Angle parking lots or perpendicular parking lots?

[roadman]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

First time I've seen perpendicular spots on a through street.  And my advice is the same, back into the space instead of having to back out.

[kphoger]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

First time I've seen perpendicular spots on a through street.  And my advice is the same, back into the space instead of having to back out.

So you were comparing angled street parking to parallel parking? but I was reading it as a comparison of angled street parking and perpendicular street parking.

[Rothman]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

First time I've seen perpendicular spots on a through street.  And my advice is the same, back into the space instead of having to back out.

Heh.  The reason why a lot of drivers do not is because they're afraid of damaging other cars.

That said, it is done frequently in snowier areas because it's easier to drive out over the inevitable banks.

[kphoger]

In Wichita, it is illegal to back into a public parking space (not enforceable on private lots) because we don't have rear license plates.

[roadman]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

First time I've seen perpendicular spots on a through street.  And my advice is the same, back into the space instead of having to back out.

Heh.  The reason why a lot of drivers do not is because they're afraid of damaging other cars.

That said, it is done frequently in snowier areas because it's easier to drive out over the inevitable banks.

I do it because it's easier to see other traffic (including pedestrians) if you pull out rather than back out.  And, the risk of me hitting another car while backing in to a space is less than the risk of somebody hitting me as I'm backing out, especially if my view is blocked by vehicles in the adjacent spaces.

[dlsterner]

In Wichita, it is illegal to back into a public parking space (not enforceable on private lots) because we don't have rear license plates.

Just a wild guess, but I assume you mean "because we don't have front license plates"?

That said, I would not want having - or not having - a front license plate be the deciding factor for whether I park head in or head out.

[GenExpwy]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

With perpendicular parking, you only have to turn your head 90° to each side; while backing out at an angle you have to turn your body more awkwardly, and the rear pillar may obstruct your view.

A year and a half ago, I was backing out of an angled space on Main St in Hornell NY. I got so twisted around trying to see past the rear pillar and the SUV in the next space, that I got my feet tangled up and stepped on the gas instead of the brake. Of course, the car I hit had to be a Ferrari.

[Big John]

Then there is Seattle parking. They use diagonal striping but in reverse, making it necessary to back into the the parking spot.

[Rothman]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

With perpendicular parking, you only have to turn your head 90° to each side; while backing out at an angle you have to turn your body more awkwardly, and the rear pillar may obstruct your view.

A year and a half ago, I was backing out of an angled space on Main St in Hornell NY. I got so twisted around trying to see past the rear pillar and the SUV in the next space, that I got my feet tangled up and stepped on the gas instead of the brake. Of course, the car I hit had to be a Ferrari.

A Ferrari in Hornell?

[1995hoo]

I've never especially liked on-street angled parking, but then I'm very good at parallel parking (taught myself how to do it because it's not required to get a license in Virginia).

There are a few places in DC where they allow angled "back-in, pull-out" parking (those are the words the signs use) on Sunday mornings in areas otherwise designated for parallel parking; the reason for the different rule on Sunday is to squeeze in more cars near churches. People do a horrible job of parking when that rule is in effect. You often see varied angles, cars sticking out too far, other cars backed in so far that they protrude across the sidewalk, etc. People also routinely get tickets for overstaying–the diagonal parking ends at 2 PM, but people don't always move by then. Tomorrow will be a good example: G Street across from Verizon Center allows the back-in diagonal parking until 2:00 on Sundays, and tomorrow there's a hockey game beginning at 12:30. Invariably when that happens, some people going to the game park diagonally and get ticketed because the game doesn't end until closer to 3:00. I view that as user error, not reading the signs–suck it up and walk a longer distance or just pay to park in a garage, though I do understand why people want to take advantage of the lack of meter fees on Sunday. (You can also get a ticket if you don't back in when this rule is in effect and if your car is parallel parked, even if it were parallel parked before the diagonal parking kicks in.)

