Advanced Parking

Management Systems:

A CROSS-CUTTING STUDY

January 2007

Advanced Parking

Management Systems:

A CROSS-CUTTING STUDY

Taking the Stress Out of Parking Taking the Stress Out of Parking
Notice

The Federal Highway Administration provides high-quality information to

serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes

public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and

maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information.

FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and

processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
i

Dear Reader,

We have scanned the country to bring together the collective wisdom

and expertise of transportation professionals implementing Intelligent

Transportation Systems (ITS) projects across the United States.This

information will prove helpful as you set out to plan, design, and deploy

ITS in your communities.

This document is one in a series of products designed to help you

provide ITS solutions that meet your local and regional transportation

needs. We have developed a variety of formats to communicate with

people at various levels within your organization and among your

community stakeholders:

• Benefits Brochures let experienced community leaders explain in

their own words how specific ITS technologies have benefited their

areas.

• Cross-Cutting Studies examine various ITS approaches that can be

used to meet your community’s goals.

• Case Studies provide in-depth coverage of specific approaches being

taken in communities across the United States.

• Implementation Guides serve as “how to” manuals to assist your

project staff in the technical details of implementing ITS.

ITS has matured to the point that you are not alone as you move

toward deployment. We have gained experience and are committed to

providing our state and local partners with the knowledge they need 

to lead their communities into the future.

The inside back cover contains details on the documents in this series, 

as well as sources to obtain additional information. We hope you find

these documents useful tools for making important transportation

investment decisions.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey F. Paniati

Associate Administrator for Operations

Federal Highway Administration

Foreword

iii

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................... 1-1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 2-1

THE PARKING CHALLENGE ......................................................................... 3-1

NATIONAL TRENDS .............................................................................................................. 3-1

SITE-SPECIFIC CHALLENGES................................................................................................. 3-1

PUBLIC SENTIMENT.............................................................................................................. 3-2

APMS—WHAT ARE THEY? ......................................................................... 4-1

PRE-TRIP PARKING INFORMATION SYSTEMS .................................................................... 4-1

LOT-SPECIFIC PARKING INFORMATION SYSTEMS ............................................................. 4-1

FLOOR-, AISLE-, AND SPACE-SPECIFIC PARKING INFORMATION SYSTEMS .................... 4-2

PARKING RESERVATION SYSTEMS...................................................................................... 4-3

PARKING NAVIGATION SYSTEMS ....................................................................................... 4-3

APMS—WHO IS USING THEM?...................................................................5-1

APMS—WHAT ARE THE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS?...................................6-1

COUNTING SYSTEMS ........................................................................................................... 6-1

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS............................................................................................... 6-2

FACTORS TO CONSIDER WHEN CHOOSING COUNTING AND 

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS.......................................................................................... 6-2

APMS—WHO SHOULD BE INVOLVED? ......................................................7-1

FORMING THE STAKEHOLDER GROUP .............................................................................. 7-2

STUDY SITE DESCRIPTIONS ........................................................................8-1

SITE SELECTION .................................................................................................................... 8-1

SEATTLE CENTER .................................................................................................................. 8-2

CHICAGO METRA PARK-AND-RIDE .................................................................................... 8-6

BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ................................................... 8-8

OTHER APMS APPLICATIONS .....................................................................9-1

FACILITY-BASED RESERVATION SYSTEMS .......................................................................... 9-1

ONLINE RESERVATION SYSTEMS ........................................................................................ 9-2

PARKING NAVIGATION SYSTEMS ....................................................................................... 9-3

CROSS-CUTTING FINDINGS .......................................................................10-1

BENEFITS ............................................................................................................................. 10-1

COSTS .................................................................................................................................. 10-3

LESSONS LEARNED............................................................................................................. 10-4

CONCLUSION .............................................................................................11-1

REFERENCES ...............................................................................................12-1

RESOURCES ................................................................................................13-1

OVERVIEW OF APMS ......................................................................................................... 13-1

APMS CASE STUDIES.......................................................................................................... 13-1

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES .........................................................................14-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - The “Mercer Mess” in Downtown Seattle........................................................... 3-2
Figure 2 - Parking Destination Information Available at ParkMilwaukee.com................ 4-1

Figure 3 - A Chicago Metra Sign Providing Lot-Specific Parking Information.................. 4-2

Figure 4 - Illustration of Availability by Aisle at BWI Airport.............................................. 4-2

Figure 5 - Entry/Exit Counter (Highlighted in Pavement) with Traffic 

Delineation Guide ................................................................................................................ 6-1

Figure 6 - Map of Seattle Center Parking.............................................................................. 8-3

Figure 7 - Seattle Center Illustrating Active and Passive Components .............................. 8-4

Figure 8 - Seattle Center In-surface, Wireless Vehicle Detector.......................................... 8-5

Figure 9 - Seattle Center APMS System Architecture........................................................... 8-5

Figure 10 - Map of the Chicago Metra System with the Rock Island Line Highlighted .. 8-6

Figure 11 - Chicago Metra’s APMS System Illustrating the Parking 

Information Network........................................................................................................... 8-8

Figure 12 - BWI Daily Garage Entrance Sign Providing Availability by Floor.................... 8-9

Figure 13 - BART Park-and-Ride Facility in Millbrae, California.......................................... 9-1

Figure 14 - Customer Satisfaction Survey Responses at BWI............................................. 10-1

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Potential Stakeholders and Roles....................................................................... 7-3

Table 2 - APMS Site Overview ............................................................................................ 8-1

iv
1-1

Many metropolitan areas have seen explosive growth in the number of

visitors and patrons due to urban revitalization, extension of transit

services into suburban areas, and the general trend toward increased

mobility of our society. As a result, frustration with parking is becoming

a major concern. Parking patrons often do not know where the best

parking locations are, what the facility operating hours are, what the

expected costs are, and, most importantly, whether a parking place will

be available when they arrive. 

Advanced parking management systems (APMS) help people find

parking spots quickly, thereby reducing frustration and enhancing the

visitor’s experience. Advanced parking management systems include

elements from traditional traveler information systems, as well as

specialized parking management applications. The applied traveler

information concepts cover a wide range of applications, from pre-trip

Web-based information systems to navigation systems that provide

turn-by-turn directions all the way to an individual parking space. 

This study examines advanced parking management systems in three

venues: airports, central business districts, and transit park-and-ride

locations. Specifically, the systems examined in this study provide

directional and space availability information to patrons as they proceed

to the parking facility.

This study presents findings from current advanced parking

management literature and visits to APMS project sites. Lessons

collected from six sites are presented and three sites are profiled in

depth. Interviews with planners, deployers, and operators provide

insight into the benefits, costs, and issues from differing venues located

in different regions of the country.

The study discusses various types of benefits that have been attributed

to APMS including the following:

• At Baltimore-Washington International (BWI) Airport, nearly 13,000

hourly and daily parking spaces are served by an advanced parking

management system. During an initial test period, the system

increased customer satisfaction and improved traffic flow in the

hourly facilities. The stakeholders’ praise for the system is evident.

Says Harry Zeigler, Assistant Manager for the Maryland Department

of Transportation’s Office of Transportation and Terminal Services

at BWI Airport, “The impact of SmartPark at BWI has been

tremendous—it has not only made parking easier and faster, but it

has improved customer satisfaction and reduced illegal parking.”

Executive Summary

“The impact of

SmartPark at 

BWI has been

tremendous—it

has not only made

parking easier

and faster, but it

has improved

customer

satisfaction and

reduced illegal

parking.”

–Harry Zeigler,

Assistant Manager,

Maryland Department

of Transportation,

Office of

Transportation and

Terminal Services,

BWI Airport
1-2

For the traveler, a survey conducted for this study indicated that over

2/3 of the airport patrons felt that parking at BWI was quicker and

easier than comparable parking at other major airports in the

region.

For the airport authority, the system has reduced illegal parking and

recirculation which block fire lanes and increase congestion in and

around parking facilities. 

• In San Francisco, advanced parking management increased the

probability that commuters would leave their personal automobile

and switch to transit. 

• In downtown St. Paul, an advanced parking management system

demonstrated positive impacts for patrons looking for special event

parking and reduced congestion at a key intersection during the

period immediately preceding special events. In the time period

preceding a major special event, the estimated vehicle delay at the

intersection of West 7th Street & Kellogg Boulevard decreased by

10 percent, while the total intersection volume increased by

15 percent.

This study also identifies major lessons learned to help guide others in

achieving similar benefits. The following list highlights some of these

elements critical to successful APMS deployment.

