Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Inside a Mechanical Parking Garage

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the at-least-the-valet-isn't-joyriding dept.

poisedleft writes "Slate has this article about a mechanical parking garage in DC. 'Despite the undeniable Jetsons cachet of the robo-garage, the Summit Grand Parc went automatic only because it had to. A 60-foot-by-106-foot lot behind the building, the only land available for a conventional garage, couldn't hold more than 14 spaces.' One potential problem for suffering city dwellers: long lines at rush hour."

25 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Beware... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Funny

    Cars not picked up in time to avoid having racked up more charges for being parked than they're worth are automatically loaded into the attached crusher...

  2. Old Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    This sort of technology has been widely used in Japan since the early 90s.

  3. Jetsons? by ejaw5 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It sure has been a long while...but IIRC when George Jetson arrived at work after dropping off Jane, Elroy and Astro his vehicle collapsed into a standard size briefcase which he took into the office.

    --

    $cat /dev/random > Sig
  4. Not new news by gnuman99 · · Score: 5, Informative
    I've heard of these types of parking lots being operational in places in Japan and Hong Kong for a number of years now.

    Of course, if everyone just used public transit, then public transit would be faster and we could put parks in place of parking lots. But I guess it is more convenient to sit twice as long in a grid lock...

    1. Re:Not new news by Durin_Deathless · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are some people for whom public transit isn't an option. You ever think about taking an 80lb concert grand harp on a train or bus? No, I didn't think so. I know several professional harpists that would have that limitation. String bass would be tricky too. Oh, and what about chefs carrying their knives? What do they do when they can't carry their tools of the trade around because of antiterrorist paranoia? The Boy Scouts, heading on a camping trip, each needing around 60lb of gear? There are plenty of people for whom public transit will never be an option at all. Don't try and shove it down their throats. I don't deny that for many people, public transit is a viable solution. For some, however, it is impractical or substantially more expensive than owning and using a car.

      --
      You should use AdiumX on your Mac.
    2. Re:Not new news by Ironica · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As if it would be more convenient for us suburban types to walk a few miles...When I lived downtown, I rode the bus back and forth everywhere.

      You chose to live in a place without accessible transit. Sure, you probably had your reasons... of course, if our public policy didn't encourage people to buy as much house as they can possibly afford, and we didn't make it so much cheaper to develop in the outskirts than in the city, your choice might have been different. But it's still the choice you made.

      Where do you work? Do you commute to a place where you're competing with tens of thousands of other people for road space? If so, then moving out to the suburbs just made everything that tiny bit worse for all of us. If you work at home or somewhere near where you live, then it makes a bit more sense.

      --
      Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
    3. Re:Not new news by Feanturi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As if it would be more convenient for us suburban types to walk a few miles (about 4 where I am) in the rain to get to a bus stop. And since there are only a handful of buses that come near me, I would have to forgo anything in my schedule that happens before 1100 am.

      I think the assumption was that if everyone was using public transit, it would be faster, not only because there would be less traffic. It would also be because ridership would be so high they could afford more buses, tighter routes, and shorter waits. More shelters too for your rainy wait.

      One of the main reasons so many bus systems are crappy or deemed inadequate by potential users is because there just aren't enough users to support to level of service we'd like to see. Remember, somebody has to pay all those drivers every day, and fuel and maintain all of those buses. That's why your rates go up and the schedules get messed with. If everyone was taking the bus everywhere, you would likely see dramatic improvements in service, and rates could possibly relax as well.

    4. Re:Not new news by cmacb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "You chose to live in a place without accessible transit. Sure, you probably had your reasons..."

      No, I think you decided what you had to say before you read his post though: *They moved the route!*

      Never the less. I have lived here near DC and have used both public transit and driven to work. About an equal amount of each.

      I was inclined to use mass transit when my hours were both fixed, and normal. If your hours are unpredictable, as many are these days, you can get screwed. Parking lots that feed the metro system here in DC fill up between 8AM and 9AM. Shortly after that the busses go into a reduced schedule, then stop running completely in many places except for the morning and afternoon rush. Makes perfect sense doesn't it? Using mass transit with even a slightly shifted schedule here is almost impossible. The system runs at full capacity for a couple hours every morning and afternoon and then dries up almost completely, simply because there is no way to get to it.

