You are on page 1of 29

Modelling Parking

Overview

-Parking is a fundamental component of any vehicle trip

-Vehicles must be parked before individuals can partake in their desired


activity

-As such, parking is a integral part of any vehicle based trip and the inclusion
of this aspect in transport models is essential

-The supply of parking is also a fundamental tool in managing traffic flows

-The models should be able to ascertain the impact of changes in the supply,
pricing and enforcement of parking.
Parking as a Travel Demand Management (TDM) tool

Parking can be used as a TDM tool.

The supply of parking in a city centre can influence the number of trips
attracted into the city centre.

Parking can also be supplied in conjunction with public transport services to


increase the range of public transport services.

Work placed parking has also been used as a tool to deter individuals from
driving to work.

In most urban centres workers are provided with free parking. Dublin is no
exception, as 75% of those that work in the Greater Dublin Area have free
parking.

By placing a levy on these parking spaces, it is hoped that this will deter
individuals from driving into the city centre.
Parking Design Models

Parking design models can also be termed a physical design model.

This approach uses a set of design standards to determine the design of the
car park.

Computer based programs can be used to assist planners when designing


car parks using this approach.

Such an approach is satisfactory for small car parks where there is little traffic
interaction.

In situations where a large number of cars interact – this approach is not


satisfactory, as it can not adequately model the relationships between
circulating traffic and departing traffic.

The modelling approaches used in this model range from simple deterministic
models to advanced optimisation models.
Parking Design Models (2)

Gap theory is used in this modelling approach. It assumes:

•The arrival of a vehicles at any particular point in time is assumed to be


random, and independent of any other vehicle arrivals

•The model is used to calculate the delay of un-parking vehicles on all links
(road segments in the car park)

•The un-parking time is related to the size of the space, space angle and the
road with.

•90°degree parking with 5.5 m aisle widths and 2.47 m wide spaces the
average parking time is 5.2 seconds and the un-parking time is 12.6 seconds.
For 2.63 m wide spaces, 60°degree parking, and 5.5 m aisle widths the
parking and un- parking times fall to 4.5 and 10.2 seconds, respectively.
Parking Design Models (3)

These numerical models have concentrate primarily on the need for parking
spaces and the possibility that a person will not find a place to park.

The capacity of a car park is static – each car park has a maximum number of
spaces.

The dynamics of car parks are such that the capacity of the car park can be
influenced by the parking and un-parking movements, the characteristics of
the entry and exit conditions and other stochastic elements.

This results in the dynamic capacity of a car park being much less than the
actual capacity.

Typical regression relationships were derived for a subsystem of a car park


with inflow and outflow reservoirs.

In order to design a total parking system the subsystems are grouped into
sections. Sections represent independent parking areas within a system. The
total parking system is a combination of the sections.
Parking Allocation Models

Parking allocation models tackle the problem of modelling car parking, by


formulating a relationship between allocating a number of fixed arrivals with a
number of fixed parking spaces.

This relationship is determined on the basis of a procedure of measuring the


attractiveness of each space, and allocating them to arriving vehicles.

Generally several approaches can be used.


Parking Allocation Models (2)

Optimisation models

This modelling approach seeks to insure that parking facilities are used as
efficiently as possible.

This procedure compares the estimates:

1. parking demand by blocks generated by a land-use model with existing


supply

2. minimised the total walking distance for all parkers in the location and
sizing of new facilities.

The model assumed that the vehicle travel time to the facility, delay in the
parking lot, delay on the transport system and revenue had no impact on
the optimisation function.
Parking Allocation Models (3)

Optimisation models

This is a very simplistic approach, which neglects the effect of direct costs,
car-park accessibility, and trip-maker characteristics.

The temporal variation in parking duration was not considered, nor were the
turnover characteristics of the parking lots.

Optimisation models are very useful in determining the optimal location of


parking spaces or lots, and provide a “best possible” distribution of
parking.

It is, unlikely that people will choose their individual parking locations in such
a way that minimises the total cost to the system.

Further, optimisation models do not consider the dynamics of choice that are
present in many parking situations, nor do they recognize the fact that
drivers may not have full information about the transport or parking system
available to them.
Parking Allocation Models (4)

Constraint models

This model works on the basis that individuals will look for a satisfactory
parking space over an optimal one.

Neale (1972) developed the approach which examines individuals’


constraints, as a function of where they are most likely to choose their
parking space.

Individual’s acceptance of spaces under given price and distance from


workplace.

Their model determined the set of acceptable parking places and then
allocated parkers to them. If any spaces were left over, their price could be
reduced.
Parking Allocation Models (5)

Constraint models

An interactive process was used to search for an equilibrium condition. The


model was calibrated and applied to parking in the central business district
of Seattle.

Individuals were allocated on a block-by-block basis. The demand created in


a block was calculated using trip-generation equations.

This model offered an alternative to the optimisation models, but the


subjective nature of the allocation process made calibration difficult.
Parking Allocation Models (6)

Gravity models

This modelling approach uses a gravity model framework, similar to that used
in the four-stage model.

These models determine the origin—destination matrix given the trip


productions and attractions, and simplified assumptions about separation
between origins and destinations.

Gravity models provide estimates of the interchange of trips between


particular origins and destinations.

Their behavioural basis offers a number of advantages over the optimisation


and constraint models discussed above, particularly for those trips where
the parking-location decision affects the destination choice (e.g., shopping
trips).
Parking Allocation Models (7)

Gravity models

The validity of the behavioural basis is not as clear in the case of work trips,
since the location of parking is unlikely to affect the choice of destination in
the short run.

