PART 1

Why Simple Design is Often Complex

BY GEORGE M. BURTON

HE INTENTION OF THIS TWOpart article is to describe the path a

design process usually takes in order to
arrive at a desirable product a userfriendly car park and to present an
overview of some relevant factors that influence the
process of functional design of any parking facility.
The Car and the Parking Facility

As we all know, there is no such thing as free parking. Parking costs money and someone has to pay for it. In one way or
another, it is the end user of the space who pays for parking,
whether it is directly in the car park, via a lease for the
office/shop, or indeed in the prices of goods sold in the shops.
In this article, the term commercial parking operation
relates to car parks where a fee is charged directly to the user of
the parking facility.
As illustrated in Exhibit 1, car park design is subject to
numerous considerations, some of which affect the design
process more than the others. Broadly speaking, car park design

G.M. BURTON
CONSULTING

CAR PARK
FEASIBILITY
PARKING
DEMAND

COMMERCIAL
FEASIBILITY

Simple Design = Simple Management

PLANNING
CONSIDERATIONS

EXTERNAL

FUNCTIONAL

USER
FRIENDLINESS

ARCHITECTURAL
STRUCTURAL

ENVIRONMENTAL
AND
STATUTORY

AESTHETICS

LOCATION OF
VEHICULAR
ACCESS
PARKING
LAYOUT

CONTROL OF
AIR POLLUTION
(CAR EMISSION)

INTERNAL
TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION

TRANSPORT AND
PARKING POLICY
RESTRAINT

PEDESTRIAN
CIRCULATION

BETTER
UTILISATION
OF EXISTING
PARKING STOCK

SECURITY
SIGNAGE
PARKING
EQUIPMENT

STRUCTURE

16

JUNE 2009

PARKING WORLD

needs to take into account user, functional, environmental and

other considerations.
User considerations are presented in the viability of a car
parking development and, as such, are a prerequisite of the design
process. Determination of the car park viability entails a Parking
Demand Analysis and a Commercial Feasibility Study.
Assuming that the parking demand analysis concludes there
is a need for parking supply, then the results of the commercial
feasibility study will determine whether the functional design
process shall be instigated or not.
Functional considerations are directly affected by the
criteria of user friendliness and indirectly by environmental
considerations.
However, environmental considerations directly relate to
transportation, and therefore to parking as a whole, in their
pursuit to improve air quality and to alleviate traffic congestion. The car, being an essential utility, is a target of environmental concern.
The role of mass transportation is limited to areas of high
population densities. It essentially moves people between two
points. However, people depart from that and scatter in all
directions.
Therefore, the car will remain an integral part of the transportation system and continue to be its primary mode.
Consequently, car parking is and will remain an essential
part of all civic, cultural, social, business and shopping activities.
People conducting these activities generate parking demand,
which must be responded to with sufficient, effective and efficient car parking facilities.

www.parkingworld.com

Car parks are the normal and natural termination points for
access roads and city streets. However, they are not the end of a
journey. They act as an interchange where a person goes from
being a motorist to being a pedestrian. Hence, car parks must
be functional and meet the needs of both motorists and pedestrians. How efficiently the car park receives, stores and discharges cars determines its usefulness to its developer and the
community it serves.
Simplicity and ease of parking are the basis of good functional design practice. The design must provide for traffic circulation and parking manoeuvres in a safe and expedient manner,
with minimum delay and no hazard to the safety of vehicles and
pedestrians. The design also must recognise the different types of
users so that the car park can function efficiently.
Simple parking design generally results in simple parking
management and, at the same time, a higher degree of acceptance of the parking facility by the driving public. This basic
equation applies to the pre-design, design and post-design
stages of any parking facility, regardless of whether it is a multi-storey structure or a surface car park. The significance of this
practical equation is magnified in a commercial context; however, its implications are equally important for any other type of
parking operation.
Designers should beware of falling into the trap of overdesign, resulting in increased driver confusion and frustration as
well as unnecessary extra cost. On the other hand, oversimplifi-

cation without any real improvements to the design also should

be avoided.
An inefficient design could lead to a car park not being well
patronised by users due to their preferences for more convenient
alternatives, which, of course, might seriously affect the ultimate
commercial success of a development.

