Parking Lot Tool
| |
|
|
|
A user in France has asked me to create a Parking Lot tool as part of WildTools. The French externals ArchiX tools had such a tool, and they are not yet available for PowerCADD 6. The tool drew parking lots in three types: parallel, perpendicular (to the road), and at a variable angle. The tool placed a fixed number of parking spaces. If I were creating the tool, I would make it fixed or variable. The tool offered the choice of drawing single lines or doubled-lines, I suppose to indicate concrete separators. The tool offered the choice of placing text in the drawing numbering the spaces, that is, each space was given a number: 1, 2, 3, 4.... I suppose a tool like this should offer single and double rows for perpendicular and angled styles. My thought is that the Linear Repeat tool is ideal for drawing parking spaces. I suppose if the parking lots are at an angle or drawn with double lines, then a tool might be useful. The Linear Patterning tool could also be used, and it would have the advantage of being able to follow a curve in the road. So... what's your reaction to all of this? Alfred |
Examples from France
|
Several others have already responded in regards to the complexity/variety of angles and sizes. The tool would need to be a fairly powerful parametric design tool to be effective in calculating the numerous design variables. But in regards to graphic depiction, we would need BOTH a single line option AND a double line option. Parking lot stripes are typically 4-inches wide. On a 1"=40' site plan we wound tend to show the stripes as single lines. However, when we draw parking details at 1"=20', 1/16"=1'-0", or 1/8"=1'-0", we show the actual width of the stripe. I would think the stripe would need to be two lines with end caps, or a polygon, so that we can also assign a fill, hatch, or color attribute to the stripe. We have done full color site presentations for shopping malls where we needed to show the strips in their colors. Thanks, |
|
Sounds like a good idea to me. I like the numbering of the bays too. (I currrently use the Linear Repeat tool) It would also be helpful to show the manouvering space required on the entry side of the parking bays. Disabled size parking bays could also be included (with a wheelchair symbol in the bay) David Scott |
|
I reacted to this by wondering where the line of usefulness for specalized tools is. 10 years from now, are we gonna click on the WT pallet and have 500 icons pop up? Since this can be done with tools already available (abeit with a few extra steps) I would view this as more clutter than useful. JMO. At some point it seems to me, general and more wide ranging tools should prevail. I'm not saying however that that point has been reached. Dave Zellers |
|
It would need to have variable widths & depths, as the space requirement varies from town to town. Some go by square footage of space itself, some include the space and manuvering space in the area calc, some go by fixed size. Option to show concrete wheel stops or not would be good. I tend to give the sum total number of spaces in a run (ex: 9 @ 9'-0" = 81'-0"), rather than number each one. Lately I've been using a fat white line over a fill to better illustrate painted striping on pavement. Oh, but I'd rather have a Stair Tool... Ed Groh |
|
>>Oh, but I'd rather have a Stair Tool...<< Well now, there ya go. Me too. One man's clutter is another man's favorite tool... Dave Zellers |
|
"En talon" (literally like a heel) means perpendicular to the road, "en épi" (literally like a corn stalk) is at a variable angle and "en creneaux" (literally like a castle crenellation) is parallel. I agree that it shouldn't take too much imagination to use existing tools for plain parking layouts without creating a new tool. What might also be useful to some people could be to incorporate vehicle turning circles (for example articulated trucks), and to allow parking spaces to follow irregular lines. This would mean creating a parking design tool, which would be a step beyond a parking draughting tool. But these requests would be described better by a landscape architect, I think, and might be answered simply by library items or symbols. (In Europe a standard public parking space is 5.0 x 2.5 metres and a private one 4.8 x 2.4 metres, but I imagine that these would be too small in the USA. For the time being, anyway!) Here is an ancient carparking diagram which may be of some use, but with notes in German. [see above] Iain Stewart |
|
Except for large lots the variables and requirements are too complex. You need accessible spaces and a lot of other refinements for planters etc.. For the most part WT duplication tools help "a lot" once you've already designed the lot. Good luck, though. This may be useful in large lot layout. Thanks for looking at custom tool ideas, Alfred. I like rotated rectangles for the striping. White stripes over a poche pavement. Peter Bacot |
|
My opinion is that there are so many variables that they would quickly become unwieldy, and the linear repeat tool does every automatic thing I want from a tool to assist in laying out parking lots. the ability to count spaces and label them with corresponding numbers would be helpful, but I'm at a loss to know how it could keep track, as I am working (adding and deleting spaces, reconfiguring). But I am very happy with the room size tool, so to each his own. Matt Arnold |
|
I think a parking lot tool would be an appropriate addition to wildtools since it is such a normal part of architectural plans. This may also be good niche market for powercadd in general since parking layout appears to be a gap between the building modeling programs and the civil engineering programs. A tool that would be flexible so one could drag to fit available space like the insulation tool would be fantastic if it was possible. Architectural Graphic Standards has a listing of various sizes and angles that may be helpful in developing a tool. There are also some related information that you may want to consider as part of a parking lot tool pkg. such as truck turning radius. Joe Calabrese |
|
I like the idea of a PL tool. I would love to, on the fly, add a compact stall of a given stall width every few stalls too like we do in shopping center work. It would also be great if we could specify double or single striping with several design options if possible. If we cannot place the same detail/type of parking that a client or owner wants then it would not be helpful unless you are providing this just as a preliminary layout tool. Also, would be able to specify stall widths as these vary with different projects and jurisdictional requirements. Also, I am wondering how the planter or striped ends are handled? Do we have to place those afterwards? Same for adjustments for handicap striping, etc. It sounds very cool and helpful. It also sounds like there may a ton of hurdles and variables. Gary Veasy |
|
A tool to place numbers in a sequence would be a big time saver. Randy Shanks |
|
I generally use the Linear Repeat and Distribute tools for tasks like this. There are other similar tasks like stair steps in section and custom muntin/lite patterns in windows. I'd hate to see an explosion of specialized tools that only do one little specific task, so the more uses a tool can have the better. Rob |
|
We use the Linear Patterning Tool, with the understanding that it is not sufficiently accurate for construction drawings. I realize this is a little inflammatory, but it's true. The LP tool is lovely for master planning where approximation is acceptable. But for a PLT to work, it must know in advance the length of the available space and accurately divide the space without the need for the user to click on a starting point, or without the user adjusting line locations in any way (as in, for example, the way that LPT allows you to 'slide' along the target line). The LPT can follow irregular lines (although this is tricky, owing to the way it calculates distances, and whether or not the curve is convex or concave), and this curve-following is essential. Often we have parking lots that are formed by arcs and tangents, and in this case we use the Join tool (I think) to create a single-object polygon from the arcs/tangents before applying the LPT. (and by the way, Join, Attach, and similar tools always make an object with nil line color and this bugs the hell out of me). This process is onerous. It's also common in many municipalities to limit the number of contiguous parking spaces without an intervening landscape island, and this needs to be part of the equation. The width of the island invariably has a minimum, and the maximum is normally determined by the 'left-over' space after adding the parking spaces (is this clear?). Other irregularities, like required handicap spaces, or loading spaces, are in my view best handled with a separate application of the tool, as these are normally in a special place in any event. Michael Spencer |