      But that doesn't stop people from saying data-free things like "if more people would just use mass transit, things would be so much better".

      Most of these systems run at a loss. They almost all were built on a model that said they could run profitably if ridership were "X" and now in most cases ridership is "2X" or more.

      Thats not to mention recent finding that there is little or no preparedness for terrorism in these systems. Guess what? They "forgot" to deal with that issue, and now they will need more money for that. They also "forgot" what they did with millions of dollars in parking fees for the system, and yes, they will need more money(!) to automate their money tracking system better so they don't lose so much money in the future. Maybe.

      These systems become huge bureaucratic sinkholes, with nobody really claiming responsibility for anything that happens. In the end, taxpayers anywhere in the vicinity of these systems end up footing the bill for all the waste, and politicians who get chauffeured to work utter platitudes about increasing ridership to solve all problems.

      Is the answer for everyone to get a low gas mileage SUV and drive 75 miles to work every day? No. But there are lots of alternatives. Fuel efficient cars. Car pooling. An for the vast majority of information/office workers, simply STAY HOME. Our problems with this are way more cultural than technological. Very few people who work for the federal government can work at home. They have to show up. To see, and be seen by all the other people who show up. Never mind what they accomplish, or fail to accomplish. They were there for roll call, now where is the paycheck?

      Many people who live only a few hours from these urban eye-sores drive economy cars, work a few miles away at the hardware store or coffee shop. They don't breath polluted air. They don't drink lead contaminated water (that DC city officials "forgot" to tell anyone about).

      The solution to many of these problems is to stop cramming people into high rise buildings where they live and bussing them to high rise building where they work. That model fails to produce quality of life wherever it has been tried worldwide.

    5. Re:Not new news by frdmfghtr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I have lived here near DC and have used both public transit and driven to work. About an equal amount of each.

      I wish I could say the same...

      My daily commute from Virginia to DC is about 9 miles one-way across the Woodrow Wilson Bridge. Anybody who has lived in the DC/VA/MD area knows what a PITA that route can be. I also drive a hybrid, so I get great gas mileage and super-ultra-low emissions. I'm not just saying that; the car is rated as a SULEV. So when I sit in rush-hour traffic, I'm generally not burning any gas.

      One day I rode the bus/train to work because (a) My car was somewhere else and (b) I wanted to know how long it would take in case I had to do it repeatedly.

      My findings?

      When I leave the house at 6:30am, I get to work around 6:50. At 45 MPG and 90 miles/week, that's two gallons of gas. At $1.75/gallon, that's $3.50 work of fuel I burn in my commute every week. Per mile, my commute costs me 3.8 cents per mile in fuel.

      If, OTOH, I take the metro, I have to leave the house at 6:30 via the free shuttle from my place to the closest metro station, take the train into DC, transfer to another train, ride to another station, transfer to a bus, and ride the bus to the stop outside the office. That trip runs me about $2.75 ONE WAY and takes two hours. Total cost: $22.50 per week in metro fares. Now, taking into account that the run also covers roughly 3x the distance, that comes to about 8.3 cents per mile.

      So, riding mass transit costs me about twice what it costs me to drive myself on a per-mile basis, or over SIX TIMES what in costs me in absolute terms; but that's of course made up for by the fact that the commute takes six times as long.

      Fortunately I don't pay for parking, so I do have a big advantage there. If I paid for parking, then the story changes dramatically.

      In short--I'll continue to drive myself to work in the morning.

      Not to say that there aren't other times I'll take the metro to other places because of the convenience of not having to pay for parking or even finding a spot; I don't drive into downtown DC unless I have to, because traffic is a g-- d--- nightmare.

      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
  5. Also, by rasafras · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Your car is much harder to steal. Two layers of security, not just one - but it is a cool hacking challenge. Any takers?

    --
    webpage
    1. Re:Also, by mrseigen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think a spoofed magnetic card might be a valid way to attack this system, however the fact that all the access terminals are in very public places will deter most people from tampering with it (like ATMs in malls).