Planning User-Friendly Car Parks

Nowadays, planning user-friendly car parks is a different
ballgame from what it was only a few years ago. In fact, it
requires a considerable change in design approach. The times are
gone when supply, regardless of quality, was the main concern.
Today, car parks compete with one another, whether they are
within an urban area or out of town. If drivers dont like one car
park, they go into another one or they park somewhere else.
Car parks with associated hazards to safety too many
columns, tight layout with confusing and redundant traffic circulation patterns, bad or non-existent signage, etc. do not attract
drivers at all.
External aesthetics significantly contribute to user-friendliness (additional comments on this subject will be made further on).
All elements of car park design and operation must be of the
highest standard. Car parks should be not only pleasing to the eye
but also commercially viable; they should be safe, user-friendly,
secure and incurring low maintenance costs.

The basic ingredients of user-friendliness are:

Convenient, with efficient layouts and circulation patterns
without collision points and other surprises.
Fast means of inter-floor and intra-floor travel, guiding traffic to the nearest vacant parking spaces.
Well-laid-out column grids allowing for best possible visibility and safety. Preference is for clear span design in freestanding structures.
A high standard of illumination that will enhance confidence in safety and security.
A clean and bright interior and good-looking exterior.
All in all, the planning of user-friendly car parks entails all
the considerations mentioned above, but first and foremost, it
requires the application of good design practice.
Part 2 of George Burtons article will be found in the next
issue of Parking World, in which he will write about the
specifics of good design.
George M. Burton, M.I.E. (Aust), CEng, M.P.A. (Aust.), is Principal
of Parking Design Specialists and Principal Consultant of Parking
Consultants International. He can be contacted at either
gmb@carparkingdesign.com or
george.burton@parkingconsultants.com.

PW

PW BLOG
Editor Jolyon Porter and Publisher John Van Horn blog
at the Parking World Web site, www.parkingworld.com.
Log on and add your comments to his almost daily,
well periodic but more than weekly, blogging. Here are
some samples.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place

I had the pleasure of a trip to the US late last year for work, LA
to be precise. It was my first trip overseas and was great fun.
When I made my visit to the cash-exchange centre to buy some
U.S. dollars, I was immediately struck by the lack of differentiation
in the greenbacks. Every denomination was virtually the same, the
greatest difference being the faces of the presidents gracing the front.
And then my first purchase gave me some coin, and the largest one
they have is the world-renowned quarter.
Thinking on this now, it seems strange that a country that is
always seen as one moving ahead has done nothing to alter its currency for ... I know not how long.
Here in Australia, we moved from pounds to dollars in 1966,
with each denomination a different colour and size. Then a few
decades later, we introduced plastic bank notes. These have proved
extremely difficult to counterfeit something the paper U.S. dollar
always seems to have problems with.
As inflation has worked its demon ways, the introduction of the
dollar coin and then the two-dollar coin saw the removal of those
pesky little bank notes. And this simple move proved a great boon to
manufacturers and distributors of coin-operated machines, be they
for confectionery, chips, cigarettes, drinks, etc.
It also meant that parking meters and ticket machines were given a greater life span. They didnt need bank note-recognition technology as soon as might otherwise have been the case.

This is not the case in the U.S., where the quarter is still king
in parking meters. Unfortunately, it has proven to be a real problem
for some city treasuries whose hands have been tied in regards parking fee increases.
Lets say the city bosses decide that they need more cash from
parking, and so double their current fees from $1 per hour to $2 per
hour. This potentially doubles the number of coins going into the
meters coin vault. Beauty! More cash flow.
Hang on, the meters now fill up twice as quickly and need to be
emptied twice as often, otherwise they will jam and nobody pays.
Extra staff are now required to empty the machines, count, sort and
bank the cash.
The alternative? Invest large amounts of money that they probably dont have at this time in the economic cycle to purchase new
machines of some sort. Preferably ones that accept credit cards as
well as bank notes. Thats between a rock and a hard place.
Meanwhile, perhaps the U.S. Treasury could look at replacing the
1 and 5 buck notes with coins? How about a $2 coin while theyre at it?
JP

Macquarie Bank and Parking

Australias Macquarie Group is reportedly letting its parking
operations in the U.S. go back to its lenders. (See my April 27 Parking Today blog.) It also seems that Macquarie could be having problems in Europe, too.
The parking business has dodged much of the problems with the
economic downturn. However, those operations that focus on airports
and have a lot of debt could have some problems. My interview with
Park n Flys new president in Mays Parking Today noted that there
had been some downward pressure on the companys occupancy
rates, somewhere in the 10% to 15% range. Seems that if Macquarie
Continued on Page 33
JUNE 2009

PARKING WORLD

www.parkingworld.com

17

PART 2

Why Simple Design is Often Complex

BY GEORGE BURTON

Queuing Areas, Intake and

Discharge Capacity

N PART 2 OF HIS ARTICLE, GEORGE

Burton goes more in depth on specific points
of car park design. Here is a summary of the
article. It contains initial paragraphs of all
the relevant topics that are discussed in detail
in the unabridged version which can be read online
together with Part 1 at www.parkingworld.com.