• It is important to involve all stakeholders in a formal and

collaborative manner to ensure that the needs of all stakeholders

are met. Advanced parking management systems can benefit many

stakeholders including travelers, parking operators, attraction

operators, nearby neighborhoods, and the local jurisdiction itself. 

• There must be a champion and a formalized stakeholder group.

Because APMS deployments are often integrated into urban or

neighborhood environments, they take time and involve a very

diverse group of stakeholders. Therefore, it is important to maintain

the leadership role of a champion and to ensure that the

stakeholder group works from a formal charter that binds the

member organizations to the effort.

• APMS sign structure and locations require continuity of effort.

Coordinating sign appearance and locations with historical

preservation organizations, commercial property owners, and local

jurisdictions requires continuity of effort over several years. In two of

the three sites visited, changes to signage in the latter part of the

deployment introduced significant costs and delays.
1-3

• Coordination with the regional ITS architecture helps ensure

interoperability and helps leverages resources. Stakeholders should

consider APMS as part of a developing local ITS architecture. In

doing so, it may be possible to leverage funding for the system by

sharing costs with other ITS-based traveler information systems,

congestion management efforts, and clean air attainment programs.

Broader stakeholder support and a wider range of funding options

increase the potential for successful deployment.

• System accuracy is a critical factor. System error characteristics can

cause the inventory count to be in error in a positive or a negative

direction. Under-counting available spaces means a lost opportunity

for a patron and lost revenue for the operator. Over-counting

available spaces results in extremely frustrated patrons and potential

loss of future credibility and revenue for the operator.

• It is important to identify the roles and responsibilities of each

agency for system operations and maintenance. It is critical to

identify these responsibilities early in the planning process. At one of

the sites visited, the effort was delayed for nearly a year as the

stakeholder group resolved the funding responsibilities for the

operations and maintenance costs. Failure to maintain the systems

will reduce credibility and public acceptance will be negatively

impacted.

The purpose of this study is to enable those considering advanced

parking management systems to benefit from the experience of others

in their planning, design, operation, and maintenance.

2-1

Many areas have seen explosive growth in the number of visitors and

patrons as the result of urban revitalization, suburban development,

and the general trend of ever-increasing mobility. Parking is increasingly

becoming an important aspect of transportation planning.

As stakeholders set out to address parking management issues, they

often consider Intelligent Transportation Systems. ITS applications

involving APMS have been employed in Europe and Japan for several

years and are beginning to be deployed in the U.S. Advanced parking

management systems maintain real-time parking space inventories

across a set of participating facilities. These data are used to generate

parking availability messages that are distributed to travelers through

several different means. Such data also help facility owners track

demand. In some cases, the information is provided for pre-trip use to

travelers seeking information on the Internet. In other cases, it is

provided to motorists on roadways by dynamic message signs (DMS)

located at key decision points along routes to a desired destination. 

Advanced parking management systems help travelers find parking

spots quickly, thereby reducing frustration and enhancing a visitor's

overall experience. Advanced parking management systems include

elements from traditional traveler information systems, as well as

specialized parking management applications. Advanced parking

management systems offer a wide range of applications, from pre-trip

Web-based information systems to navigation systems that provide

turn-by-turn directions all the way to an individual parking space. 

A topic of growing interest in the U.S. is the use of ITS for finding safe

and legal parking for commercial vehicles, especially large trucks. Hoursof-service regulations require that commercial vehicle drivers rest after

driving for certain periods of time. In order to rest, drivers need to find

a place to park their trucks. In cases where truck parking is not

available, drivers are forced to choose between equally bad options,

such as going over their legal hours of service or parking in

undesirable—or even dangerous—locations. A 2005 white paper1 noted

that, while the number of available truck parking spaces equals demand

when averaged nationwide, there are regional shortages, especially in

the Northeast, the Northwest, and southern California. ITS technologies

are seen as a cost-effective way to help drivers plan where they will stop

when their hours-of-service for the day have expired. In 2007, the

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) will announce the

selection of one or more vendors for implementation of a project called

Introduction

1 Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (2005). Intelligent Transportation Systems

and Truck Parking.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/

intelligent-transportation-truckparking.htm.
SmartPark to demonstrate the use of ITS technologies for truck parking.

The cross-cutting study provided in this report, however, will only

address the use of ITS for parking as it applies to automobiles, not

commercial vehicles.

Among advanced parking management systems currently deployed or

being considered, there are common elements that can be identified.

This study discusses common parking problems, defines the stakeholders

and their interests, and examines the range of APMS technologies in use

within the U.S. today. In addition, this study provides summaries of

three case studies and concludes with findings and lessons learned that

may help accelerate APMS solutions. 

2-2

Introduction
3-1

Parking is an ever-growing challenge in cities and towns across the U.S.

Increasingly, availability of parking is one of the more significant issues

that town and city staffs face.

• In some communities, ample public parking is available, but travelers

are unaware of where the parking facilities are, the hours the

facilities are open, or the costs of these facilities.

• In others, public parking is in short supply, and privately owned

parking is available and underutilized.

• In others, there is a shortage of parking facilities, and travelers are

unaware of this fact until they arrive at their destination.

In all three cases, travelers lack credible, timely information. The

absence of information causes travelers to make bad decisions, including

not making the trip, exhibiting poor driving habits due to frustration in

not locating a parking place, missing the beginning of an event, and

parking illegally.

Parking demand is routinely high at airports, in downtown areas, and

around transit park-and-ride facilities due to several factors, including

record level air travel, large interest in attending downtown events, and

the desire for commuters to avoid delays by switching to transit at

opportune points along their route during the trip. While serving

different traveler needs, each situation has one thing in common -

people in a hurry want to know the answers to three main questions:

“Where are parking facilities close to my destination?”, “Is there an

open spot in the facility I choose?”, and “How much is this going to cost

me in time and parking fees?” 

At airports, the challenge is to provide an efficient transition for the

traveler from the roadway transportation system to the airport

transportation system. Many travelers run on tight agendas and are

under pressure to make a scheduled flight. These travelers do not have

time to search for parking. Because many BWI passengers are not

frequent air travelers, they are unfamiliar with the airport parking

facilities. As a result, they often depart their homes or workplaces

excessively early rather than risk missing check-in times. As they circle

from floor to floor in a parking garage looking for an empty space,

frustration begins to mount. In desperation, some travelers are tempted

to park illegally in fire lanes or other restricted areas.

In central business districts (CBDs), visitors may not be familiar with the

downtown street layout and get lost as they search for difficult-to-find

parking facilities. Excessive circulation results in more traffic congestion

on the street system, which overwhelms the traffic signals in the vicinity

of the downtown attractions. Traffic congestion can become gridlock,

leading to drivers’ heightened frustration levels. In Seattle, traffic

The Parking Challenge

National Trends

Site-Specific

Challenges

Airports

Central Business Districts
congestion is so bad near the Seattle Center that locals have nicknamed

it, the “Mercer Mess,” as shown in Figure 1.

At transit park-and-ride facilities, the problem is three-fold: 

• Frustration associated with a commuter hunting for a parking spot

while trying to meet a train or bus departure schedule may result in

the vehicle being parked in nearby neighborhoods.

• A commuter who cannot find a parking spot and does not elect to

abandon his or her vehicle in a neighborhood due to tight ticketing

or towing policies will return to the freeway or arterial roadway,

having lost valuable time. 

• Commuters who habitually have problems finding parking at the

park-and-ride facility ultimately may elect not to ride transit. As a

consequence, these additional vehicles contribute to already

excessive freeway and arterial roadway congestion and trafficrelated emissions. 

The risks of traveling in areas with inadequate parking information vary

with the type of trip. For those going to the airport, difficulty finding a

parking spot can lead to a missed flight. For travelers going to a central

business district, the risk is evident in a late arrival at a show or sporting

event for which expensive tickets were purchased. For commuters

seeking to transfer to transit, the risk is a missed transit departure.

3-2

The Parking Challenge

Figure 1. The “Mercer Mess” in Downtown Seattle

Public

Sentiment

Park-and-Ride Lots
Following is a sampling of public sentiment regarding the risks of

traveling in areas with inadequate parking:

• A 2003 intercept survey of off-airport parking users at Detroit’s

Wayne County International Airport indicated that many travelers

opted for off-airport parking because of the level of confidence they

had in the time it would take to find a parking space and to take a

shuttle to the terminal. Over 50 percent felt that the lack of parking

availability signage on the freeways approaching the airport was a

significant factor in their decision.2

• A 2002 Metropolitan Planning Organization survey of the SeattleTacoma region found that a majority of respondents said that they

plan to travel to the downtown area at least eight times in a given

year. These people also indicated that parking in the downtown

Seattle area is a major problem. In a separate 2003 survey developed

to gain specific insight into perceptions of Seattle Center parking,

visitors to the center on a major event evening were asked about

their satisfaction with the parking situation: 37 percent of the

respondents indicated they were “Dissatisfied” or “Very Dissatisfied”

with the parking situation.3

• A Chicago Metra transit rider survey conducted in 2000 measured

the parking needs of the customers and their preferences regarding

parking information. Over 300 commuters were interviewed at

various Metra rail stations during and immediately following the

morning rush hour. At least 62 percent of total transit riders believed

that parking signage indicating where to park could be improved.

