Advocacy & Safety - Angle Parking

There's been a proposal around here to change the downtown parking scheme from parallel parking to angle parking, and it's gained some traction in the city council. Currently the downtown area is built around a pair of three-lane one-way streets with parallel parking on both sides. The proposed scheme would remove a lane, making these two-lane one-way streets with angle parking on the right (and parallel on the left). It is also supposed to help create around a five-foot buffer on both sides between traffic and parking.

This seems like a really bad idea for cyclists... especially the ones uncomfortable with taking lanes who'll probably try to ride down the buffer and be even more invisible to motorists who blindly back into traffic.

Anybody got any advice for shooting this sort of scheme down?

Not sure, but I have previously been subject to angle parking on a major street. It's a big nightmare, b/c you can't have absolute faith that the reverse lights work on each vehicle - so you never really know when someone is going to back into you. At least with parallel parking the vehicles with legal tinting on the windows generally let you know if there is someone in the car.

Good luck

The best thing you can do is talk to your city council. I went to mine tonight and argued the construction of new bike lanes in useless parts of town. At least it gets them thinking about the topic from someone who uses the roads for a different purpose.

There is angle parking by my high school, and 2 weeks ago a motorcycle cop got injured by some ****** backing out without looking. They blocked off the whole street and made a huge deal of it.

Bad idea.

We have angled parking in several places here, including on the street where I work, but the angle is so that drivers have to back into their spots.

The act of parking holds up traffic more than parallel parking, because driving backwards at an angle really exposes how little driving skill someone might have. But, it seems like they can see a lot better when it's time to leave their spot -- the side mirror is useless, so they turn to look out the window where there isn't even a B-pillar to get in the way.

In the downtown Auburn area, we have angle parking like that. I thought it would be a problem whereas angled drivers backing out couldn't see cyclists. Their view would be blocked by other parked cars. I've found that this street is busy enough that that trafic moves slowly enough that no body backs out unless there is plenty of room. Perhaps going from 3 to two lanes one way will slow the traffic enough to be amenable to cyclists.

We have angled parking in several places here, including on the street where I work, but the angle is so that drivers have to back into their spots.

The act of parking holds up traffic more than parallel parking, because driving backwards at an angle really exposes how little driving skill someone might have. But, it seems like they can see a lot better when it's time to leave their spot -- the side mirror is useless, so they turn to look out the window where there isn't even a B-pillar to get in the way.

This is the way it should be, for safety reasons when leaving the parking space. Diagonal parking also remove the possibility of dooring cyclists. I dont think it will hold up traffic because it is normal to back into parallel parking spaces.

We have angled parking in several places here, including on the street where I work, but the angle is so that drivers have to back into their spots.

The act of parking holds up traffic more than parallel parking, because driving backwards at an angle really exposes how little driving skill someone might have. But, it seems like they can see a lot better when it's time to leave their spot -- the side mirror is useless, so they turn to look out the window where there isn't even a B-pillar to get in the way.
FWIW Back-in parking is supposed to be bike friendly and I guess it is better then front-in parking but still I would rather see corner parking lots (with landscaped screening) then streets lined with cars.

This is the way it should be, for safety reasons when leaving the parking space. Diagonal parking also remove the possibility of dooring cyclists. I dont think it will hold up traffic because it is normal to back into parallel parking spaces.

On the block by my workplace, people block both lanes of traffic (one each direction) while backing into a spot. It's doesn't last long, but it's pretty dependable.


FWIW Back-in parking is supposed to be bike friendly and I guess it is better then front-in parking but still I would rather see corner parking lots (with landscaped screening) then streets lined with cars.

Personally, I'd rather see business and homes taking up those lots, and fewer cars overall. It helps my area that public transit is really good -- limited parking kinda encourages people to take the cab and subway instead.

There's been a proposal around here to change the downtown parking scheme from parallel parking to angle parking, and it's gained some traction in the city council. Currently the downtown area is built around a pair of three-lane one-way streets with parallel parking on both sides. The proposed scheme would remove a lane, making these two-lane one-way streets with angle parking on the right (and parallel on the left). It is also supposed to help create around a five-foot buffer on both sides between traffic and parking.

This seems like a really bad idea for cyclists... especially the ones uncomfortable with taking lanes who'll probably try to ride down the buffer and be even more invisible to motorists who blindly back into traffic.

Anybody got any advice for shooting this sort of scheme down?

Which city? Honolulu?

Which city? Honolulu?

Of course not. Just small town California. (the moniker is an inside joke)