The efficiency of a car parks design and its subsequent operation is conditional on the provision of adequate entrance and
exit capacities. They depend on the expected flow of traffic,
extent of the queuing reservoir (particularly on entry), and the
service rate of the control equipment installed and on the street
absorption capacity particularly at exit.

SPECIFICS OF GOOD DESIGN PRACTICE

Levels of Service

Car Park Location and Vehicular Access

Each and every part of a car park can be assessed by its

dynamic performance, which is characterised by its dynamic
capacity, sometimes referred to as service capacity or handling
capacity. These terms are applied to the maximum flow of cars
(or people) which can be processed through the car park, or its
part under examination, in an hour. Analysis of car park dynamic
capacities is entailed in the level of service concept, which in
principle is similar to the concept used in traffic engineering for
roadway traffic.

Unless the car park provides free or subsidised parking, its

location is of utmost importance. An inconvenient location may
have serious consequences on the commercial success of a car
park. The difference of one city block could mean a loss of commercial attraction and possible failure of the car park operation.
Generally speaking, the level of occupancy and revenues to
be derived from a car park are contingent upon its location, its
convenience to the generator(s) it serves and to other centres of
attraction, the road network, and last but not least on the parking
convenience in the facility itself.

Continued on Page 11

AUGUST 2010

PARKING WORLD

www.parkingworld.com

Why Simple Design is Often Complex

from Page 5

Internal Traffic Circulation

It is needless to say that employment of a simple and logical traffic circulation pattern, both interfloor and intrafloor, is
an important consideration of good design practice. Whilst
large shopping centre car parks, and particularly the ones
entailing large surface parking areas, tend to allow for maximum dispersion capability of users, the multi-level parking
facilities must provide for delineated and highly disciplined
circulation patterns.

Psychological Factors
Now some brief comments about a subject which does not
get a lot of exposure. When a driver enters a car park which has
columns situated along the edges of the parking module (i.e. the
car park being a long span structure), the parking area appears to
him as being wider, more spacious and giving him a perceived
freedom of movement. This type of column grid creates a positive psychological effect on the driver and is therefore considered
user friendly.
On the other hand there are numerous factors of a psychological nature which adversely affect drivers in car parking facilities and which can be avoided or mitigated, provided a little foresight is put into the process of functional design.

Car Park Signage and Linemarking

Vertical signage and floor/pavement markings are an essential component in regulating parking and traffic activity in car
parks. The significance of signage increases with the degree of
complexity of the car parking facility. Huge shopping centre
parking areas would require more signage than smaller parking
facilities where only very little signage would be required. How-

ever, parking and traffic management cannot work efficiently

without appropriate signs.

Aesthetics and Car Park Usefulness

Aesthetics in the car parking planning is a consideration of
increasing significance, and simultaneously the subject of continuous controversy. A point of concern is that environmental
requirements are frequently onerous; the expectation of high level of aesthetics may seriously affect the financial viability of
some parking projects.

Car Parks for Special Events

The principal difference of special event car parks is in the
rate of intake and discharge. Generally speaking these car parks
experience the almost simultaneous departure of all vehicles, and
therefore should be capable of filling and emptying in less than
one hour: the usual the time limit is 30 minutes or less.

Conclusion
The intention of this article was to discuss in a practical and
concise manner only some topics of functional design. However,
these topics contribute to the degree of complexity of the process
of planning and design of a user-friendly car park, which is simple to understand, and simple to manage.
George M. Burton M.I.E. (Aust), CEng, M.P.A. (Aust.), M.P.C.C.
(USA) is principal (retired) of Parking Design Specialists (formerly GM Burton Consulting) and principal visiting consultant of
Parking Consultants International. He can be contacted either on
gmb@carparkingdesign.com or
george.burton@parkingconsultants.com

PW

bringing
to you
www.facebook.com/parkingworld
www.parkingworld.com

Get the latest news, commentary, and

product information In the world of parking.

