Search results

The purpose of this paper is to design a parking space management platform to alleviate the parking problem and a two-stage solution for sharing and allocating parking spaces.

The market design mechanism and auction mechanism are integrated to solve the problem of parking space sharing and allocation. In the first stage, the market design mechanism with two rules is applied for making the good use of idle parking spaces. In the second stage, two sequential auction mechanisms are designed by extending first/second-price sealed bid auction mechanism to allocate both private and public parking spaces, which are received in previous stage and owned by the platform. Two stages are connected through a forecasted price which is calculated through the exponential smoothing method.

First, we prove three important properties of the proposed sequential auction mechanisms, namely, incentive compatibility, revenue equivalence and individual rationality. Second, a simulation study is used to verify the effectiveness of the mechanisms through numerical analysis. The impact of the system on three parts, namely, agents (private parking space suppliers), bidders (parking space customers) and the platform, is examined. Third, the results show that the sharing mechanism with monetrary incentive will attract a number of agents to join in the platform. The bidders are also able to obtain considerable utility, as compared with the (average) market parking fees. The platform can thus effectively allocate parking spaces with reasonable prices.

This paper combines the classical sequential auction mechanisms with the market design mechanism for the parking space sharing and allocation problem. The modeling and analysis method can also be used to address the similar allocation and pricing problems of other resources like bicycle sharing.

This paper claims that the parking policy is one of the most obvious tools for reducing traffic congestion, pollutant emissions and conflicts between transportation network users. The purpose of this paper is to propose and implement a strategy, via a simulation tool, for the sharing of parking places between light cars and vans for goods delivery.

Temporal and spatial dynamic booking of on‐street parking places is described by using the multi‐agent paradigm. Main agents concerned by the sharing of parking places, their rules and interactions are implemented. Behavioral models and learning process of cognitive agents based on stated preferences collected beside the network users are designed for capturing multi‐agent interactions.

By coupling a 2D traffic simulation tool and the Copert III methodology, it is possible to simulate the traffic and environmental consequences of several scenarios for different infrastructures, occupancy rate of the places reserved for goods delivery and durations of the delivery process.

Several points are under development: a 3D environment will capture with more realism the behavior of agents in a larger spatial scale and in real time. The behavioral models will be designed by stated preferences obtained from surveys containing questions coupled with pictures of possible scenarios.

Applied in a real context, the sharing of parking places strategy shows benefits for traffic and for the environment. A decision maker can use this strategy for simulating scenarios, in the context of an urban area in particular.

The paper demonstrates how a simulation tool based on strategy of parking place sharing can satisfy constraints of transportation network users.

Transport governance is dependent on, and works through, legally defined or socially accepted categories that are challenged by the technological and business disruptions that characterize smart mobility. This chapter explores the dynamic interactions between the categories of transport governance and new (disruptive) forms of mobility, using a framework that highlights the ways governance solutions are influenced by how problems are framed. The argument is made through two empirical cases – of car sharing and motorized (electric) personal mobility devices. Car sharing emerged quietly onto the transport landscape in Australia, and has been accommodated and facilitated by local government parking policies. In this case, the tools for governing smart mobility already existed, and became adaptable to new imperatives. Personal mobility devices (PMDs), battery-powered motorized devices designed to be used by an individual on footpaths or shared user paths, are neither common nor legal on many roads or footpaths. The process through which PMDs became regulated in the Australian state of Queensland is used to illustrate the ways in which ‘epistemic experimentation’ can challenge regulatory framings and foster the introduction of new forms of smart mobility. The chapter concludes that smart mobility both disrupts and confirms dominant framings of transport governance, especially in relation to automobility, and that further challenges will need to be met as autonomous vehicles become more widespread across transport infrastructure.

Parking policy in the United States is dominated by zoning codes with minimum parking requirements stipulated for a variety of uses. Some cities have realized that this approach has not yielded the desired policy outcomes; instead, it may be causing unintended consequences including added auto-travel, dispersed development, congestion, and air pollution that cities now wish to mitigate.

This paper identifies historic and contemporary trends in United States’ parking policy as cities gain additional insight and embrace new priorities.

Three emerging trends in the U.S. context are identified: Rethinking zoning codes that require parking with development; introducing pricing to better manage curb resources thereby cutting down curb-space competition; and looking for urban design solutions to parking access, location and on-site placement which can lead to more efficient mode use decisions.

The chapter provides an analysis of cases showing how cities are now seeking alternative approaches.

After many years of policy intervention focused on the alleviation of parking shortages by requiring additional off-street parking, cities are now seeking alternative approaches.

Cities can learn from each other’s experiences. New paradigms in parking policy will lead to different social outcomes: they could increase the cost of auto use (disadvantaging the poor) but decrease auto dependence (favoring the poor).

The originality of this chapter is in the juxtaposition and analysis of trends that have, heretofore, had little exposure.

This chapter focuses on strategies to initiate a shift in mobility behaviour away from private cars towards a combination of more environmentally friendly transport modes including public transport, ride- and car sharing or even completely carbon-free modes like walking and cycling. The requirement for such a shift is that people must be able to actually choose between different travelling options and combine them within an intermodal mobility network. Here, shared mobility has a considerable potential to fill the gap between public and individual transport options.

This chapter summarises results from different studies on shared mobility from the providers’, the users’ and the political perspective. The user’s perspective is based on an empirical study comparing car sharers’, car drivers’ and public transport users’ attitudes and mobility patterns.

The empirical findings from the case study have shown that shuttle trips by car in general, and to the train station in particular, are an important field of action for improving the environmental impact of intermodal trips. The study has also shown that car sharing enables people to live without a private car by using different transport modes for different purposes. As the majority of car sharers report needing a car only one to three times a month, they have a very small carbon footprint compared to the average car owner.

Mobility patterns are determined by local transport options as well as by personal routines. Hence, current changes due to new shared mobility options seem to have a considerable direct impact on how people organise their daily lives on the one hand and an indirect impact on their living costs on the other hand, since private cars have an important share of private household costs.

From an environmental perspective, any incentives to encourage people to choose alternative forms of transport over their private cars would seem to be particularly effective. Thus, understanding the behaviour and needs of multi- and intermodal travellers is an important step towards sustainable mobility. Acknowledging that most travellers still need a car every now and then, car sharing is an essential addition to public transport systems, supporting both public transport use and carbon-free mobility like walking and cycling.