Feasibility Study for Vehicle Sharing in Charleston, South

FeasibilityStudyforVehicleSharinginCharleston,SouthCarolina

JanetLiCityofCharleston

DepartmentofPlanning,Preservation&Sustainability

August26,2011

1

TABLEOFCONTENTS

EXECUTIVESUMMARY........................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................5

FEASIBILITYINCHARLESTON..........................................................................................................7DENSITYANDSETTING.................................................................................................................................7EXISTINGTRANSPORTATION.....................................................................................................................7DRIVINGENVIRONMENT............................................................................................................................10BICYCLINGENVIRONMENT........................................................................................................................23DEMOGRAPHICS............................................................................................................................................32

BESTPRACTICES.................................................................................................................................36BICYCLESHARING.........................................................................................................................................36CARSHARING.................................................................................................................................................39BOTH.................................................................................................................................................................41

OPERATINGMODELANDIMPLEMENTATION...........................................................................42PILOT................................................................................................................................................................42SUSTAINABLEFINANCIALMODEL...........................................................................................................43SAMPLEBUSINESSMODELS......................................................................................................................50EVALUATIONSYSTEMS...............................................................................................................................55MARKETABILITY...........................................................................................................................................58SCALABILITY..................................................................................................................................................63PARTNERS.......................................................................................................................................................64TIMELINEANDROLLOUTOFOPERATIONS..........................................................................................69RESOURCEDEVELOPMENT........................................................................................................................70MARKETINGANDCOMMUNICATIONS...................................................................................................71

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................................72

REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................73

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

SusanCollins

BrianSheehan

3

LISTOFFIGURES

Figure1:CARTADASHTrolleyRoutes..........................................................................................................8

Figure2:MostCongestedStreetsonthePeninsulain1999.............................................................10

Figure3:2000TrafficCongestion................................................................................................................11

Figure4:1990‐2000ChangeinTrafficVolumeandPopulation.....................................................12

Figure5:HoursWorkedandModeofTransitofCharlestonResidents.......................................13

Figure6:1999MajorPedestrianAreasonPeninsula..........................................................................14

Figure7:1999CarriageTourZones............................................................................................................15

Figure8:1999BusTourZones.....................................................................................................................16

Figure9:BeforeandAfterImprovementsinSignalRetimingProject.........................................17

Figure10:1999CharlestonPeninsulaParkingInventory...............................................................19

Figure11:CurrentParkingontheCharlestonPeninsula...................................................................20

Figure12:AffectofClimateonCities’BikeShareRentals.................................................................23

Figure13:CharlestonSharedUsePathSystemMap............................................................................24

Figure14:CharlestonBicycleNetwork,2008.........................................................................................25

Figure15:AssessmentofCyclingInfrastructureinSpecificCities................................................26

Figure16:CentralMinneapolisBikeFacilities.......................................................................................27

Figure17:CharlestonPeninsulaBicycleParking..................................................................................30

Figure18:SuccessfulCarSharingDemographicsAsComparedtoCharleston........................32

Figure19:BikeShareLiabilityOptions......................................................................................................37

Figure20:Vendor‐OperatorOperatingModels.....................................................................................42

Figure21:Franchisevs.City‐BuiltBikeShareinNewYorkCity....................................................44

Figure22:VehicleSharingCostsandRevenueStreams.....................................................................44

Figure23:EstimatingtheMarketNearaPotentialCarSharePod................................................46

Figure24:SummaryofPublicSectorCar‐SharingTrends................................................................47

Figure25:Car‐SharingMarketPenetrationinDowntownSanAntonio.....................................48

Figure26:SanAntonioBusinessModel1.................................................................................................49



Figure29:SampleCarShareBudgetTemplate......................................................................................53

Figure30:CarSharePerformanceMeasurestoMonitor...................................................................55

Figure31:CarSharePartnerEvaluationTechniques..........................................................................56

Figure32:VisitorTransportationModestotheCharlestonArea..................................................58

Figure33:BreakdownofOvernightVisitorExpenses.......................................................................59

Figure34:CharlestonCityFleetVehicles..................................................................................................66

8

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

19

20

23

24

25

26

27

30

32

37

42

44

44

46

47

48

49

51

52

53

55

56

58

59

66

4

EXECUTIVESUMMARY

TheCityofCharleston,SouthCarolinaiscommittedtogreeninitiativesandthereduction

ofgreenhousegasemissionsoverthenextseveraldecades.TheCityisworkingonmany

differentsolutionsinordertotacklethelargeproportionofemissionsthatcomefrom

transportation.Oneidea—vehiclesharing—wouldbeaverylarge‐scaleprojectifexecuted.

Thisfeasibilitystudywasthereforelaunchedfirsttodeterminethepotentialsuccessof

thesetypesofprogramsinCharleston.

Vehiclesharingencompassesbothcarandbicyclesharing.Theyareanextensionof

thepublictransitsystem.Vehiclesaredistributedatstationsacrossaregionandcanbe

rentedbythehourbymembersoftheprogram.Theyareintendedforshort‐termusesand

enrichexistingmodesofpublictransportationbyofferinganadditionalflexible,alternative

formoftransit.

WhileCharlestonhasalargepercentageofpeoplewhoownanddrivetheirown

vehicles,alongwithsomelackoffullbicyclenetworkconnectivity,themarketforvehicle

sharingstilllookspromising.Thisisdueinmostparttothecity’shugepopulationof

touristsandstudents,whichrepresenttwokeytargetmarketsforacarorbicyclesharing

program.Inaddition,theCity’soveralldedicationtosustainabilityandtheirdetermination

tomakevehiclesharingarealityarecriteriathatcanreallyboostthepotentialsuccessofa

program.

5

INTRODUCTION

Charleston,SouthCarolinaisacitydedicatedtosustainabilityandprotectingthebeauty

andfunctionalityofitsnaturalenvironment.TheCityleadsbyexampleinaddressingthese

goalsthroughstepssuchasincreasingefficiencyinCitybuildings,improvingtrafficflow

andreducingidling,replacingtrafficsignalswithenergy‐savingLEDs,requiringtheuseof

recycledpaperinallcitydepartments,andmuchmoreNon‐governmentalentities

throughoutthecountyhavealsoparticipatedinenergy‐consciousefforts,includingthe

developmentofawindindustryclusterandtheintroductionofenergyandsustainability

curriculaatlocaluniversities.

MayorJoeRileyformedtheCharlestonGreenCommitteein2007tofleshoutthese

sustainablegoalsinaGreenPlanforCharleston.Whatstartedoutasathinktankof22

citizensbecameacollaborativecommunityeffortofover800people.Subcommitteeswere

formedtotacklesixmainobjectives:betterbuildings,cleanerenergy,sustainable

communities,improvedtransportation,zerowaste,andgreeneducation(CharlestonGreen

CommitteesPlan,2010).TheGreenPlan,trulytheresultofdedicated,widespread

communityparticipationandteamwork,wasacceptedbytheCityCouncilin2010.Oneof

itscomprehensivegoalswastoaddressCharleston’slevelsofgreenhousegasemissions.

Backin2005,MayorJoeRileyhadbeenoneofthefirsttosigntheU.S.Conferenceof

MayorsClimateProtectionAgreement,whichpledgedtoreducegreenhousegasemissions

byatleast7%of1990levelsby2012(GreenPlan17).Fromdatacollectedin2006,roughly

58%ofgreenhousegasemissionsinCharlestonaregeneratedthroughbuildingsand

energyuse,while40%comefromtransportation(measuredthroughcars,trucks,and

motorcycles;notshipsorrail,whichcouldnotbeeasilyassessed)(GreenPlan22).TheCity

hasalreadylaunchedtwoprogramsaimingtoreducebuilding‐generatedemissions:the

GreenBusinessChallengetargetingcommercialbuildings,andCharlestonWISEfor

residentialdevelopments.Addressingemissionsproducedthroughtransportationis

thereforecrucialtomeetingCharleston’sgoalinthereductionofgreenhousegas

emissions.

SouthCarolinaitselfisalsorankedfifthinthenationforamountofgasoline

consumedpercapita(GreenPlan68).Totacklethesestatistics,thePlanrecommends

minimizingvehicleemissionsinplanningforfuturegrowth,decidingwheregrowthshould

gobeforeplanningtransportation,andpursuingtransit‐orienteddevelopment.Italso

encouragescompact,complete,mixed‐usecommunities.Theseare,incidentally,thetypes

ofcommunitieswhererideandvehiclesharingprogramswouldthrive.

6

TheGreenPlan’smaintransportationgoalsare:toreducedependenceonsingle‐

occupancyvehicles(SOVs);toincreaseconvenient,reliablepublictransportation;to

expandbicycleandpedestrianoptions;toincreasefuelefficiencyanduseofbiofuels;and

toimproveairquality(GreenPlan93).Anoverarchingaimaddressesvehiclemilestraveled

(VMT):infact,accordingtotheBerkley‐Charleston‐DorchesterCouncilofGovernments

LongRangeTransportationPlan(2003),thegreaterCharlestonarea’sVMTareestimated

toincrease39%by2030(GreenPlan93).TheGreenPlanthereforeaimstopreventthis

VMTgrowth.OnestrategyistopromotealternativeformsoftransportationtoSOVs,

includingwalking,biking,multiple‐occupancyvehicles,andincreasingpublictransit.

Improvinginfrastructuretoaccommodatethesealternatemodesoftransport,aswellas

targetingimportantgroupssuchastouristsandemployeeswhocommute,iskey.

OthersuggestionsincludeusingefficientCityfleetvehicles,improvingtrafficflow

throughsystemmanagementorthroughtheencouragementofautomobilealternatives,

adoptingacompletestreetsordinance,andprovidingfreeorpreferredparkingforhigh‐

efficiencyvehicles,amongothers.

Thedevelopmentofabicycleorcarsharingprogramwillhelpcarryoutanddefine

thetransportationgoalsoftheCharlestonGreenPlan.

7

FEASIBILITYINCHARLESTON

DENSITYANDSETTING

Ridesharinghasbeenproventoworkbestinareaswithhighpopulationdensity.Higher

densitymeansthatthereareagreaternumberofpotentialcustomerswithinwalking

distanceofeachvehiclesharingstation.Inaddition,denseneighborhoodstendtohave

lowerratesofautomobileownershipandtravel,becausedestinationsareusuallycloser

andtripsarethusshorter(TCRPReport108,2005).

Onthisfront,thegreaterCharlestonareahasbeenundergoingsteadypopulation

growth,witha21%growthrateoverthepasttenyears;makingtoday’spopulationabout

665,000(CharlestonRegionalDevelopmentAlliance).CharlestonCountymakesupmorethan

halfofthispopulation,with350,209residentsand144,309households.TheCityitselfhas

apopulationof120,083,a24%increasesince2000.

94%ofcarsharingmembershipintheUnitedStatesisconcentratedinthecoresof

largemetropolitanregions;asof2003,theseincludedBoston,NewYork,DC,SanFrancisco,

SanDiego,LosAngeles,Portland,andSeattle(TCRPReport108,2005).However,some

smallerAmericancommunitiesalsorunsuccessfulprograms.Theprogramsneedtobe

largeenoughtosupporthowmuchitcoststokeeptheminoperations.

EXISTINGTRANSPORTATION

Ridesharinghasbeenshowntobesuccessfulinhigh‐densitymetropolitanareasthathave

existingpublictransitsystems,asthisshowsthatcommutersalreadyutilizemanydifferent

typesofalternatetransporttosingleoccupancyvehicles.Charlestonisthesecondmost

populouscityinSouthCarolinaafterColumbia,andhasanextensiveandvaried

transportationsystem.TheCharlestonInternationalAirportsupportssixairlines,bringsin

morethan100flightseveryday,andrunsnon‐stopservicetoandfrom14majorairports

(CRDA,2011).SixothersmallerairportsarelocatedthroughouttheCharleston‐N.

Charleston‐Summervillemetropolitanstatisticalarea(CharlestonMSA).Threefreight

railwaysofferinboundandoutboundexpressservicesoutofCharlestondaily:CSX

Transportation,NorfolkSouthern,andSouthCarolinaPublicRailways.Amtrakrunsdaily

SilverServiceandPalmettopassengerroutesfromtheemergingNorthCharleston

IntermodalTransportationCenter,connectingCharlestonwithalmosttheentireeastcoast

8

fromMiamitoNewYork(Amtrak.com).Thestationservedapproximately80,000ridersin

totallastyear.ThisNorthCharlestontransportationhubhadbeeninplanningstagessince

1997,andconstructionbeganin2007afterenoughstate,federal,andlocalfundswere

collectedtostarttheproject.Oncecomplete,thecenterwillservebothpassengertrains

andregionalandlong‐distancebuses(GreatAmericanStations.com).

Inaddition,CharlestonMSAishometothreeinterstatehighways(I‐26,I‐95,I‐526),

threemajorUnitedStateshighways(US17,78,52),andsevenmajorstatehighways(SC7,

30,61,171,517,700,703)(SouthCarolinaDepartmentofTransportation).Animportant

componenttoCharleston’stransportationsystem,thePortofCharlestonisthemosthighly

ratedcontainerportintermsofcustomersatisfactioninNorthAmerica,andtheeighth

largestbycargovalueintheUnitedStates(CRDA,2011).ThePortismadeupoffive

terminals:twoontheHarborinCharleston,twoontheCooperRiverinNorthCharleston,

andoneontheWandoRiverinMountPleasant.Itserves40steamshiplinesandmorethan

150countriesglobally.PortactivityisoneofCharleston’shighestsourcesofrevenue.

Onland,theCharlestonAreaRegionalTransportationAuthority(CARTA)operatesa

totalof24busroutes,includingtwoexpressroutesandonefreedowntowntrolley,mainly

gearedtowardstouristslookingtoseeCharleston’shistoricsites(RideCARTA.com).There

arethreeoftheseroutes(seeFig.1),andthevehiclesaremarkedbytheirgreen,old‐time

trolleystructure.CARTAroutesprovideservicetothecountiesofCharlestonand

Dorchester,includingthecitiesCharleston,NorthCharleston,MountPleasant,JamesIsland,

andpartsofIsleofPalmsandSullivan’sIsland.CARTAistheentitymanagingthe

developmentoftheNorthCharlestonIntermodalTransportationCenter.The

transportationauthorityalsooperatessmallerTel‐A‐Rideshuttlesindesignatedareasfor

thosewhomeetthecriteriaoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct.CARTA’sRack&Ride

programintegratesbikingintothepublictransitsystem,withbicycleracksavailableonall

CARTAbuses.Thesearecapableofcarryingtwobikesatonce.CARTAwouldbeavery

importantpartnerinacarorbicyclesharingprogram,andtheiradministrationhavebeen

veryinformativeandsupportiveinpreliminarydiscussions.Someoftheirinitial

recommendationsregardingapotentialvehiclesharingprogramareincludedinlater

sectionsofthisreport.

9

Meeting/King Shuttle Visitor Center Historic King Street Four Corners of Law Broad Street Shopping District Waterfront Park City Market Charleston Museum Upper King/ Design DistrictC of C/Aquarium Shuttle SC Aquarium College of Charleston Visitor CenterLockwood/Calhoun Visitors Center C of C Medical Complex Ashley River Hotels Citadel/ Stadiums

POINTS OF INTEREST

TROLLEY ROUTES Trolley Stops RT 210 C of C/Aquarium RT 211 Meeting/King RT 213 Lockwood/Calhoun Offstreet Parking Facilities

RIDETHE TROLLEY

RIDETHE TROLLEY

THE MOST CONVENIENT WAY TO SEE

CHARLESTON

The Trolley is a component of CARTA’s public transportation system.

CARTA Trolleys are not utilized as tour vehicles. For your convenience, information concerning Charleston’s many privately owned tour companies is available at the Visitor Reception & Transportation Center.

How to Use This Brochure. The Trolley System map inside this brochure is color-coded by route and corresponds with schedule information. Shuttle stop locations are also shown.

CARTA Trolleys display color-coded destination signs in the windows beside the passenger doors.

Identifying Your Bus. When the trolley approaches be sure to check the overhead sign, right above the bus windshield, to insure you are boarding the right trolley.