Parking World

11/01/11 1:44 PM

Subscriber Services | Calendar | Contact Us

Home
Magazine

Store

Magazine

Go

Conferences

Blog

Marketplace

Resources

Why Simple Design is Often Complex

Part 1
By George M. Burton
The intention of this two-part article is to describe the path a design process usually takes in order to
arrive at a desirable product a user-friendly car park and to present an overview of some
relevant factors that influence the process of functional design of any parking facility.
The Car and the Parking Facility
As we all know, there is no such thing as free parking. Parking costs money and someone has to pay for
it. In one way or another, it is the end user of the space who pays for parking, whether it is directly in the
car park, via a lease for the office/shop, or indeed in the prices of goods sold in the shops.
In this article, the term commercial parking operation relates to car parks where a fee is charged directly
to the user of the parking facility.
As illustrated in Exhibit 1, car park design is subject to numerous considerations, some of which affect the
design process more than the others. Broadly speaking, car park design needs to take into account user,
functional, environmental and other considerations.
User considerations are presented in the viability of a car parking development and, as such, are a
prerequisite of the design process. Determination of the car park viability entails a Parking Demand
Analysis and a Commercial Feasibility Study.
Assuming that the parking demand analysis concludes there is a need for parking supply, then the results
of the commercial feasibility study will determine whether the functional design process shall be instigated
or not.
Functional considerations are directly affected by the criteria of user friendliness and indirectly by
environmental considerations.
However, environmental considerations directly relate to transportation, and therefore to parking as a
whole, in their pursuit to improve air quality and to alleviate traffic congestion. The car, being an essential
utility, is a target of environmental concern.
The role of mass transportation is limited to areas of high population densities. It essentially moves people
between two points. However, people depart from that and scatter in all directions.
Therefore, the car will remain an integral part of the transportation system and continue to be its primary
mode.
Consequently, car parking is and will remain an essential part of all civic, cultural, social, business and
shopping activities. People conducting these activities generate parking demand, which must be
responded to with sufficient, effective and efficient car parking facilities.
Simple Design = Simple Management
Car parks are the normal and natural termination points for access roads and city streets. However, they
are not the end of a journey. They act as an interchange where a person goes from being a motorist to
being a pedestrian. Hence, car parks must be functional and meet the needs of both motorists and
pedestrians. How efficiently the car park receives, stores and discharges cars determines its usefulness to
its developer and the community it serves.
Simplicity and ease of parking are the basis of good functional design practice. The design must provide
for traffic circulation and parking manoeuvres in a safe and expedient manner, with minimum delay and
no hazard to the safety of vehicles and pedestrians. The design also must recognise the different types of
users so that the car park can function efficiently.
Simple parking design generally results in simple parking management and, at the same time, a higher
degree of acceptance of the parking facility by the driving public. This basic equation applies to the predesign, design and post-design stages of any parking facility, regardless of whether it is a multi-storey
structure or a surface car park. The significance of this practical equation is magnified in a commercial
context; however, its implications are equally important for any other type of parking operation.
Designers should beware of falling into the trap of over-design, resulting in increased driver confusion and
frustration as well as unnecessary extra cost. On the other hand, oversimplification without any real
improvements to the design also should be avoided.
An inefficient design could lead to a car park not being well patronised by users due to their preferences
for more convenient alternatives, which, of course, might seriously affect the ultimate commercial success
of a development.
Planning User-Friendly Car Parks
Nowadays, planning user-friendly car parks is a different ballgame from what it was only a few years ago.
In fact, it requires a considerable change in design approach. The times are gone when supply, regardless
of quality, was the main concern. Today, car parks compete with one another, whether they are within an
urban area or out of town. If drivers dont like one car park, they go into another one or they park

http://www.parkingworld.com/articledetails.php?id=55

Page 1 of 2

Parking World

11/01/11 1:44 PM
somewhere else.
Car parks with associated hazards to safety too many columns, tight layout with confusing and
redundant traffic circulation patterns, bad or non-existent signage, etc. do not attract drivers at all.
External aesthetics significantly contribute to user-friendliness (additional comments on this subject will be
made further on).
All elements of car park design and operation must be of the highest standard. Car parks should be not
only pleasing to the eye but also commercially viable; they should be safe, user-friendly, secure and
incurring low maintenance costs.
The basic ingredients of user-friendliness are:
Convenient, with efficient layouts and circulation patterns without collision points and other surprises.
Fast means of inter-floor and intra-floor travel, guiding traffic to the nearest vacant parking spaces.
Well-laid-out column grids allowing for best possible visibility and safety. Preference is for clear span
design in freestanding structures.
A high standard of illumination that will enhance confidence in safety and security.
A clean and bright interior and good-looking exterior.
All in all, the planning of user-friendly car parks entails all the considerations mentioned above, but first
and foremost, it requires the application of good design practice.
Part 2 of George Burtons article will be found in the next issue of Parking World, in which he will write
about the specifics of good design.
George M. Burton, M.I.E. (Aust), CEng, M.P.A. (Aust.), is Principal of Parking Design Specialists and
Principal Consultant of Parking Consultants International. He can be contacted at either
gmb@carparkingdesign.com or george.burton@parkingconsultants.com.
Article Abstract from June, 2009

