Identify key design issues in the deployment of advanced parking management systems (APMS).
Experience from APMS deployment sites.
BWI Airport,Baltimore,Maryland,United States; Seattle Center,Seattle,Washington,United States; Chicago,Illinois,United States
- Integrate the APMS project into a larger regional ITS architecture. By linking the APMS project to the existing regional architecture, it may be possible to leverage existing resources, such as communications channels and traveler information media that are funded under larger regional efforts. Several of the APMS projects examined for this study suffered delays and cost overruns because of uncertainties with stand-alone communications, power, and design and placement of the signs. Linking with a regional architecture reduces the potential for technical difficulties that may delay implementation and at the same time may provide opportunities to seek Federal and state funding (i.e. funding associated with ITS based traveler information systems, congestion management, and clean air attainment programs).
- When choosing a technology, consider whether the facility is new construction or a retrofit, whether the facility is subject to frequent repaving, and whether or not the parking configuration will change over the long term. The two types of counting systems for APMS deployments include entry/exit counters and space occupancy detectors. APMS applications that employ closed systems (such as BWI Airport and Chicago Metra) use signs, space occupancy detectors, and a dedicated central computer. These systems typically use dedicated fiber optic lines to communicate between nodes. While they provide real-time, high quality information, they are expensive and usually require that the communications infrastructure be included in the facility construction. In cases where existing facilities are retrofitted with APMS, space occupancy sensors that use RF communications are a good alternative to fiber optic communications. These RF transmitters communicate between individual parking spaces and a local hub, with the local hub transmitting the information to a central computer. Entry/exit counters are another option, especially appropriate for retrofitted facilities. While entry/exit counters are not as accurate as individual space sensors, they are easier to install and operate as they do not require complex communications infrastructure.
- Consider the design requirements associated with different technologies. For example, with deployments that use entry/exit counting systems, wide driveways and narrow detection zones can lead to missed counts. Moreover, when there is significant transient traffic that shares the entrance with the parking facility, the system count refresh rate needs to be fairly high to ensure that transient or circulatory traffic is not counted against the number of available spaces.
- Research the availability of communications lines and powers supplies thoroughly and get the permit process going early; check availability in the field before committing to a design. APMS devices require access to communication channels and power supplies, and the availability of communications lines and power lines may constrain the choice of technology options. Solving connectivity issues is a major activity within the system design and installation process.
- The Seattle APMS project experienced problems with the wireless communications between the detectors and the central computer, resulting in significant project delays. As of 2006, only the passive component of the system (providing directions to parking) was functioning. Due to technical difficulties, the active component (i.e. the provision of real-time space availability) was not operational.
- Metra was proactive in addressing any potential issues by calling for a radio frequency field study as part of the construction bid.
- Involve those that have authority and influence in the approval of sign appearance and location early in the design process. Sign appearance and locations can become a significant source of delay and increased cost, since approval is often required by architectural control boards and historical preservation organizations. Late changes in sign appearance can jeopardize a project’s progress, as they often require redesign and re-permitting for new communications infrastructure and power access. Throughout the design process, records of approvals and changes should be kept, and a final sign design must be formally agreed upon.
- In two of the three sites visited changes to signage in the latter part of the deployment introduced significant costs and delays.
Published By: U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration
Prepared by SAIC for the U.S. DOT
Source Date: January 2007
EDL Number: 14318
Other Reference Number: Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011URL: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/jpodocs/repts_te/14318_files/14318.pdf
RITA/Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
Average User Rating
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Arterial Management > Parking Management > Information Dissemination
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Arterial Management > Information Dissemination > Dynamic Message Signs
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Traveler Information > Tourism & Events > Advanced Parking
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Electronic Payment & Pricing > Parking Fee Payment
Major Initiatives > Mobility Services for All Americans
Major Initiatives > Integrated Corridor Management Systems
Major Initiatives > Nationwide Surface Transportation Weather Observing and Forecasting System - Clarus
Major Initiatives > Emergency Transportation Operations
Other Program Activities > Amber Alert
Other Program Activities > Real Time Traveler Information
Other Program Activities > Rural ITS Deployment
DMS, CMS, VMS, Changeable Message Signs, Variable Message Signs, planned special events