Shuttle Stops. Shelters, benches and trolley stop signs are located throughout the city. It is very important that you wait at the trolley stop. For your safety, Trolley drivers are instructed to serve only posted trolley stops. NO SPECIAL STOPS CAN BE MADE. Stops can be identifi ed by a green CARTA Sign with a CARTA route number.

Animals. Police dogs, guide, signal or service dogs are the ONLY pets permitted on CARTA Trolleys.

Fares. Effective November 22nd, 2010 CARTA Trolley route rides are FREE.Courtesy Seats. The seats located in the front of each trolley behind the driver are reserved for senior citizens and disabled passengers.

Lost and Found. Lost items are turned in at the CARTA Operations Center in North Charleston. Please call (843) 747-0922. The route and description of the driver is helpful when calling.

Park at the Visitor Reception & Transportation Center Garage and ride the Trolley!

Comments and Complaints. When calling or writing with a comment or complaint please:

Note the time and date of the incident and any identifying outside factors or circumstances (i.e. location of shuttle stop)

Give the route name and trolley number.

If a driver is involved, try and get his/her name.

Leave your name and address or phone number so a full investigation of the complaint can be made.

Send comments or complaints to: Charleston Area RegionalTransportation Authority

36 John StreetCharleston, South Carolina 29403

Telephone: (843) 724-7420

www.ridecarta.comwww.ridecarta.com

Daniel Island

Figure 1: CARTA DASH Trolley Routes

10

Finally,itisimportanttomentiontheexistingridesharingservicethatwas

introducedtoCharlestonwithinthelastyear,knownasTridentRideShare.Trident

RideShare(TridentRideShare.org)isafreeprogramsupportedbytheFederalTransit

Administration.Itconnectspeoplelookingtosharecars,taxis,bicycles,transit,orwalking

trips,usingaweb‐basedservice.TheprogramcurrentlyservesBerkeley,Charleston,and

DorchesterCounties,andhelpsconnectusersbysearchingforcommuterswholivenear

themandhavesimilartriplocationsandschedules.Usersoftensharetripstocommuteto

workorschool,butsomehavealsousedtheservicetoshareridestoone‐timeevents.

TridentRideSharehelpspromotesitsservicetocompaniesinCharlestonthroughthe

messagethatridesharinghasbeenshownbothtoreduceemployeeabsenteeismand

turnoverandtostrengthenworkrelationships(Minis).

TheCityshouldconsiderworkingwithandgatheringmoredataandinformation

fromTridentRideShareasitpursuesthedevelopmentofvehiclesharingprograms.

Currently,therearemorethan200registeredusers,andtheyworkatavarietyofdifferent

companiesandinstitutions;thebiggestincludeSPAWAR(whichhas10,000employees

altogether),KiawahResorts,andTridentTechnicalCollege(Gilreath).

DRIVINGENVIRONMENT

TheCitycommissionedatrafficandparkingstudyoftheCharlestonPeninsulain1999to

complementtheCharlestonDowntownPlan.Thisplanforincreaseddevelopment

downtown,includingthebuildingoftheCharlestonAquariumandthe65‐acreUnionPeer

Terminalredevelopment,requiredtheCitytoformastrategytoaccommodatethese

growingtransportationneeds(CityofCharlestonPeninsulaTrafficandParkingStudy,2000).

Withtheincreasedgrowthoftheresidentialpopulationandtheconstantincomingflowof

tourists,downtownCharleston’sstreetswerealreadyfacingtransportationpressuresthat

wouldonlyincreaseifnotaddressed.Amapfromthestudy(Fig.2)showsthearterieswith

lowerthanacceptablecongestiongradesatthetime.

AnotheranalysiscompletedbytheBCDCOG(BerkeleyCharlestonDorchester

CouncilofGovernments)in2002,usingdatafrom1990‐2000fromtheSouthCarolina

DepartmentofTransportation,similarlyhighlightstheareasofgreatestcongestion(Fig.3);

andthepercentchangeinvolumegrowthfrom1990to2000,ascomparedtotheincrease

inpopulationinvariousregions(Fig.4)(TrafficintheBCDRegion,2002).Fromallofthese

maps,wecanseethattrafficvolumesweresteadilyincreasingandthat,in2000,there

11

wereareasofunacceptablyhighratesofcongestionacrossCharlestonCountyand

especiallyinthePeninsula,whichneededtobeaddressed.

Figure 2: Most Congested Streets on the Peninsula in 1999

12

Figure 3: 2000 Traffic Congestion

13

Intermsofvehiclemilestraveled(VMT),thetotalnumberacrossallcounty

residentshasbeenincreasingfasterthantherateofpopulationgrowth.In2000,dailyVMT

was~8.4millionandthepopulationofCharlestonCountywas~310,000.Fouryearslater,

in2004,dailyVMThadincreasedto9.3millionwhilethepopulationhadincreasedto

~330,000,a10%increaseinVMTanda5%increaseinpopulation(GrowthIndicatorsinthe

BCDRegion,2005).ThisisconsistentwithpastVMTgrowth,whichhasmorethandoubled

populationgrowth;essentially,thesamepeoplearedrivingfurtherandmoreeveryday.

Asurveyconductedin2001,inconjunctionwithaCommunityBenchmarking

Collaborativeproject,showedthat,intheBerkeley‐Charleston‐Dorchesterregion,residents

pinpointedtraffic/roadsasthesingleworstfactoraboutlivinginthearea,beatingclimate,

crime,economy,andeducation(TrafficintheBCDRegion,2002).82.2%ofrespondentssaid

Figure 4: 1990-2000 Change in Traffic Volume and Population

14

thattheyconsistentlyavoidcertainareaswithhighcongestion;57.7%weredissatisfied

withroadmaintenance;and43.5%werehappywithpublictransit.Onesuggestedpossible

solutiontosomeoftheseproblemswastoincreaseuseoftransitandridesharing,which

worktodirectlyreducecongestionbytakingvehiclesoffoftheroad.Useoftransithas

declinedfordecadesincorrespondencewithsprawldevelopmentpatternsandthe

ascendencyofsingle‐occupancyvehicles;however,inlargermetropolitanareas,this

decreasehasstoppedasmorepeopleturntopublictransitwiththeriseoftrafficand

congestion.Ascanbeseenbythetablebelow(Fig.5),intheCharlestonPeninsula,where

59.8%ofthosewholivethereworkthere(TrafficintheBCDRegion24),therearehigh

proportionsofresidentswhousealternativemethodsoftransportationtocommuteto

work,includingcarpooling,publictransit,walking,andbiking.Onlyalittlemorethanhalf

drivealonetoworkeveryday,andthisprobablymostlyincorporatesthosewholiveonthe

peninsulabutworkelsewhereintheregion.

Thispopulationofresidentswhoalreadyutilizealternativemodesoftransportationwould

beagoodonetotargetforvehiclesharingprograms,whichgivepeopleevenmore

flexibilityintheireverydaytransit.

Figure 5: Hours Worked and Mode of Transit of Charleston Residents

15

Figure 6: 1999 Major Pedestrian Areas on Peninsula

16

Anotheranalysisofexistingconditionsfromthe1999PeninsulaStudyshowsthe

areaswithgreatestpedestrianactivitydowntown(Fig.6).Theseincludedtouristand

shoppingareaslikeMarketandKingStreet,aswellasthezonessurroundingtheCollegeof

CharlestonandtheMUSCcampus.

Indevelopingvehiclesharingstations,itisveryimportanttotakeintoaccountthe

trafficgeneratedbyalltypesofvehicles,includingpedestrians,andwherethisoccursmost.

Whileplacingastationinanareawithhighintermodalusesmightallowittohavethemost

visibilityandaccessibility,itmightalsoincreasecongestionifnotplannedeffectively.On

theotherhand,itcouldrelievecongestionifmarketedwell,andifenoughcommuters

choosetomaketheswitchtothisprogram.Tothisend,itisimportanttoworknotonly

withcarandcyclingpaths,butalsowithexistingpedestrian,carriage(Fig.7),andtourbus

(Fig.8)routes.TheCitymustfigureoutthebestlocationstoplacevehiclesharingstations

inrelationtothesetracks,orpotentiallyreconfiguretheseroutesifthatwouldmakeboth

setsmostefficient.

Figure 7: 1999 Carriage Tour Zones

17

Sincethesestudies,theCityofCharlestonhasworkedtodecreaseemissions

generatedbytraffic,completingacitywidetrafficsignalretimingprojecttominimizetime

spentidlingformotorists.In2008,newcoordinatedtimingswereimplementedon189

trafficsignalsindowntownCharlestonanditssurroundingarterials,allowingdriversto

saveanimpressivetotalof569,659hoursspentwaitingand341,795tonsofgasolineper

year(DowntownandWestAshleySignalTimingEffectivenessStudy,2008).Assumingavehicle

occupancyrateof1.2,$3.50pergallonofgasoline,and$10/hourasthevalueofa

motorist’stime,theprogramisestimatedtogeneratealmost$9millioninannualsavings.

Thechartsbelow(Fig.9)showthecumulativeaverage“before”and“after”improvements

intimings,measuredoverAM,PM,andpeaktimesonweekdays.

Figure 8: 1999 Bus Tour Zones

18

However,thesheernumberofvehiclestravelingeverydayhasremainedrelatively

constantoverthepastdecade,andtheaveragetimespentdrivingtoworkforCharleston

residentsisstillabout20.1minutes(InsuranceUSA.com).Thesearetheproblemsthatweare

nowaimingtoaddresswithavehiclesharingprogram.

The1999CharlestonPeninsulastudyrecommendedpoliciessuchasproviding

adequatecapacityfortrafficandpedestriancirculationandmovementon/offthe

peninsula,aswellasprovidingasufficientsupplyofparking.Specificpolicy

recommendationsincluded“revisingtheparkingratestructuretoencourageuseof

alternativetransportationmodessouthofCalhounStreet”and“providingimprovementsto

enhancetheuseofbicyclesonthepeninsula”(CharlestonPeninsulaTrafficandParkingStudy,

2000).Avehiclesharingprogramwouldcontinuetoworktowardstheachievementof

thesegoals.

Charleston’scurrentTrafficManagementCenterwasopenedin2007andusesstate‐

of‐the‐arttechnologytomonitorandcontrolover235signalizedintersectionsthroughout

CharlestonandMountPleasant(Charleston‐SC.gov).Thetrafficsignalsystemworks24/7,

constantlysupervisingequipmentandadjustingplansaccordingtospecifictraffic

Figure 9: Before and After Improvements in Signal Retiming Project

19

conditions.Inparticular,theseconditionsarecloselymonitoredalongtheArthurRavenel,

Jr.BridgeandInterstate26,wherethepolicedepartmentcanbeimmediatelynotified

whenaccidentsoccur,therebyminimizingcongestion.

ThecurrentwideningofUSHighway17fromMountPleasanttoCharlestonshows

thatitisaprimeexampleofthehightrafficvolumesandcongestionaffectingthecounty.

Thehighwayhaslongbeeninfamousforitsnon‐movingcongestion,worstonweekday

mornings.Toaddresstheproblem,this$84millionCharlestonCountyRoadwiseproject

wasdeveloped.Itisfundedbyahalf‐centtransportationsalestaxthatwasendorsedina

referendum.ConstructionworkbeganinApriltoexpandthehighwayfromfourtosixlanes

andissettofinishbyspring2013(ParkWestPalazzo.blogspot.com).

Charleston’sDepartmentofTraffic&Transportationisconstantlyrunning

programsinordertooptimizetrafficandtransportationflowwithinthecity.One,the

TrafficCalmingProgram,seekstoreducethenegativeeffectsofvehiculartrafficin

residentialneighborhoods(Charleston‐SC.gov).ThePedestrianSafetyProgramaimsto

increasepedestriansafetythroughbrochureandposter‐driveneducationinitiatives,and

theimplementationofbarricadesatschoolcrosswalks.TheseprogramsshowtheCity’s

commitmenttoimprovingtransportationfrommanydifferentapproaches.

ParkinginCharlestonencompassesseveraloptions:publicstreetparking,private

andpublicparkinggarages,publicparkinglots,andprivateresidentialparking.An

interactiveonlinemapontheCharlestonDepartmentofTraffic&Transportation’swebsite

(http://www.charleston‐sc.gov/shared/docs/0/parking.html)marksallpublicparkinggaragesinthe

cityandincludesdetailedinformationsuchashoursofoperation(Fig.10).Ifavehicle

sharingprogramweretobeimplemented,itmightbeefficienttoreassignsomeofthese

city‐ownedspacesasstationsforcarsharing;however,Charlestonmustbecarefulnotto

undulyincreaseparkingpressuresonitsvisitorsbytakingawaylotsandgaragesthatare

currentlyhighlyutilized.TheCharlestonPeninsulastudyalsorecommendedincreasingon‐

streetparkingratesfrom$.75to$1/hour,toencouragedriverstoparkingaragesanduse

alternativetransitoptionsforcirculatingonthepeninsula(CharlestonPeninsulaTrafficand

ParkingStudy,2000).

20

TheCityoperates1800parkingmetersinCharleston(Fig.11).Theon‐street

parkingmetersareenforcedMondaysthroughSaturdaysfrom9amto6pm,whilethe

Figure 10: 1999 Charleston Peninsula Parking Inventory

21

Figure 11: Current Parking on the Charleston Peninsula

22

metersinsurfacelotsareenforcedstartingat8am(Somerville).Asforparkingnot

controlledbytheCity,in1999,MUSCprovided6245parkingspacesforitscampusandran

ashuttleprogramtoencourageitsemployeestoutilizeremoteparkingareas(Charleston

PeninsulaTrafficandParkingStudy,2000).Through2020,MUSCplanstoincreaseitsparking

supplyby30%.TheCollegeofCharlestonprovided2650spacesandwasalsoconsidering

waystoaccommodateanincrease.

Charlestondoesseemtohaveafewparkingpressures,asstreetparkingcan

occasionallybedifficulttofind.AlthoughparkingatBatteryParkisfree,spacesoftenfillup

bynoon.FromdiscussionswithregularCharlestonvisitors,parkinggaragesrarelyseemto

befull,exceptduringspecialoccasionssuchasthePiccoloSpoletofestival,andlotspaces

arealsousuallyavailable.Parkinginpublicgaragesandlotsisalsorelativelyinexpensive

comparedtootherAmericancitieswithsimilardensity,withratesof$1/hour(Morrison).

Intermsofresidentialparking,therearecurrentlytendesignatedresidentialareas

wherehomeownerscanapplyforresidentialparkingpermits.Theseareascovermuchof

downtownCharleston,whichleaveslessspaceforvisitorparking.Thisprogrambeganin

1975andnowissuesover8000residentialparkingpermitseveryyear(Morrison).The

HamptonParkTerraceNeighborhoodwasjustaddedthisyearandisthefirstfour‐hour

enforcementdistrictintheCity.TheParkingDivisionoftheCharlestonDepartmentof

Traffic&Transportationtriestooptimizeparkingforallvehiclesbyperformingparking

studiesandsitedistanceanalysestodeterminethebestlocationsforonandoff‐street

parkingspaces,commercialloadingzones,tourbuspullareas,handicappedparkingspots,

etc.ItalsoledtheinnovativeSmartCardParkingProgram,whichallowsdriverstousea

cardinsteadofcoinstopayatover50%oftheenabledparkingmetersinCharleston

(Charleston‐SC.gov).

PeterTecklenburg,thetransportationplanneratCARTA,believesacarsharing

programwouldworkwellinWestAshley,perhapsaroundCitadelMall;anotheroptionis

neartheCollegeofCharleston.CitadelMallisastoponfivedifferentCARTAroutesand,

sinceitisnotindowntownCharleston,wouldtargetcommuterswhowouldwanttousea

carforshoppingtripsanderrandsoffofthepeninsula.ThebusiestCARTAbusstationon

theCharlestonPeninsulaisattheintersectionofMeetingandMaryStreets;eightroutes

utilizethisstop,anditislocatednexttoaparkinggarage,whichwouldprovidespacefora

sharingstation.Mostoftheriderswhousethislocationareemployeescomingfrom

outlyingareasforworkintheserviceindustryandpatientscomingformedicalneeds.The

secondtwobusieststationsareatCalhounandJonathanLucasandCalhounandSt.Philip

Street.AtCalhounandJonathanLucas,almostalldismountingridersareMUSCorRoper

23

studentsorstaffandprobablydonotneedextratransportation,astheyonlyneedtowalk

twoorthreeblockstotheirdestination.TheCalhounandSt.PhilipStreetstop,ontheother

hand,servesmanyCollegeofCharlestonstudents,isclosetobusinessesonKingStreet,and

istheclosestexpressstop(8‐10blocksaway)forthosewhoworkonBroadorMeeting

Street.Manychoosenottoridebecauseofthisdistance,althoughtheycouldaccesstheir

destinationbytransferringtoaDASHroute.Thepopulationofcollegestudentsaroundthis

stationisyoungerandmoreurbanandwouldprobablybemoreopentojoiningavehicle

sharingprogram.Parkinginthisareaisalsodifficult,leadingmanytoalreadyutilize

alternativetransportationsuchasbicycles.