About Us | Contact Us | Site Map

http://www.parkingworld.com/articledetails.php?id=55

Page 2 of 2

PARKING WORLD - News

11/01/11 1:44 PM

Subscriber Services | Calendar | Contact Us

Home
News

Store

Magazine

Go

Conferences

Blog

Marketplace

New Products

WHY SIMPLE DESIGN IS OFTEN COMPLEX

Part 2

Current Articles on Site

By George Burton M.I.E. (Aust)

People in Parking

Current and Back Issues of PW

SPECIFICS OF GOOD DESIGN PRACTICE

Submit News

Car Park Location and Vehicular Access.

Resources

Unless the car park provides free or subsidised parking, its

location is of utmost importance. An inconvenient location
may have serious consequences on the commercial success
of a car park. The difference of one city block could mean a
loss of commercial attraction and possible failure of the car
park operation.

Site Map
About Us
Contact Us
Submit News

Generally speaking, the level of occupancy and revenues to

be derived from a car park are contingent upon its location, its
convenience to the generator(s) it serves and to other centres
of attraction, the road network, and last but not least on the
parking convenience in the facility itself.
A car park should be located within walking distance of the main places of destination. (A point to
remember is the fact that people are prepared to walk longer distances when they park free of charge.) If
possible it should not be tucked away out of sight or its entrance located in secondary streets. This is quite
a contentious issue in large cities where a primary location may not be possible due to various reasons,
e.g. traffic implications on street network, urban planning requirements, pedestrianization of Frontal Street,
etc. If the car park entrance is to be located away out of sight, then access to it should be clearly signed
and the car park occupancy advised on route (by dynamic parking guidance signs) so that redundant
traffic circulation within the street system can be minimized and, if necessary, alternative car parks
directed to.
However, in small cities or suburban shopping districts, where the knowledge of parking areas is more
prevalent, car park entrances may be located in secondary streets.
As mentioned above, car park entrances should be clearly defined and obviously distinguishable from
exits. Increased attention should be paid to the architectural design of entrances as the pleasing and
inviting first impression can contribute to successful parking operation.
The number of entries and exits should be restricted to what is actually required. Broadly speaking, the
number of entry and exit lanes is determined by the maximum number of vehicles that can be processed
through a lane in one hour. Providing more than the required number of accessways may not necessarily
alleviate traffic problems and could, on the contrary, create operational difficulties and security problems
inside the car park.
Where possible, both entries and exits should be orientated to favour left-hand turns for incoming and
outgoing traffic. Vehicular access to the site should be planned so as:
to provide easy access to parking by means of a satisfactory rate of receiving, storing and discharging
vehicles,
to minimize conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians,
to minimize the impact of driveways and ramps on the building frontage, and
to diffuse traffic onto surrounding streets in a satisfactory manner.
Queuing Areas, Intake and Discharge Capacity
The efficiency of a car parks design and its subsequent operation is conditional on the provision of
adequate entrance and exit capacities. They depend on the expected flow of traffic, extent of the queuing
reservoir (particularly on entry), and the service rate of the control equipment installed and on the street
absorption capacity particularly at exit.
Sufficient queuing capacity should be provided at entry between vehicular control points and the street
alignments so that cars can queue inside the site and not adversely affect traffic flow in surrounding
streets or obstruct movements in other parts of the car park.
Good design practice would also call for the provision of a queue length on exiting, between the exit
control points and street alignment. This would not only accommodate cars waiting to enter the road flow
but it also enable a driver to draw clear immediately when the boom gate opens. It would also alleviate
cars from stacking up and hampering the check-out procedures in case pedestrians are crossing the
driveway.
The length of queuing/holding reservoir on exiting can be determined on the basis of traffic engineering
analysis of a car park exit onto a road as for a T-junction.
Ideally car parks should be capable of receiving and discharging their static capacity within a maximum of
one hour. However, we dont live in an ideal world and this desired aim is frequently impossible to
achieve. Consequently car parks are usually designed to receive and discharge the projected peak inflows
and outflows (determined by traffic impact studies and usually expressed as a % of the static capacity)
within one hour.
The term static capacity relates to the total number of parking spaces in a car park. Special event car
parks, i.e. the ones that cater to a surge type of parking demand should be able to empty in less than one
hour. It is not unusual for the discharge capacity of such facilities to be 30 minutes.
Levels of Service
Each and every part of a car park can be assessed by its dynamic performance, which is characterised by

