Cited by 180Transportation and Mobility InnovationsSmart Parking Systems ResearchTransportation Planning and Optimization

Parking spaces in the age of shared autonomous vehicles: how much parking will we need and where?

Zhang, Wenwen, Guhathakurta, Subhrajit·2017·Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

Abstract

The world is on the cusp of a new era in mobility given that the enabling technologies for autonomous vehicles (AVs) are almost ready for deployment and testing. Although the technological frontiers for deploying AVs are being crossed, transportation planners and engineers know far less about the potential impact of such technologies on urban form and land use patterns. This paper attempts to address those issues by simulating the operation of shared AVs (SAVs) in the city of Atlanta, Georgia, by using the real transportation network with calibrated link-level travel speeds and a travel demand origin–destination matrix. The model results suggest that the SAV system can reduce parking land by 4.5% in Atlanta at a 5% market penetration level. In charged-parking scenarios, parking demand will move from downtown to adjacent low-income neighborhoods. The results also reveal that policy makers may consider combining charged-parking policies with additional regulations to curb excessive vehicle miles traveled and alleviate potential social equity problems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3141/2651-09

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A reduction of 4.5% is suggested for a penetration of 5%, with each SAV freeing more than 20 parking spots.

    “Zhang & Guhathakurta (2017) suggest a reduction of 4.5% for a penetration of 5%, mentioning that each SAV can free more than 20 parking spots.”

    From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Zhang & Guhathakurta, 2017

  • Zhang & Guhathakurta (2018) integrates a residential location choice model with the SAV simulation model of Zhang & Guhathakurta (2017).

    “In this study, a residential location choice model (developed using 2011 Atlanta Travel Survey & Zillow home sales data) is integrated with the SAV simulation model of Zhang & Guhathakurta (2017).”

    From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Zhang & Guhathakurta (2017)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, W., & Guhathakurta, S.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Guhathakurta, Subhrajit
Venue
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board
Published
2017-01
Volume
2651
Issue
1
Pages
80-91
ISSN
  • 0361-1981 (ISSN-L)
  • 2169-4052
OpenAlex
W2767127672
Cited by
180
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
FWCI
7.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Smart Parking Systems Research
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
Keywords
shared autonomous vehicles, parking demand, urban form, travel demand simulation, market penetration, vehicle miles traveled, social equity, land use change, Atlanta

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review