The survey found that 80 percent of the Metra riders who felt

signage around stations could be improved were regular rush hour

travelers.4

These statistics indicate that the ease of finding a parking space can

influence the decisions people make about traveling. Better

information reduces the uncertainty that leads to early departures,

recirculation trips, and late arrivals resulting in missed connections or

missed events. 

3-3

The Parking Challenge

2 A survey of travelers that chose off-airport parking was conducted at Detroit’s Wayne County

International Airport twice in the fall of 2003. The first survey was conducted in mid-October on a

Wednesday, during which 34 travelers were surveyed during the AM peak departure period. The

second survey was conducted on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, during which 40 travelers

were surveyed during the peak AM departure period. 

3 In addition, a survey of over 200 Seattle Center patrons attending simultaneous evening events in

three different venues was conducted in November 2003 in support of this study. Visitors were

surveyed as they made their way from the parking facility to the event itself. 

4 Wilbur Smith Associates (1999). Parking Management Systems: Needs Assessment Report.

4-1

There are several different types of advanced parking management

systems currently in use in the U.S. today.

Pre-trip parking information systems can be as low-tech as publishing a

map of available parking facilities. For more high-tech systems, several

cities across the U.S. provide pre-trip parking information over the

Internet. These Web pages provide a map of where the parking facilities

are relative to major access routes and attractions. These Web pages also

provide other information to help the traveler make a parking plan, i.e.,

the facility’s address, capacity, hours of operation, costs, and forms of

payment accepted. One such website in Milwaukee, Wisconsin

(http://www.parkmilwaukee.com), as shown in Figure 2, operates

independent of any real-time parking information being collected at the

individual garages. Often, this approach is the first step in moving

towards a more sophisticated APMS solution. 

APMS—What are They?

5 ParkMilwaukee.com Website (2006). ParkMilwaukee.com—Your Downtown Parking Resource.

http://www.parkmilwaukee.com.

Pre-Trip Parking

Information

Systems

Figure 2. Parking Destination Information Available at ParkMilwaukee.com5
4-2

APMS—What are They?

Floor-, Aisle-,

and SpaceSpecific

Parking

Information

Systems

Figure 3. A Chicago Metra Sign Providing Lot-Specific Parking Information

In addition to providing information about which lots are full and how

many spaces are available at remaining lots, more complex advanced

parking information systems have signs on every floor of a garage, at

the start of every aisle, and sometimes in front of every individual

parking space. The BWI Airport advanced parking management system

profiled in this report is an example of a system that provides

information on the availability of parking spaces at the floor, aisle, and

parking space level of specificity. Figure 4 is an artist’s rendering of the

system used at BWI airport with signs showing the number of spaces

available per aisle.

Figure 4. Illustration of Availability by Aisle at BWI Airport

Lot-specific systems provide parking information using signs that

typically have both passive and active components. The passive

component provides simple directions to parking facilities, such as with

an arrow. The active component supplements the passive component to

advise the traveler of the availability of spaces at the facility. The

Chicago Metra Park-and-Ride and the Seattle Center advanced parking

management systems profiled in this report both use signs to provide

lot-specific information. Figure 3 shows one of the signs used by Metra.

Lot-Specific

Parking

Information

Systems
4-3

Parking

Reservation

Systems

Parking

Navigation

Systems

Some advanced parking management systems allow the traveler to

reserve and pay for a parking space using the telephone, Internet or

wireless handheld devices. The system used by Bay Area Rapid Transit at

a park-and-ride facility in Millbrae, California, and the services offered

by private companies such as MobileParking LLC and SpotScoutTM, all of

which are profiled in this report, are examples of reservation systems.

(See Other APMS Applications, page 9-1.)

The most sophisticated type of advanced parking management system

under development is one that guides the traveler to an open spot. A

prototype of such a system was demonstrated by XM Satellite Radio in

2005. (See Other APMS Applications, page 9-1.)

APMS—What are They?

5-1

APMS—Who is Using Them?

Advanced parking management systems have been operational in Europe

and Japan since the early 1970s to reduce the congestion, environmental

impact, and driver frustration associated with trying to find parking in city

center areas. In the U.S., however, the use of ITS technologies to distribute

parking information to travelers is still in its infancy. A 2004 survey of

state transportation agencies shows that only four states (Arizona, Maine,

Texas, and Virginia) distribute some sort of advanced parking

information.6 More detail about this statistic, as well as others relating to

advanced parking management systems, is available on the U.S. DOT’s

ITS Deployment Statistics website http://www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov.

Several advanced parking management systems are operational in the

U.S. and others are in the design or installation phase. In each of these

applications, parking information for drivers is displayed on specially

designed dynamic message signs that provide both directional

information as well as space availability information. The information

helps drivers plan and execute a parking search strategy more

efficiently, since valuable information is made available at key decision

points along the selected travel route. 

In the U.S., advanced parking management systems have seen the

widest application in airports including Baltimore-Washington

International Airport, Orlando International Airport, and Detroit’s

Wayne County International Airport. More limited CBD applications

include systems in St. Paul, Minnesota; Seattle, Washington; and

Norfolk, Virginia. In 2005, transit park-and-ride applications were

initiated in Chicago, Illinois; and San Francisco, California.

The primary reason that APMS applications in the U.S. have been limited

to airports, CBDs, and park-and-ride facilities is the level of

infrastructure required to make the systems work. Many advanced

parking management systems in the U.S. rely on fixed-location,

dedicated components that include vehicle detection, space inventory

management, and communication equipment.

However, although the majority of advanced parking management

systems in the U.S. invest in such an extensive level of infrastructure,

such a level of investment is actually not required. In fact, other systems

use a combination of dynamic and static message signs or other low-cost

options. Other potential venues that would benefit from APMS include

special event facilities, such as festival locations and sports arenas. In

Lincoln, Nebraska, for example, an online system allows University of

Nebraska football fans to reserve their downtown parking spaces in

advance. 

6 U.S. DOT (2006). ITS Deployment Statistics Database.

http://www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov.

6-1

APMS—What are the Technology Options?

When planning advanced parking management systems, two main

decisions need to be considered: “What type of system will count the

number of vehicles in the facility?” and “How will the various

components of the system communicate with each other?”

There are two types of counting systems: entry/exit counters and space

occupancy detectors. 

Entry/exit counters can use one of several technologies currently

available. Traditional induction loop counters can be employed where

surfaces and anticipated weather treatments support their application.

In cases where loop detectors are not feasible, video detection

technologies similar to those used in actuated traffic signal control may

be considered. Another alternative, shown in Figure 5, is the use of small

ultrasonic counting devices installed in the surface of the roadway. These

devices can be powered by long-life batteries and can communicate

using a radio frequency (RF) transmitter.

Space occupancy detectors are manufactured for installation in the

ground under the vehicle, on a post in front of the space, or over the

space on garage ceilings. Most occupancy detectors use ultrasonic

sensors or induction loops. Each approach has unique power and

communication requirements. 

Traditionally, APMS applications have focused on solutions that employ

closed systems that use dedicated resources to generate and display

parking space availability in real-time. These closed systems—such as

Chicago Metra and BWI Airport—use signs, space occupancy detectors,

and a dedicated central computer. These systems typically use dedicated

fiber optic lines to communicate between nodes. Though these systems

provide real-time, high-quality information, they are expensive and

Figure 5. Entry/Exit Counter (Highlighted in Pavement) with

Traffic Delineation Guide

Counting Systems

Space Occupancy

Detectors

Entry/Exit Counters

Communication

Systems
6-2

usually require that the communications infrastructure be included in

the facility construction. These systems may also require purchase or

lease of dedicated fiber optic communications capacity to serve the

APMS sign system. 

Because not all APMS projects involve new construction, fiber optic

communications are not always practical. Space occupancy sensors that

use RF communications are a good choice when existing facilities are

retrofitted with an advanced parking management system. These RF

transmitters communicate between individual parking spaces and a local

hub. The local hubs collect and forward that information using wireline

or wireless media to the central computer.