http://www.parkingworld.com/s_article.php?id=95

Page 1 of 4

PARKING WORLD - News

11/01/11 1:44 PM
its dynamic capacity, sometimes referred to as service capacity or handling capacity. These terms are
applied to the maximum flow of cars (or people) which can be processed through the car park, or its part
under examination, in an hour. Analysis of car park dynamic capacities is entailed in the level of service
concept, which in principle is similar to the concept used in traffic engineering for roadway traffic.
Level of service is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic
stream, and their perception by motorists and passengers [1]. For example, the parking space dimensions
recommended in some countries are based on a level of service range C to D which is considered
adequate for low turnover operations. Other parking consultants using the same concept of dynamic
performance define the levels of service for car parking facilities thus:
High Level of Service when the traffic flows are below the dynamic capacity;
Satisfactory Level of Service when the traffic flows are equal to the dynamic capacity;
Unsatisfactory Level of Service when the traffic flows are in excess of the dynamic capacity.
It is obvious that the establishment of dynamic capacities is of paramount significance in the level of
service concept.
Dynamic capacities of aisles and parking areas can be expressed by a number of formulas as applicable
for inbound and outbound flows. They are subject to numerous variables such as aisle width, space
dimensions, % of cars reversing into spaces, etc. A good example is presented in Exhibit 2 depicting the
floor plan of an underground multi-level car park for 2500 cars with which the author was involved some
years ago. Dynamic capacity of the principal circulation aisle was calculated as 1100 cars inbound and
900 cars outbound. In order to accommodate the projected peak traffic flow (particularly on the levels
nearest to the entry and exit control points) there were two circuits of express vertical travel employed
catering to both the inbound and outbound traffic. Adoption of this measure resulted in achieving a high
level of service inside the car park.
An interesting application of dynamic capacity is for entries and exits. Car park entrances and exits, which
incorporate boom gate control, behave as
intersections with traffic signals allowing one
vehicle through each green cycle. In the
standard procedures of traffic engineering for
capacity analysis, the rate of traffic flow is
measured in 15 min periods, although a
period of 30 minutes or the full period of one
hour is often used. In the car parking
application the peak 15 min rate of flow is
then expressed as the peak hourly flow
equivalent and as such is used for
ascertaining dynamic capacity of individual
entrances and exits or the internal circulation
system in the car park.
For example, a peak flow of 680 cars / hour
has a peak hourly flow equivalent of say 800
cars / hour. In practical terms this means that
two automatically controlled entry lanes, each
having a service rate of say 400 cars / hour, would provide a satisfactory level of service during the peak
15 minutes and a high level of service outside this period.
Queue length on entry is another dynamic characteristic, which must be established in order to ensure that
cars would queue inside the car park and not on the street. Queues that would occur are derived from an
application of the queuing theory, which is based on rather complicated equations of Poisson distribution
of the volume of arriving vehicles for single and particularly multi-channel queue requirements.
Internal Traffic Circulation
It is needless to say that employment of a simple and logical traffic circulation pattern, both interfloor and
intrafloor, is an important consideration of good design practice. Whilst large shopping centre car parks,
and particularly the ones entailing large surface parking areas, tend to allow for maximum dispersion
capability of users, the multi-level parking facilities must provide for delineated and highly disciplined
circulation patterns.
Various types of patronage could dictate the pattern of internal traffic circulation in multi-storey car parks.
In high turnover car parks, a one-way flow system would be preferable, whereas in commuter car parks
with significant peak ingress in the morning and peak egress in the evening, consideration could be given
to two-way traffic circulation. The latter usually results in a more economically attractive structure.
However, in multi-level car parks the basic recommendation would be for one-way traffic circulation with a
repetitive floor pattern. Two-way internal traffic circulation may cause congestion of tidal traffic, creating
numerous collision points in general and on the interacting 2-way aisles in particular and slowing down the
flow of traffic.
The following comments concern a recurring question as to the use of clockwise or anti-clockwise
circulation pattern in car parks and are prompted by the authors involvement several years ago in
arbitration between a local government authority and a developer. The authority insisted on using
clockwise traffic circulation wherever possible.
As we all know, circulation on a ramp system may be clockwise or anticlockwise. Clockwise rotation is
generally preferred because it places drivers inside of turns, enabling better vehicle handling. This is
particularly relevant and even amplified if ramp dimensions and related turning radii are at their minimum.
It is important to note however, that this is first of all beneficial to the very means of interfloor travel, i.e. to
the clearway ramp systems that are in fact relatively steep and narrow roadways and therefore have more
prominent safety hazards than the level floors.
Ramp systems usually dictate the pattern of intrafloor (i.e. horizontal) traffic circulation in commonly sized
multi-level car parks containing up to say three parking modules and a repetitive floor pattern. Such ramp
systems would often take up a significant proportion of the parking floor. A typical example is a split-level
car park where the clockwise circulation is indeed advantageous.
However, this advantage may be inhibited in car parks with large floor areas, containing a multi-aisle layout
and accommodating hundreds of cars per floor. In these cases, it is the parking layout that usually dictates
orientation of the intrafloor traffic circulation, which are then suitably complemented by the ramp system. It
is quite common for large parking areas to adopt unidirectional flow along the floor perimeter aisles and
two-way traffic in cross aisles with the clockwise traffic circulation having no clear advantage over
anticlockwise. In fact, the use of anticlockwise traffic circulation along perimeter aisles may significantly
reduce if not eliminate the crossing interactions of traffic streams between the perimeter aisle and cross
aisles.

