When developing a project where the site geometry is complex and space is limited, clients often ask: how can we maximize the parking program?

An automated parking system [APS] can be the answer—fitting the necessary parking into far less space at less cost, with proven technology. For example, a volume that might hold 100 cars in traditional form might hold 125-135 cars with an APS. Cars are stacked vertically and side by side, and the equipment eliminates the need for room for driving or walking room. Safety and a valet-like user experience are advantages, as drivers simply stop in a central location and don’t need to wander through a garage.

GLY and ZGF Architects are currently incorporating an APS within a Seattle healthcare and research campus expansion, providing parking for 165 cars below a six-story patient care tower. As interest rises among our clients in other sectors, we find ourselves sharing key considerations that can help drive the decision to use an APS and determine the right partners. Following are some of these factors, with a focus on options analysis through procurement.

Options Analysis + Selecting the Provider

Typically, the pressure is on to decide whether to pursue an APS early in a project’s design. This is due to the large variation in below-grade massing, structure, power needs, and APS equipment characteristics. Another reason is because public reviews consider factors such as parking counts, building volumes, and entries before land use permit applications can be approved.

A thorough options analysis should detail APS concepts along with traditional approaches, with rough massing, stall counts, cycle times to park and retrieve cars, ROM costs, and numerous other factors. Thankfully, while APS is new in our region, proven providers exist around the world.

For our healthcare and research client, we used a multi-step approach for the best analysis and a competitive selection. This was successful, and we’d recommend a similar approach for your first project. Later projects can be streamlined in some areas. Here are a few guiding steps:

• Bring in an expert to provide enough data to choose whether to pursue an APS—performance criteria, structural and electrical needs, ROM costs, etc. We worked with CityLift at this stage. Along with GLY’s analysis of traditional garages and the shell of the APS parking concepts, this provided enough information for the client to commit to an APS.
  
• Engage top providers in a pre-qualifications and learning process. We talked to Harding Steel, CityLift, Parkworks, and Utron. Systems vary substantially, so be prepared to ask a lot of questions to get into the details: structural configuration, number of lifts needed, ability to visit factories and operational systems, lead times, the potential for EV charging, references, construction hoisting, who installs and maintains the system, and much more. Begin with informal discussions, then shortlist the appropriate firms.
• Conduct an RFP and selection process, developed with knowledge gained during the prequalification process. This stage requires detailed performance commitments, which can be the driving factor in which systems meet the project needs. When a client is choosing a new concept, it’s important to really understand not only the costs but the operational aspects and user experience as well!