Communications with APMS signs can also be accomplished wirelessly

using owned or leased microwave systems that operate under Federal

Communications Commission (FCC) guidelines. Cellular telephones are

generally not practical as a communications medium, due to the

frequent communication required to update the information that is

necessary to maintain an accurate count of available spaces. 

When choosing a technology option, decision-makers need to consider

whether the facility is new construction or a retrofit, whether the

facility is subject to periodic repaving, and whether or not the parking

configuration will change over the long term. Whether new

construction or a retrofit, stakeholders should expect some challenges in

dealing with dynamic field conditions.

Barry Resnick, Planner for the Department of Planning and Real Estate

Development at Metra, said, “Uniquely uncommon causes [for power

and communications obstacles] are not always considered or

investigated during the design engineering phases prior to such

demonstrations or deployments.” Metra was proactive in addressing any

potential issues by calling for a radio frequency field study as part of the

construction bid.

Each ITS-based parking management solution is different, requiring a

carefully chosen architecture that meets the needs of the various

stakeholders. Factors that should be considered when deciding among

these options include:

• Availability of mounting space for detectors

• Operational environment in which the components will be used

• Communication channels

• Electrical power supplies.

APMS—What are the Technology Options?

Factors to

Consider When

Choosing

Counting and

Communication

Systems

“Uniquely uncommon

causes [for power and

communications

obstacles] are not

always considered or

investigated during

the design engineering

phases prior to such

demonstrations or

deployments.”

–Barry Resnick,

Planner, Department of

Planning and Real Estate

Development, Metra 
7-1

APMS—Who Should be Involved? 

In ITS projects, the stakeholder groups and their interests must be

identified early in the process. In the case of parking management, this

notion holds especially true as there are many direct stakeholders who

would not necessarily be included in deployments of other types of ITS

technologies.

In parking management applications, project planners must consider the

point of view of each stakeholder group, including private sector

concerns and neighborhood issues. In most advanced parking

management systems, there will be many stakeholder groups, such as

attraction operators, parking operators (public and private), parking

patrons, departments of transportation (city, county, state, and Federal),

Councils of Government, utility providers, historical preservation groups,

and neighborhood boards. 

Typical interests of the first three stakeholder groups—attraction

operators, parking operators, and parking patrons—are outlined below

within the context of CBD, airport, and transit park-and-ride

applications. 

• Attraction operators are interested in providing safe and efficient

access to their patrons. Downtown shop owners are interested in

customer access to parking near shopping districts, while airport

authorities are interested in the orderly flow of traffic to, from, and

through the terminal area and into the parking area. Transit

operators are interested in providing timely transfer opportunities

for park-and-ride patrons.

• Parking operators are interested in maximizing the utilization of

their facilities and minimizing the cost of providing parking services.

Operators in business districts want to ensure that visitors are aware

of availability of parking facilities. Those operating airport facilities

want to ensure that patrons are aware of available spaces at the

various facilities that support short- and long-term parking on the

airport grounds. Airport parking operators also want to ensure that

patron frustration with recirculation does not lead to parking in fire

lanes or other illegal locations. Park-and-ride operators want to

ensure that patrons view the transfer from the freeway or arterial

roadway to transit vehicle as quick, safe, and frustration-free.

• Parking patrons are interested in minimizing the time spent looking

for a parking spot and in minimizing the distance from the parking

spot to the attraction. In airport parking environments, patrons are

interested in saving time and in having adequate information to

allow them to select the level of service that corresponds with their

preference for high-, moderate-, or low-cost parking. In park-andride situations, patrons are especially interested in knowing whether

space is available before they leave the freeway or arterial street as
7-2

they want to reduce the chance that they will have to return after

wasting time in a fruitless search. Transit parking patrons want to

eliminate the need to search for a parking space, in an effort to

minimize the time to transfer from the private to the transit vehicle.

Most localities and regions actively address parking issues within their

cooperative governmental structures ranging from neighborhood

participation in city-run parking forums to jurisdiction representation in

Councils of Government (COGs). COGs often form special committees

that address parking issues. These committees define parking problems,

investigate parking management solutions, and estimate parking

management benefits and costs. Within these governmental groups are

many stakeholders, including those who represent public agencies,

components of the private business sector, and citizens of the

community or region. Parking is becoming an increasingly important

aspect of transportation planning.

Stakeholder group membership depends on the individual jurisdiction—

its governmental organization, the division of responsibilities for

parking operations and maintenance, jurisdiction membership in

regional COGs, and participation of Citizen Action Committees (CACs).

Table 1 lists the agencies and groups that may be included in an APMS

project and identifies the roles each may have in the planning,

installation, operations, and maintenance of advanced parking

management systems. 

APMS—Who Should be Involved? 

Forming the

Stakeholder

Group
7-3

Stakeholder Responsibility

State Department of

Transportation

• Integrate APMS project into regional initiatives

and larger statewide ITS architectures

City or County Planning

Departments

• Seek Federal and state Congestion Management

and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds

• Coordinate growth and development plans

City or County

Transportation or Public

Works Department

• Champion the project

• Coordinate with local transportation planning

efforts including transit development

• Seek Federal and state transportation and transit

improvement funds

City or County Police

Departments

• Support the APMS project, seeking reduction in

uniformed police services to enforce illegal

parking and/or control intersections in close

proximity to major attractions

Councils of Government • Coordinate with other jurisdictions within the

participating region identifying interoperability

issues and resource sharing opportunities

Citizen Action

Committees

• Support the APMS project, seeking improved

neighborhood environments

• Help promote public awareness

City or County

Architectural Control

Boards

• Review signage plans to ensure consistency and

fit within the architectural and visual

environment

Utility Companies • Provide information on the availability of power

sources and advise on restrictions to power access

Communications

Companies

• Provide information on the availability of fiber

optic, T-1, and twisted copper wire

communications media

• Advise on restrictions to communications access 

Privately Owned

Parking Vendors

• Provide the information and linkages required to

develop large-scale public and private facility

networks

APMS—Who Should be Involved? 

Table 1. Potential Stakeholders and Roles

8-1

Study Site Descriptions

Three sites—Baltimore-Washington International Airport near Baltimore,

Maryland; Seattle Center in Seattle, Washington; and the Chicago Metra

park-and-ride facilities near Chicago, Illinois—are featured in this

section. These APMS sites represent a range of system maturity,

stakeholder relationships, and APMS technical approaches.

BWI has equipped over 13,000 spaces in its parking garages with APMS

technology in an effort to improve service for the airport’s travelers.

Seattle Center has equipped publicly owned parking facilities with APMS

technology to improve the downtown sports arena and cultural center

visit experience. The Chicago Metra commuter rail system has installed

APMS technology at two park-and-ride locations. Table 2 provides a

summary of key characteristics of each site. 

Table 2. APMS Site Overview (continued on next page)

Site Characteristic Seattle Center Chicago Metra

Park-and-Ride BWI Airport

Setting Central business

district

Suburban

freeway

Airport property

Attraction(s)

Served

Cultural

and sports

attractions

Commuter rail

station

Airport

Number of Signs

Deployed

2 8 Hourly Garage

• 10 (one per level

and one at each

up/down ramp)

• 32 aisle signs7

Approximately 4,800

LED indicators (one

above each space)

Daily Garage A 

• 17 (one per level,

one at each

up/down ramp,

entrance) 

• 135 aisle signs

Approximately 7,100

LED indicators (one

above each space)

7 Aisle signs in the Hourly Garage and Daily Garage A convey the number of spaces available per row.

Site Selection
8-2

Study Site Descriptions

The following sections present each site’s APMS deployment and

operations experience in terms of the history of the deployment,

planning considerations, operational environment, and operations and

maintenance of the facility.

Seattle Center, located in the downtown area of Seattle, Washington, is

an example of an APMS deployment in a CBD environment. The Seattle

Center site was developed for the 1962 World’s Fair. It is a 74-acre urban

park that serves as a center of the cultural, festival and sports interests

of the Puget Sound region which has a population of 3.5 million people.

Surveys of Seattle metropolitan area residents conducted by the Puget

Sound Regional Council (PSRC) indicate that members of the average

household will frequent Seattle Center approximately eight times per

year, attending events at a variety of venues including museums, concert

halls, convention facilities, and sports arenas. Often, many events run

concurrently, creating a surge in travelers on the downtown streets as

ticket holders strive to arrive in time for the opening curtain or tip-off.

To meet the parking demand, Seattle Center operates several parking

facilities, providing a total of 3,535 parking spaces located around the

park complex. Figure 6 shows a map of Seattle Center parking facilities. 