[sparker]

San Jose parking lots are all over the map; even the regional Walmarts differ (Almaden: perpendicular, Milpitas: angled -- but the latter is shared space with the McCarthy Ranch shopping complex).  Almost all parking places in industrial parks are perpendicular, including the one where my business is located (and when the spaces fill up before I get there, it's back to parallel parking in front of my rollup door!).  Even then, when parking in the supplied spaces there, I back in -- it's upslope to the buildings (my aisle is also the park drainage!), so it's easier getting out after dark.  But, all in all, when it comes to shopping areas, I'll always take the angled approach -- easier to back out, particularly when my little old Camry is sandwiched in between a couple of Expeditions with, of course, the resultant loss of visuals regarding traffic in the aisle.  Almost gotten hit a couple of times in local complexes since, at least in this area, drivers are loath to yield to those backing out of spaces (a "side" problem that may warrant discussion!).

[kphoger]

In Wichita, it is illegal to back into a public parking space (not enforceable on private lots) because we don't have rear license plates.

Just a wild guess, but I assume you mean "because we don't have front license plates"?

That said, I would not want having - or not having - a front license plate be the deciding factor for whether I park head in or head out.

Yes, that's definitely what I meant.  Thank you.  But maybe you misinterpreted:  having a front license plate or not is not the determining factor.  Being in Wichita is the determining factor.  It's a city ordinance.  But the reason for the ordinance is that Kansas doesn't use front license plates.

while backing out at an angle you have to turn your body more awkwardly

Depends which way you turn your head, doesn't it?

[GenExpwy]

Angle parking on a street only when it's back-in parking.  Backing out of an angle space onto an active street, especially when you're in a small sedan and there are 'road behemoth" sized SUVs or pickup trucks in the adjacent spaces, is not one of my favorite experiences. 

How is backing out of an angled spot any worse than backing out of a perpendicular spot along the street (such as the South Bend example posted by tradephoric)?

With perpendicular parking, you only have to turn your head 90° to each side; while backing out at an angle you have to turn your body more awkwardly, and the rear pillar may obstruct your view.

A year and a half ago, I was backing out of an angled space on Main St in Hornell NY. I got so twisted around trying to see past the rear pillar and the SUV in the next space, that I got my feet tangled up and stepped on the gas instead of the brake. Of course, the car I hit had to be a Ferrari.

A Ferrari in Hornell?

Yep, a 2012 owned by a guy in Hornell. I'm not enough of a car guy to say what model, but I recognized that yellow shield in a tenth of a second. I've also seen a Rolls-Royce at the Corning Wegmans.

[Terry]

Rarely see angled parking. But, I did find one small one in downtown Edmonton last summer. It was a hassle trying to figure out which way to go to match the angle.

Perpendicular parking is easy and, if you hate backing up, find one that has both stalls empty, Then drive through to the far stall and park, do your business, and drive ahead out. BTW, plates are only at the rear in Alberta and no law requiring plates to be facing out.

[jakeroot]

Pretty much seen it all in Tacoma:

Pull-in angle parking and reverse angle parking? Check and check

Perpendicular parking along a four-lane arterial? Check.

My general preference is for perpendicular parking because I can back in. But I usually design angle parking because you can cram in more stalls (usually), which is necessary to meet local zoning requirements.

[jeffandnicole]

Ever since we were babies, every time we go out, whether it be as drivers or riders, the destination usually involves parking. Reading some of the posts on this thread, I can only shake my head at how difficult it is for some road enthusiasts, who cringe at signage not using the proper font or everyday signage not being up to proper standards, can't figure out how to park in a parking lot.

[7/8]

I voted for perpendicular, but I would also be happy with reverse-only angled parking. I remember my Dad had to back out of an on-street angled parking in Paris, ON (street view) and it was pretty dangerous since it's hard to see when you're reversing onto a busy street, especially if you're parked beside a truck.

[kphoger]

BTW, plates are only at the rear in Alberta and no law requiring plates to be facing out.

It's not a Kansas law.  It's a Wichita law, and it only applies to public lots.

That is to say, it would be the equivalent of Red Deer having a municipal ordinance dictating which way you have to park.

[skluth]

Don't really care as long as the spaces are wide enough. Too often, local ordinances regarding lines have exceptions from grandfather clauses and zoning exemptions, or enforcement is lax-to-nonexistent. There may not even be ordinances/ enforcement for unincorporated or rural areas.