BICYCLINGENVIRONMENT

Inorderforabicyclesharingprogramtobesuccessful,thereneedstobeaminimum

standardofbicycleinfrastructureforsafeandconvenientcycling,aswellassufficient

spaceforracksorparkingstationsinordertoguaranteeaccessibility(NICHES,2007).Public

bicyclescanbethegatewaytopromoteurbancycling;however,peoplewillonlyusethem

iftheyseethemasaconvenient,efficient,safewaytogetsomewhere.Thismeansthere

needtobegoodframeworkconditionsbeforeimplementation,includingmeasuressuchas

trafficcalming,thecontinueddevelopmentofabicyclenetwork,secureparkingfacilities,

education,etc.Trafficeducationisespeciallyvitalincitieswherecyclingisnotwell

establishedorcommonplace.Educationalcampaignstopromotemutualrespectbetween

drivers,cyclists,andpedestrianscanhelppreventproblemsandaccidentsbetweenthese

differentsetsofcommuters.TheCitycanalsothinkaboutmeasurestodiscouragecaruse

andincentivizevehiclesharing.

Charleston’scityscapeiswellsuitedforbicycling.Itscompact,densemetropolitan

area,flattopography,andyear‐roundreasonableweatherallelevateCharleston’spotential

asacyclingcommunity(ClemsonArchitectureCenter,2009).Ascanbeseenbelow(Fig.12),

fromtheOptimizingBikeSharinginEuropeanCitiesHandbook,climatecontributesto

bicyclesharingbyallowingorlimitingaccessibilitytotheprogramduringdifferentseasons

(OBIS,2011).SinceCharlestonhasamildclimateallyearround,itcouldmakethemostuse

ofandrevenuefromitssharingprogrambyrunning365daysoftheyear,unlikecitieswith

moreextremeweather.

24

Inaddition,researchbytheCityofCharleston’sEconomicDevelopmentDivisioninJuly

2006determinedthatapproximately5000bicyclesarerentedinCharlestonyearly,

indicatinghighbicycleusage(Charleston2012BikeDraftPlan).

Withregardtoexistingbicycleinfrastructureandfacilities,Charlestoncitizens,

includingthenon‐profitgroupCharlestonMOVESandMayorJoeRiley,arecurrently

workinghardtoqualifythecityasaLeagueofAmericanBicyclists’BicycleFriendly

Community.Thismeanstakingclearstepstoincludebicyclistsonasmanyroadsas

possibleandtomakeuseofbikelanes,paths,andcorrectsignageandsignals.Charleston,

andthewholeofSouthCarolina,havebeenworkingtowardsimilargoalsforyears.In

2004,theBikesBelongCoalitionandtheLeagueofAmericanBicyclists(LAB)awardeda

$50,000“CompleteStreets”granttoSouthCarolina,requiringSCcountiestoincorporate

bicyclingandpedestrianimprovementsintoalltransportationplanningwherestateor

federalfundingisutilized(SCDOTPedestrianandBicycleMilestones).ThishelpedraiseSouth

Carolina’snationalrankinbicyclefriendliness,asdeterminedbyLAB,torisefrom#50in

1989to#15in2008.

AsforCharlestonitself,in2008,MayorRileysignedtheCompleteStreets

Resolution,pledgingthattheCitywouldassuretheaccommodationofpedestrians,

Figure 12: Affect of Climate on Cities’ Bike Share Rentals

25

bicyclists,publictransit,andmotorizedvehiclesinplanningormaintainingallfuturepublic

streets.Manyofthecurrentspecificprojectsrelatedtothisresolutioncanbefoundonthe

CityofCharlestonDepartmentofTransitandTransportation’swebsite(Charleston‐SC.gov).

Adraft2012BikePlanforCharleston,puttogetherbycityplannersandstaffin

collaborationwithotherexperts,listsallexistingbicycleroutesandfacilitiesandmakes

extensive,wellthoughtoutrecommendationsregardingnetworkandparking

improvements.Thereportalsoincludeseducationalandmarketingplanstoencourage

bicyclingtoCharlestonresidentsandvisitors(Charleston2012BikeDraftPlan).

Thismapfromthereport(Fig.13)showstheexistingnetworkofbicyclepaths,

lanes,andsidewalksthroughoutCharleston.Mostnotableincludethebike/pedestrianpath

Figure 13: Charleston Shared Use Path System Map

26

onHighway17overtheCooperRiverontheArthurRavenel,Jr.Bridge(11)andtheWest

AshleyBikeway(4).Theadditionoftheseparate12‐foot‐widecyclingandpedestrianlane

ontheRavenelBridgewasincorporatedintothebridge’splansduetothestrengthsofa

campaignbylocals.Itrunsfor2.7milesandistrulyajewelofanattractionforwalkers,

runners,andcyclistsfromaroundtheworld,andatestamenttotheCity’scommitment

bothtoworkinghand‐in‐handwithitscommunityandtopursuinghealthy,alternative

transportation.Asisevidentbythemap,moreinvestmentandplanningareneededto

increaseoverallnetworkconnectivityandcoverage,andforCharlestontobecomeatruly

bicyclefriendlycity.MorebicycleroutemapsofCharlestoncanbefoundat

CoastalCyclists.org.

Figure 14: Charleston Bicycle Network, 2008

27

Theabovetablefromthereport(Fig.14)liststhetotalnumberofmilesofbicycle

networksinCharlestonasof2008(about24miles),aswellasthe14differentspecific

pathsandsystemsthroughoutthecounty.TheEastBayPath(10)washelpedfundedbya

2007grantfromBikesBelong.Unfortunately,Charleston’scyclingnetworkseemssmaller

thanthenetworksofothercitieswithsuccessfulbicyclesharingprograms(Fig.15,

PhiladelphiaBikeshareConceptStudy,2010).ItscurrenttotallengthiscomparabletoLyon’s

networkbeforetheprogrambegan,butthisexpandedbyalmost600%astheprogram

continued.

ThelackoffullconnectivityofthebicyclepathsandlanesthatdoexistinCharlestonisalso

somethingthatneedstobeaddressed.ComparethemapofCharleston’sbicyclenetwork

withtheonebelowofMinneapolis(Fig.16,PhiladelphiaBikeshareConceptStudy,2010),acity

withamostlyseasonalbicyclevolume.Minneapolis’networkdiffersfromCharleston’sin

thattherearefewerholes;cyclistshaveaccesstomoreofthecity.

Figure 15: Assessment of Cycling Infrastructure in Specific Cities

28

DespitesomeofCharleston’sshortcomings,itsbicycleplandraftstillshowsthatCharleston

isseriousaboutitscommitmenttomakebicyclingsaferandmoreubiquitousacrossthe

city.

CharlestonMOVESisanon‐profitorganizationthatencouragesbicyclingand

walkingbyadvocatingasafeenvironmentandeducatingthepubliconthebenefitsofa

communitythatisfriendlytobicyclesandpedestrians.Oneofitscurrentprojectsis

supportingtheCityofCharleston’splantocompletetheWestAshleyGreenway(3),a

recreationaltrailrouteconnectingFollyRoadtoMainRoad,whichistobepartofthe

bigger,almost3000‐mileEastCoastGreenwayalongtheeastcoastoftheUnitedStates.

CharlestonMOVEShaslongbackedCharleston’sprogressinconnectingvariousbikeways

throughoutthecityandencouragesthecitytogoevenfurther.Suggestionsinclude

buildingabicycleandpedestrianlaneonabridgeovertheAshleyRiverandextendingthe

WestAshleyBikeway(4)(CharlestonMoves.org).

Infact,asofearly2010,$800,000hadbeeninvestedintoongoingdesignand

engineeringofaplannedmulti‐usecantileveredpathovertheAshleyRiverdrawbridge,

connectingbikingbetweenWestAshleyandtheCharlestonPeninsula(CharlestonLAB

BicycleFriendlyCommunityApplication,2010).Totalconstructionwillcostanestimated$4

Figure 16: Central Minneapolis Bike Facilities (lanes blue, paths green)

29

million,whichwillbepursuedthroughfederal,state,andlocaltransportationfunding.

Otherspecificimmediateprojectsincluderepavingandaddingstripedbikelanestothe

two‐mileSaintAndrewsBoulevardinWestAshley;pavingandmakingsurface

improvementsintheWestAshleyGreenway;mountingway‐findingsignageforboth;

improvingbicycleparkinginfrastructurethroughanincreaseinbicycleracks,theinstalling

ofon‐streetbikecorralsonKingandStPhilipStreetsandacoveredbikestateprototypeat

theCharlestonCivicDesignCenter;andcontinuedenforcementofpoliciesandprovisions

requiringdeveloperstoaccommodatebicyclesandpedestriansinnewprojects.

TheCityrecentlyreinstatedseveralstreetsfromone‐waytotwo‐waytrafficto

reducespeedsandmakethemmorefriendlyforbicyclistsandpedestrians,includingparts

ofKingSt,AshleyAve,RutledgeAve,BeaufainSt,andWentworthSt;SpringandCannonSt

arenext.Altogether,25%ofthebicycleplansinCharleston’sCenturyVComprehensive

Planhadbeencompletedasofearly2010(CharlestonLABBicycleFriendlyCommunity

Application,2010).Theprojectsaresupportedbyacombinationoffunds,fromthe

CharlestonCountyTransportationCommitteetotheTransportationSalesTaxtofederal

Enhancementgrants,amongothers.

Movingforwardinpursuingcyclingsafety,moresupportisneededfromthestate

governmentandSCDOT.Charleston’shistoric,narrowstreetsaresometimesdifficultto

retrofitforextratransportation,whichiswhymoreexpertise,funds,andcollaborationare

neededtocomeupwithcreativesolutions.Still,amultitudeofcyclingeventseveryyear,

includingFestiVeloandCharlestonMovesfestivals,demonstratethestrengthofthecycling

communityinCharlestonandcontributetoitsgrowingculture.

TheCityisveryseriousaboutbicyclesafetyandassuch,hasproducedaBikeSafe

brochure(CharlestonDept.ofTraffic&Transportation,RideSafe).Bikelaw—anetworkof

bicyclelawyers(BikeLaw.com)—andthePalmettoCyclingCoalition—abicyclingadvocacy

non‐profit(PCSSC.net)—havealsobeenworkingtirelesslytowardbicyclesafety.They

helpedreformSouthCarolina’soutdatedbicyclinglawsin2008andlaunchthecampaign

SafeStreetsSaveLivestodrivebicyclesafetyeducation(SafeStreetsSaveLives.org).

13%ofelementaryschoolsofferaSafeRoutestoSchoolprogram,whichmostly

targetlowerincomestudentpopulationswhohavefewertransportationoptions

(CharlestonLABBicycleFriendlyCommunityApplication,2010).Threeschoolsalsoaregaining

LABcurriculumprogramsthroughaCooperRiverBridgeRungrant.Otherentities,suchas

bikeclinics,aSafetyTown,helmetfitseminars,andtrailridingclasses(throughCounty

ParkandRecreationCommissionprograms),contributetoeducationaswell.Additional

30

specificsafetyschemesincludepublicserviceannouncements,dedicatedblogsand

newspapercolumns,sharetheroadsignsandawarenessindrivereducation,etc.

CharlestonishometofiveLeagueCyclingInstructorsandhashostedLeagueCycling

Instructorseminars.Citystaff,aswellastransitandschoolbusoperators,allparticipatein

bicycleawarenesstraining.TheCityofCharlestonandMUSCbothofferincentivesfor

employeeswhocycle,includingfreelunchesandgiveaways.In2009,theCityPolice

DepartmentstartedaneducationalsafetyinitiativewiththeCollegeofCharleston.TheCity

alsomaintainsafleetofbicycleslocatedatseveralofficesforsharedutilizationbystaff.All

ofthiscombinedworktowardscyclingsafetyandawarenesshashelpedtolowerSouth

Carolina’srankinthenumberofbicycleaccidentfatalitiespercapitafrom5thinthenation

(in2008)to11th(in2009)(USDOTNationalHighwayTrafficandSafetyAdministration,2009).

Thedeathofabelovedcyclistearlierthismonthpromptedincreaseddiscussionon

bicyclesafetyintheCity.Beforetheaccident,theCharlestonCountyCouncilhadbeen

workingonafeasibilitystudyforaprojecttoreassignonelaneoftheAshleyBridgefor

bicyclesandpedestrians.MayorRileyemphasizedhowthisproposalwouldgivecyclistsa

saferoptionforcommutingtoJamesIsland,overtheconnectorwherethefatalaccident

happened(Knight).Aftertheaccident,themayorwrotealettertotheSouthCarolina

DepartmentofTransportationaskingiftheyhadanyotherrecommendationsregarding

bicyclesafetyontheJamesIslandConnector.Withthepotentialimplementationofabike

sharingprogram,Charlestonmustcontinuetomakethesafetyofcyclistsandallthose

aroundthemapriority.AstudydonebytheOregonDepartmentofTransportationdidlink

increasesinper‐ridersafetylevelswithgrowthinthetotalnumberofcyclists,which

makessenseduetotheincreasedvisibilityandpresenceofbicyclesontheroad;however,

thisincreaseinbicyclistsstillrepresentsagreaternumberofpotentialcasualties,which

theCityshouldobviouslywishtoavoid(PhiladelphiaBikeshareConceptStudy,2010).

IntermsofdowntownCharleston,thefollowingmapfromthe2012draftBikePlan

showstheconcentrationofexistingbicycleracksthroughoutthecity(Fig.17).Thereare

currently2543bicycleracks,9bicyclelockers,and1bicycledepotinthecommunity

(CharlestonLABBicycleFriendlyCommunityApplication,2010).Thevastmajority(91‐100%)

ofschoolsandlibrarieshavebicycleracksorstorageunits,comparedto76‐90%ofparks

andrecreationcentersand61‐75%ofgovernmentbuildings.Thelocationsthatneedmore

parkingincludetransitstations(currentlyonly31‐45%havestoragefacilities),office

buildings(16‐30%),shops(16‐30%),andpublichousing(16‐30%)(CharlestonLABBicycle

FriendlyCommunityApplication,2010).Currentracklocationscouldpotentiallybe

reassignedasstationsinabicyclesharingprogram.However,itwouldprobablybewiseto

31

buildmore,astheperceivedcurrentnumberofbicyclefacilitiesseemstobeinsufficient.

Lastyear,aproposaltooutlawlockingbicyclestostreetsignsorparkingmeters,which

wasaregularoccurrenceinthecity,wasremovedfromthebicycleordinanceafterprotests

fromCharlestonMOVESandTheHolyCityBikeCoopsupporters,aswellasothercitizens

(Slade).TheirstancewasthatCharlestondidnothaveenoughbicycleracks,andthatthe

Cityshouldnotbefurtherdiscouragingcyclingduetoitsownlackofavailableparking

facilities.However,itmaynotbetruethatthereisaninadequateamountofbicycleparking

space;rather,someracksareactuallylocatedinparkinggaragesorotherareaswithlow

visibility,whichmakesthemmoredifficultforcycliststofind.

Figure 17: Charleston Peninsula Bicycle Parking

32

Also,thereiscurrentlyabicycleroutethatattemptstodirectcycliststhroughthe

downtownstreetnetworkviasignage.Unfortunately,theroutewasdesignedtwentyyears

ago.Thereisalackoforiginalsignageremaining,andpatternsintraffic,roadconditions,

andlandusehaveallchangedsignificantly.Thisroutedesperatelyneedstobeupdatedif

Charlestonwantstoimplementasuccessfulbicyclesharingprogramdowntown.