The problem faced by Seattle Center patrons is that on nights when

multiple events take place, there are significant delays encountered on

Site Characteristic Seattle Center Chicago Metra

Park-and-Ride BWI Airport

Distance of Signs

from the Facility

Approximately

1 mile

Between 1/4 and

3 miles away from

both stations 

All signs and LED

indicators are located

at the entrance to, or

within, the Daily and

Hourly Garages.8

Facility Type Multi-level

garages and

surface lots

Surface lots Multi-level garage

Counter Type Entry/Exit Entry/Exit Individual space

Communication

Backbone

Wireline/

Wireless

Wireline/

Wireless

Wireline

Integration with

Regional ITS

Yes Yes No

Table 2. APMS Site Overview (continued from previous page)

8 Signs located on the roadway approaching BWI are maintained by the Maryland Aviation

Administration and inform travelers of availability and the cost per hour of each parking facility at

the airport. 

Seattle Center
8-3

Study Site Descriptions

the streets that access Seattle Center parking facilities from nearby

Interstate-5 (I-5). Traffic occasionally backs up to the freeway exit ramp

as patrons queue up to approach the first of the several facilities

operated in support of Seattle Center events. Events at the Seattle

Center contribute to heavy traffic between Mercer Avenue and I-5,

which must follow a complex path of one-way streets. Locals call traffic

backups that result the “Mercer Mess.”

To address these problems, Seattle Center and the Washington

Department of Transportation (WSDOT) began the deployment of an

advanced parking management system in 2003. The system includes

signs with both active and passive components. As of 2006, only the

passive pieces of the signs were being used. At the time of this study’s

publication, the local stakeholders were continuing to work towards

implementing a stable, functioning system that includes both passive

and active components. If both components operate as designed, the

Seattle Center advanced parking management system will become part

of the Puget Sound region’s SmarTrek traveler information system.

As designed, the system consists of remote sensors, a central computer,

strategically located dynamic message signs, a website interface, a

SmarTrek data systems interface, and the associated communications

and power infrastructure. The APMS signs are configured so that they

may contain both active and passive message components. Figure 7

shows a sign with both active and passive components, although the

active component is not operational in this photograph. The active

component can provide space availability at the various facilities. The

passive component points to nearby garages. If both pieces were

operational, these two elements would provide the traveler with the

Mercer S

Not to Scale

Q

ep ublican St.

alley St.

oy St.

y

B oad S

homas S

ohn St.

Denny Way

Ballard

Walkway

Under

Hw

arrison S

Figure 6. Map of Seattle Center Parking 
8-4

Study Site Descriptions

information required to make the best choice on whether to wait in the

entry queue or whether to divert to another facility.

Should the active sign components become operational, the garage

facilities will use an entry/exit counting system to track the number of

spaces available. The number of spaces available would then be

forwarded to a central computer and used in generating displays on the

active components of the APMS signs. The use of entry/exit counters,

while not as accurate as individual space sensors, can overcome the

difficulty of installing in-surface space sensors in pre-existing garage

facilities, which are not equipped with the conduit required to support a

space-by-space counting system. 

The surface lot also uses in-surface sensors, such as the one shown in

Figure 8, that communicate wirelessly with an inventory management

system that provides count information to the central computer. The

systems selected do not require in-surface wiring and can be removed to

facilitate periodic resurfacing of the asphalt surface.

A centralized system can monitor the number of vehicles in each facility

and then generate the messages to be displayed on the active piece of

the sign and the Seattle Center website. Two dynamic message signs,

located along adjacent roadways, have been installed to present realtime parking availability information, should the active piece become

operational. Figure 9 illustrates the system’s architecture. As currently

deployed, various elements on the passive sign direct traffic to nearby

parking facilities.

Figure 7. Seattle Center Sign Illustrating Active and Passive Components
8-5

Study Site Descriptions 

Smar Trek Interface

Denn y/Taylor

Mercer Street

Garage

5th Avenue

Lot

st Avenue N Garage

5th/Roy

Web Page

Figure 8. Seattle Center In-surface, Wireless Vehicle Detector

The system was funded primarily by WSDOT. Seattle Center, which is a

separate government entity, is responsible for the maintenance of the

system. The system is designed to provide parking availability for the First

Avenue North Garage, the Mercer Garage, and the Fifth Avenue Parking

Garage. The system has not yet operated as designed due to various

issues. Many of these issues are directly related to the system’s central

computer. For example, security upgrades within the central computer

have affected the communication with the dynamic message signs. 

The Fifth Avenue garage has also experienced problems with the

wireless communications between the detectors and the central

computer. While some of the dynamic message signs have the option of

being operated manually, this has never been done. The technical

challenges encountered have caused the project to be delayed many

times. This has led to waning interest among participants and lowered

the priority of the project. Additionally, many of the agencies involved

have experienced staff changes in key positions since the project began,

resulting in the need to continually seek buy in, as new staff members

become involved.

Figure 9. Seattle Center APMS System Architecture 
8-6

Study Site Descriptions

As part of an integrated corridor management plan, the Chicago Metra

commuter railroad is deploying an advanced parking management

system to guide commuters from the freeway to park-and-ride lots with

open parking spaces. As of the date of this study’s publication, all the

equipment had been deployed and operational testing was underway. 

The system was installed on the Rock Island Line, which is one of 12 lines

operated by Metra that run from downtown Chicago to the outlying

suburbs. Figure 10 shows a map of the Metra system with the Rock

Island Line highlighted. The two stations where the system is installed

are the Hickory Creek/Mokena station and the Tinley Park/80th Avenue

station. Both stations are located a short distance from Interstate-80 (I80). As with many commuter railroads, park-and-ride facilities are an

integral part of the service Metra provides.

Figure 10. Map of the Chicago Metra System with the Rock Island Line

Highlighted9

Chicago Metra

Park-and-Ride

9 Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation (2006). Metra System Map.

http://metrarail.com/System_map/index.html.
8-7

10 Wilbur Smith Associates (1999). Parking Management Systems: Needs Assessment Report.

Metra implemented the system with the hope that the park-and-ride

APMS application would increase the number of monthly pass holders

on the line. Approximately 60 percent of riders from the two Rock Island

Line stations use monthly passes. The remainder use 10-trip or single ride

passes. One of Metra’s goals for the system is to convert occasional riders

to monthly pass holders, securing a more stable ridership base and

associated revenue streams. Additionally, the system is expected to

reduce the number of times commuters return to the roadway or park in

a nearby neighborhood as a result of not finding parking. 

The State of Illinois received Federal funding for the advanced parking

management system in 2000. The project, overseen by the Regional

Transit Authority (RTA), involves design, deployment, testing, and

evaluation of a prototype system at two Metra park-and-ride facilities.

The system will collect information on parking availability at select parkand-ride lots, and will provide this information to travelers through

dynamic message signs located on the freeways and arterial streets

along the commuter corridor. Signs will provide travelers with “road-toparking lot” guidance, as well as “lot-to-lot” guidance within parking

facilities or between nearby parking facilities where appropriate.

Functional system design was guided by information collected from

transit rider surveys conducted during a needs assessment. Metra

conducted surveys of commuters at various rail stations during and

immediately following the morning rush hour. The survey consisted of

11 questions on station parking, station signage, and types of

information that riders would like posted on dynamic message signs.

The survey found that a majority (62 percent) of all transit riders felt

that signage around transit stations could be improved. The survey

found that over 3/4 of regular transit riders felt that inadequate parking

guidance information was a significant issue.10

The first station served by the system is the Tinely Park/80th Avenue

station. Tinley Park is considered a high-growth area. The station has

approximately 2,000 surface spots and 40 handicapped spots situated in

two parking lots. These lots are nearly 100 percent utilized on weekdays.

This station has an approximate daily ridership of 2,297. The second

station, the Hickory Creek/Mokena Station, is located south of the 80th

Avenue/Tinley Park Station off of I-80. This station has roughly 2000

available spaces in one parking lot, which are 70 to 80 percent utilized

each weekday. The Hickory Creek Station has a daily ridership of 1,135. 

Metra hopes to create an inter-station group that will allow riders to

park at either facility, since the two stations are located close to each

other. As such, the system provides parking availability information on

all lots that would be of interest based on the DMS location. The

dynamic message signs provide the available number of spaces at each

lot and static directional arrows to direct the drivers to these lots.

Study Site Descriptions 
8-8

Metra’s system uses entry/exit detectors at all lots, with a field processor

that communicates the availability information to eight dynamic

message signs at various locations. Communication between the lots and

the field processor and between the field processor and the DMS devices

is wireless. The system employs one microwave tower that serves the

entire network. The signs, located on the nearby freeways and arterial

streets, operate within a carefully planned information network.

Figure 11 shows a schematic map of the system. Metra expects the

system to become operational in 2006.

