Much discussion has surrounded the topic of justifying UC applications, but on the mobile UC front, we can deliver the goods. One such example is a new parking meter system that is being tested in San Francisco. Using a network of wireless sensors, the network can monitor the availability of on-street parking spaces and communicate that information to drivers either through street displays or maps sent to their smartphones.
Our readers who live in small cities where on-street parking is readily available might not recognize the scope of this problem, but in major cities like New York and San Francisco, looking for a parking spot is something akin to the search for the Holy Grail. A study by Transportation Alternatives, a public transit advocacy group, found that people searching for parking spots in a 15-block area in NY’s Upper West Side drove about 366,000 miles a year. As the problem of in-city congestion (and the resulting effect on air quality) worsens, that same group found that 28% to 45% of traffic on some NYC streets was comprised of people looking for parking spots. New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg had been pushing a congestion pricing scheme that would charge vehicles $8 to enter large portions of Manhattan during business hours, but that plan died in the State Legislature earlier this year.
San Francisco Take the Hi-Tech Approach
Rather than throwing up tollbooths around the downtown area, San Francisco is experimenting with a wireless network that will put drivers in touch with available on-street parking spaces. The technology comes from a company called Streetline Networks, and it is part of a two-year $95.5 million program to help clear congestion on downtown streets. The pilot project will address 6,000 of the cities 24,000 parking meters.
The first building block of the system is a 4” by 4” battery operated wireless sensor called a “bump” that is glued to the pavement by each parking spot; those sensors would not be as practical in cities that have to contend with snow plowing. The sensors are reported to be >98% accurate and Streetline predicts the battery will last 5 to 10 years. The sensors communicate with a monitor that installs in the parking meter; that monitor is powered by a single AA battery that should last 12- to 18-months. The meters in turn relay that information to a central collection point.
One critical element that contributes to the long battery life is the fact that the wireless network is constructed as a mesh where data is relayed from device to device to a central collecting point. As the signal only has to be relayed to the next device in the mesh, the devices can operate at very low power. Streetline does not describe the exact nature of their wireless technology other than to say it is mesh-based and operates in either the 900 MHz or 2.4 GHz unlicensed radio bands, but this type of low-power wireless system Is not unique. Similar systems are used for a variety of applications like meter reading, and the IEEE has developed a mesh-based standard for sensor networks called ZigBee (IEEE 802.15.4).
Once the city knows that the space is occupied, the information can be used both for charging and for advertising availability. For charging, an intelligent system of this kind could add enormous flexibility to a parking meter system. Different prices could be charged at different times of the day, the maximum duration could be changed, charges could be billed to a credit card, and a user might be able to extend the duration remotely using their cell phone. You would still need “meter maids” to ticket cars parked at expired meters, but the meter maids will know exactly where the expired meters are.
For drivers, the biggest convenience will be the ability to locate available spaces without having to drive around endlessly. Space availability could be shown on street displays or delivered to users’ smartphones. I saw a similar system of street displays in Dublin, Ireland recently where the number of spaces available in municipal garages was displayed throughout the downtown area. Of course, that doesn’t mean that space will still be available when you finally navigate your way to it, but it is certainly a better plan than hundreds of gas consuming random searches.
Conclusion
From the macro view, the fundamental flaw in the plan is that it is making it more convenient to drive into the city. I live in suburban NYC, and I’ll take public transportation any chance I get. The policy makers will have to decide how attractive they want to make the driving option. However, an intelligent system should be able to eliminate waste and frustration (which has led to countless angry confrontations) from the process, and the flexibility provided will allow the city considerable latitude in defining the rules that govern the cost and convenience of the driving option. It is somewhat ironic that the studies used to illustrate the advantages all come from public transportation advocacy groups!
Longer term they are talking about expanding the range of sensors supported to monitor traffic speed, congestion, air quality, and other factors. As we’re not going to haul an Ethernet cable out to every parking meter, any plan to automate city services is going to depend on wireless, and the payoff from wireless UC-B is undeniable.