      The question is: who's legally responsible when the computer driving this thing screws up and drops your car a couple storeys?

  6. Can you leave your dog in it? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 3, Funny

    This sounds great for dog owners. Not only can you park and leave your dog in the shady underground, no animal rights people will be able to get to your windshield to leave a flier explaining what a bastard you are.

  7. Pictures and Details by nacturation · · Score: 5, Informative

    Available here.

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  8. I can picture it now by dicepackage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having some guy with a crappy car dripping oil down on your convertable.

  9. Well... by Moocowsia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the power went out you'd be screwed.

    --
    Moo!
  10. Re:Please note the date... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nope... it appears the company really exists.

    Slate would have had to have gone a long way to fake a website this detailed and then not link to it in the story.

  11. car dispenser? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How about something like ZipCar, with hourly-rental cars distributed throughout the city/county/interstate, near mass-transit junctions? These automated dispensers would be replenished with a just-in-time supply chain. Now economies of fleet scale, including propane/CNG/electric power, can be available to the aggregated community, amortizing the capital costs across the maximum use.

    Every new building in crowded centers should build 150% of their parking capacity requirement into their architecture, and get all parked cars off our congested streets. When the spaces are filled with fuelcell vehicles, the building can autonegotiate with the vehicle owners for competitive power pricing in either direction across their charge plugs. All this possibility makes the Jetsons look like some 1960s cartoon.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  12. Thanks for the typical snark Americanisms by Durindana · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Like a robotic vacuum cleaner or a remote-control lawn mower, the automated parking garage is an object that adds almost nothing to the original.


    Moron. Just because America is "not lacking in parking spaces" doesn't mean an auto-carpark isn't a massive improvement over the traditional, enormously wasteful (of space and money) parking lot. Sprawl and pollution, for starters, would be significantly less than the major, major insurmountable problems they are now in virtually all American cities if we could do away with our dependence on plentiful free parking.
    1. Re:Thanks for the typical snark Americanisms by donutello · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Moron.
      You would think that someone who goes around declaring others as "morons" would at least display some rudimentary amount of intelligence themselves.

      Just because America is "not lacking in parking spaces" doesn't mean an auto-carpark isn't a massive improvement over the traditional, enormously wasteful (of space and money) parking lot.
      In most American cities, the auto-park is a solution looking for a problem. The machinery itself is fairly complex to build and maintain. The average cost of a parking spot in the auto-park is $25,000. In most American cities, the average cost of a parking spot is a lot less than that. Now you tell me which is the "waste of money".

      Sprawl and pollution, for starters, would be significantly less than the major, major insurmountable problems they are now in virtually all American cities if we could do away with our dependence on plentiful free parking.
      Huhh?? What does expensive stack parking have to do with pollution? I hope you're not suggesting that the extra 100 yards a car has to drive in your average parking lot is a measurable source of pollution. Ditto for sprawl.

      Stack parking does make sense in places where real estate is very expensive - Manhattan, for example. However, the value proposition is just not there for the majority of places. Once the value proposition gets there, there will be more of these around.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    2. Re:Thanks for the typical snark Americanisms by be-fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I dunno about the other bits, but I can vouch for the sprawl one. Have you ever been to Atlanta? The city, which was designed to be driver-friendly, is ONE GIANT PARKING LOT. Seriously, you have have WalMarts with football-field sized parking slots out front. And back. And on the sides. Now, because land is so cheap, giant parking lots are probably more cost-effective, but it does make the city look like a post-apocalyptic nightmare.

      IMHO, the Europeans built their cities right. Paris is half the land area of Atlanta, and utterly undrivable. However, that doesn't mean much, because there are close to 400 metro stations in the cities, plus another 150 RER stations for the suburbs. Washington DC is almost as compact (and nearly as undrivable), but its subway pales in comparison.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    3. Re:Thanks for the typical snark Americanisms by Xzzy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's more a product of evolution than planning, I'd think. Cities in europe got their start when everyone travelled by foot. Cities in America caught the tailend of that, and as the population spread westward transportation got easier, culminating with the auto.