Baltimore-Washington International Airport near Baltimore, Maryland

has been a leader in APMS applications at U.S. airports. The site has the

largest airport ITS parking system in the country. The system determines

garage space availability in real time and guides travelers to the

available parking spaces. BWI deployed the system to improve the

traveler’s experience as part of the airport’s aggressive growth strategy.

In April 2001, an advanced parking management system was installed on

Level 2 of the hourly garage (approximately 1,100 spaces) as an

operational test of the system. The purpose of the limited installation

was to test the effectiveness of the parking system prior to making a

large capital investment. During the operational test, the Maryland

Aviation Administration (MAA) received an overwhelmingly positive

response through surveys and e-mail comments. In addition to the

positive feedback, the parking operators found a reduction in the

Study Site Descriptions

BaltimoreWashington

International

Airport

Figure 11. Chicago Metra’s APMS System Illustrating the Parking Information

Network 
number of cars parked illegally in fire lanes and other no-parking areas.

Based on the positive operational test results, the MAA expanded the

system to the other four levels of the Hourly Garage. In addition,

installation of APMS technology was included in the construction of a

new garage–Daily Garage A. This expansion was completed in early 2004.

Daily Garage A offers 7,100 spaces on eight levels, bringing the total

number of spaces served to over 13,000. Total cost of the BWI system is

estimated at $6 million.

The BWI system uses ultrasonic sensors positioned over each parking

space to monitor the availability of the space. Information is collected

for each aisle, floor, and facility. The information is processed in a

central computer. General parking guidance information is provided to

travelers on a dynamic message sign on the airport access road. This sign

indicates the “Open” or “Full” status of each facility. As the traveler

drives through an APMS-equipped facility, billboard signs at the entry to

each level indicate the number of spaces available on that floor. There

are also signs on the up and down ramps within the garage that

indicate the number of spaces on floors above and below. Daily

Garage A also has a sign at the main entrance listing the number of

spaces available on all floors, as shown in Figure 12.

8-9

11 Schick Electronic, SA Website (2006). Signal-Park.

http://www.signal-park.com.

Once on the aisle, the traveler sees space availability on a light-emitting

diode (LED) sign over each space. The LED system displays the space

status based on the ultrasonic detector located in the detector/display

assembly. The LED displays green for “available” and red for

“unavailable.” Those spaces reserved for handicapped-accessible parking

spaces are equipped with a blue LED display.

Study Site Descriptions 

Figure 12. BWI Daily Garage Entrance Sign Providing Availability by Floor11

9-1

Other APMS Applications

New advanced parking management systems go beyond providing

information to the traveler on the availability of parking spaces. Some

APMS applications take reservations for parking spaces and some even

guide travelers, with turn-by-turn directions, all the way to the available

parking space. 

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is sponsoring the

development and testing of a parking management system with

reservation capabilities. Caltrans is partnering with the University of

California at Berkeley, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), ParkingCarmaTM,

and Quixote Corporation to test the system at the BART park-and-ride

lot in Millbrae, California.The project began in September 2004,

following two years of research and development. Electronic sensors in

the east lot of the Rockbridge BART park-and-ride facility communicate

space availability to commuters on the freeway using two temporary

dynamic message signs. Figure 13 shows a schematic map of the Millbrae

BART parking facility with the two lots that operate the ParkingCarmaTM

system highlighted.

12 Bay Area Rapid Transit (2006). Millbrae Station Parking Map.

http://www.bart.gov/docs/permit/pk_millbrae.pdf.

Facility-Based

Reservation

Systems

BART riders may reserve any of these 50 spaces over the Internet, personal

digital assistant (PDA) or telephone. Daily or monthly reservations are

available up to two weeks in advance. It costs a commuter $4.50 to reserve

a spot in advance through ParkingCarmaTM, compared to the daily rate of

$1.00 for those who drive into the lot and find a space.

Figure 13. BART Park-and-Ride Facility in Millbrae, California12
9-2

Other APMS Applications

Utilization of the reserved parking spaces has increased from 10 percent

before the test to 75 percent after the test.13 Over 1,000 users have

registered to participate in the reservation program. Stakeholders

believe that the system also has improved difficult-to-quantify measures

such as customer satisfaction. One commuter said that without the

ParkingCarmaTM service, “I would probably not take BART.”14

The latest trend in parking management is online reservation services.

Two companies—including MobileParking LLC and SpotScoutTM—allow

drivers to check parking availability for select cities using their radio,

cellular telephone or computer. MobileParking LLC currently covers 400

parking facilities in 50 cities across the U.S. MobileParking’s service

allows drivers to call a toll-free number from their cellular telephones to

check parking availability in their city. After the driver provides the

operator with his or her final destination, the operator directs the driver

to the closest available space. The first reservation is free. Additional

reservations cost $1.75 each. At some of MobileParking’s partner

garages, in addition to paying MobileParking for the reservation,

customers can also pay the parking fee itself through MobileParking,

eliminating the need to make a separate payment to the garage

operator.

SpotScoutTM launched in 2004 and began taking parking reservations in

New York and Boston beginning in 2006. The SpotScoutTM service allows

drivers to reserve and pay for parking spots either online or through

Web-enabled cellular telephones. Once a driver has reserved a spot and

paid for it, a text message is sent to the driver’s cell phone with a

confirmation code and directions to the facility.

In addition, SpotScoutTM allows users to sell their personal parking

spaces to other motorists for short-term use. These users are called

“SpotCasters.” SpotScoutTM allows users to “set the price and time

parameters within which they wish to make their space(s) available.”15

In the future, SpotScoutTM hopes to include on-street spaces in its

network of parking spaces. Since the SpotScoutTM service allows the

parking facilities to update the number of available spots online, no

sensor infrastructure is required.

Online

Reservation

Systems

13 Botkin, Donald (2005). ParkingCarma’s Innovative Smart Parking System Featured this Week at

ITS World Congress in San Francisco.

http://www.parkingcarma.com/ITSPR.aspx. 

14 Saranow, Jennifer (2006). “Your Space is Waiting: Reserving a Parking Spot.” The Wall Street Journal. 

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06088/677762-96.stm.

15 SpotScoutTM Website (2006). SpotScoutTM: Parking the Mobile Generation.

http://www.spotscout.com.
In 2005, XM Satellite Radio, which already provides real-time traffic

information to in-vehicle navigation devices, demonstrated a potential

service called “Dynamic Parking Information.” The service provides XM

Radio users with the number of available parking spaces at specific lots. 

The system relies on sensors within the parking lots to transmit the

availability information to the vehicle’s navigation system. (Parking lots

in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Detroit provided data for the

demonstration.) The in-vehicle display uses color-coded icons to reflect

the percentage of unoccupied spaces. 

XM Radio has plans to take the service nationwide. At the time of the

demonstration, company officials announced that it was in negotiation

with major parking providers about participating in the service.

9-3

Parking

Navigation

Systems

Other APMS Applications

10-1

Cross-Cutting Findings

This section presents the benefits, costs and lessons learned findings

from the three sites visited. These findings, as well as additional

benefits, costs, lessons learned, and extent of deployment of advanced

parking management systems are available on the ITS Applications

Overview website http://www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov and search for

“parking management.”

The benefits of APMS are specific to the stakeholders involved:

• Travelers: easier access, reduced time spent looking for parking, and

reduced frustration

• Venue operators: increase in accessibility and associated increase in

patronage and customer satisfaction

• Parking operators: increased space occupancy and associated

increase in revenue

• The jurisdiction and nearby neighborhoods: reduction in the

number of patrons circulating through the street network looking

for a parking space and fewer vehicles parked illegally on local

streets.

Specific benefits found in visits to APMS sites are cited below.

An October 2003 survey of BWI travelers found that most have a

positive impression of parking at BWI Airport. Of the 63 travelers

surveyed, 81 percent answered that they “strongly agree” or “agree”

that parking is easier at BWI than at the other airports they frequented.

Similarly, 68 percent responded that they “strongly agree” or “agree”

that parking is faster at BWI than at the other airports they frequented.

Figure 14 shows a graph of the survey results.

Figure 14. Customer Satisfaction Survey Responses at BWI

Strong y Agree

D sagree

Neutra

Agree

Strong y D sagree Parking a BWI:

Faster

Easier

Benefits

Ease of Access

“Customer

satisfaction became

the major factor in

the decision to

expand from a test of

several thousand

spaces to deployment

across all hourly and

daily garage

facilities at BWI.”