The aggregate nature of gravity models requires a relatively simple


representation of the transport and parking network.
Parking Search Models

This group of models examine the role of searching for a parking space to
understand parking behaviour.

These models focus upon drivers perceptions of the parking system and the
process of gathering information about the parking system in order to
make a parking decision.

These models are more accurate as they allow for several factors to impact
upon choice.

The models simulate individual drivers or groups of drivers and trace their
movements though the car park.

This modelling approach allows for the used of stochastic elements into the
modelling process.
Parking Search Models (2)

Thomson and Richardson (1998) defined this model.


Parking Search Models (3)

The model is based upon the following premise

- Parking is considered a search exercise, where drivers make a number of


linked decisions based upon experience

- Individuals examine car parks sequentially as they enter the urban area

- After examining the car park – they can select to park their or move on to
another car park

- The inspection of the car park is undertaken to identify their attributes and
to determine the availability of spaces

- The evaluation process of the car park is based upon the level of
satisfaction associated with the current car park (utility) and the
expectations with other known car parks.
Parking Search Models (4)

- It is possible that the car park selected will have no unused capacity –
therefore the individual will have to wait for a space to become available.

- The model combines various costs associated with selecting a car park to
estimate a generalised cost or disutility providing a numerical measure of
a car park's attractiveness that is used to evaluate the current parking
alternative.

- Access costs are those costs incurred while travelling to a car park and
include the in-vehicle travel time from the vehicle's current location to the
car park as well as the time spent searching within the car park for a
space.

- Native (or usage) costs associated with a car park, include the monetary
cost of the direct fee and expected one as well as the egress time (i.e.
walking travel time from the car park to the final destination).
Parking Search Models (5)

- It is possible that the car park selected will have no unused capacity –
therefore the individual will have to wait for a space to become available.

- The model combines various costs associated with selecting a car park to
estimate a generalised cost or disutility providing a numerical measure of
a car park's attractiveness that is used to evaluate the current parking
alternative.

- Access costs are those costs incurred while travelling to a car park and
include the in-vehicle travel time from the vehicle's current location to the
car park as well as the time spent searching within the car park for a
space.

- Native (or usage) costs associated with a car park, include the monetary
cost of the direct fee and expected one as well as the egress time (i.e.
walking travel time from the car park to the final destination).
Parking Search Models (6)

- Individuals may also incur a waiting time cost before entering a car park
which occurs when they have to queue at a car park before being able to
enter

Estimating the disutility of parking

As with all disutility measurement, parking also has a generalised cost


function.

The costs are identified in three levels

1. Native
- Direct fee
- Expected fine
- Egress (walk) time
Parking Search Models (7)

2. Waiting time
- Wait time

3. Access
- In car search time
- In-vehicle travel time

The following relationship is used to model individuals perceptions of a car-


park.
Parking Search Models (8)
Parking Search Models (9)

Stopping rule formulation

This model assumes that an individual will decide whether to stop or not
based upon an evaluation of the current car park.

To estimate whether or not an individual will choose one car park over
another the following model is used.
Parking Search Models (10)

if g’>0 (where g’ = expected utility gain), the individual will choose the car park
that satisfies this equation.
Parking Search Models (11)
Parking Search Models (12)
Parking Choice Models

Choice models take many forms, but generally aim to measure individual’s
reaction to changes in the supply, price, and operation of parking facilities.

These reactions may include change in parking location, trip start time, mode
used, destination, or the abandonment of the trip.

The extents to which each of these responses occurs depend, in part, on the
trip purpose and the number of trips is related to the size of the land use.

These models have tended to take the form of a multinomial logit model.

The logit model assumes that decision-makers derive a utility or benefit from
a particular activity.

Hence the utility of partaking in an activity is a function of the benefits gained


from the activity minus the dis-benefits of getting to the activity from the
previous activity.

The trip is therefore a dis-benefit or disutility.


Parking Choice Models (2)

The utility is a function, usually additive, of the utility gained from each
characteristic of the activity.

The logit model assumes that the decision-makers and modellers cannot fully
describe all the parameters describing each alternative.

Most of the models used to study parking-mode and parking-location choice


do not view the total process of making a trip and gaining a benefit from
an activity.

Rather they concentrate on the choice of mode or location of parking.

The decision to make a trip or choose a particular location to park is therefore


seen as a process of minimising the disutility of the trip rather than the
benefit of the total process.
Parking Interaction Models

The allocation, search, and choice models have their role in parking policy
analysis.

An area in that almost all the above models are particularly weak is their
representation of the behavioural response of travellers to parking
policies.

Since the allocation of vehicles to parking spaces is generally performed


either just before or simultaneously with the assignment of vehicles to the
road system, the admissible behavioural response to policy is basically
restricted to a change in the type or location of the chosen parking facility.

Other valid behavioural responses such as changes in the choice of mode or


time of travel cannot be represented in these models.
Parking Interaction Models (2)

They used a series of traffic models and pollution prediction techniques to


investigate the impacts.

These models found that fringe parking, park-and-ride strategies, and parking
management would only move the problem.

Strategies based on alternate fuels, enhanced maintenance and inspection,


and traffic-flow improvements decrease the contribution by each parker
rather than the number of parkers.

While the city has not instituted a fringe parking system, staff and consultants
are concerned that a fringe system may not serve one important city
objective — improved air quality.