Slashdot Mirror


Sensor Networks In San Francisco Finds Parking Spots

MrSeb writes "You've heard of smart cars, and now, rolling out in San Francisco, is a smart parking system that promises to eliminate the arduous process of finding a parking spot. SFpark is a network of magnetic sensors that have been installed under 8,200 street parking spaces, along with additional information from parking garages and parking meters. These sensors are all linked together in a mesh network, and ultimately link back to a central command center. Drivers can access this parking data via the SFpark website or smartphone app, and see in real-time where parking spaces are available. At any one time, a third of cars on the road in urban areas are looking for parking spots, consuming more fuel, creating more pollution, and causing more accidents. With SFpark, you can see at a glance where there's a parking spot — but in the future, you'll be able to hit a button and have your smartphone direct you to the nearest parking spot."

18 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. Parking tickets by grimsnaggle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...now delivered with greater efficiency than ever before.

    1. Re:Parking tickets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about they link to my credit card so I get charged for the length of time I'm parked NO MATTER HOW LONG IT IS. Never happen, because the tickets are a gold mine.

    2. Re:Parking tickets by Ichijo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Parking tickets...now delivered with greater efficiency than ever before.

      Actually, they've found the opposite to be true:

      Prior to the new meters, 55 percent of the revenue came from payments drivers used to buy time and 45 percent from fines. After the new meters went in, the amount from payments increased to 70 percent and the amount from fines plummeted to 30 percent.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re:Parking tickets by fluffy99 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Parking tickets...now delivered with greater efficiency than ever before.

      Actually, they've found the opposite to be true:

      Prior to the new meters, 55 percent of the revenue came from payments drivers used to buy time and 45 percent from fines. After the new meters went in, the amount from payments increased to 70 percent and the amount from fines plummeted to 30 percent.

      The reduction in fines is because "In addition, the new meters have less restrictive time limits, generally allowing drivers to park for four hours or more." So people can actually put enough money in the meters to cover the length of their visit now.

    4. Re:Parking tickets by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How about they link to my credit card so I get charged for the length of time I'm parked NO MATTER HOW LONG IT IS. Never happen, because the tickets are a gold mine.

      The point of street/meter parking is short term parking. You park, go into the store, finish, leave, done. It's not designed for long-term parking (it's why it's very punitively priced - you wouldn't want to park there for 8+ hours unless you like paying $1000/month or more for parking). If you want to park for hours (i.e., work), you're better off finding a parking garage. Plus, the store owners you park in front of may not take kindly to you parking in front of their store day after day since they like that spot for customers.

      But there are two problems with credit card meters. First, they need to put a hold on your card. If you're paying for a set time (e.g., 4 hours) then the hold and charge is the same. If you want it to be indeterminate, then they need to apply a huge hold (e.g., a day's worth of parking) and you'll end up with people who can't pay because their remaining credit limit isn't enough. Like we have nowadays with people who can't buy gas with credit because the pumps are now putting holds of $200 or more.

    5. Re:Parking tickets by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Informative

      San Francisco is a terrible place to have a car. This city has among the highest densities of cars per mile of road of any city anywhere in the world. Having lived there in the early 90s, I can say that my car was much more of a hindrance than a blessing!

      San Francisco has great public transportation and stiff density. Walking isn't such a big deal because you don't have to go so far, and buses take you where you don't want to bother walking.

      And when you drive, you rarely get to go faster than 20 MPH. You certainly never *average* much more than that. And at that pace, a guy on a bicycle could easily match your progress. The car isn't so much of an advantage.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  2. Race you to the nearest open spot by rednip · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While this is a great idea, in some cases it'll be a race to get an open spot, even worse than now. Now you'll be able to see open spots blocks away even if you can't get to it in time, so after a while people will know that they need to hurry and exactly where to go.

    --
    The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
    1. Re:Race you to the nearest open spot by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hack the system. Advertise some bogus open spots a few blocks away. All the other suckers head over there. You park over here.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  3. Re:cool idea, but... by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oh, and since the summary inexplicably didn't link it, SFpark is here.

  4. Competition can be ugly by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will the system be smart enough to only provide info to the two or three closest cars requesting information? I'd hate to see the carnage when a dozen spot-seekers show up simultaneously to claim "their" spot.

  5. Oh good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now we have a new reason for people to be paying attention to something other than the road while they're driving. I'm pretty sure that's just what we needed.

  6. Re:Convergence by mlts · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can see the owner of the system making additional income by only showing parking places to the highest bidder, so places would show to the guy who bid $50, but not to the guy who bid $20 until all the higher bidders are off the system.

  7. One little detail... by 0WaitState · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One little detail omitted is that they plan on (and are) raising the meter rates such that it becomes too expensive for some people to park. The goal is to price things such that "there is at least one open spot per block". (I don't know if that means per street-front block, or per 4-sided block.)

    That those rates can go up to $18/hr, coupled with the minimum $50 parking tickets is why some people describe San Francisco as having "a war on cars". There's also the little gem that you can't pre-pay the electronic meters for the next morning--so yeah, it's free from 11PM to 7AM, but you have to be there on the dot of 7AM to beat the ticket-wielding meter maid summoned by the electronic sensor. Makes life a little rough for overnight guests who might like to have some wine with dinner.