–Harry Zeigler, 

Assistant Manager,

Maryland Department of

Transportation, Office of

Transportation and

Terminal Services,

BWI Airport
10-2

Cross-Cutting Findings

Direct BWI customer feedback gathered by the Maryland Aviation

Authority indicates that customers felt the system “saved them

aggravation” leading to very high levels of customer satisfaction with

the BWI parking experience. Harry Zeigler, Assistant Manager for the

Maryland Department of Transportation’s Office of Transportation and

Terminal Services at BWI Airport, stated: “Customer satisfaction became

the major factor in the decision to expand from a test of several

thousand spaces to deployment across all hourly and daily garage

facilities at BWI.”

In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, several business improvement districts have

embarked on an ambitious plan to improve parking in the downtown

area, and survey results indicate that the city’s efforts have been

successful. In recent years, the city has installed better signage at parking

facilities and launched a Web-based pre-trip parking information service.

A survey conducted in 2003 of metropolitan area residents found that

there was a 10 percent decrease (as compared with the previous year) in

the number of respondents who felt that parking availability prevented

them from visiting downtown Milwaukee.16 The same survey revealed

that a larger portion of citizens (68 percent in 2003 compared with 54

percent in 2002) felt that the Milwaukee downtown area is improving as

a place to visit. 

In February 2004, a downtown St. Paul, Minnesota parking survey was

conducted to determine the city’s ability to accommodate Winter

Carnival visitors. The survey district included an area served by 42

parking facilities—17 of which are participants in the downtown St. Paul

advanced parking management system. The vacancy rate at the facilities

participating in the system was much lower—17 percent versus

38 percent.17

The system in St. Paul connects 10 parking facilities in the downtown

area. Fifty-six (56) signs provide information on parking availability: 10

of these are dynamic message signs providing parking availability, while

46 are static signs which guide drivers to facilities. 

A study of the traffic flow impacts of the APMS was conducted in St.

Paul as part of the system’s 1997 field operational test. The impacts on

travel time and intersection performance were measured in the vicinity

of the West 7th Street and Kellogg Boulevard. Travel time on a street in

the CBD area was measured before and after activation of the system

during periods of equivalent demand. Over the measured course, travel

16 Milwaukee Downtown (2003). Status of the Downtown Milwaukee Brand

in Southeastern Wisconsin.

http://www.milwaukeedowntown.com/pdf/whitepaper.pdf.

17 St. Paul Transportation Management Organization (2004). Event Parking Empty Space Report.

Reduced Frustration

Increased Venue

Accessibility

Increased Facility

Occupancy

Improved Traffic Flow 
10-3

Cross-Cutting Findings

times were reduced by 9 percent and the stopped time delay over the

course decreased by 4 percent. At the signalized intersection itself,

individual vehicle delay was reduced by 10 percent even as intersection

volume increased by 15 percent.

Advanced parking management systems can range widely in cost,

depending on several factors including the following:

• Type and level of accuracy of the information provided

• Degree of complexity in installation of the sensors

• Availability of communications channels

• Availability of power supplies for remote components

• Signage required to convey the information at appropriate decision

points.

This study has found that advanced parking management systems cost

between $250 and $800 per space, depending on the factors listed

above.

At BWI, the unit cost of the equipment was approximately $450 per

parking space. BWI stakeholders estimate that the system would have

been more expensive if an existing garage had been retrofitted with the

system’s equipment. The advanced parking management system was

estimated to cost between 2 and 5 percent of the overall construction

cost of the new parking structure, excluding land costs. 

In the case of Seattle Center, the cost per space varied widely based on

the facility type (garage or surface). The overall cost was driven to a

significant degree by the cost of getting the signs installed and linked to

the central computer and to local power supplies. 

For the Chicago Metra project, Metra will have a two-year warranty

period that will begin when the system becomes operational. During

that time, Metra will document operational costs such as staff time and

materials. Metra expects the electrical costs to be approximately $20 per

month for each electrical sign. There are seven electrical signs in the

Metra system; an eighth sign is solar-powered. Metra expects the annual

electrical costs to be $1,680. The cities in which the project is taking

place have offered to pay these electrical costs, and Metra expects to

take them up on their offer.

Costs
10-4

Cross-Cutting Findings

The costs for an advanced parking management system are typically split

between the parking facility operators and the local jurisdictions.

These life cycle costs cover all of the system’s functional requirements.

These costs can be divided into several categories: system design,

equipment, installation, communications, operations, and maintenance. 

System design, equipment, installation, communications, operations, and

maintenance costs can themselves be divided into categories:

• Sensors

• Integration and operating software

• Display systems

• Electronic payment systems

• Power supplies.

Communications costs can be divided into the following categories:

• System interface terminals

• Line charges for twisted wire, fiber optic, T-1, or wireless services,

depending on the configuration of the system

• Web-based services.

This section summarizes specific lessons reported by the sites visited. The

lessons were common across all three sites, and are presented in terms

of policy and planning, design and deployment, and management and

operations.

• Involve all appropriate stakeholders in a formal and collaborative

manner throughout the planning, deployment, and operations

phases. Advanced parking management systems will impact many

stakeholders, both public and private, including travelers, parking

operators, venue operators, nearby neighborhoods, and the local

jurisdiction itself. To be successful, the needs and concerns of all

stakeholder groups must be addressed. For those APMS projects that

involve very diverse groups, including those located in CBDs and

transit park-and-ride facilities, stakeholders need to consider forming

a formal organization and writing a memorandum of understanding

that outlines the short- and long-term roles of each member. 

Barry Resnick, Planner for the Department of Planning and Real

Estate Development at Metra, cites government coordination as a

key aspect of the deployment’s success: “Positive aspects of

coordination among the various levels of government helped stave

off unnecessary future costs and potential relocation of systems.” 

“Positive aspects of

coordination among

the various levels of

government helped

stave off unnecessary

future costs and

potential relocation

of systems.”

–Barry Resnick, 

Planner, Department of

Planning and Real Estate

Development, Metra

Lessons

Learned

Policy and Planning
10-5

Cross-Cutting Findings

• Ensure that the stakeholder group works from a formal charter that

binds the member organizations to the effort, provides a forum for

resolution of issues, and ensures a consistent advocacy message.

APMS deployments, with the exception of airports, are often

integrated into urban or neighborhood environments and, as such,

take time and involve a very diverse group of stakeholders. Latebreaking or unresolved stakeholder concerns can stall the effort

indefinitely. To prevent stalling, the stakeholder group should obtain

formal endorsement from the leadership of the jurisdiction involved.

The mayor or county executive should seek city or county council

endorsement and should designate a staff member or a specific

public agency as "champion" of the system. The champion should

exercise executive leadership within the stakeholder group and

represent the project in public policy discussions and funding

requests. 

As Eldon Jacobson, Advanced Technology Engineer for the

Washington Department of Transportation, noted regarding the

challenges encountered during the Seattle Center APMS deployment,

“One lesson that can be learned is to never start a project like this

unless there is a signed public agency agreement outlining roles and

responsibilities that is approved at the highest levels within a city.” 

• Integrate the APMS project into a larger regional ITS architecture. An

important consideration in the design phase is to link the APMS

project to a regional ITS architecture. In doing so, 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 during the course of

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 ITS architecture reduces the

potential for these technical surprises that delay implementation and

increase costs. In addition, connection to a regional ITS architecture

provides opportunities to seek Federal and state funding associated

with ITS-based traveler information systems, congestion

management, and clean air attainment programs. 

• For systems that use entry/exit counting systems, consider the

sensor’s detection zone in design of entrance or exit driveways.

Wide driveways and narrow detection zones can lead to missed

counts. In addition, when there is significant transient traffic that

shares the entrance with the parking facility, (e.g., vehicles going to

“kiss and ride” drop-off zones) the system count refresh rate needs

to by fairly high to ensure that transient or circulatory traffic is not

counted against the number of spaces available.

“One lesson that can

be learned is to never

start a project like

this unless there is a

signed public agency

agreement outlining

roles and

responsibilities

that is approved at

the highest levels

within a city.”

–Eldon Jacobson, 

Advanced Technology

Engineer, Washington

Department of

Transportation 

Design and

Deployment
• Research the availability of communications lines and power

supplies thoroughly and get the permit process going early; check

availability in the field before committing to a design. APMS

devices, although small and mostly self-sufficient, require access to

communications channels and power supplies. Solving connectivity

issues is a major activity with in the system design and installation

process. 

• Involve those that have authority and influence in the approval of

sign appearance and location early in the design process.

Throughout the design process, records of approvals and changes

should be kept. A final sign design must be formally agreed upon.

