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 189
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds
5.10 Conclusion
Partnerships can be a win/win arrangement both for the car-sharing opera-
tors and their various partners. Car-sharing organizations are still in their
infancy in the United States and Canada, despite the significant growth that
has occurred in recent years. The level of support by partner organizations
can be critical to their success or failure. Besides financial support, espe-
cially during the start-up phase, partner organizations contribute to success
through very basic support, such as increasing visibility of car-sharing as
an option in the community and providing parking for the vehicles. Some
partners identified in this research have gone beyond this basic support
through other means, such as by integrating car-sharing into their gov-
ernment policies, by substituting car-sharing for parking requirements in
developments, and even by allowing tax breaks for car-sharing.
Partner organizations have benefited as well. Some benefits are concrete,
such as reduced parking requirements and elimination of the organization's
fleet vehicles. Car-sharing can also be a mitigation tool for environmental
impacts and a societal tool for increasing community mobility, although
these benefits have not as yet been adequately quantified. Nonetheless, the
benefits cited the most by car-sharing partners are those with the potential
to increase the quality of life for everyone, whether they are car-sharers or
members of the community at large.
References
City of Vancouver (2005). Policy Report: Parking Requirement Standards for
Multiple Residential Use. April 13, 2005. [Adopted by City Council June 14,
2005] Accessed June 23, 2005 at http:// vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20050426/
tt3.pdf.
"Ecotrust: Flexcar Key Component of LEED Certified Building," www.
flexcar.com
Enoch, Marcus (2002). Supporting Car Share Clubs. A Worldwide Review. Paper
presented at the 3rd MOSES ESG Meeting, February 20-22, 2002.
Forinash, Christopher; Millard-Ball, Adam; Dougherty, Charlotte and Tum-
lin, Jeffrey (2004). Smart Growth Alternatives to Minimum Parking Requirements.
Paper presented at the Transportation Research Board 83rd Annual Meeting,
Washington, DC, January 11-15, 2004.
Page
5-55
OCR for page 190
Chapter 5 ˇ The Role of Partners
Murray, Gail; Koffman, David; Chambers, Cliff; and Webb, Peter (1997).
TCRP Report 21: Strategies to Assist Local Transportation Agencies in Becoming
Mobility Managers. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Shaheen, Susan and Meyn, Mollyanne (2002). Shared-Use Vehicle Services: A
Survey of North American Market Developments. University of California at Da-
vis, Institute for Transportation Studies, Publication UCD-ITS-RP-02-15.
Shaheen, Susan; Schwartz, Andrew; and Wipyewski, Kamill (2004). "Policy
Considerations for Carsharing and Station Cars: Monitoring Growth, Trends,
and Overall Impacts," Transportation Research Record 1887, pp 128-136. Wash-
ington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
US Green Building Council (2004). Green Building Rating System For New
Construction & Major Renovations (LEEDŽ-NC). Version 2.2. First Public Com-
ment Draft. December 2004. Accessed June 23, 2005 at: http://www.usgbc.
org/Docs/LEEDdocs/NCCC%20v2%202%20MASTER_public_1_clean.pdf
Page
September 2005
5-56