    Not to mention the scam of "street cleaning", which seems to require clearing the street of cars once a week yet somehow get cleaned at best twice a year. And you guessed it, $50 ticket regardless of whether any street cleaners actually showed up.

    So yeah, neat technology. It's practical purpose is to raise money for the city and to provide price supports for off-street parking lots.

    --

    Remain calm! All is well!
    1. Re:One little detail... by mattyj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah. The article fails to elaborate on the true reason for this system: to raise or lower prices based on demand. I live in San Francisco and I love it. I drive a motorcycle so my parking is cheap. This system is not designed to help the consumer, it's to help the city government. Which is fine but I hate how they are presenting it as a boon to people looking for parking spaces.

      They feed us some vision of people 'shopping' for cheaper parking spaces a bit further away, which will never happen. In this city, nobody will pass up a parking spot no matter how much it costs. So this is just a way for the City to squeeze more money out of you during certain times of day.

      I still don't know how they can tout the smartphone apps but still have laws on the books making it illegal to use smartphones while you are driving. Are we to bring a 'spotter' with us everywhere we go?

      Anyway, the novelty will wear off soon enough, I guess. Maybe one day this technology will be universally built into GPS units or something but for now I don't really see it catching on.

  8. Re:Convergence by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can see the owner of the system making additional income by only showing parking places to the highest bidder, so places would show to the guy who bid $50, but not to the guy who bid $20 until all the higher bidders are off the system.

    No, this is a municipal agency as far as I can tell, which actually makes this another liberal fascist policy telling us where we can park. Another freedom lost...

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  9. Re:Illegal to use a cell phone while driving by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yup, the actual law states that:

    The base fine for the FIRST offense is $20 and $50 for subsequent convictions. With penalty assessments, the fine can be more than triple the base fine amount.

    Californian here. Knowing people who have been caught breaking that law, even for the first time with no other offenses, you can expect to pay over $400 for that ticket in San Diego and San Bernardino counties. Just a public service announcement for you potential tourists. So slump in your seat so the cops behind you can't see, cover your phone with your hand like you're scratching your ear so the cops to your left can't see, and keep your mind on the road.

  10. Old News by guttentag · · Score: 4, Informative
    This story is old news:

    July 13, 2008
    Smart Parking Spaces in San Francisco
    This fall, San Francisco will test 6,000 of its 24,000 metered parking spaces in the nation's most ambitious trial of a wireless sensor network that will announce which of the spaces are free at any moment. Drivers will be alerted to empty parking places either by displays on street signs, or by looking at maps on screens of their smartphones. They may even be able to pay for parking by cellphone, and add to the parking meter from their phones without returning to the car.

    September 28, 2011
    IBM Launches Parking Meter Analytics System
    "It's not just a parking spot, think of it as a 'revenue-producing asset,' says Vinodh Swaminathan, IBM's director of intelligent transportation systems. Working with San Francisco-based startup Streetline, IBM has launched a system designed to help cities ease parking congestion and collect more parking fees. Streetline's remote sensors can determine if a parking space is taken by a car, whether a customer has paid, and how much time is left on the meter. And IBM's business intelligence software parses the data and generates reports and statistics for government managers. Drivers can benefit too: A free mobile phone app can help locate available parking spaces."

  11. war on cars by tknd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've become a firm believer in "paid" parking or "market driven" parking. That is where we get rid of "free" parking and instead directly charge users fees for the parking they utilize. This article adequately explains why: http://www.lamag.com/features/Story.aspx?ID=1568281.

    You can claim the street cleaning thing is a scam, sure I'll agree there that should go away, however, we should not have free parking at all. It is not logical. It only makes sense that the person that utilizes the parking should pay for it. That's how normal things work.

    When we have "free" parking, the costs of parking are hidden from the user. This leads to abuse. If you are aware that something is free but obviously costs money to maintain or provide, then by all means as a typical capitalist, you should abuse the hell out of that free service. So now we have grown up with an expectation of "free" parking when that is clearly not the case.

    This penalizes us in multiple ways. The strip mall is now twice as large in order to provide a surface level parking lot (the cheapest option). You must now buy a new house or condo with parking due to minimum parking laws (what if I don't need the space?). The city is now designed around cars and not people (we will never get density as long as this is true).

    In related studies on traffic, the findings are similar. If we expand lanes on a congested freeway, demand will increase to fill up that lane because the freeway is subsidized. That is, the cost of using the freeway to users appears to be "free" therefore demand increases in order to take advantage of a free resource. The result is for a short period the freeway is not congested, then suddenly it has the same amount of traffic.

    "Free" parking creates the problem it tries to cure. Users complain "parking is expensive" so the city gives them free parking, then suddenly everyone uses the parking because it is free and now there is a shortage of parking again. This is like giving people free money. They say "I have no money" so you give them $5 dollars. Then they go spend it. Then they complain they have no money again...