 
|
Policy contribution
The contribution to achieving transport policy objectives and alleviating
problems made by the examples above is assessed below.
|
Contribution to key objectives
|
|
Objective
|
Massachusetts
|
San Francisco
|
SCHOOLPOOL
|
Puget Sound Vanpools
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
= Weakest
possible positive contribution, |
 |
= strongest
possible positive contribution |
 |
= Weakest
possible negative contribution |
 |
= strongest
possible negative contribution |
 |
=
No contribution |
|
Contribution to alleviation of key problems
|
|
Problem
|
Massachusetts
|
San Francisco
|
SCHOOLPOOL
|
Puget Sound Vanpools
|
|
Congestion-related delay
|
|
|
|
|
|
Congestion-related unreliability
|
|
|
|
|
|
Community severance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Visual intrusion
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lack of amenity
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global warming
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local air pollution
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noise
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction of green space
|
|
|
|
|
|
Damage to environmentally sensitive sites
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility
impairments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic
groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number, severity and risk of accidents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area
|
|
|
|
|
|
= Weakest
possible positive contribution, |
|
= strongest
possible positive contribution |
|
= Weakest
possible negative contribution |
|
= strongest
possible negative contribution |
|
=
No contribution |
Appropriate Contexts
|
Appropriate area-types
|
|
Area type
|
Suitability
|
|
City centre
|
|
|
Dense inner suburb
|
|
|
Medium density outer suburb
|
|
|
Less dense outer suburb
|
|
|
District centre
|
|
|
Corridor
|
|
|
Small town
|
|
|
Tourist town
|
|
|
= Least suitable
area type |
|
= Most suitable
area type |
Adverse Side Effects
The key adverse side effect resulting from ride sharing is likely to be
abstraction from public transport services. In a commercial environment,
any substantial reduction in fare box revenues is likely to cause a reduction
in service levels. A reduction in service levels is likely to have negative
impacts on equity and accessibility. Additionally, if increased car use
results from the reduction in public transport services, the negative
impacts of car use will increase, and for low income households forced
to purchase a car, poverty will become a more serious issue.
|
