Search

Abstract: This paper analyzes personal and car-sharing characteristics of commuters at university in Los Angeles, California. These commuters do not hold an on-campus parking permit and commute by an alternative mode other than driving alone. Each month, the university offers them 8h free use of shared vehicles across the campus. University employee car-sharers’ housing distribution is significantly different from that of their counterparts who drive to work. Commuter benefits influence not only the participation rate of a car-sharing program but also the program participants’ frequency, time and quantity of car-sharing consumption. Car-sharing is most popular among bus commuters, university students and female employees. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Research on environmental justice and social inclusion suggests that high-income wage earners may have better job access due to their greater choices in both housing and transportation markets. This study compares the jobs/housing balance and mode choice of different groups of employees of a large employer (27,113 employees) and those of the “reference groups” from comparable employees working for smaller employers in Los Angeles. Based on spatial and statistical analyses, this paper finds the following: [a)] Across all employee groups, a better jobs/housing balance was accompanied by higher income, as was likelihood to patronize Travel Demand Management (TDM) programs. [b)] Employees from the large employer had more options for carpooling and thus drove alone less, even after controlling overall housing stock, residential location, annual income, and/or commute time. [c)] Across all employee groups, good jobs/housing balance did not necessarily bring about green mode choice. [d)] Comprehensive TDM measures by the large employer significantly reduced employees’ dependence on driving, even in a region where autocommuting dominates. However, these measures were costly to implement. [e)] Different employee groups favor different TDM programs, and the patterns are marked by income. The above findings suggest that shared or consolidated TDM and housing programs, which pool smaller employers, might better promote green mode choice. Participating employers may also negotiate better deals for program implementation when these programs involve third-party transit agencies and contractors. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This manuscript examines employees' participation in a free and discounted try-transit program called 'Dump the Pump' (DtP) in Los Angeles, California. DtP offered eligible employee drivers a 12-week free transit pass and a discounted transit pass after the free trial as long as the employee drivers continued buying transit passes. By one-year after the program's introduction, DtP attracted 33% more transit riders to the system. At the program's zenith, 5% of the eligible drivers who lived within a half-mile from a direct transit line to their workplace had switched. Drivers were more likely to try the program under conditions in which (1) gas prices were relatively high and (2) the travel time difference between driving and transit was relatively low. After trying transit, participants remained on transit longer if they had no children, were unresponsive to lower gas prices, and had a bus schedule that matched their travel needs. The DtP experience indicates recruitment programs can attract drivers over the long-term, but those drivers who do stay with the program have more flexible commute schedules than drivers as a whole. These findings echo those of previous studies. Parents and other caregivers respond to service quality differences between transit and driving more than other commuters. Employers will need to consider that sensitivity when designing try-transit programs if they want drivers to stick with public transit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]