Car Stackers - anyone used them in a development?

Hi Folks,

Have a site in Melbourne that will probably need cart stackers to satisfy council car parking requirements.

Has anyone out there actually used them in a development?
Be keen to hear your thoughts.

 

I vaguely remember a developer here mention it. Maybe it was @Westminster ? Or @MTR ? Or was it turntables?

 

Turntables I think
This is a stacker though:

 

Here's the thread- Vehicle Turn table

 

I had an experience with a car stacker that was incorrectly installed, the gradient of the concrete leading to the stacker was all wrong, not even a golf would fit on the bottom (lower deck) of the 2 deck stacker, roof of the car would scrape if you tried to drive it in. Real nightmare, not sure if it ever got fixed.

 

Oh boy, that's a bit of a mistake.
I wonder who had to wear the cost of that.

 

Councils and Tribunal Members are used to car stackers in development proposals now.
Lots of Members are tolerant even some are pro-car stackers as it is preferable than having lots of visitor carparking on off-site street parking.
It is generally accepted that car stackers will not present a noise issue to neighbours if it is located in an underground carpark. But if they are aboveground, that is a different issue and neighbours can oppose it based on noise grounds, then you have to get an acoustic engineer in to present evidence that the noise will only be so many decibels at a distance of xx metres, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Are your car-stackers located aboveground or underground?

 

Hi Beanie Girl,

Thanks for the response - and interesting point about the noise.

Mine would be located at ground level (primarily because the cost of going underground is prohibitive. We could go underground, but it would force us to dramatically increase the density to compensate, etc etc).

Both are inner city suburbs less than 7kms from the CBD.
The choices at the moment are:

1) Use the stackers to meet the minimum car parking requirements; or

2) Apply for dispensation (which we would probably given the close proximity to train stations and trams).

I guess I'm trying to weigh up the pros and cons.

From a buyer perspective, would you prefer the extra car park if it meant dealing with a stacker?
And from a developer perspective, do they work as advertised?

 

If it's for visitor carparking, since you are close to tram and train and have ample off-site parking spaces in street or the parking spaces nearby
I would ask for waiver/ dispensation of visitor carparking, this is very commonly asked for
How far are you from train and tram? 400m and less is ideal

Is it for visitor carparking that you need the carstackers?
Or for the householders themselves? Units/townhouses or apartments?

 

It's a 3-4 townhouse site, so no visitor car parking required.
They are all 3 bedders - so 6-8 car parks required depending on whether we go with 3 or 4 units.

Without the stackers, we'd only have room for one car park per dwelling.

Site sits between two train stations and is 550 metres away from both of them.
Tram is 550 metres away as well.

 

Lots of restrictions on car sizes too, heights, weights. They're a pain to use if you're on the bottom. Might be worth going for the waiver.

 

Yes, the statutory requirement in Melbourne is 2 carspaces for 3 bedroom dwellings.
Does your Council/Council planner support a reduction in statutory carpark requirements? Based on

• Availability of public transport
• Car Ownership Rates – Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) - typical of your suburb
• Empirical Assessment of Car parking Demand

Requesting a reduction in statutory carparking requirements requires a permit in addition to requesting a sub-division of one lot into two or more lots.

Opal, have you talked to Council or a Council planner at this stage to gauge an indication if they will support a reduction in statutory carpark requirements for your development?

4.1.1 Car Parking Demand Assessment
With regard to not providing the statutory parking requirement on-site, the Planning Scheme
indicates that a Car Parking Demand Assessment must assess the car parking demand likely to
be generated by the proposal. The assessment must consider the following:
 “The likelihood of multi-purpose trips within the locality which are likely to be combined
with a trip to the land in connection with the proposed use.
 The variation of car parking demand likely to be generated by the proposed use over
time.
 The short-stay and long-stay car parking demand likely to be generated by the
proposed use.
 The availability of public transport in the locality of the land.
 The convenience of pedestrian and cyclist access to the land.
 The provision of bicycle parking and end of trip facilities for cyclists in the locality of the
land.
 The anticipated car ownership rates of likely or proposed visitors to or occupants
(residents or employees) of the land.
 Any empirical assessment or case study”
The combination of these factors often results in car parking demand being generated at rates
different to the statutory rates

 

Beanie you are so comprehensive in all of your posts

 

Thanks Beanie Girl,

Wow, that was a much more comprehensive response than I expected - but very much appreciated.

You wouldn't happen to be a town planner?

I've just started working with a private town planner who seems to think the chances of getting dispensation in our case are quite high.

I guess now it's a case of working out whether we give everyone one car park... Or whether we give them two via a compromise with the stackers.

Any developers out there had stackers implemented?

Was it worth it... Or was it a world of pain?

 

@opal3259

You can look at option of tandom carpark arrangment for 3-4 townhouse site.

At that location, you may get dispensation for car park requirement.(subject to comprehensive traffic engineer report) However, as a developer, you may want to provide sufficient car parks for such dwelling to maximise resale value of the project.

I am sure designer can work the problem or at best go for double cross over with smaller basement.

I would consider a smaller basement option with direct access to each townhouse and incorporate storage, bicycle parking in basement.

You will get a better design and end product.

 

Yup - tandem parking is another option we are exploring.
Basement would be ideal, but I think the additional cost would make it prohibitive.

 

Opal, regardless of whether you are aiming for a reduction in statutory minimum requirement for carparking or for car-stackers, I think it would be helpful to get an experienced traffic engineer's input into your development of 3-4 townhouses. They can look at the design, look at swept paths, turning circles or into the type and dimension of car-stacker you should have.
I know for aboveground and underground carparks, I've seen traffic engineering companies like O'Brien's, Traffix and Ratio recommend Klaus Multibase carstacker as a good standard to follow.

Or traffic engineers can make a study into car-ownership rates in your suburb and availability of public transport to argue a case for you at Council for a dispensation to minimum carparks.

Good traffic engineers are familiar with a wide variety of councils in Melbourne and are aware of the undercurrents in direction the State is going vis-a-vis planning and carparking.
Planners and traffic engineers work hand-in-hand for Council applications and merit appeals at VCAT.

In my suburb recently, even for 4-6 townhouses, Council is forcing developers to build and excavate underground carparks. So developers save money on the buildings because of the cost to dig underground by bringing in pre-fab stuff from China loaded on trucks and put together on site.
My council seems to want to lessen the off-site street parking problem on the roads by making developers dig basement carparks.

So my suggestion is get a traffic engineer into your development feasibility studies early to lessen your headaches!

 

Beanie Girl,

Thank you so much for the detailed response.

I had a meeting with my private town planner earlier in the week - and he also suggested chatting to a traffic engineer.

I think I'll get someone on board the moment the next set of concept drawings are completed.
Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on the pre-fab stuff coming out of China?