« sprawl and serenity | Main | comment of the week: serene and effective transit »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John Perry

Car-sharing is really a genius way to encourage alternative transportation in the long run - by using ZipCar, my family was able to sell their own car and use a car only when taking public transit was too inconvenient. For my family, this was huge - they had grown up in places where owning a car was seen as a necessity and ZipCar really helped wean them off from overdependence on a private vehicle, which seems to have had better long-term consequences then having being forced to go cold turkey all at once (I think if that had happened, then they would have been desperate to get back to owning a car).

If more cities were to follow Sydney's example, it could have immensely positive consequences. That move from owning a car to not using a car is easier to facilitate when you take it step-by-step.


Car sharing is an excellent transitional step between car-based and public transit, because in most cities, 99% of the time you really don't need a car, but that 1% is what gets you. But I see car sharing as more of a way to cover the gaps in areas where public transit is not quite there yet: I use ZipCar quite regularly in San Jose, and wish there were more cars, and in Boston I've used it to travel to the suburbs where commuter rail service is sparse. Inside a central city, it doesn't seem hugely useful aside from the fairly rare trip to buy furniture or something.

As an aside, I really hate the term "alternative transportation", because it places it in opposition to cars, which are of course ordinary transportation for ordinary people. You know, as opposed to alternative transportation for people of alternative lifestyles.


Mandating a car-share space in new high-rise apartment buildings seems like a reasonable move, but it would be more effective to ban (or at least radically limit) all off-street parking provision in new housing.

Dead right about the unique political circumstances of the City of Sydney - it's got a lot of potential for that reason to be a vanguard for other councils.

Ed O

Walking around the residential streets near the Sydney CBD in areas like Surry Hills, you see the car-share vehicles in marked parking spaces on nearly every corner. The car-share system is user-friendly in itself, but having so many cars available makes the whole scheme, so much more accessible and attractive, and the arguments for keeping a car in the inner-city really start to fall away.

One of the interesting things about car-share is that drivers are aware of the cost of each trip - and although it's very easy to book and jump into a car – you modify your car usage to try to keep your monthly bill down. For some trips and on some occasions, nothing but a car will suffice – and with car-share, you maintain your ability to move around the city as any other motorist at these times, but on a day to day basis, there’s the ongoing incentive to consider walking, cycling and transit as options first. Encouraging more efficient and rational use of cars is another way car-sharing schemes are such a brilliant idea in helping to reduce the impacts of cars in urban areas.


I wish Brisbane City Council would be even half this proactive. They seem to be actively hostile to car share programs.

Tom West

Car share programs always seem to be in dense inner city areas. I did think that was because these araes tend to have good transit provision, and that car share users are people who mostly use transit. However, you seem to find car share schemes in all inner city areas, regardelss of transit mode share, which suggests that the real driver of car share demand is the cost/availabiltiy of parking.


Population density might be a factor in car-sharing locations - having enough people within walking distance of a car-share space.


When I lived in Woolloomooloo (don't you love all those Os?) which is considered an inner-east suburb of Sydney, I took the train to work from Kings Cross to North Sydney, via Town Hall, but when I wanted to go into the City to shop or to a movie or to a performance at the Opera House, I walked. I think the same is true of people who live in East Sydney, Darlinghurst, Paddington and other inner-east suburbs, or the western edge of the City and the inner west suburbs. A car-share program may have come in handy but I can't think of a single instance where it would have been absolutely necessary.


I live in the inner-east of Sydney and used to belong to a car-share scheme. I eventually quit it because I never used it. The per-hour pricing scheme made most trips expensive because you had to pay for the time you stayed at your destination - for me that was usually a few hours. It was usually cheaper (and definitely easier) to just hail a cab.

Jarrett at HumanTransit.org

Simon.  Yes, car sharing's best use is for fairly short errand trips where you need a car to haul stuff -- e.g. bi-weekly trips to a big box retail or something.  I used it a lot in San Francisco, but never for trips where I was spending more than a couple of hours at a destination.  For that I used transit (which is much more versatile than in Sydney) and taxis.


Tom. Car Share is in the inner city because in the burbs more people have the ability to park, so your assertion is partially true. But it is also about density, because low density makes the location of cars close enough to enough people difficult + the trip times and distances are such that it becomes financially uncompetitive for users. It is also important to note that many businesses are now using car share (500 in Sydney) as a way to minimise unproductive capital investment in fleet where use is not high, or where the occasional flexibility is more affordably met with car share. Car share also provides things like wagons and vans for those Ikea (shudder) moments.


Ive spoken to all the car sharing schemes about a tiny little carve out from the australian governments cash for clunkers policy. Instead of $3000 to buy a car, how about just $300 towards a year of car share? Melbourne lord mayor Robert Doyle is also all for it! It would be a boost to awareness and patronage beyond what clover could achieve, and would add genuine green credentials to what is a terribly wasteful idea.

Brian Sandle

Car-sharing may or may not mean ride-sharing. Now there is software such as Avego which allows automated sharing of the cost of a ride. Ride-sharing reduces the number of single-occupier vehicles on the road.

The comments to this entry are closed.

the firm

Jarrett is now in ...

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...