FromtalkingtoPeterTecklenburgonCARTA’sthoughtsonabicyclesharing

program,hebelievesthatitcouldpotentiallybeagoodfitdowntown.Asmentionedinthe

previoussection,thebusiestbusstopsonthepeninsulaincludetheintersectionsof

MeetingandMaryStreets,CalhounandJonathanLucas,andCalhounandSt.PhilipStreet.

TecklenburgseesmostpromiseinlocatingabicyclesharinghubneartheCalhounandSt.

PhilipStreetstation,sinceitisclosetotheCollegeofCharlestonandKing,Broad,and

MeetingStreets.Thecollegestudentswouldbeakeytargetpopulation,andarealready

bicyclefriendly.

Offofthepeninsula,theneedforbicyclesstillexistsbutthespreadoutnatureofthe

bikingnetworkwouldmakeitmoredifficulttoestablishahighenoughdensityofstations.

Tecklenburgbelievesthebiggestchallengetobikesharingisfindingenoughlocations

wheretheycanbereturnedaroundthecity.Hedoesnotthinkthattouristswouldbea

goodfitforunderstandingbikesharing.OtherproblemswithCharlestonincludeless

bicycleparkingandaccesstobicycle‐friendlytransit.

ThereisalsoasurveybeingdonebytheDepartmentofPlanning,Preservation&

SustainabilitythatasksspecificquestionsaboutbicycleuseinCharleston(PhilipOvercash).

Questionsaddressissuessuchasperceivedridingskills,purposeandlocationforcycling,

lengthofrides,hindrancestocycling,etc.Finalsurveyresultsshouldbeobtainedand

analyzedastheCitycontinuestothinkaboutandpursuebicyclesharing.

DEMOGRAPHICS

Theleftpartofthetablebelow(Fig.18)isfroma2005reportoncarsharingsponsoredby

theFederalTransitAdministration(TCRPReport108).Therightcolumncompareshow

Charlestonmatchesupwiththesestatistics.

33

Forallvariables,thevaluesarethesuggestedminimumsneededforaviablecar‐sharing

service,exceptfor“%drivealonetowork,”forwhichthevaluesarethesuggested

maximums.

Ascanbeseen,Charlestondoesnotmeettherecommendedvaluesforanyofthe

criteriaasappliedtohighgrowthzones,exceptforthenumberofhousingunitsperacre.In

fact,inthecategoriesof%1‐personhouseholdsand%householdswithlessthantwo

vehicles,Charleston’sstatisticsfallevenlowerthanwhattheyarerecommendedtobeat

forlowgrowthareas.Themostworrisomenumberisperhapsthestatisticthatmorethan

halfofresidentsowntwocarsormore.However,overtime,othercarshareprogramshave

seenalargepercentageoftheiruserseitherselloneoftheircarsorrefrainfrombuying

one,iftheydonotownone,sothereisstillhopeforCharleston.

ThevastmajorityofcarownersinCharlestonandSouthCarolinaingeneralare

insured.In1997,28%ofSouthCarolinadriverswereuninsured,whichmeantthatthe

statehadthethirdhighestrateofuninsuredmotorists.Adecadelaterin2007,only9%

wereuninsured,comparedtothenational14%average(CharlestonRegionalBusiness

Journal,2009).Moreresearchneedstobedonetodeterminewhethertheuninsured

Fig.18:SuccessfulCarSharingDemographicsAsComparedtoCharleston

Variable LowGrowth HighGrowth Charleston

Demographics

%1‐personhouseholds 30% 40‐50% 28.3%

CommuteModeShare

%drivealonetowork 55% 35‐40% 73.5%

%walktowork 5% 15‐20% 8.5%

VehicleOwnership

%householdswithnovehicle 10‐15% 35‐40% 11%

%householdswith0or1vehicle 60% 70‐80% 47%

NeighborhoodCharacteristics

Housingunitsperacre 5 5 10.7

Sources:U.S.CensusBureau,2000Census;CityData.com;CharlestonRealEstateGuide,U.S.CensusBureau

AmericanCommunitySurvey20052009;CLRSearch.com

34

populationwouldbeatargetpopulationforcarsharingprograms.Theylikelymaynotbe,

asmostparticipantsinvehicleprogramshavemidtohighincomes,andnothavingcar

insuranceiscloselycorrelatedwithunemployment.Ontheotherhand,acarshareprogram

wouldgiveitsusersaccesstoinsuranceiftheydidnothaveany,sothiscouldbean

incentivetojoin.Thosewhoareuninsuredandunemployeddriversmaypossiblybemore

likelytoparticipateinabicyclesharingprogram,astheyprobablycouldnotaffordtodrive

themselves;however,vehiclesharingmembershipsandratescanbemoreexpensivethan

otheralternativetransportation,likepublictransit.Therefore,itisalsounclearifthereis

anymarketforbikesharingwiththeuninsured.

Statisticsfromsuccessfulcarsharingprogramsshowthatthevastmajorityof

subscribers,over80%,haveaBachelor’sormoreadvanceddegree.CharlestonCounty’s

populationincludesanimpressive51.2%whosharethesamequality(CRDA,2011).Also,

bothcarandbicyclesharingprogramshavefoundsuccessonornearbyuniversity

campuses,asthelargepopulationofstudents,whooftentimesdonotowncarsandarein

needofalternateformsoftransportation,makesanexcellentconsumerbase.Thecityof

CharlestonishometotheMedicalUniversityofSouthCarolina(MUSC),whichmakesita

viablecandidateforridesharingprograms.Infact,inadditiontoitslargepopulationof

enrolledstudents,MUSCisthesecondlargestemployerinCharleston,directlyemploying

over11,000people.TheMUSCcampuscomplex,includingitscolleges,researchfacilities,

andhospitals,makesupalargechunkofdowntownCharleston.26othercollegesare

spreadacrossCharlestonCounty,makingthetotalenrolledpopulationofstudentsover

38,000.TheothermainuniversitiesasidefromMUSCincludeCharlestonSouthern

University(3231enrolled),TheCitadel(3339),CollegeofCharleston(11,772),andTrident

TechnicalCollege(14,834)(CRDA,2011).Theseuniversitieswouldmakeanexcellent

marketforvehiclesharingprograms.

AnothermajorindustryofCharlestonistourism.Thevisitorpopulationmustbe

takenintoaccountwhenanalyzingthepotentialcustomermarketofaridesharing

program.Charlestonhasahistoryofbeingrankedasoneofthetoptraveldestinationsin

theUnitedStatesbyvariouspollsandsurveys.Thetouristindustryaddsmorethan$3

billiontothelocaleconomyeveryyear,makingitoneofgreaterCharleston’stopexports.

Altogether,Charlestonreceivesmorethan4millionvisitorsannually,makingtouristsakey

populationinmarketingvehiclesharingprograms(CRDA,2011).

Asforbiking,accordingtotheNICHESreport,duringweekdays,trippurposesare

largelyworkorstudyrelated,andtouristscanalsobearelevantusergroup(NICHES,2007).

Duringeveningsandweekends,moreconsumersusebikesharingforshoppingand

35

leisure‐orientedactivities.Interestingly,thereisoftenapeakduringnighthours,when

publictransitismoreinfrequent.

36

BESTPRACTICES

BICYCLESHARING

Thefirstgenerationofbicycleshareprogramsemployedplainorusedbicyclefleets,hadno

stations,andwerefree.Theywerealsoquicktoattractthieveryandvandalismandwere

therebyhighlycostlyandultimatelyunsustainable.Anexampleofthistypeofprogramwas

Portland’sYellowBikeProject,begunin1994.Itwasahugepublicitysuccessintermsof

openingAmerica’seyestothepossibilitiesofbikesharing,butithadtobeshutdown

becauseitsbicycleskeptdisappearingandgettingdamaged.

Inaway,bicyclesharingbecamemoreandmoreadvancedsimplyinresponseto

thisearlywaveofcrime.Smartlocksandstationsweredeveloped,becomingevermore

technologicallyadept.OneofthefirstprogramstousesmartstationswasBikeaboutatthe

UniversityofPortsmouthintheUnitedKingdom.ThetechnologywascalledGrippaand

waslaterutilizedbyprogramsintheNetherlands.Bikeaboutbeganin1995onlytobe

discontinuedlaterinfavorofminibuses.

Securitycamerasbegantobeinstalledatstationstopreventvandalismandother

crimes.Programsstartedrequiringuserstoprovideasecuritydeposit,personal

identificationinformation,oracreditcardinordertoborrowabicycle.Heavyfineswere

imposedifthebicyclewasfoundoutsideofthecity.CopenhagenCityBikes,whichstarted

in1995,wasthefirstprogramtousespeciallydesigned,uniquebicyclepartsthatcouldnot

besoldorusedwithotherbicycles.Italsoutilizednominaldepositlocks,inwhichriders

usedcoinstounlockabikeandretrievedthemafterproperlyreturningittoastation.This

wasthesecondgenerationofpayment,inbetweenthefirst,freegeneration,andthethird

generation,operatedentirelybysmartphoneorcreditcard.

Inanycase,otherprogramsfollowedsuitwiththeft‐deterrentbicyclesthatwere

heavy,abrightcolor,singlegear,andbuiltwithspecialpartsthatwereunusableforany

otherbike.Manybikesharestodayalsousebrightlycoloredbicyclesasawaytobetter

establishtheirpresenceandmarketthemtoothersastheyarebeingridden.

Togeneratemorerevenue,bicyclesharingprogramsrunbygovernmentsbegan

partneringwithadvertisingcompanies,whowouldreceiveadvertisingspaceonbicycles,

stations,andthroughoutthecity.Inreturn,thecompanywouldfundthecapitalcostsof

bicyclesandstationsandsometimesalsorunthewholeprogram.Paris’Velibprogram,the

secondlargestbikeshareintheworldwithabout20,000bikesincirculation,isrunbya

ten‐yearpublic‐privatepartnershipwithJCDecaux.Thecompanypaidstartupcostsof$115

37

millionandemploystheequivalentof285full‐timepeopletorunoperations(Anderson,

2007).Anyrevenuecollectedthroughbicyclesharinggoestothecity.Inreturn,JCDecaux

hascontroloverhalfofthe1628city‐ownedbillboardsandkeepsallrevenuegenerated

fromthem(Anderson,2007).

Bicycleparkingstationshavebecomemorehigh‐techandcomplexoverthelast

decade,andVelibisnoexception.Eachpick‐up/drop‐offstationhas15‐40electronicracks,

whichareconnectedtoacentralizedcomputerthatmonitorseverybicycle’sconditionand

location.Montreal’sBIXIstationsystemhassevenpatents(Capital.BIXI.com).Itisportable

andmodular—abletobeinstalledinlessthananhour—andrunsonsolarpowerand

batteries,sleepingwhennotinuse.Bixiequipmentisnowusedinbikesharingprogramsin

London,Toronto,Ottawa,Minneapolis,DC,etc.

TheWashingtonStateUniversityGreenBikeProgram,whichbeganinSeptember

2009anduses50Bixibicycles,isfreetoallstudents,faculty,andstaffwithaCougarCard

(GreenBike.WSU.edu).Thehillycampusdiscouragesuse;nonetheless,theuniversityrunsa

freebicycleclinicacoupleoftimesamonthinordertogooverabriefhistoryofcyclingas

wellastoexplaingeneralmaintenanceskillsandsafetyprecautions.Collegecampuses

makeexcellentlocationsforbikesharingprograms.UCIrvine’sZotwheelsisanotherprime

example.Itmakesuseofaninteractivemapofstationsandbicycleavailability

(Parking.UCI.edu/ZotWheels).

BixiisNorthAmerica’slargestbikesharingsystemasofMay2009,andisuniquein

thatitwasdesigned,implemented,andnowrunbyMontreal’sparkingauthority.While

advertisementsdecorate200outofthe300stations,adrevenueonlymakesup5%ofthe

operatingcosts.Thismeansthattheprogramislosing$7millioneveryyear.Still,the

companywhooperatesBiximakesmoneythroughalloftheotherbikesharesithelpsrun.

Infact,theMontrealgovernmenthadagreedtoprovide$108millioninloansand

guaranteesforthecity‐ownedPublicBikeSystemCompanyrunningtheBixisystem,

essentiallymakingbikesharingaCanadianexport(Bhattari,2009).

Toronto’sBikeShare,runbytheCommunityBicycleNetworkfrom2001to2006,

usedtobethemostpopularbikeshareinNorthAmericauntilithadtobediscontinueddue

toalackoffunding(TransportCanada,2010).

Denver’sB‐Cycle,launchedinApril2010,wasthefirstlarge‐scalemunicipalbike

sharingsysteminthecountry.Itbeganwith500bikes,eachwithitsownGPSunit.The

programwasinitiatedduringtheDemocraticNationalConventionwithDenver’s

“Freewheelin’”program,duringwhich1000bicyclesweredistributedtovisitorsand

residentstouseduringtheconvention,promotingcyclingbeautifully(Denver.BCycle.com).It

38

isimportanttolaunchtheprogramwithabang,inordertogeneratethemostamountof

interestinpotentialconsumers.

Lyon’sVelo’vintroducedmanynewinnovationstobikesharingwhenitlaunchedin

2005,includingelectroniclocks,smartcards,telecommunicationsystems,andonboard

computers.Itwasalsoincrediblycheap:only10euros/year,andhalfofthatmoneygoes

backtoone’sownridingcredit(Velov.GrandLyon.com).Almostallbikesharingprograms

nowadayshavemembershiporsubscriptionfees.Itisimportanttokeeptheselessthan

$70peryearorso,otherwisethehighsubscriptionfeewouldputoffpotentialcustomers,

andtheymightbeinclinedtosimplypurchasetheirownbicycles(OBIS,2011).

Anotherbestpracticeincludessteadilyincreasingpricesasthelengthofrental

increases.Bikesharingismeantforshorttrips;otherwise,onecangotoabikeshopand

rentabikeforaday.Itisimportanttokeepbicyclesincirculation,andmakingonlythe

firsthalf‐hourorhouronthebikefreeisanexcellentincentive(OBIS,2011).

Totackleredistributionproblemsandthecosts,bothmonetaryandenvironmental,

ofhavingtousetruckstoredistributebicyclesacrossanarea,Paris’Velibcameupwithan

innovativesolution.Theprogrambeganofferingincentivesifusersreturnedtheirbicycles

toharder‐to‐reachareas,likeuphillstationsorstationsfartherfromthecitycenter.These

includedextratimeandcreditsusefulforfuturecycling(DeMaio,2009).

Insurancecanbetricky.Intheearlystages,mostprogramssimplyutilizeda“rideat

yourownrisk”insurancepolicy,notmakingthemliableforanypossibleaccidentsor

damage.Today’sprogramsoftenoffersomekindofmunicipalcoverage.Theprosandcons

ofseveraldifferentliabilitymethodsarelistedbelow(Fig.19,PhiladelphiaBikeshareConcept

Study,2010).Itisrecommendedtoconsultalawyerorinsuranceproviderwhendeciding

ontheappropriateavenue.

Figure 19: Bike Share Liability Options

39

AsrecommendedbyNICHES,thelocationswherepublicbicyclescanbefoundin

thecityshouldbeveryeasyfortheusertolocate.Fixedterminalsshouldnotbelocated

morethan300‐500metersfromimportantsourcesanddestinationsoftraffic,andfrom

eachother(NICHES,2007).Ahighdensityofstationsisneededinordertohaveanextensive

bicyclesharingnetworkthatismostconvenientforriders.TheHangzhoupublicbicycle

system,circulating60,000bikesandthelargestbikeshareintheworld,hasstationsevery

200meters,contributingtoitspopularityandsuccess.

Bicyclesarealsospace‐efficient;inLyon,fivepublicbicycleracks,whichhavean

averageof15users/day,cansubstituteoneparkingspace,whichseesanaverageof6

users/day.Anotherstrategyfordiscouragingcaruseandencouragingvehiclesharingwas

demonstratedbyLondon’scongestionchargingscheme,whichledtoa28%increasein

cyclinginitsfirstyear(NICHES,2007).

TheNetherlands’OV‐fietsschemeisafinalcasestudyofabicyclesharingprogram

thatisalmostdirectlyapartofthelargerpublictransportsystem.Bicyclesareavailableat

over100railstationsthroughoutthecountryandcanbeusedasanextensionoftherail

trip.Inaddition,thosecommutingtoworkbytrainrentbicyclestotravelfromthestation

totheirworkplace.Therewerealready23,000registeredusersasof2006,andOV‐fietsis

expectedtobeoneofthefewprofitablepublicbicycleschemes,asitcanachieveeconomies

ofscale(NICHES,2007).