Sign appearance and locations can become a significant source of

delay and increased costs, as they must often be approved by

architectural control boards and historical preservation

organizations. In addition, APMS signs may conflict with local

commercial property signs that are planned or already in place. Late

changes in sign appearance and location can be catastrophic to

progress, as they often require redesign and re-permitting for new

communications infrastructure and power access. In two of the three

sites visited, changes to signage in the latter part of the deployment

introduced significant costs and delays. 

• For systems that use space occupancy counting systems, confirm

detector operation periodically. In the case of the LED light system

employed at BWI, attendants conduct periodic drive-through

inspections to ensure all the detectors accurately reflect the space

status. 

• Identify the roles and responsibilities of each agency for system

operations and maintenance early in the planning process. Failure

to maintain the systems will reduce credibility and public acceptance

will be negatively impacted. At one of the sites visited, the effort

was delayed for nearly a year as the stakeholder group resolved the

debate over who would pay for operations and maintenance.

10-6

Cross-Cutting Findings

Management and

Operations
11-1

Conclusion

Parking is and will remain an issue that affects everyone in the

community, from traffic management and law enforcement to attraction

owners to residents of nearby neighborhoods. All types of systems will

be needed to address the parking challenge, from systems that provide

parking availability at the regional and lot-, floor-, aisle- or space-specific

level to high-tech parking reservation and navigation systems. 

This study has found that facilities, venues, and communities that have

deployed APMS have experienced a wide range of benefits, from

increased customer satisfaction to higher patronage and revenues. These

benefits are the result of collaboration among diverse stakeholders, as

advanced parking management systems take the stress out of parking.

12-1

References

Bay Area Rapid Transit (2006). Millbrae Station Parking Map.

http://www.bart.gov/docs/permit/pk_millbrae.pdf.

Botkin, Donald (2005). ParkingCarma’s Innovative Smart Parking System

Featured this Week at ITS World Congress in San Francisco.

http://www.parkingcarma.com/ITSPR.aspx. 

Milwaukee Downtown (2003). Status of the Downtown Milwaukee

Brand in Southeastern Wisconsin.

http://milwaukeedowntown.com/pdf/whitepaper.pdf. 

MobileParking LLC Website (2006). Parking Made Easy as "1-2-3.”

http://www.mobileparking.com. 

Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation (2006).

Metra System Map.

http://metrarail.com/System_map/index.html. 

ParkMilwaukee.com Website (2006). ParkMilwaukee.com—Your

Downtown Parking Resource.

http://www.parkmilwaukee.com. 

St. Paul Transportation Management Organization (2004).

Event Parking Empty Space Report. 

Saranow, Jennifer (2006). “Your Space is Waiting: Reserving a

Parking Spot.” The Wall Street Journal.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06088/677762-96.stm. 

Schick Electronic, SA Website (2006). Signal-Park.

http://www.signal-park.com.

SpotScoutTM Website (2006). SpotScoutTM: Parking the Mobile Generation.

http://www.spotscout.com. 

U.S. DOT (2006). ITS Deployment Statistics Database.

http://www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov.

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (2005). Intelligent

Transportation Systems and Truck Parking.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/researchtechnology/report/intelligent-transportation-truckparking.htm.

Wilbur Smith Associates (1999). Parking Management Systems: Needs

Assessment Report.

13-1

Resources

Smith, Lauren and Hans Roth (2003). Parking Systems Technologies.

http://www.calccit.org/itsdecision/serv_and_tech/

Parking_Systems_Technologies/parking_systems_tech_report.htm.

This website provides basic overviews of advanced parking systems,

parking guidance systems, parking information services, automated

parking systems, advanced payment systems, and advanced parking

meters. This site also provides brief descriptions of various

deployments of these systems throughout the U.S., Europe and Asia.

Pati, Bikash Ron (1998). “Using ITS Technology to Manage Congestion

at Parking Facilities.” Network.

http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/publications/

network/Issue_43/43_30_PatiB_ITSTechnologyManage.asp.

This article provides a high-level overview of both parking guidance

systems and parking management systems. The article also lists the

common components that make up the system, a general

description of system operations, per space system cost estimates,

and the benefits the project stakeholders can expect after

deploying either type of system.

ITS Applications Overview Website (2006).

http://www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov, search for “parking management.”

This Web page provides “one-stop shopping” for information on the

benefits, costs, lessons learned, extent of deployment and other

information about advanced parking management systems. This page

allows “one click” access to the parking management sections of the ITS

Benefits Database, the ITS Costs Database, the ITS Lessons Learned

Knowledge Resource, and the ITS Deployment Statistics Database.

Spillar, Ron (1998). “Smart Parks: The Next Generation in Park-and-Ride

Facilities.” Network.

http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/publications/

network/Issue_42/42_10_SpillarR_SmartParksNextGen.asp.

This article discusses the Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority’s Smart

Park deployment in San Jose, California, which is unique in that it

ties parking management information with traveler information.

The article provides an overview of the deployment, which provides

riders with trip planning and vehicle location information in

addition to alerting them to parking availability through DMS and

LED indicators. 

Overview of

APMS

APMS Case

Studies
13-2

Shaheen, Susan A and Caroline J. Rodier (2004). Applying Integrated

ITS Technologies to Parking Management Systems: A Transit-Based

Case Study in the San Francisco Bay Area.

http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/publications/2004/UCD-ITS-RR-04-18.pdf.

This report presents the background research that was conducted as

part of Caltrans’ test deployment at the Rockbridge BART station.

The report provides the results of an extensive literature review of

various smart parking applications worldwide. Also described is the

field test technology that was used in the deployment. The

document includes the results of focus groups and surveys that

were conducted pre-deployment to gauge consumer interest in

smart parking services. 
14-1

Baltimore Washington International Airport

Richard L. Hasson

Project Manager and Principal Engineer

Phone 410-684-6311

rhasson@cablespeed.com

Chicago Metra Parking Management Guidance System

Barry Resnick

Planner, Department of Planning and Real Estate Development, Metra

Phone 312-322-8994

bresnick@metrarr.com

Gerry Tumbali

Manager, Engineering and Technology, Regional Transit Authority

Phone 312-913-3251

tumbalig@rtachicago.org

Seattle Center Advanced Parking Information System

Eldon Jacobson

Advanced Technology Engineer, Washington Department of

Transportation

Phone 206-685-3187

eldon@u.washington.edu

Don Loseff

Associate Transportation Planner, Seattle Center

Phone 206-684-7184

Donald.loseff@seattle.gov

Additional Resources


Federal Highway Administration Resource Center Locations

Baltimore, MD

10 S. Howard Street

Suite 4000

Baltimore, MD 21201

Phone 410-962-0093

Facsimile 410-962-3419

Atlanta, GA

61 Forsyth Street, SW

Suite 17T26

Atlanta, GA 30303

Phone 404-562-3570

Facsimile 404-562-3700

Olympia Fields, IL

19900 Governors Drive

Suite 301

Olympia Fields, IL 60461

Phone 708-283-3500

Facsimile 708-283-3501

San Francisco, CA

201 Mission Street

Suite 2100

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone 415-744-3102

Facsimile 415-744-2620
THIS DOCUMENT IS ONE IN A SERIES OF PRODUCTS THAT ADDRESS

ITS ISSUES PERTINENT TO A VARIETY OF AUDIENCES

Elected and Appointed Officials • Senior Decision Makers

Transportation Managers • Technical Experts

Representing:

States • Cities • Counties • Motor Carriers 

Licensing and Registration Service Bureaus • Law Enforcement 

Public Utilities/Commercial Vehicle Enforcement 

Additional Transportation Stakeholders

ITS Topics Addressed in This Series:

• Commercial Vehicle Operations

• Emergency Services

• Enabling Technologies

• Emissions Management

• Freeway and Arterial 

Management

• Planning and Integration

• Real-Time Traveler Information

• Transit, Toll, and Rail Management

• Weather Information for Travelers

and Maintenance

• Work Zones

For a current listing of available documents, please visit our website at:

http://www.its.dot.gov

Benefits Brochures quote how ITS

technologies have benefited specific areas.

Cross-Cutting Studies present current

data from related ITS applications.

Case Studies provide in-depth coverage

of ITS applications in specific projects.

Products Available in This Series

Technical Reportsinclude results from

various Field Operation Tests.

Implementation Guides assist

project staff in the technical details of

implementing ITS.
FHWA-JPO-07-011 EDL# 14318

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7th Street SW

Washington, DC 20590

Phone: 866-367-7487

Facsimile: 202-493-2027

“The impact of SmartPark at BWI has been tremendous—it

has not only made parking easier and faster, but it has

improved customer satisfaction and reduced illegal parking.”

–Harry Zeigler, 

Assistant Manager, 

Maryland Department of Transportation, 

Office of Transportation and Terminal Services,

BWI Airport