What do you do if your transportation system needs a creative boost?

1) The problem was to provide a (really) sustainable mobility over urban areas, where most of the mobility nuisance is created. 2) Assessing the need was the easiest part, once it is realized that existing products the industry has to sell will not help. 3) Bringing any significant effect where it counts, on a global scale, implies requirements going well beyond what today stakeholders are comfortable with: - a much less expensive technique - bring more services than are currently proposed - be sustainable right now, without further delay - forget about costly, sophisticated technologies

A primary mistake when undertaking a needs assessment upon which to base planning efforts is to limit the scope and audience involved. In the case of transit, the biggest mistake is to limit engagement to those using the transportation system. While they certainly can present a subset of needs based on their experience with using public transportation, it is equally important to seek to assess needs from those not using public transportation because it is quite possible their views if addressed could result in expanded demand for the transit system. This means identifying and engaging stakeholders such as business organizations, large employers, two and four year colleges, etc. It also means engagement should include public forums.

As a matter of fact, CarLina was initially rejected by many usual stakeholders, all with a single objection: "not expensive enough". How strange it is to hear the message only demonstrates the first point in our above assessment: the solution being much less expensive than they are used to build businesses on. Concurrently, even the toughest examinators could not find any blocking factor in the proposed solution. To the contrary, the solution is only favourably received. What we are looking for now are local communities wanting to deploy a pilot. This would even cost very little money if any, since the project not only is inexpensive in itself, but also addresses most environmental requirements that deserve public subventions.

We depart from this idea that cutting-edge whatever is the issue. This is not about fancy businesses to flourish, but the environment first. Having said that, the makket size for an affordable solution like CarLina might be extremely big, for matching a massive global need.

CarLina targets the urban dense habitat area, plus about 10km around, where it provides the same services the automotive and PT do but: - undisturbed commercial speed of 36km/h in town, to 60km/h in open areas - congestion free, predictable to the minute - carrying people + goods, 24/7, one minute max wait + very high capacity - easy deployment anywhere without public works - absolute minimal energy, renewable compatible A pilot fitting within a square km would be enough to acquire a transport authorization. A city authority can deploy this to solve some bottleneck nothing else can, is the typical scenario.

Of course, while it may seem pretty difficult to bring less constraints on a territory than CarLina does. Technically, the CarLina network barely impacts the terrain. Ground occupancy is at an extreme low, and everything was done to coexist with existing buildings and transports.