CARSHARING

Whatsetscarsharingapartfromcarrentalsistheusers’desiretoborrowacarforashort

amountoftime.Carsharesthereforechargebythehour,makingshorttripscosteffective.

Carsharingprogramsalsotendtousedecentralized,neighborhood‐basedpodsofvehicles,

inordertoincreaseaccessibilityforasmanypeopleaspossible.Thesestationsshouldalso

beeasilyreachedthroughpublictransit.Inaddition,theabilitytoself‐accessacariswhat

differentiatescarsharesfromcarrentals:thismeanseliminatingthecheck‐inprocessand

allowingmemberstoreserveacar,startit,andreturnitwithoutdealingwithanyone.Of

course,thisselfservicecomponentrequiresthatwhentheuserfirstbecomesamember,he

orsheneedstoundergoabackgrounddrivingcheckandhaveanestablishedformof

paymentbeforebeingallowedaccesstothecars.

40

Itisalsoimportantforprogramstohavediversefleetswithcarstosuiteveryone’s

needs.Finally,carsharesoftenincludefuel,maintenance,insurance,andreservedparking

all‐in‐onewiththeautomobile,asoneofthekeyattractionsofcarsharingliesinavoiding

thehasslesofowningavehicle(CityCarShare,2005).

Carsharingprogramscanberunbyacommercialbusiness,ademocratically

controlledcompany,apublicagency,acooperate,oranadhocgroup.Therearecurrently

over1000citieswithcarsharingsystemsglobally,called“carclubs”intheUnited

Kingdom.TheUnitedStateswashometo60,000carsharingmembersin2004,andCanada

11,000.Carsharingisrapidlygrowing,althoughitstillrepresentsonly.03%oftheurban

populationandlicenseddrivers(TCRPReport108,2005).Oneofthefirstcarshareswas

Amsterdam’sWitkar,activefromthe1970sto1980s.Thisprogramusedsmallelectriccars

andelectronicallycontrolledreservationsandreturn.Gradually,programsbeganto

expand.Asof2010,thebiggestcarsharingserviceintheworldbyfarisZipcar,with

400,000membersin4400differentlocations.Zipcarrepresents80%oftheAmerican

marketshareandhalfoftheworld’scarsharingpopulation.WhileZipcarseemssuccessful

insomeways,andboughtitscompetitorFlexcarin2006,itisactuallylosingmoneyevery

year.Italsoincursveryhighcapitalcostsforcitieswishingtojointheprogram.Another

problemthatuserswantedtochangewastheinflexibilityoftheconditionthatcarsmustbe

droppedoffinthesamelocationtheywerepickedup(Davis,2011).ThefounderofZipcar

alreadyleftforFranceinordertostartBuzzcar,apeer‐to‐peersharingsystem.Thesekinds

ofprogramsaremuchmorelikelytobeprofitablethantraditionalcarshares,sincethe

vehiclesusedbelongtotheusers,andtherearenostartingcapitalcosts.

Thetechnologyusedincarsharingvariesgreatly.Cardreadersallowmembersto

unlockcarsandactivatetimersthroughblinktechnology.Newerprogramsareusingplug‐

inhybridelectricvehicles(PHVE),whicharemuchmoreexpensivethanregularfleets,and

vehiclesspeciallydesignedforcarsharingandpublicurbanuse.However,thesearemostly

thingsofthefuture,andthemajorityofnewlydevelopingcarsharesutilizeregular

automobilesintheirfleets.

Agoodstrategyintheimplementationofacarsharingprogramistohavemunicipal

fleetsparticipate.Thisshowssupportandincreasespublicityandawarenessofthe

program.Visibleparkingstationsinstrategic,keylocationsisalsovitaltotheprogram’s

success,asisthecleanlinessandgoodmaintenanceofcars.Asmentionedbefore,itiswise

tobemissiondrivenoverprofitdriven,asprofitabilitycanposealargechallenge.

Anothervariationoftraditionalcarsharingisservicesthatarerunbycarrental

companies.Thesesubprogramsbeganarisingin2008;already,ConnectbyHertzhas

41

invadedEuropeandAmerica,WeCarbyEnterpriseRent‐A‐Carrunscarsharingin

MountainView,CA,Nashville,andatthreeuniversities(WashingtonUniversity,University

ofMissouri,andTulane).EvenUHaulrunsaUCarShare.

Peer‐to‐peercarsharingprograms,asmentionedabove,workthroughexistingcar

owners,whorenttheircarstotheirpeerswhentheyarenotinuse.Abillknownasthe

“OregonProposal”toeasecarsharingthroughinsurancepoliciespassedSenateearlierthis

year.Itensuredthattheinsuranceofthecarownerwouldnotgoupiftherenterwerethe

onewhogotintoanaccident.Thecarisinsuredthroughthecarsharingcompany,andthe

carsharingcompanyandtheownersplitthemoneyearned.Importantly,insurance

companieswouldnotbeallowedtodroppeoplewhoparticipateinpeer‐to‐peercar

sharingprograms(Hubbard,2011).

Finalbestpractices,asenumeratedbytheTransitCooperativeResearchProgram

Report,includetheadoptionofpoliciesandregulationstosupportcar‐sharing;marketing

togeneratecommunitysupport;andtheintegrationoftheprogramwithexistingtransit.

Therightneighborhoodstotargetwillhavedensity,walkability,publictransitaccessibility,

mixeduse,andparkingpressures.Outreach,togetinstitutionalandcommunitybuy‐in,is

ofutmostimportance.

BOTH

Carsharingandbicyclesharingprogramssharesomecommonbestpractices.As

mentionedinbiking,thereneedstobeahighdensityandnumberofstations,combined

withlongoperatinghoursandtimes,inorderforusagetobehigh.Usingsmartphone

technologytoallowuserstocheckthestatusofnearbystations(e.g.,throughSpotcycle)

hasbecomemoreandmorecommonplace.

Itwillbeimportanttogetcommunitybuy‐inbycollaboratingonvehiclesharing

withuniversitiesandbusinesseswithcommutingemployees,whoarekeyserviceable

markets.Inaddition,integratingtheprogramwiththepublictransitsystemandutilizing

thesamesmartcardwouldencourageallformsofalternativetransportation.Mostvitalis

communicationandworkingwithcommunity‐basedorganizationstohelpturntheideaof

vehiclesharingintoareality.

42

OPERATINGMODELANDIMPLEMENTATION

PILOT

Avehiclesharingprogramcanbesignificantlyaffectedbymanydifferentfactors.Totest

thewatersbeforeimplementingalarge‐scalesystem,itisadvisabletofirstlaunchapilot,

inordertocheckthefeasibilityoftheprogram,makechangesandadaptationsas

necessary,andpromotetheprogramandgenerateincreasedinterestinalong‐term

sharingsystem.Ofcourse,apilotprogramrequiresagoodamountoffunding,andthere

aremanydifferentwaysinwhichtoobtainthis.

Sourcesforpilotfunding:

Governmentfunding

- Requiresaclearbusinessplan,quantifiedinformationonthepublicpolicybenefitsfromvehiclesharing,proposalwithspecificobjectives(e.g.,establishingastationinaparticularlocationorservingaparticularmarket)

- Potentialfederallevelsources:o CongestionMitigationandAirQualityImprovementProgramo TransportationEnhancementActivitieso AccesstoJobsandReverseCommuteProgramo TransportationandCommunityandSystemPreservationProgramo ValuePricingProgram

- State/regionalsources:o Metropolitanplanningorganizationso SouthCarolinaDieselEmissionsReductionAct(DERA)Grants

(http://www.scdhec.gov/environment/baq/DERA/)o More:http://www.statelibrary.sc.gov/docs/grant/foundation2010.pdf

Privatefunding

- Bettersuitedforcooperativesandfor‐profitvehiclesharingorganizationso Sometreatmemberdepositsassharesintheorganization,althoughtheydo

notnecessarilyrefundthemoneyifthememberleaves- Automobileindustry

o ThroughdonationsofdiscountedvehiclesLeveragedvalue

- Fororganizationsthatwouldbeaffectedbyvehiclesharing,suchascarandbikerentalcompanies

- Vehiclesharingcanhelpthesecompaniesrecoupbenefits- Forexample,acarrentalcompanycouldagreetopayafixedamountforeach

referralfromacar‐sharingoperator,forthevolumeofbusinessthatischanneledtheirway

Privatefoundations

- Goodsourcefornonprofit,501(c)(3)organizations

43

- Targetedprogramsaremorelikelytogetfunded- CharlestonCounty:CoastalCommunityFoundation

Otherdonations

- Frommembers,businesses- “Donateyourcar”program

o Providestaxwrite‐offformemberso Sourceofrevenueifcarcanbesoldo Takesmorevehiclesoffthestreets

(Source:CityCarShare:BringingCarSharingtoYourCommunity,2005)

ItisalsoimportanttoquantifythecontributionthattheCityisableorwillingto

maketotheprogram.

SUSTAINABLEFINANCIALMODEL

Thebusinessmodelofacarorbicyclesharingprogramwillvarydependingonwhoruns

theoperations,andhowinvolvedthecityisintheoverallventure.Thecityhasseveral

optionsfortheorganizationalstructureoftheoperations,includinghowtheyarerunand

howtheyarefunded.ThePhiladelphiaBikeshareConceptStudysuccinctlyoutlinesthekey

possiblearrangementsforabicyclesharingprogramandthebenefitsanddetrimentsof

eachconfiguration(Fig.20).

Vendor Operator Funding Example

Private Private Advertising(usuallythroughstreetfurniture)

Lyon,Paris

Private Private Chicago(St.XavierU)

Private Public Barcelona

Public Public Public Montreal

Public Private Boston(sponsoredbyNewBalance)

Non‐profit Public/Private Minneapolis(federal,municipal,universityfunding)

Figure 20: Vendor-Operator Operating Models

44

Vendor/Operator

Theadvantagesofapublicvendorandoperatorincludetheirdevotiontothecause,

andhavingdirectcontroloverfundingandoperations.Disadvantagesinvolvepotentially

highupfrontcapitalinvestmentcostsandhighlyvariableoperationalcosts.Therearealso

limitedexperiencedvendorstochoosefrom.

Privatevendorsandoperatorsusuallyrequirenoupfrontcapitalinvestmentfrom

thecity.However,theoperatorisnotdrivenbythemobilitycause,anditcanbehardfor

thecitytoworkwiththemifconflictsarise.Tocombatthis,thecityshouldensurethatthe

contractbetweentheentitiesclearlyspecifiestermsandincludesprovisionslikedata‐

sharing,optionsforexpressingdissatisfaction,etc.Thereshouldalsobeincentivesforthe

operatortoprovidegoodservice,e.g.,throughrevenuesharing.

Funding

PrivatefundingremovestheburdenfromtheCitytoseekotherfunding.Programs

thatarenotprivatelyfunded,ontheotherhand,haveaccesstofederalandpublicfunding,

aswellaslocalfundingsourcessuchasuniversitiesthatcanbeincorporatedintothe

citywidesystem.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Anotherreportexaminedthedifferentbusinessstructuresofacity‐runprogram

versusafranchise.Thetablebelow(Fig.21)comesfromthebicyclesharingfeasibility

studydonebytheCityofNewYorkin2009.

45

BikeShare:OpportunitiesinNewYorkCity(TheNewYorkCityDepartmentofTransportation

recentlybeganaprogramtounifythelookofallstreetfurniture.)

Nomattertheorganizationalstructurechosen,therearecostsandpossiblerevenue

streamsthataresimilaracrossallmodels.Someofthesearespecifiedinthetablebelow

(Fig.22).

Costs Revenuestreams

Overhead/fixedcosts Contractrevenue

Figure 21: Franchise vs. City-Built Bike Share in New York City

Figure 22: Vehicle Sharing Costs and Revenue Streams

46

OfficespaceSalaryandbenefitsStaff:designandengineering,customerservice,salesandmarketing(itwouldbesmarttoautomateasmuchofthesystemaspossible)Technology(forstations,etc.)Marketing,publicrelations:brochures,advertisingOfficesupplies

- Largerbusinessesmaybewillingtopre‐payforblocksofexclusivetime

- Developercouldbewillingtoguaranteelevelofrevenueinexchangeforplacingvehiclesatspecificlocation)

AdvertisingEarnedrevenue(membership/subscriptionandone‐offridecosts)FinesCarbonoffsetcreditsales(CityRyde)

Variablecosts

VehiclecapitalLiabilityandinsurancecostsParking/stationbuildingGasolineCleaningMaintenanceandrepairsRedistributiontrucks,otherdistributioncostsLost,stolenvehicles

Thereareseveraldifferentmethodstodeterminetheoptimalpricingscheme.A

marketstudyutilizingsurveysandfocusgroupsseemslikeoneofthemostreliable,

althoughthiscanbeacostlyandtime‐consumingprocess.Inaddition,thesekindsof

studiescanfailtoaccountforlong‐termchangesinconsumers’approachtotransportation.

Adifferentmethodissimplytrialanderror.Onecanuse“best‐guess”pricingpointsbased

onothercitiesandbasedonestimationsofthetargetdemandprofile.Then,periodic

adjustingoffaresandpricingschemesarecrucialinordertorespondtoactualdemand

patterns.Animportantschemetokeepinmindisthatoff‐peakdiscountratescanhelp

generateusageatnightandatothertimescarsharingisnotnormallyutilized.

Thefollowinganalysis(Fig.23)wasputtogetherbyCityCarSharetoestimatethe

marketnearapotentialcarsharingpod.Itanalyzesthreedifferentpotentialmarkets:

residential,business,andtransittransfer,andtakesintoaccountsthemostimportant

factorsforeachmarket(CityCarShare,2005).

47

Thetablebelow(Fig.24)detailsthepartnershipsvariouscitiesacrosstheUnited

Stateshavewithdifferentcar‐sharingfranchises,includingbothprivateandnon‐profit

ones.TheleveloftheCity’sinvolvementrangeswidelyacrossvariousprograms,although

therearesimilarcommitmentsincludingprovidingfreeparkingforcar‐sharingvehicles,

signingupcityemployeesandfleetsfortheprogram,etc.

Figure 23: Estimating the Market Near a Potential Car Share Pod

48

(CityofSanAntonioCarSharingFeasibilityStudy,2011)

Figure 24: Summary of Public Sector Car-Sharing Trends

49

AnothertablefromtheCityofSanAntonio(Fig.25)showshowmanyvehicles

wouldneedtobeapartoftheprogramaccordingtovariousfactors.Firstisthemember‐

to‐vehicleratio.IfcalculatedthroughafranchisesuchasZipcar,whichhas>400,000

membersand>7000vehiclesinoperation,theratioisapproximately57:1.However,ifwe

excludethefivelargestcar‐sharingoperatorsintheUnitedStates,theratiobecomes20:1

(CityofSanAntonio,2011).Theothervariableisthemarketpenetrationrate.Thisrefersto

thepercentageoftheresidentialpopulationthatwouldlikelyparticipateintheprogram.A

rateof0.5%isonthelowend,forareaspredeterminedtobefeasiblebasedontheir

demographicsstatistics(asaccordingtothestudybytheTransportationResearchBoardof

theNationalAcademies).

SanAntoniousedGISanalysistodetermineitsresidentialareasthatwouldbemost

likelytoparticipateincarsharing.AftertheCitydeterminedthefourmosttargetable

censustracts,thestudyfurtherlimitedthispopulationtoonlythoseaged21‐55(amarket

of10,258residents),addedthenumberofpotentialemployeeswhowouldjointhe

program,andcalculatedthetotalnumberofvehiclesneededinaccordancewiththe

aforementionedshiftingvariables.