http://www.parkingworld.com/s_article.php?id=95

Page 2 of 4

PARKING WORLD - News

11/01/11 1:44 PM
Psychological Factors
Now some brief comments about a subject which does not get a lot of exposure. When a driver enters a
car park which has columns situated along the edges of the parking module (i.e. the car park being a long
span structure), the parking area appears to him as being wider, more spacious and giving him a
perceived freedom of movement. This type of column grid creates a positive psychological effect on the
driver and is therefore considered user friendly.
On the other hand there are numerous factors of a psychological nature which adversely affect drivers in
car parking facilities and which can be avoided or mitigated, provided a little foresight is put into the
process of functional design.
Although psychological factors may be difficult to quantify, they can be broadly qualified as:
Tunnel effect - in long and narrow enclosed corridors, drivers feel anxious and claustrophobic after a
short period of time. People tend to object driving in tunnels. Typical examples are long straight or circular
ramps, enclosed with solid walls on both sides.
Ramp structures should be as open as practicable, with abundant illumination (avoiding glare which can
blind drivers) and with adequate sight distances.
Bridge effect - when driving in long, narrow suspended corridors. Drivers feel uncertain on narrow bridges
suspended in open space; their awareness of height is accentuated and their driving concentration
distracted.
Note: Parapet walls along long ramp sides are often used to reduce drivers distraction by the emptiness
outside the ramp structure.
Spiral effect when too many revolutions take place over a relatively small area. Notes:
(a) There is consensus of opinion that about six revolutions is the preferred maximum for a circular ramp.
(b) It is agreed that the car parks vertical circulation pattern should be limited to six revolutions (i.e.
maximum six floor circuits on the way up or down).
Column effect when too many columns are employed within a car park, thus creating an impression of
visual pollution, smallness and tightness of the space with increased hazard to safety or even personal
security, increased difficulty of manoeuvring, etc. Drivers may feel that the space is closing in on them.
Roller-coaster effect when there is no continuity of gradient maintained on ramps or ramped floors. This
effect is amplified on the ramps linking floors with a highly repetitive floor pattern.
Car Park Signage and Linemarking
Vertical signage and floor/pavement markings are an essential component in regulating parking and traffic
activity in car parks. The significance of signage increases with the degree of complexity of the car parking
facility. Huge shopping centre parking areas would require more signage than smaller parking facilities
where only very little signage would be required. However, parking and traffic management cannot work
efficiently without appropriate signs.
Signage has gone through considerable technological and qualitative improvement in recent years.
Continuously increasing environmental and energy saving consciousness has brought about intensified
application of dynamic guidance systems which are now being frequently used inside and outside car
parking facilities. Application of dynamic signs can reduce the extent of travel and eliminate redundant
traffic circulation, thus saving on travel time, reducing fuel consumption and at the same time decreasing
air pollution.
External route guidance sign systems are becoming an essential part of street networks and they should
play an even more significant role in the future. In relation to car parking such route guidance systems
guide motorists to the car park situated near or at their place of destination.
External signs are of great importance, especially for public car parks. Viability and usefulness of public
car parks can largely depend upon external signs identifying the facility with enough impact to catch the
attention of those who are unfamiliar with the car park.
As noted earlier, every car park can be described by its static and dynamic characteristics. Similarly the
car park signs can be described as,Static signs i.e. painted (silk screened, laminated, etc.) or illuminated, imparting basic information for the
drivers in terms of regulation and warning.
Dynamic signs which automatically guide drivers to available parking spaces.
The principle of a dynamic sign system is in the inductive loop coils detectors embedded in the floor or
overhead ceiling mounted ultra-sonic directional sensors. Ultrasonic sensors are gradually replacing
inductive loops due to their extremely accurate directional vehicle counts including identification of non
vehicles such as shopping trolleys and pedestrians and additional important positive features. They count
cars in and out of the specific areas and relay this information to counters [or a central processing unit
(CPU)] which have been preset with the capacity of a particular area. The counters (or the CPU) would, in
turn, activate the relevant dynamic sign.
Aesthetics and Car Park Usefulness
Aesthetics in the car parking planning is a consideration of increasing significance, and simultaneously the
subject of continuous controversy. A point of concern is that environmental requirements are frequently
onerous; the expectation of high level of aesthetics may seriously affect the financial viability of some
parking projects.
Many architects do not realise that the quality of functional design is more important to the customer than
an aesthetically pleasing faade. After all car parks are constructed for parking cars in them and that
external presentation cannot compensate for an internal design which is not user friendly.
Therefore it is really up to the combined efforts of architects and parking consultants to sensibly address
the whole issue of aesthetics without interfering with the car parks usefulness. We are all interested in
safeguarding environmental and aesthetical considerations and understand that car parks must be user
friendly, appealing and inviting. An efficiently functional, bright and clean interior is as important as a goodlooking exterior.
Car Parks for Special Events
The principal difference of special event car parks is in the rate of intake and discharge. Generally
speaking these car parks experience the almost simultaneous departure of all vehicles, and therefore