      Drive through any old US city like NYC or Chicago, and the highways will be crammed into two lanes with a confusing braid of onramps and offramps. Regions like Seattle or the SF bay on the west coast have massive 8 lane highways and a number of tributaries (expressways, etc) feeding cars into local streets.

      That part of the world is the newest, so it benefits (though I suppose the use of "benefits" is a potential debate topic ;) the most from modern transportation.

  13. Other automated parking garages by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative
    Paris has a few automated parking garages. Because Paris is built on easily-tunneled limestone, it's a good place for underground garages.

    Trevipark, a British firm, has a nice, rather simple technology for modest size parking garages, with several installations in Italy. Trevipark is a silo with a turntable/elevator at the center. This technology is best suited for underground storage. It's elegant in that there's very little visible on the surface.

    Parksysteme, in Germany, has been building such systems for forty years. But they haven't had many installations.

    An automated garage operated in Manhattan in the 1960s.

    None of these systems has reached ten installations.

  14. Necessity is the mother of all invention. by mfh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Many people have commented on the fact that Japan, Taiwan, and Hong Kong have been implementing these systems for many years now.

    The obvious observation here is that Japan and Taiwan are island countries with limited real estate and space and spatial efficiency is at a much higher premium there than it is here. Hong Kong has a similar predicament; it is landlocked by the rest of China on three sides and an ocean on the other, and has actively secured borders. (i.e., they can't just annex land or start building strip malls and boulevards like most cities in the US and Europe)

    The only American analog I can think of off the top of my head is Manhattan, NYC, but I suspect that instead of being luddites, their motives against implementing such systems are economic in nature as they are the exception to the general American rule in terms of availability of real estate to build parking garages. Being an island nation definitely has influence on cultural and technological development.

    Anyway, I suspect that entire graduate theses can be written on such a topic.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  15. vertical lift systems, power failure problems by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Interesting

    NYC has had these for years; they're 3-4 spaces high, you drive into the space, the guy pushes a button, the car goes up 2-3 levels in the unit. Another car drives up, goes up 1-2. Etc until it's stacked full.

    Only problem? Well, I remember a photo of a enraged car owner screaming at a parking attendant on the day of the massive NYC blackout; they're useless in a power outage; you're not getting your car out, and that's that.

    "Oh, they must have had backup generators", you say. Ever been to NYC? Everything is done as cheaply as possible. They'd sell your car after you parked it if they thought they could get away with it. They're certainly not going to keep a backup generator around just in case there's a power outage- they're just going to tell you to walk home.

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
  16. Been doing this for a long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here at Saturn, we store our body panels in a similar (nearly identical) system.

    The "paint buck" has its Smarteye tag read and the buck gets removed from the carrier and transported down one of several aisles by a rolling lift which transverses either in one direction horizontally or vertically. You get the idea.

    The ASRS (Automatic Storage & Retrieval System) makes note of where it got put and then it's off to get the next one.

    The empty paint carrier leaves and goes off to get another buck.

    When it comes time to load another job on to the line (to be sent to the General Assembly building where the panels will get put onto the spaceframe), the procedure gets repeated in reverse. The lift then finds the panel set of the desired color, gets it, puts it on the carriers that go to GA and then sends it on its way.

    BTW, The weight of the paint buck is comparable to that of a car (probably around 3000 pounds). A-yup, they are heavy. It's an "all hands on deck" event when one of these falls off of its carrier over in our building.

    Most of the time things work flawlessly, however...

    The ASRS has been known to overtravel in the past and wipe out the sprinkler heads.
    Has been known to put the buck in the wrong hole.
    Has been known to retrieve the wrong paint buck.
    Has been known to not retrieve anything.
    Has been known to dump the paint bucks off from about 60 feet up (everybody out?)
    Has been known to have the lift fail.
    Has been known to get partially stuck, forcing Maintenance folks to perform death-defying feats to get the damm things unstuck.

    So, no riding in the car when it's getting stored or retrieved.
    Beware of fire and flood.
    And eventually (probably soon) things will begin to wear out and the system will inevitably need to be serviced while it's getting your car.

    I'm sure that it will be only a matter of time before somebody's Rolls gets upended. Read the fine print on the parking spot agreement.

    John