Figure 25:

50

SAMPLEBUSINESSMODELS

Thefollowingaresomebasicsamplepotentialbusinessmodels,asputtogetherbySan

Antonio.Therearethreedifferenttypes:oneisamodelinwhichonlycityemployeeshave

accesstocar‐sharingvehicles(Fig.26);oneisapilotprogramwithgradualexpansionof

theprogramfromcitystafftothepublic(Fig.27);andoneisapartnershipwithaCity‐

startednon‐profitorganization(Fig.28).Ofnote,theterm“guaranteedrevenue”refersto

theCity’sfinancialcommitmenttothecar‐sharingoperator.Arguably,theeasiestwayto

providesupportisthroughsubsidizedparking,includingprovidingdedicatedon‐street

parkingspaces,off‐streetparking,and/orfreeutilizationofparkingmeters,etc.However,a

goodportionofcitiesalsoguaranteeacertainamountofrevenueperoperatingvehicle.

Thiscanbedonethroughasemi‐dedicatedfleet,wherecityemployeeshaveexclusive

accesstovehiclesduringcertainhoursandpayaccordinglyforthisguaranteedavailability.

However,opensystemsarealsoinplace,wheretheCityandthegeneralpublichaveequal

accesstovehiclesandthereislessguaranteedfinancialcommitment.Forinstance,neither

PhiladelphianorPittsburghguaranteesrevenuepervehicletotheiroperator,Zipcar.

Figure 26:

51

Inthismodel(Fig.26),itisassumedthatthecar‐sharingoperatorrequires

$1500/monthinguaranteedrevenuepervehicletocoveroperationalcosts(e.g.,vehicle

leasing,maintenance,fuel,insurance,cleaning)andprofitmargins.AccordingtoSan

Antonio,thedataavailableforguaranteedrevenuearrangementsshowsthat$1500isan

upper‐bound,conservativefigure,andrealarrangementswillvary.Thismodelrepresents

aworst‐casescenariowherenoresidents—onlycityemployees—usethecars,andthecity

simplypaysthefull$1500permostlyidlevehicleeverymonth.

Thissecondmodel(Fig.27)incorporatesthreemonthsofexclusiveusebycity

employees,followedbyasustainedmarketingpushtothegeneralpublic,followedbya

gradualincreaseinvehicleutilizationbyresidentsandlocalemployers.Thisallowsforthe

monthlysubsidyfromtheCitytodecreasefrom$7500($1500/vehicle)to$0aftersix

months.Thismodelassumesthateachvehiclewillbeusedsixhours/dayoncefully

operationalandthatcityemployeescomprisefourofthese.Accordingtothisplan,the

programwouldbreakevenaftersixmonths.

Finally,thethirdmodel(Fig.28)estimatesthepotentialcostsofanon‐profitcar‐

sharingorganization.Thefollowingassumptionswereused:carsharingcosts$10/hour

withnoadditionalmileageormembershipcosts;eachcargenerates6hoursofusageevery

day;125membersjoineachquarter;and5extracarsareaddedwhentheratioofvehicles

tomembersreaches50:1.Overall,thistypeofnon‐profitwouldrequirealmost$200,000in

grosssubsidizationcostsandwouldbreakeven(revenuesexceedingexpenditures)inthe

latesecondyear.

52

Figure 27

53

Figure 28

54

Asamplebudgetwithmorespecificlineitemsisbelow(Fig.29,CityofSanAntonio,2011).

Figure 29: Sample Car Share Budget Template

55

Itisimportantnottounderestimatethescopeofthesavingsthatcanbeattained

throughaCity’sparticipationincarsharing.In2004,theBerkeley,Californiacity

governmentreplaced15ofitsfleetvehicleswithfivecarsharingvehicles,culminatingin

savingsof$400,000afterthreeyears(Cohen,ShaheenandMcKenzie,2008,7).Thisincluded

$250,000inreplacementcars,gasolineandmaintenanceand$150,000oninsuranceand

fleetmanagement(CityofBerkeleyMayor’sOffice,2004).NewYorkCityanticipatessaving

$500,000from2010to2013throughitspartnershipwithZipcarforfleetmanagementof

300employeesthrough25vehicles(CityofNewYork).Finally,inPhiladelphia,thecity

governmentpartneredwithPhillyCarShareandreduceditsfleetby330vehiclesinone

year,andhadaprojectedsavingsof$9millionoverfiveyears(Millard‐Balletal.2005,5‐

21;CityofPhiladelphia2004).Theseincludedreducedcostsforacquisition,parking,

vehiclemaintenance,andfuel(Bieszczat,Schwieterman,2011).

Ofcourse,PhillyCarSharewasrecentlypurchasedbyEnterpriseWeCar.Financial

termsofthetransactionwerenotdisclosed,althoughitisknownthatthePhillyCarShare

brandnamewillbemaintainedthroughtheintegrationprocessandthatitwillnow

operateasafor‐profitservice(“EnterpriseHoldingsAcquiringPhillyCarShare,”2011).In

addition,almostallstaffmembersfromPCSwereofferedpositionsatWeCar.PCSseemed

happywiththechange,duetotheirgoaltoserveeveryneighborhoodinPhiladelphiaand

Enterprise’sintentonenhancingandexpandingthesystemasquicklyaspossible.

Enterpriseisalsocurrentlystronglyadvocatingforendingdiscriminatorycarrentalexcise

taxes(“EnterpriseHoldingsStandsupforCar‐SharingCustomers,”2010).

EVALUATIONSYSTEMS

Inanybusiness,itiswisetohavesystemstotrack,monitor,andassessperformance

milestones.Differentvehiclesharingprogramshaveuseddifferenttypesofevaluations,

fromusersurveystoindependentevaluationsdonebyinstitutionssuchaslocal

universities.Thesecansometimesbecostly.Belowisatable(Fig.30)listingthekey

programaspectsthatshouldbeevaluated.

56

Figure 30: Car Share Performance Measures to Monitor

Internalefficiency Externalimpacts

Numberofmembers,numberofvehiclesUtilizationrate

- Numberofrevenuehours/dayavehicleachieves

- Revenue/vehicle- Analyzevehicle,area,andfleetasawhole- Calculateutilizationrateneededtobreak

evenRetentionrateNetnewmembers/monthFixed:variablecostsratio(shouldgodown)Staff:vehicleratio(shouldgodown)Fareboxrecoveryratio(earnedrevenueaspercentageoftotalcosts)Member:vehicleratio

PercentageofmemberswhohavesoldcarsNumberofcarstakenoffstreetsAmountofvehicletravelsavedNumberofnewtransittripsAmountoftransitagencyfarerevenueincreaseTonsofemissionsreductionsPercentageoflow‐incomemembers

Thefollowing(Fig.31)areexamplesofothercarsharingprogramsthroughoutthe

countryandthespecificevaluationtechniquestheyuse(TCRPReport108,2005).

Bringing Car-Sharing to Your Community (City CarShare)

57

Figure 31: Car Share Partner Evaluation Techniques

58

(TCRPReport108)

MARKETABILITY

Asmentionedinthepreviouschapter,twoofthekeypotentialmarketsforvehiclesharing

inCharlestonarethetouristandcollegestudentpopulations.

Figure 31: Car Share Partner Evaluation Techniques (cont’d)

59

Tourists

Touristsspend,onaverage,$29perdayontransportation‐relatedcosts(Collegeof

CharlestonOfficeofTouristAnalysis).Thedemographicsofmostvisitorsalignwellwiththose

ofothersuccessfulcarshareprogramsthroughoutthecountry(seeFig.18).Inasurvey

from2010withdatafrom820tourists,collectedrandomlybyCollegeofCharleston

studentsandthroughvoluntaryparticipation,73.7%werefoundtohaveaBachelor’sor

higherdegree,whileanother14.1%startedcollegebutdidn’tfinish(Smith,Pan,2011).The

meanageofvisitorswas55.8.42%werefulltimeemployeesand34.6%wereretired.

77.1%reportedanannualhouseholdincomeof$60,000ormore.

IntermsofhowtouristsgettoCharleston,73.2%drove,eitherwiththeirown

(67.3%)orrented(5.9%)cars.15%arrivedviaplane,while6.7%flewtoanothercityand

thenrentedacar(Fig.32,Smith,Pan13,2011).Itwouldprobablymakemostsensetotarget

visitorswhocomebyairplane,andpotentiallysomewhodrivetheirownvehicles,if

parkinginthecityisanissue.Atouristfamilycould,forexample,leavetheirownvehicleat

theirhotel,inn,orrentalhouse,andutilizecarorbicyclesharingtotravelthroughoutthe

citybecauseofparkingincentives.Infact,thefactorthattouristssaidmostnegatively

impactedtheirvisittoCharlestonwasparking(24.4%).Secondwasuneven

sidewalks/pavement(12.6%)andfourthwastraffic(9.6%)(Smith,Pan,2011).

Figure 32: Visitor Transportation Modes to the Charleston Area (820 Responses)

60

Inaddition,only6.8%cametostaywithfriendsorrelatives.Thesetouristswould

mostlikelyhaveaccesstotheirfriends’andfamily’svehiclesandwouldnotbeagood

targetforvehiclesharing.

Asforlengthofvisits,only8.5%oftouristscamefordaytrips.Oftherest,the

averagetimespentinCharlestonwas3.7nights:3.4forfirst‐timevisitorsand4forrepeat

visitors(Smith,Pan,2011).Thisrelativelylengthyspanoftimespentinthecitymeansthat

thecostsofrentingacarwouldaddupquickly.Fortouristswhorentedcarstocometo

Charleston,itwouldactuallybemorecosteffectiveforthemtoreturnthecaruponarrival

andthenrentoneagaintoleave.Inbetween,theycouldutilizecarorbicyclesharingto

travelaroundthecity,whichwouldbemuchcheaper.Thetablebelow(Fig.33)shows

othertouristexpensesandtheaveragecostsassociatedwitheach.

Finally,themostcommonmetropolitanarearesidenceofvisitorswasNewYork

City,with35tourists(4.7%),followedbyAtlanta,GA;Charlotte,NC;Chicago,IL;

Figure 33: Breakdown of Overnight Visitor Expenses

61

Washington,DC;Greenville,SC;andBaltimore,MD(Smith,Pan,2011).Allofthesecitieshave

theirownbicycleand/orcarsharingprograms,whichmaymaketheirresidentsmore

willingorinterestedinutilizingvehiclesharinginCharleston—NewYork:Mint,developing

bicyclesharing;Atlanta:Zipcar;Charlotte:HertzonDemand;Chicago:iGo,B‐Cycle;DC:

CapitalBikeShare,Zipcar;Greenville:WeCar(Miller,2011);Baltimore:Altcar,Zipcar,

developingbicyclesharing(Reutter,2011);amongothers.

Students

TridentTechnicalCollege

With16,000full‐timeundergraduatestudents,TridentTechnicalCollegeisthe

universitywiththesecondbiggestundergraduatepopulationinSouthCarolina.However,

thestudentsarespreadoutoverfivecampuses,andnoneliveatthecollege;allmust

commutetogetthere.Onecampus—Palmer—islocateddowntownandis,accordingto

RussellDarnall(inchargeofGreenBusinessandSustainability,andContinuingEducation

&EconomicDevelopmentatthecollege),probablythecampusmostsuitedforacar

sharingprogram.TridentTechhasverylargegrowth,withanapproximate20%increase

ofstudentseveryyear,whichhasstressedmuchoftheinfrastructureoftheuniversity,

includingparking.Thecollegehastriedtopushpublictransitandridesharing(through

TridentRideShare)toaddressthisproblem.However,inasurveysenttostaffandfaculty,

whichaskedwhattheseprograms’barrierswere,manyrespondedwiththeneedfor

flexibility:theabilitytoleavecampusthroughouttheday,whenevernecessary,andto

accommodateavaryingschedulewhichmaynothavethesamehourseveryday.Acar

sharemightbeabletoaddressthisbetterthancarpooling,whichisinflexibleintermsof

hours,andpublictransit,whichmaybemoreinflexibleintermsofgeography.

TridentTechhasbothdayandeveningclasseswhichareprettymuchsplit50‐50in

termsofhowmanystudentsareenrolledineach.Staffcomeinaround8:30am–5pm

everyday.Inaddition,thereare500,000“contacthours”forskillstrainingeveryyear,

whichisthetotalsumoftheseveralhourseachpersoncomesinforsettypesofskill

learning;thisrepresentsapproximately10,000students(Darnall,2011).

Intermsofbicyclesharing,thePalmercampusisunfortunatelynotverypedestrian

orbicyclefriendly.Therearenosidewalks,anditwasconstructedinthe1960s‐70s,when

carsruledall.Thereareafewbicycleparkingracks,but,accordingtoDarnall,most

studentslikelydon’tlivewithinbicyclingdistanceanyway.Withthatsaid,thenew

62

buildingsthatarebeingbuilthavebicycleracksandshowers(forpeoplewhobiketowork

andneedtoshower),inparttogainLEEDpointsandalsotoaccommodatethosewhodo

cycletocampus.Asforautomobileparking,currentlygrassfieldsarebeingused,butthisis

atemporaryfix.Thecollegeisinvestinginenvironmentalparkingwithloopparkinglotsin

ordertoaddresstheirshortageofparkingfacilities.Ingeneral,however,theseparking

pressures,aswellasthemassivenumbersofpeoplewhomustcommutetocampusand

seekmoreflexibilityintheircommute,givesTridentTechnicalCollegealotofpotentialto

beasuccessfulplaceforcarsharing.

CollegeofCharleston

WeCarofEnterpriseRent‐a‐CarhasalreadybeenincontactwiththeCollegeof

Charleston.Theyareflexibleintheirapproachtocarsharingandinthesharedbusiness

modelbetweenthecompanyandthecityorinstitution.Forinstance,currentlyatClemson

University,theCityhasnocontroloverthevehiclesorratesandonlyprovidesparking

spacesforthecars.TheCitygainsnosubsidybutthereisstillachanceforClemsonto

generateaportionofrevenueoncetheprogramismoreestablishedoncampus.

TheCityhasbeenincontactwithCherylRothenberger,WeCar’sDirectorof

BusinessRentalSales,andshouldcontinuetokeepinclosecommunicationwithherand

othersinthedevelopmentofthisprogram.AnotherkeycontactattheCollegeofCharleston

isBrianFisher,anassistantprofessorinPoliticalScienceandEnvironmentalStudies,who

hasbeenworkingonatransportationreportfortheadministration.Heintendsonforming

asubcommitteeontransportationtocomprehensivelyreviewandtacklethedetailsof

implementingspecificrecommendationsfromthereport,andthisincludescarsharingand

possiblybicyclesharingaswell.Additionally,JanBrewton,theDirectorofBusinessand

AuxiliaryServices,wasthecontactattheCollegeofCharlestonwhoworkedwithCARTAto

bringDASHtrolleyroutestothecampus.

TheCitadel

WeCarhasalsobeenincommunicationwithTheCitadel,specificallyCharlieAdams,

theExecutiveDirectorofAuxiliaryServices.Preliminarydiscussionsincludedtalksofa

partialsubsidy;forexample,asystemwhereTheCitadelwouldreaphalfoftherevenueof

theprograminexchangeforprovidingotherbenefits.Thismodelisstillhighlynegotiable.

63

MedicalUniversityofSouthCarolina(MUSC)

MUSCrecentlysentoutasurveyaddressingtransportationuses,focusingon

bicycling,toitsstudentsandemployees.Outofthe1157respondents,83.8%werestaff,

8.6%werefaculty,and7.5%werestudents(MUSCCommuterSurvey,2011).Thesurvey

foundthat48.7%ofpeopletravelfewerthan10milestogettoworkeveryday,while

another27.5%havea10‐20milecommute.Theseshortdistancesreducetheincentivefor

MUSCstudentsandemployeestorequiretheirowncarforcommuting.While75%takean

automobiletowork,9%bus,2%bike,2%walk,and11%utilizeaflexiblecombinationof

alldifferenttypesoftransportation.Thisispromisingbecauseitshowsthatagoodportion

ofpeoplearewillingtoexperimentwithalternativemodesoftransitandarenot

necessarilygluedtooneparticularform,i.e.singleoccupancyvehicles.

26%said“yes”or“maybe”toaquestionaskingiftheywouldconsiderbikingto

work.Incentivesforcyclingincluded,inorderofimportance:forfitnessbenefits,for

environmentalbenefits,forloweringtransportationcosts,andforbeingapractical

transportationalternative.Thebiggestbarriersforcyclingincluded,inorder:alackofbike

pathsandlanes,excessivecommutingdistance,lackofshowersorchangingfacilities,

difficultycrossingtheAshleyRiver,inadequateparking,andtheneedformultipletrips

duringtheday(MUSCCommuterSurvey,2011).