http://www.parkingworld.com/s_article.php?id=95

Page 3 of 4

PARKING WORLD - News

11/01/11 1:44 PM
should be capable of filling and emptying in less than one hour: the usual the time limit is 30 minutes or
less. For example, if a car park with a 1000 space capacity were to empty within 30 minutes, then its peak
hour equivalent would be 2000 cars / hour and the whole car park design must take this requirement into
account. In other words the design must provide for dynamic capacity of 2000 cars / hour to enable the
car park to discharge its static capacity of 1000 cars within 30 minutes.
Special event parking requires a lot of preparation even though the use of sophisticated access and
revenue control equipment in conjunction with dynamic parking guidance systems can go a long way in
assisting the overall operation.
During the course of the event managerial resources must be properly coordinated and prepared to deal
with the unexpected and also with special parking arrangements.
It is needless to say that correct functional design goes hand-in-hand with effective and efficient
management of special event parking.
One of the most important special event car parks is the Sydney Olympic Park P1 car parking facility for
3400 cars on 6 elevated + 1 basement levels, built prior to Sydney Olympic Games in 2000. An overview
of the design process of this car park can be found in the Parking (Australia) magazine issue No. 3, 1999,
[7].
Conclusion
The intention of this article was to discuss in a practical and concise manner only some topics of functional
design. However, these topics contribute to the degree of complexity of the process of planning and
design of a user-friendly car park, which is simple to understand, and simple to manage.
The paper endeavours to combine some theory with practical implications, thanks to the writer being able
to wear two hats, one of a parking consultant/traffic engineer and the other one of a practical car parking
operator.
Due to the limited scope and objectives of this paper, additional aspects of functional parking design, such
as: pedestrian circulation and pedestrian signage, security and safety, parking equipment and
technological trends, construction trends, etc have been omitted.
George M. Burton M.I.E. (Aust), CEng, M.P.A. (Aust.), M.P.C.C. (USA) is principal of Parking Design
Specialists (formerly GM Burton Consulting) and principal consultant of Parking Consultants International.
He can be contacted either on gmb@carparkingdesign.com or George.burton@parkingconsultants.com
Bibliography References
[1] Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice, Part 2, Roadway Capacity, NAASRA, 1988
[2] Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice, Part 1, Traffic Flow, NAASRA, 1988.
[3] AS 2890.1 2004, Part 1, Car Parking Facilities,
[4] The Dimension of Parking 3rd (draft) edition and 4th edition, ULI & NPA, 1992 & 2001.
[5] M.S. Smith: The Analytical Approach to Entry/Exit Design, Parking (US), May-June 1988.
[6] R.A. Weant: Parking Garage Planning and Operation, ENO Foundation for Transportation, 1978.
[7] G.M. Burton: Sydney Olympic Park P1 Car Parking Facility, Parking (Aust.) Issue #3/99.
[8] G.M. Burton: Handbook on Parking Information, Kings Parking Company, 1973
[9] P.B. Ellson: Dynamic Capacities of Car Parks, RRL Report LR 221.
About Us | Contact Us | Site Map
Parking World 2011 All Rights Reserved

http://www.parkingworld.com/s_article.php?id=95

Page 4 of 4