I've driven mostly smaller cars my entire life. So I usually back into perpendicular slots so I can see better when I leave between the SUVs, oversized pickups, and minivans at Costco.

It's really funny, but Smoke Tree Village here in Palm Springs has both. It's perp along the west side near Sunrise except for spaces around the closed bank on the corner. Then there's angle in front of the smaller shops/restaurants area in the middle before going back to perp in front of Ralph's and hardware store and finally angle again around the Bank of America and the little bit directly in front of the hardware store. The BoA may be a separate property, but the rest is all Smoke Tree Village.

[tradephoric]

Downtown Paso Robles, California is a good example of parallel parking along main streets and angled parking along the side-streets:


https://www.google.com/maps?ll=35.62804,-120.69043&z=18&t=h

[jeffandnicole]

Definitely angled. Easier to get in and out of. The Walmart in Jackson, Ky., switched from angled to perpendicular several years ago. I understand that the number of police reports for fender-benders went up afterwards. They re-striped a couple of years ago and went back to angled parking. I understand they lost only about 10 spaces because of that.

I keep thinking back to this post.

When they switched from angled to perpendicular, did they change the width of the aisles or length of the stalls? Mr. Matte in Reply #3 posted the perfect guideline to parking lot measurements.  If they went from angled to perp but kept it in the same footprint, there would've been a loss of at least 4 feet of aisle space for vehicles to back up, which is significant in a small space.  The parking stalls may be smaller lengthwise as well, so vehicles, especially longer ones, would have a tendency to stick out, further reducing available aisle space.

Using this site, it gives a great image of how many vehicles would fit in a similar area.  https://my-scalecloud.tumblr.com/post/86359102192/via-36310080-parking-design-standards .  If you look at the perp row, there's 10 parking spots in that row.  However, in the angled parking aisle next to it, only 7.5 spots fit in the same area.  Since you mentioned they only lost about 10 spots in total across what is normally a large parking lot, that would also indicate they didn't account for the wider width necessary for an angled parking stall.  Depending on the angle, a 10' wide angled spot could become an 8.5' perp spot. Less room in a spot; less room between cars, less area to turn and more door dings as a bonus.

So, to put it bluntly, they fucked up when they converted from angled to perpendicular spaces.  And I don't blame Walmart for this necessarily - I blame whoever owns that parking lot, and the municipality it's located in.  There are very basic, standard ways to lay out a parking lot, but you have to account for a significant spacing modification as well.

[hbelkins]

Definitely angled. Easier to get in and out of. The Walmart in Jackson, Ky., switched from angled to perpendicular several years ago. I understand that the number of police reports for fender-benders went up afterwards. They re-striped a couple of years ago and went back to angled parking. I understand they lost only about 10 spaces because of that.

I keep thinking back to this post.

When they switched from angled to perpendicular, did they change the width of the aisles or length of the stalls? Mr. Matte in Reply #3 posted the perfect guideline to parking lot measurements.  If they went from angled to perp but kept it in the same footprint, there would've been a loss of at least 4 feet of aisle space for vehicles to back up, which is significant in a small space.  The parking stalls may be smaller lengthwise as well, so vehicles, especially longer ones, would have a tendency to stick out, further reducing available aisle space.

Width of the aisles. When they were angled, they were one-way. When they switched to perpendicular parking, the aisles became wider and two-way. When they switched back to angled, they became narrower but one-way.

The aerial view (link) shows the old perpendicular parking, before it was re-sealed and re-striped for angled parking.

Note that the spaces at right, which are in front of a grocery store, are still perpendicular even after the main aisles were changed to angled.

[ErmineNotyours]

The second half of this video examines the efficiency of various parking angles.

[Terry]

BTW, plates are only at the rear in Alberta and no law requiring plates to be facing out.

It's not a Kansas law.  It's a Wichita law, and it only applies to public lots.

That is to say, it would be the equivalent of Red Deer having a municipal ordinance dictating which way you have to park.

Thanks. Unfortunately, reading the various rules in each state or municipality, it's hard to tell who would have a law like Wichita.