TY  - BOOK
AU  - Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C.
TI  - Ridesharing as a complement to transit : a synthesis of transit practice
SN  - 0309223539
U1  - 388 
PY  - 2012///
CY  - Washington D.C.
PB  - Transportation Research Board
N1  - CONTENTS SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER ONE  INTRODUCTION  5 Overview, 5 Methodology, 5 Literature Review, 5 Survey, 5 Agency Profiles, 6 Organization of the Report, 6 CHAPTER TWO  LITERATURE REVIEW  7 Introduction, 7 Public Transit Agencies with Ridesharing Programs, 7 TransitOperated Vanpool Programs, 7 Ridesharing Programs and Incentives, 8 Casual Carpooling, 8 Dynamic Ridesharing, 9 Economic Considerations of Ridesharing within Public Transit Agencies, 9 Conclusion, 10 CHAPTER THREE  SURVEY RESULTS: RIDESHARING WITHIN  11 PUBLIC TRANSIT AGENCIES Ridesharing Services Offered by Transit Agencies, 11 Profile: King County Metro Transit in Seattle Integrates Ridesharing into Agency, 11 Profile: Kings County Area Public Transit Agency Vanpools Serve Farmworkers, 14 Profile: Pace Covers the Last Mile with Metra Feeders, 15 Ridesharing in the Planning Process, 15 Funding of Ridesharing, 16 Performance Measures of Ridesharing Success, 16 CostBenefit Comparison of Ridesharing and Transit Services, 17 Profile: Des Moines Area Regional Transit Agency (DART) Captures Vanpool Miles to Maximize Revenue, 17 Coordination with Regional Entities, 18 Challenges, 18 CHAPTER FOUR  SURVEY RESULTS: RIDESHARING WITHIN  19 NONTRANSIT AGENCIES Motivating Factors, 19 Ridesharing Services Offered, 19 Profile: Metropolitan Transportation Commission Leverages Ridesharing and Transit in the San Francisco Bay Area, 19 Incentives, 20 Coordination and Integration with Transit Agencies, 22 Profile: Washington State Leads Nation in Vanpooling, 22 Performance Measures of Ridesharing Success, 23 Challenges, 23 CHAPTER FIVE  SURVEY RESULTS: MARKETING AND TECHNOLOGY25 Marketing Strategies Integrating Ridesharing and Transit, 25 Profile: Vanpoolers Get Deals on Transit Rides at DART, Pace, and King County Metro, 25 Incorporating Customers' Perspectives, 25 Technology and Social Media, 27 Profile: SCAT and DART Communicate through Social Media, 28 Dynamic Ridesharing, 29 Profile: Dynamic Ridesharing Coming to Seattle, 29 CHAPTER SIx  SURVEY RESULTS: PUBLIC TRANSIT AGENCIES  31 AND CASUAL CARPOOLING Profile: BART and Cities Manage Casual Carpooling, 31 Profile: PRTC Supports Casual Carpooling, 32 CHAPTER SEVEN  CONCLUSIONS 33 Reasons for Public Transit and Ridesharing to Work Together, 33 Technology, 33 Challenges, 33 Opportunities, 34 Conclusion, 35 REFERENCES 36 APPENDIx A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS  38 APPENDIX B  PROFILES OF PARTICIPATING TRANSIT  57 AND NONTRANSIT AGENCIES APPENDIX C TRANSIT MODES OPERATED BY RESPONDENTS  60 61 APPENDIX D RIDESHARING PLACEMENT WITHIN AGENCIES
ER  -