MUSCmaybeagoodplacetoexploretheinitiationofacarorbicyclesharing

program,asithas,duetoparkingandtrafficpressures,alreadypartneredwithCARTAand

madeavailabletoitsstudents,staff,andfacultyvariousshuttlesandbusesthatarewidely

utilizedthroughoutdowntownCharlestonandevenoffofthepeninsula.CARTAbusesare,

infact,freetorideforanyonewithanMUSCidentificationbadge.Inaddition,MUSCrunsa

carpoolprogramwhichgivespermitsanddesignatedparkinglocationstoitsmembers

(MUSC.edu).BecausemanyMUSCemployeesandstudentsalreadyhaveexperiencewith

publictransportationandcarpooling,theymaybemorelikelytoparticipateinother

alternativeformsoftransitsuchasvehiclesharing.Inaddition,thepopulationofpeople

whoworkorstudyatMUSCisenormousandrepresentsalargepotentialmarketforacar

orbicyclesharingprogram.

SCALABILITY

Scalabilitywilldependuponthefranchisethecitychoosestopartnerwith,andcanchange

asthevehiclesharingprogramdevelopsandexpands.Evenwithapilotortheinitiallaunch

64

oftheprogram,however,itisimportanttoensureasufficientnumberofstationsand

vehiclesinorderforusagetobeatasolidrateandfortheprogramtobesuccessful.

PARTNERS

Inadditiontotheinstitutionsmentionedabove,thereareotherkeyplayersthattheCity

shouldtrytoworkwithinestablishingavehiclesharingprogram.

CARTA

AmajorpartnerisCARTA,theCharlestonAreaRegionalTransportationAuthority.

Carandbicyclesharingarenewerformsofpublictransportandcanbeusedtoaugment

andimprovetheexistingpublictransitsysteminthecity.Todothis,itisnecessaryto

understandanyandallproblemswiththecurrentsystem.

ThemainproblemthatCARTAfaces,accordingtoPeterTecklenburg,their

TransportationPlanner,isfunding.CARTAonlygets17%ofthe½pennysalestax,while

manyothercities’transitauthoritiesgetafullpenny.Thismeansthatthetransitsystemis

robustandextensiveinurbanareasclosertothecitycenter,butbecomeslimitedthe

fartheritgetsfromthecity.

Inpastyears,fundinghasplayedanenormousroleintheimagethatCharleston

residentshadofCARTA.CARTAusedtobefundedbySCE&G,apowercompany,which

madesenseinthe1900sto1940swhenpublictransitwasessentiallyentirelymadeupof

electricstreetcarsandtrolleys.However,withtheshifttoautomobilesanddieselbuses,

SCE&Gwaslosingmoreandmoremoneyeveryyear,andtheyhadnoincentivetoprovide

goodserviceorimproveitifthatwouldcostmoremoney.Finally,CARTAtookover,with

anagreementthatSCE&Gwouldcontinuetopayforanextratenyearsofservice.Atthe

endofthisterm,theresidentsofthecountyhadtovoteona½centsalestax(Tecklenburg,

2011).ThereferendumwoundupbarelypassingandwasoverthrownintheStateSupreme

Courtbecausepeoplehadthemisconceptionthatthebussystemwasonlyforthepoorand

minorities,andwasdirtyandunsafe.Thesecondreferendumalsofailed,whichforced

CARTAtocut75%ofitsroutes.Thisledtothelossofjobsforhundredsofpeopleandthe

inconveniencingofthousandsmore,furtherincreasingthepoorperceptionofCARTA.Only

riderswhohadnootheroptionsusedtheroutes,andbusescouldonlycomeevery2‐3

hours.Finally,thereferendumpassedthenextyear,in2005,andofthe½centtax,some

wenttogreenspacesandroadswhileonlyaportionmadeittotransit.Thisdrastically

65

changedwhatCARTAwasabletodo,however;theybeganrebuildingtheirsystem,

bringingbacktheexpresssystemand25routes,andtheridershipincreasedfrom70,000

to300,000passengers/monthinthefirstfewmonths.Today,ridershipisalmost

400,000/monthandiscomingcloserandclosertoreachingCARTA’s5million

passengers/yearbenchmark(Tecklenburg,2011).

TheperceptionofCARTAhasimprovedgreatly;MUSCandtheCollegeofCharleston

bothpartneredwiththetransitauthorityanddemonstratedthepositiveeffectsofdoingso,

especiallyboostingemployeemoraleandhelpingtoaddresstheirdifficultparking

situationsdowntown.TheTownofMountPleasantisespeciallyinterestingbecauseitis

oneofthecitieswiththehighesthomevalueandpercapitaincomeinthestate,yetisthe

onlyareathathashadroutesaddedinthelastfewyears.TheridershipofroutesinMount

PleasantisprobablythemostdiverseoutofallofCARTA’sroutes,andincludespeoplewho

workattheWalmartorTargetorfastfoodrestaurantsinMountPleasantbutcannotlive

therebecauseofthehighprices.

Thenewgreenmovementandthesuboptimalparkingandtrafficsituationinthe

cityhavealsoboostedridershipandhelpedtochangeCARTA’simage.Accordingto

Tecklenburg,thereisalsoayoungergenerationofriderswhoseepasttheperceptionsthat

afflictedCARTAfromthe1960stothe2000s,andarecontenttousethesystem.Allofthese

conditions,combinedwiththeinabilityforCARTAtoexpandtheirroutesbeyondwhatthey

makewiththeir½pennysalestax,makeforanexcellentenvironmentinwhichto

introducevehiclesharing.Asaspecificexample,Tecklenburgmentionedthatacarshare

wouldallowsomeonetodrivetoCostco,Lowe’s,orWalmartinanhour,whichmight

normallytake3‐4hoursviabus,withtheaddedconvenienceofbeingabletotransporta

largevolumeofgoods.

AsforCARTA’slong‐termvision,theyaremostlyworkingtowardsthecontinual

expansionoftheirsystemtoSummervilleandGooseCreek,aswellasthedevelopmentthe

intermodaltransportationcenterinNorthCharleston.Thisphaseofgrowthandexpanding

theexistingsystemtiesperfectlyinwithaddingextramodesoftransitthroughcaror

bicyclesharing.PetersaysthatCARTAhas“proven[they]canbepartofthefix”whenit

comestorealsolutionstothetrafficandparkingissuesinthecity.

SouthCarolinaStatePortsAuthority

ApartnerofCARTAistheSouthCarolinaStatePortsAuthority,whocurrentlyhasa

renewableannualagreementtoprovide$50,000worthoffundingtorun,service,andhelp

modifythefreeDASHshuttle(ByronMiller,2011).TheshuttlehasastationatthePortof

66

Charleston’scruiseshippassengerterminalattheintersectionofConcordandMarket

Streets.Therearealsostationsatnearbyparkinglots.Theagreementiscontingentonthe

continuationofCharleston’ssuccessfulcruisebusiness,whichbringsinhundredsof

visitorseveryday,whoaredirectedviatheshuttletotheVisitorCenterandotherhistoric

attractionsindowntownCharleston.Theagreementisalsodependentonthesuccessofthe

plannedredevelopmentoftheUnionPierTerminal.ThePortsAuthority,incollaboration

withtheCityofCharleston,areplanningtomovethecruiseterminaltothenorthernendof

thePier.Thepointofthisistoincreasepublicaccesstothepierandtothewaterfront,and

toutilizetheareaformorethanjustmaritimecommerceandcargoships,trains,andtrucks

(UnionPierPlanInteractiveBrochure,2011).

OtherpointsoftheplanincludeconnectingCharlestonneighborhoodstothewater

andextendingMarketStreettothewaterfront.Establishingabicycleorcarsharingstation

inthisareaseemstomeshperfectlywiththesegoals.Bothwouldallowmorepeople,both

residentsandvisitors,toexplorethewaterfront,andwouldmakeiteasyforvisitorsto

travelwherevertheywant,supportingtheDASHtrolleysystem.Asthefirstpointofthe

planistoincreaseaccesstothearea,establishingvehiclesharingtherewouldbevery

useful.

Boeing

WeCarhasalsoapproachedTheBoeingCompanyinapotentialplantodevelopacar

sharingprogramforitsmanyemployeesinCharleston.TheBoeingfacilityinNorth

Charlestonishugeandincludesacutting‐edgeBoeing787jetassemblyplant,whichisset

tobringin3800morejobsoverthenextsevenyears.Moreinformationonthepotentialfor

carsharingwithBoeingemployeescanbefoundthroughCherylRothenbergerofWeCar.

HertzonDemand

PreliminarydiscussionshavebeenhadwithHertzonDemand,specificallythrough

LucasBellamy,theHertzsalesrepresentativeforbothNorthCarolinaandSouthCarolina.

HertzonDemandisuniquefromseveralothercarsharingcompaniesinthatitallowsfor

one‐waycarrentalsandrequiresnomembershipfees.Thebusinessrelationshipbetween

HertzandtheCityisnegotiableanddependsonthechangingutilizationoftheprogram.

HertzonDemandhasfoundsuccessatcollegecampusesacrosstheUnitedStatesandhasa

gooddealofexperiencewithexposureandmarketingtargetingcollegestudentsin

particular,forexample,throughFacebookcampaigns.ThereiscurrentlyaHertzon

DemandprogramattheUniversityofSouthCarolinaandinCharlotte,NC,andtheyare

67

lookingatbranchingintotheUniversityofNorthCarolinaatWilmington,ChapelHill,and

NorthCarolinaStateUniversityaswell.ThepursuingofapotentialrelationshipwithHertz

onDemandwillgothroughtheDirectorofSales,whohasnotyetbeenapartofthe

conversation.

CityFleets

Inothercitiesthathavepartneredwithfranchisesindevelopingcarshares,often

thecityitselfhasconvertedsomeofitsownfleetsintocarsharingvehicles.Thisserves

bothtostimulatetheprogramthroughtheensuringofacertainlevelofusage,aswellasto

promotetheprogramthroughtheincreaseofitsrecognizablevehiclesonthestreets.

Below(Fig.34)isthedataregardingtheCityofCharleston’sfleetsbythe

departmenttheyfallunderandthetypesofvehiclesineach(CharlestonCityFleet

ManagementOffice,2011).Somewouldobviouslybeimpracticalandimpossibletoreplace

withcarsharingautomobiles,includingspecialvehiclessuchastractors,mowers,trailers,

dumptrucks,compressors,excavators,sweepers,chippers,generators,etc.However,for

someofthedepartmentswhichuseautomobilesorsportsutilityvehicles,whose

employeesdonotneedtooperateanddrivethevehiclesasanessentialpartoftheirjobs,

switchingtocarsharingvehiclesmaybefeasible.Ideally,thisswitchwouldhappenonlyfor

departmentswhereemployeesutilizecarsforabriefperiodoftimeeveryday.Inpursuing

theconvertingofsomeofthesefleetstocarsharingvehicles,continueddiscussionshould

behadwiththeCity’sFleetManagementoffice.

Figure34:CharlestonCityFleetVehicles

Department #ofvehicles

Typesofvehicles

Parkingmanagement 6 Automobile

Republicparking 11 Generator,floorsweeper,trailer,automobile,pickuptruck

Parkingmeters 1 Pickuptruck

Municipalauditorium 6 Generator,floorsweeper,forklift,pickuptruck,van

Golfcourse 12 Tractor,mower,pickuptruck

Municipalcourt 1 Automobile

Mayor’soffice 2 Automobile

BFR 4 Generator,automobile

BFRrevenuecollections 5 Pickuptruck

Humanresources 6 Generator,automobile,sportsutilityvehicle

Safety 1 Automobile

Informationtechnology 7 Minivan,sportsutilityvehicle,automobile

68

Telecommunications 3 Pickuptruck,van,sportsutilityvehicle

Parks–electrical 14 Generator,trailer,pickuptruck,aerialbuckettruck

Parks–facilitiesmaintenance 21 Watertank,mower,compressor,pressurewasher,trailer,pickuptruck,van

Publicservice–stormwater 72 Compressor,excavator,mower,concretemixer,backhoe,tractor,cutter,sewertrailer,dumptruck,semi,sewertruck,sportsutilityvehicle

Publicservice–engineering 7 Pickuptruck,sportsutilityvehicle

Publicservice–inspections 18 Pickuptruck,automobile

Livability 6 Pickuptruck

Traffic&Transportation 40 Compressor,excavator,paintstriper,linemaker,messageboard,trailer,sportsutilityvehicle,aerialbuckettruck,pickuptruck,van,automobile

Publicservice–administration 1 Sportsutilityvehicle

Publicservice–streets&sidewalks

36 Tamper,aircompressor,backhoe,roller,frontloader,grader,trailer,dumptruck,pickuptruck,asphalttruck

Publicservices–environmentalservices–administration

2 Automobile,pickuptruck

Publicservices–environmentalservices–garbagecollection

27 Sideloader,rearloader,automobile,minivan

Publicservices–environmentalservices–trashcollection

83 Clawbucket,frontloader,dumptruck,pickuptruck,sideloader

Publicservices–environmentalservices–streetsweeping

10 Floorsweeper,van,pickuptruck,streetsweeper

Fleetmanagement 31 Forklift,aircompressor,floorsweeper,steamcleaner,welder,pressurewasher,mower,chipper,trailer,pickuptruck,minivan,sportsutilityvehicle

Design,Development&Preservation

3 Sportsutilityvehicle

Planning&Neighborhoods 1 Sportsutilityvehicle

Housing&CommunityDevelopment

5 Pickuptruck,automobile,sportsutilityvehicle

Culturalaffairs 1 Minivan

Recreation 19 Pickuptruck,van,minivan,bus,automobile,sportsutilityvehicle

Parks–capitalprojects 6 Sportsutilityvehicle,automobile,pickuptruck

Parks–administration 6 Generator,minivan,pickuptruck,sportsutilityvehicle,van

Parks–groundmaintenance 100 Tractor,chipper,mower,watertank,floorsweeper,rake,gator,backhoe,bushhog,trailer,dumptruck

Parks–construction 13 Bulldozer,roller,backhoe,trailer,pickuptruck,dumptruck

Parks–urbanforestry 18 Backhoe,compressor,forklift,stumpgrinder,chipper,dumptruck,pickuptruck,watertruck,aerialbuckettruck,sportsutilityvehicle,cranetruck

Parks–horticulture 9 Mower,bushhog,watertank,trailer,pickuptruck

Dockstreettheatre 2 Generator

Maritimecenter 1 Pickuptruck

69

administration

Tourism 1 Pickuptruck

Businessservices 2 Automobile

(JackiePechon,OfficeManager,FleetManagement,CityofCharleston)

ExistingFranchises

Asstatedbefore,WeCarofEnterpriseRent‐a‐Carhasalreadyapproachedseveral

institutionsthroughoutthecounty,includingTheCitadel,CollegeofCharleston,and

Boeing,andhadbeenalreadyplanningonintroducingcarsharingtotheseareaseven

beforethisstudywasfirstinitiated.

TheCityhasalsohadpreliminarydiscussionswithHertzonDemand,andhas

reachedouttoZipcar,BMW,andPBSC(thePublicBikeSystemCompany)ofMontreal.

Movingforward,theCityshouldcontinuetocommunicatewithallofthesepotential

partnersandkeeptheminformedofthestepsbeingtakentodeveloptheprogram.

TIMELINEANDROLLOUTOFOPERATIONS

• WritingaRequestforProposals(RFP)orRequestforInformation(RFI)

• Pilotprogram

Tocontinuethepursuitofacarorbicyclesharingprogram,itisessentialforthe

Citytokeepincommunicationwithexistingcarandbicyclesharingoperators.Toformally

announcearequestforapartneroperator,theCitycansendouteitheranRFIoranRFP.

WhileanRFPpre‐definesthespecificscopeofmanyoftheservicestobeengaged,anRFIis

muchmorelooseandflexible.Itasksvendorstoproposeascopeandabusinessmodelfor

theirdeliveryofservices.UnlikeRFPs,RFIsarenon‐binding.Theiropen‐endedquality

wouldmakeserviceprovidersmorelikelytoproposenon‐traditionalbusinessmodels

which,forexample,couldcombinebothprivateandpublicvehicleuse.TheRFIshouldask

potentialoperatorshowtheywouldoperatetheirservice;thescopeandorganizationofa

pilotprogram;andhowmuchsubsidy,ifany,theywouldrequirefromtheCity.RFIscanbe

issuedtoestablishedcar‐sharingcompaniesaswellascommunitygroupsthatmaybe

interestedinfoundinganon‐profitcar‐sharingorganization.AnRFIcouldhelpfocusthe

developmentofanRFP.

