Carsharing and Carfree Housing: Predicted Travel, Emission, and Economic Benefits: A Case Study of the Sacramento, California Region

In this paper, researchers present simulation findings from three innovative mobility scenarios (forecast to 2025) using an advanced regional travel demand model. This model was employed to approximate the effects of transit-based carsharing (short-term vehicle access linked to transit), real-time transit information services, and carfree housing (residential developments designed with limited parking provisions) in the Sacramento region. The scenarios are evaluated against travel, emission, and economic benefits criteria. The results indicate relatively modest reductions in vehicle travel and emissions, in part, due to limited transit service penetration in the region. Despite the modest travel effects of the scenarios, the economic analysis indicates a net benefit for all of the innovative mobility scenarios. The total per trip benefit ranges from $0.01 to $0.05. The yearly total benefit for all scenarios would be significant.

[1]  Michael Replogle.  COMPUTER TRANSPORTATION MODELS FOR LAND USE REGULATION AND MASTER PLANNING IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND , 1990 .

[2]  Susan Shaheen,et al.  A SHORT HISTORY OF CARSHARING IN THE 90'S , 1999 .

[3]  K. Small,et al.  Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models , 1981 .

[4]  Susan Shaheen,et al.  Shared-Use Vehicle Systems: Framework for Classifying Carsharing, Station Cars, and Combined Approaches , 2002 .

[5]  Robert Cervero,et al.  TRANSIT-BASED HOUSING IN CALIFORNIA: EVIDENCE ON RIDERSHIP IMPACTS , 1994 .

[6]  B. Landheer,et al.  European Conference of Ministers of Transport , 1966 .

[7]  Caroline J Rodier,et al.  EVALUATION OF ADVANCED TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES USING CONSUMER WELFARE. IN: TRANSPORT AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS , 1998 .

[8]  Susan Shaheen,et al.  Policy Considerations for Carsharing and Station Cars: Monitoring Growth, Trends, and Overall Impacts , 2004 .

[9]  Susan Shaheen.  Carlink II: Research Approach and Early Findings , 2004 .

[10]  C. Banister.  The European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), "Urban Travel and Sustainable Development" (Book Review) , 1996 .

[11]  Victoria Nerenberg,et al.  Evaluation Results of San Francisco Bay Area Station-Car Demonstration , 1999 .

[12]  S. Shaheen.  U.S. Carsharing & Station Car Policy Considerations: Monitoring Growth, Trends & Overall Impacts , 2004 .

[13]  Prasanna Srinivasan,et al.  and sustainable development , 2003 .

[14]  Susan Shaheen,et al.  SHARED-USE VEHICLE SERVICES: A SURVEY OF NORTH AMERICAN MARKET DEVELOPMENTS , 2002 .

[15]  John Wright,et al.  Carlink - A Smart Carsharing System Field Test Report , 2000 .

[16]  Susan Shaheen,et al.  University of California, Davis Long-Range Development Plan: A Davis Smart Mobility Model , 2003 .

[17]  R Katsev,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF CAR SHARING ON TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR: ANALYSIS OF CARSHARING PORTLAND'S FIRST YEAR , 2001 .

[18]  Yu-Hsin Tsai,et al.  City CarShare in San Francisco, California: Second-Year Travel Demand and Car Ownership Impacts , 2004 .

[19]  K. Small,et al.  Applied Welfare Economics with Discrete Choice Models , 1979 .

[20]  C. Casey.  REAL-TIME INFORMATION : NOW ARRIVING , 2003 .

[21]  D. Sperling,et al.  Carsharing in Europe and North American: Past, Present, and Future , 1998 .