed the locations of transit stops and AutoShare cars.
The most extensive experience, however, comes from Europe. In Mannheim
and Aachen, Germany, a pilot program offered a discounted membership
to transit pass holders who also joined car-sharing. The discount, com-
bined with publicity about the pilot program, resulted in a 136% increase
in car-sharing in Aachen and a 118% increase in Mannheim, compared to
the previous year.
Transit Discounts
Local bus operators offer 10% off pre-paid fares for car-share members in
Bristol, England and in Quebec, Canada. The Bristol bus operator goes
one step further by giving car-share members a three-month free pass if
members give up their cars. This is particularly notable since the operator,
First Bristol, is a private company, rather than a public agency seeking to
achieve broader goals.
Fare Integration
Many transit agencies are moving towards smartcard payment technolo-
gies, which can provide further opportunities for integrating transit and
car-sharing. The same card can serve as a transit pass and as an access card
for car-sharing vehicles, providing a tangible symbol of integration as well
as convenience benefits.
WMATA has perhaps made the most progress in North America, although
there is still a long way to go. It is seeking to allow the Metro SmarTrip transit
card to be used to access both Flexcar and Zipcar vehicles. Flexcar has already
successfully manufactured 20 test cards with both chips, and the next step
is to do the same test with the Zipcar chip. WMATA wants the same card to
serve as a driver's license and is working with the District of Columbia to
achieve this goal. Integrating billing systems, however, remains a longer-term
goal; WMATA is still working through the many challenges of establishing
a common payment mechanism for the many transit agencies in the region
and is not prepared to add car-sharing agencies to the mix as of yet.
Again, the greatest experience comes from Europe. A single card in Bre-
men, Germany can be used to pay for both car-sharing and riding transit
at a discount. Members need a smartcard and PIN. They can also order
Page
5-35
OCR for page 170
Chapter 5 · The Role of Partners
train tickets or take a taxi without spending cash the bills are added to
their monthly car-sharing invoice. The smartcard in Zurich, Switzerland
is valid for discounted car rentals and car-sharing usage, as a ticket on the
national rail system, and as a free ticket for a companion on public transit.
In London, the Oyster public transportation smartcard can be used to access
CityCarClub vehicles.
Station Car Program
Station cars, which were discussed in Chapter 2, provide another integra-
tion opportunity, if the vehicles form part of the wider car-sharing program.
Portland, OR has the most experience with this model. TriMet, Flexcar and
two vanpool providers have created a unique "pool vehicle" concept for the
firm of Norm Thompson Outfitters, the Oregon Health & Science University
and others, similar to a station car program. Vanpoolers participating in
Flexvan pick up the van at a light rail station and drive to the office in the
morning. During the day, employees and any Flexcar member can reserve
the van as a company car for personal or company business. At the end of
the day, vanpoolers drive back to the light rail stations. Flexcar and TriMet
subsidize the monthly fee for the vanpoolers, because they consider it an
economical way to serve low-density office parks and suburbs. If a person
drops out of the vanpool, TriMet also helps cover the extra costs for the other
vanpool members. The subsidy is offered the first two months after a person
leaves the vanpool, with a cap of two drop-outs per year.
A similar concept was tested in Vancouver, BC in 2003, when Translink
launched the Commuter Car Share project. However, it terminated before
the end of the pilot program six months later. Only three participants had
joined in that period and the feedback was that the program was not flexible
enough, since the participants had to pay for the car on weekdays when they
did not work. Each participant paid $225 per month for transit pass and car
usage; the rest of the costs were covered by the grant. Another barrier was
that since it was a pilot program, users were reluctant to sell a car in case
the service did not continue.
Memberships
Transit agencies usually have non-revenue fleets, which include many pool
cars that could be replaced by car-sharing. While some have expressed
interest, there are no examples that are up and running yet. The most ad-
vanced in the planning process is Los Angeles Metro, which is evaluating
the possibility of replacing and reducing up to half of its 392 pool cars with
Page
September 2005
5-36
OCR for page 171
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds
a semi-dedicated car-sharing fleet. The vehicles could be made available to
other Flexcar members after working hours. The net reduction in vehicles
would also yield revenue for the agency through the cost savings which
would occur with a reduced pool fleet.
Planning, Policy and Tax Issues
Most transit agencies have not seen the need to incorporate car-sharing into
formal planning documents. One exception is BART in the San Francisco
Bay Area, which includes car-sharing in its Station Access Guidelines. These
state:
Reserved spaces for car-sharing services should be in high-profile locations,
in an area that is closer to the station faregates than the majority of the
at-large parking spots. Where clearly visible locations are available, car-
sharing spaces can be provided on street.
Car-sharing is also included in BART's hierarchy of access modes, which
give priority to walking, transit and bicycle access (Exhibit 5-22).
The other opportunity
to include car-sharing
in agency planning may
come through transit-
oriented development
programs. King County
Metro has experimented
with this concept, al-
though with limited suc-
cess as most of its land
holdings take the form of
suburban park-and-ride
lots that are not well-
suited to car-sharing. At
one Redmond site, for
example, the car was ul-
timately withdrawn due
to low utilization.
Exhibit 5-22 BART's formal hierarchy of access modes.
Source: BART Station Access Guidelines.
Page
5-37