70

SampleRFIs–Bikesharing:Boston:http://www.cityofboston.gov/transportation/PDFs/BikeShareRFI.pdfKingCounty,Seattle:http://www.metrobike.net/index.php?s=file_download&id=4Wilmington,NC:http://www.wmpo.org/PDF/2008‐10_RFI_BicycleSharing.pdfSampleRFPs–Bikesharing:Boston:http://www.metrobike.net/index.php?s=file_download&id=20MinneapolisNiceRide:http://www.metrobike.net/index.php?s=file_download&id=32Arlington,VA:http://egov.arlingtonva.us/purchasing/pdf/contracts/56‐09.pdfBoulder,CO:http://www.metrobike.net/index.php?s=file_download&id=33SampleRFPs–Carsharing:Baltimore:http://www.carsharing.net/rfp/BaltimoreCarShareRFP2009.pdfMiami:http://www.carsharing.net/library/rfp/RFP42‐07‐08.pdfWashingtonMetropolitanAreaTransitAuthority:http://www.carsharing.net/library/RFP_SVP_2004_WMATA_2.pdfSantaBarbara:http://c0133321.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/Model%20RFP%20‐%20Car%20Sharing%20Santa%20Barbara%20SF.pdfSanAntonio:http://sanantonio.gov/rfplistings/Content.aspx?id=1331

RESOURCEDEVELOPMENT

Mostoftheresourcesrelatingtocarorbicyclesharingwouldbeprovidedbythefranchise,

iftheCitydecidedtopartnerwithone.Theseincludethefleetsofvehiclesthemselves,in

additiontoanyequipmentneededforsmartstations,especiallyforbicycleshares.Car

sharesusuallyutilizeparkinglotsorgaragesanddonotneedspecialtechnologytokeep

thevehicleslocked.Otherresourcesneededforvehiclesharingincludestafftorun

operations.Again,thesewillprobablycomefromthecompany;however,theCitycould

alsoappointapersontobethecontactinchargeofrelationsbetweenthepartners,

althoughthisisn’tentirelynecessary.

Finally,somethingthatneedstobedone,whetherthroughthefranchiseorthrough

thecity,isGISanalysisacrossdowntownandotherpotentialvehicleshareareasto

determinetheideallocationsforstations.Analysisincludesmappingofvarious

demographics,proximitytospacesthatcouldbeconvertedtovehiclesharinghubs,

proximitytoothertransitstations,etc.

71

MARKETINGANDCOMMUNICATIONS

TherearevarioustoolsthattheCityandfranchisecanuseinpartnershiptopromotethe

vehiclesharingprogram.Certainonescanbeusedacrossallmarkets,whereasothersare

bettersuitedforspecifictargetpopulations.

All

- Website- Informationsessionsforcityemployees,public- Publicannouncements,newscoverage- Advertising(billboards;TV,radiocommercials,etc.)- Workwithcommunitygroups- Discounts,specialdealsduringinitiallaunch

o Freehelmets,lowermembershiprate- Safetyinitiatives

Tourists

- InformationintheVisitorCenter- Workwithairlines/airport,trains/trainstation,cruiselines

Students

- Studentrepresentativesfortheprogram;workwithstudentgovernmentstogainadvocates

- Boothsatfairs,orientation,openhouses- Facebook,othersocialmedia

72

CONCLUSION

TheCityofCharlestonshouldnotlosemomentuminbringingcarandbicyclesharing

programstothearea.Theworkthathasbeendonesofarshouldbeutilizedinthe

continueddevelopmentofrelationshipswithpotentialpartners.Charlestonisacityripe

forvehiclesharing,andvehiclesharingprogramscouldreallyhelptoreduce

transportation‐drivengreenhousegasemissions,aswellastochangethecultureoftransit

inthecityforthebetter.

73

REFERENCES

Amtrak.SilverService/PalmettoRoute.<http://www.amtrak.com>

Anderson,JohnWard.“ParisEmbracesPlantoBecomeCityofBikes.”TheWashingtonPost.24Mar. 2007.<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp‐ dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032301753.html>

Berkeley‐Charleston‐DorchesterCouncilofGovernments.GrowthIndicatorsintheBerkeley CharlestonDorchesterRegion2000‐2004.Oct.2005. <http://www.bcdcog.com/publications/GrowthIndicators.pdf>

Berkeley‐Charleston‐DorchesterCouncilofGovernments.TrafficintheBerkeleyCharleston DorchesterRegion:AnAnalysisof1990‐2000Data.March2002.

Bhattari,Abha.“Bike‐Sharing:CyclingtoaCityNearYou.”FastCompany.26June2009. <http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/abha‐bhattarai/abha‐bhattarai/bike‐sharing‐cycling‐ city‐near‐you>

Bieszcat,AliceandSchwieterman,Joseph.AreTaxesonCarsharingTooHigh?AReviewofthe PublicBenefitsandTaxBurdenofanExpandingTransportationSector.DePaulUniversity. ChaddickInstituteforMetropolitanDevelopment.June2011.

“BicycleSharingSystemsWorldwide:SelectedCaseStudies.”CityRyde.Sep.2010. <http://www.cityryde.com/reports>

BikeLaw.<http://www.bikelaw.com>

“BikeShare:ACommunityBicycleLendingProgram.”TransportCanada.15Aug.2010. <http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment‐utsp‐bikeshare‐1066.htm>

“BringingCar‐SharingtoYourCommunity.”CityCarShare.2005. <http://www.citycarshare.org/download/CCS_BCCtYC_Long.pdf>

CharlestonAreaRegionalTransitAuthority.<http://www.ridecarta.com>

CharlestonAreaRideMaps.TheCoastalCyclists.2008. <http://www.coastalcyclists.org/ride_maps.htm>

“CharlestonCarInsuranceStatistics.”InsuranceUSA.<http://www.insuranceusa.com/Charleston‐ Car‐Insurance‐SC.php>

“CharlestonCounty,SouthCarolinaPopulationandHousingNarrativeProfile:2005‐2009.” AmericanCommunitySurvey5‐YearEstimates.U.S.CensusBureauAmericanFactFinder.

CharlestonGreenCommitteeandCityofCharleston,CharlestonGreenPlan.2010. <http://www.charlestongreencommittee.com/related_documents.html>

CharlestonMOVES!<http://www.charlestonmoves.org/resources.htm>

CharlestonRegionalDevelopmentAlliance.Berkeley,Charleston,&DorchesterCounties.2011. <http://www.crda.org/business>

“CharlestonSouthCarolinaDemographics.”CharlestonRealEstateGuide. <http://www.charlestonrealestateguide.com/charleston‐sc‐demographics.shtml>

74

“Charleston,SouthCarolinaDemographicsSummary.”CLRsearch.com. <http://www.clrsearch.com/Charleston_Demographics/SC>

“Charleston,SouthCarolina.”City‐Data.com.<http://www.city‐data.com/city/Charleston‐South‐ Carolina.html>

CityofCharlestonDepartmentofTrafficandTransportation.PeninsulaTrafficandParkingStudy. June2000.

CityofCharlestonDepartmentofTrafficandTransportation.RideSafe:AQuickGuidetoCyclingin theLowcountry.<http://www.charlestoncity.info/shared/docs/0/bike_safe.pdf>

CityofCharlestonDepartmentofTrafficandTransportation.TrafficSignalTimingProject: DowntownandWestAshleySignalTimingEffectivenessStudy.Oct.2008.

CityofCharleston.2012DraftBikePlan. <http://www.charlestoncity.info/shared/docs/0/bike2012_final_draft_sm2.pdf>

ClemsonArchitectureCenter.Metro‐CharlestonBikePlanFall2009.Dec.2009. <http://www.clemson.edu/caah/architecture/fluid‐campus/docs/CAC.C‐StudioV‐Bike‐ Plan‐Expo.12.2009.pdf>

Cohen,Adam,Shaheen,Susan,andMcKenzie,Ryan.Carsharing:AGuideforLocalPlanners.2008. InstituteofTransportationStudies,UniversityofCaliforniaDavis.

Davis,Troy.“ZipcarPrizeProposal:User‐SourcedCarSharingPlanningAlgorithm.”Inputs& Outputs.<http://troy.yort.com/zipcar‐prize‐user‐sourced‐car‐sharing‐assignm>

DeMaio,Paul.“Bike‐sharing:History,Impacts,ModelsofProvision,andFuture.”JournalofPublic Transportation12.4(2009).

“EnterpriseHoldingsAcquiringPhillyCarshare.”St.Louis.9Aug.2011. <http://www.phillycarshare.org/wp‐content/uploads/2011/08/EHI‐acquires‐PCS.pdf>

“EnterpriseHoldingsStandsupforCar‐SharingCustomers.”St.Louis.29Oct.2010. <http://www.enterpriseholdings.com/press‐room/enterprise‐holdings‐stands‐up‐for‐car‐ sharing‐customers.html>

“EstimationofTourismEconomicImpactsintheCharlestonArea2010.”OfficeofTouristAnalysis, CollegeofCharleston.2011.

Findlay,Prentiss.“PartofU.S.17ProjectKicksOffwithFanfare.”ParkWestPalazzo.12Apr.2011. <http://parkwestpalazzo.blogspot.com/2011/04/us‐17‐expansion‐moves‐forward‐its‐ all.html>

Gilreath,Vonie.“Re:DiscussingRideSharingandVehicleSharinginCharleston.”4Aug.2011.E‐ mail.

Hubbard,Saul.“BilltoEaseCarSharingPassesSenate.”TheRegister‐Guard.7June2011. <http://www.registerguard.com/web/newslocalnews/26351531‐41/car‐sharing‐ insurance‐bill‐vehicle.html.csp>

InteractiveParkingGuide.PlacestoParkontheCharlestonPeninsula.TheOfficialWebsiteofthe CityofCharleston,SC.<http://www.charleston‐sc.gov/shared/docs/0/parking.html>

JZTIandBonnetteConsulting.PhiladelphiaBikeshareConceptStudy.Feb.2010.

75

Knight,Deja.“FatalBikeAccidentPromptsCityofCharlestontoTakeAction.”Live5News:James Island.7July2011.<http://jamesisland.live5news.com/news/news/fatal‐bike‐accident‐ prompts‐city‐charleston‐take‐action/61030>

LeagueofAmericanBicyclistsBicycleFriendlyCommunityApplicationforCharleston.2010.

Miller,ByronMiller.Personalinterview.22Aug.2011.

Miller,Scott.“GEChoosesGreenvilleasEVTestCity.”GSABusiness.19July2011. <http://www.gsabusiness.com/news/40373‐ge‐chooses‐greenville‐as‐ev‐test‐city>

Minis,Wevonneda.“Ridesharing:MakingFriendsandSavingMoney.”ThePostandCourier.14May 2011.<http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2011/may/14/making‐friends‐saving‐ money/>

Mullin,Dawn.SouthCarolinaFoundationDirectory9thEdition.Part1–FoundationsAccepting Proposals.SouthCarolinaStateLibrary.2010. <http://www.statelibrary.sc.gov/docs/grant/foundation2010.pdf>

“MUSCCarpoolProgramInformation.”MUSCFinance&AdministrationOperations. <http://www.musc.edu/vpfa/operations/Parking/carpool.htm>

MUSCCommuterSurvey.Berkeley‐Charleston‐DorchesterCouncilofGovernments.2011.

NICHESNewSeamlessMobilityServicesPublicBicyclesPolicyNotes.2007.

NYCDepartmentofCityPlanning.BikeShare:OpportunitiesinNewYorkCity.Spring2009.

OBIS:OptimisingBikeSharinginEuropeanCities:AHandbook.June2011.

Overcash,Philip.“Re:FollowupfromYesterday’sMeetingonBikeSharing.”5Aug2011.E‐mail.

Pechon,Jackie.EquipmentList.CharlestonCityFleetManagementOffice.2011.

“PedestrianandBicycleMilestonesinSouthCarolina.”SouthCarolinaDepartmentof Transportation.<http://www.scdot.org/getting/BikePed/BP_milestones.shtml>

Reutter,Mark.“CityPutsBrakesonBikeshareProgram,CitingCosts.”BaltimoreBrew.5Apr.2011. <http://www.baltimorebrew.com/2011/04/05/city‐puts‐brakes‐on‐bikeshare‐program‐ citing‐costs/>

“RidewithBIXI:Design,Innovation&Technology.”CapitalBIXI.<https://capital.bixi.com/ride‐ with‐bixi/station/design‐innovation‐technology>

SafeStreetsSaveLives.<http://www.safestreetssavelives.org/about.php>

“S.C.HasFewerUninsuredMotoriststhanaDecadeAgo,StudyFinds.”CharlestonRegionalB BusinessJournal.27Jan.2009.<http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/news/26285‐s‐c‐ has‐fewer‐uninsured‐motorists‐than‐a‐decade‐ago‐study‐finds?rss=0>

Slade,David.“BrakesPutonBike‐ParkingPlan.”ThePostandCourier.21July2010. <http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2010/jul/21/brakes‐put‐on‐bike‐parking‐plan>

“SmartCardParkingProgram.”TheOfficialWebsiteoftheCityofCharleston,SC. <http://www.charleston‐sc.gov/dept/content.aspx?nid=1739>

Smith,KevinandPan,Bing.2010CharlestonAreaVisitorInterceptSurvey.OfficeofTourism Analysis,DepartmentofHospitalityandTourismManagement,SchoolofBusiness,College ofCharleston.23Mar.2011.

76

Somerville,Robert.“Re:QuestionfromCitySustainabilityInternonParkingIssues.”29July2011.

“SouthCarolinaCensusData:OccupiedHousing.”CensusChartsIndex.<http://www.census‐ charts.com/OH/South_Carolina.html>

SouthCarolinaDepartmentofTransportation.GettingAroundinSouthCarolina. <http://www.scdot.org/getting/evacuation.shtml>

“SouthCarolinaDieselEmissionsReductionAct(DERA)Grants.”SouthCarolinaDepartmentof HealthandEnvironmentalControl.<http://www.scdhec.gov/environment/baq/DERA>

Tecklenburg,Peter.“RE:CharlestonBikeorCarSharingProgram,andIntegrationwithCARTA.”1 Aug2011.E‐mail.

“TheDenverBikeSharingStory.”DenverBCycle. <http://denver.bcycle.com/About/OurStory.aspx>

TheGreatAmericanStations:RevitalizingAmerica’sTrainStations.NorthCharleston,SC(CHS). <http://www.greatamericanstations.com/Stations/CHS>

“TheNeedforPedestrianandBicycleFacilities.”SouthCarolinaDepartmentofTransportation. <http://www.scdot.org/getting/BikePed/BP_need.shtml>

ThePalmettoCyclingCoalition.<http://www.pccsc.net/main.php>

“TrafficManagementCenter.”TheOfficialWebsiteoftheCityofCharleston,SC. <http://www.charleston‐sc.gov/dept/content.aspx?nid=1274>

TransitCooperativeResearchProgramReport108.CarSharing:WhereandHowItSucceeds.2005. <http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_108.pdf>

TridentRideShare.<http://www.tridentrideshare.org>

U.S.DepartmentofTransportation.NationalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministration’sNational CenterforStatisticsandAnalysis.“TrafficSafetyFacts:2009Data.”<http://www‐ nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811387.pdf>

UnionPierPlanInteractiveBrochure.AbouttheUnionPierCruiseTerminal.SouthCarolinaState PortsAuthority.<http://www.scspa.com/UnionPierPlan/7606‐ 01_UnionPierPlan_com_Interactive_Brochurec2.html>

Velo’vRates.GrandLyonUrbanCommunity.<http://www.velov.grandlyon.com>

WashingtonStateUniversity:GreenBike.<http://greenbike.wsu.edu>

Zotwheels.UniversityofCaliforniaIrvine:ParkingandTransportation. <http://www.parking.uci.edu/zotwheels>

Documents

Feasibility Study for Vehicle Sharing in Charleston, South