Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 52

Thread: Parking space size

  1. #1
    Cyburbian Mark's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Electric Ladyland
    Posts
    151

    Parking space size

    Our off street parking space size requirement is 9.5 ft. x 19 ft., for surface parking.

    Planning Commission is talking about reducing the size to 9 ft. x 19 ft.

    Any experience out there regarding 9 footers. Is it too skinny?
    Ohhhh Mama, can this really be the end!

  2. #2
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Who cares.
    Posts
    1,038
    We have 9 feet, or 180 square feet minimum. Seems to be ok.
    I don't dream. I plan.

  3. #3
    We have 9 x 19 and they work just fine. 3 inches on each side of a vehicle doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Your PC seems to be going in a different direction than a lot of Cities. I have read about a few Cities that are increasing the size of spaced becuse of all these giant SUVs and trucks.
    "I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are."

    - Homer Simpson

  4. #4
    Cyburbian ludes98's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    1,263
    9.5' is still the preferred width for most jurisdictions around here. Space length is usually 18'. Two way aisle of 26' for 90 degree, some jurisdictions use 24'. I like 60 degree parking, but you have to have well placed two way aisles and 90 degree will get you more spaces in the same area.

  5. #5
    Cyburbian MD Planner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2002
    Location
    On the corner of Walk and Don't Walk
    Posts
    537
    Every place I've ever worked 9' was the norm for the width and 18' for the length. It seems to work ok. One place even allowed 8.5' for "compact car" parking. Try to enforce that one!

  6. #6
    Cyburbian jordanb's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    City of Low Low Wages!
    Posts
    3,236
    Make them just big enough for say a minivan to fit, then ticket all of those ******** in Tahoes and Suburbans who take up two parking spots and only put money in one meter.

    (Dan) Please watch your language in this subforum. Thanks.

  7. #7
    Cyburbian Jeff's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mr. Cool Ice
    Posts
    4,161
    10x20 is more and more the norm. The Excursion thing is 19 feet long. By DOT standards, and vehicle over 8' in width needs a "Wide Load" placard. SUVs are just as wide as typical cars. Its the length and height where they are different.

  8. #8
    Cyburbian Rumpy Tunanator's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Intervention
    Posts
    4,475
    Go diagonal (if its on street parking, but it works both ways if its off-street)), you can fit more spaces to the block that way if your street is wide enough (or designated lot).
    A guy once told me, "Do not have any attachments, do not have anything in your life you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you spot the heat around the corner."


    Neil McCauley (Robert DeNiro): Heat 1995

  9. #9
    Cyburbian jordanb's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    City of Low Low Wages!
    Posts
    3,236
    Originally posted by Rumpy Tunanator
    Go diagonal (if its on street parking, but it works both ways if its off-street)), you can fit more spaces to the block that way if your street is wide enough (or designated lot).
    I've heard pluses and minuses to diagonal parking. For a busy street, reportedly, it's pretty dangerous, but I don't see how it could be more dangerous than parallel parking. It needs more lateral room but it should be a lot safer for bicyclists. There wouldn't be a chance to get doored in the bike lane, and people backing out will have to turn their cars on at least, which should give the biker some indication that there's danger.

  10. #10
    Cyburbian Emeritus Chet's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    South Milwaukee
    Posts
    8,935
    Originally posted by jordanb
    ... reportedly, it's pretty dangerous, but I don't see how it could be more dangerous than parallel parking. ...
    Simple - Turning your head 100 degrees left is easier than 120 degrees right.

  11. #11
    Cyburbian Jeff's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mr. Cool Ice
    Posts
    4,161
    But with diagonal parking you have huge blind spots if there is a car parked on either side of you. Diagonal sucks IMO, and is very dangerous for bikes because of the whole blind spot issue.

  12. #12
    Cyburbian jordanb's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    City of Low Low Wages!
    Posts
    3,236
    Drivers are so rarely looking for bikes anway. If drivers would simply check their mirror before swinging their doors open there wouldn't be any danger for bikers from parallel parked cars.

    If a car had to move to be a danger to bikes, at least that'd give the biker some visual warning that would signal to him to be careful.

  13. #13
    Cyburbian Emeritus Chet's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    South Milwaukee
    Posts
    8,935
    Originally posted by jordanb
    Drivers are so rarely looking for bikes anway. If drivers would simply check their mirror before swinging their doors open there wouldn't be any danger for bikers from parallel parked cars.

    If a car had to move to be a danger to bikes, at least that'd give the biker some visual warning that would signal to him to be careful.
    What do you know - you dont even own a car. I firmly beleive every driver should be required to ride a motorcycle in rush hour traffic, or ride a bycicle on the shoulder of an arterial for at least one week. You gain a HUGE appreciation for them.

  14. #14
    Cyburbian Rem's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,530
    Originally posted by Jeff
    But with diagonal parking you have huge blind spots if there is a car parked on either side of you. Diagonal sucks IMO, and is very dangerous for bikes because of the whole blind spot issue.
    We have a fair bit of angle parking in commercial centres where we may want to maximise roadside parking, slow the traffic, or narrow the travelling lanes for pedestrians. We do however insist on rear to kerb - ie. so you back in and drive out. Backing in should be safer because you have just traversed the road you back over to get into your space. Using your mirrors to reverse should ensure there are no surprises. Provided you drive out slowly there should be no threat to bicycles when leaving either.

    As far as space dimensions go - below is an extract from our controls (one shouldn't expect a simple answer from a planner on such questions).
    Table 7 Minimum Car Space Widths
    Minimum
    Width
    User Type
    2.4 m Reserved parking with low turnover rates, such as employee car parking areas at industrial and commercial premises.
    2.5 m Public car parking areas with low turnover rates, such as a sporting venue.
    2.6 m Public car parking areas with moderate turnover rates, such as a Local Centre shopping centre or medical centre.
    Reserved spaces where passengers and goods can be expected to be loaded or unloaded, such as tenant car parking areas in residential buildings. Visitor parking at commercial, industrial and residential premises.
    2.7 m Small public car parking areas with high turnover rates, typical duration of stay 30 minutes,
    particularly shopping centres up to 1000 m2 GFA, fast food stores etc.
    3.2 m Parking spaces reserved for people with disabilities.

    Length
    Except for small car spaces (5m) and parallel parking spaces, all bays are 5.4 metres in length.
    Parallel parking spaces are a minimum of 6.0 metres in length. This can be reduced to 5.4 metres if the space is at the open
    end of the row of spaces, or increased by 300mm if closed by a kerb at one end and by 600mm if closed by a kerb at both ends.

  15. #15
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,953
    Originally posted by Rem
    We have a fair bit of angle parking in commercial centres where we may want to maximise roadside parking, slow the traffic, or narrow the travelling lanes for pedestrians....
    The problem with on-street parking, whether parallel, angled, or perpendicular, is that we (or at least mostly the transportation engineers) have no desire or intention of slowing traffic. Any of these parking techniques could be safely employed if we designed streets appropriately for them, and enforced speed limits. Instead, we will widen a downtown street to four lanes with parallel parking, and instantly begin to complain that the street isn't pedestrian-friendly, cars and trucks travel too fast, there is insufficient parking, and it is too difficult to park when you do locate a space. Which do you want to prioritize, moving traffic quickly, or character and economic vitality?

  16. #16
    Cyburbian Tom R's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Akron
    Posts
    2,255

    Width

    Originally posted by Jeff
    10x20 is more and more the norm. The Excursion thing is 19 feet long. By DOT standards, and vehicle over 8' in width needs a "Wide Load" placard. SUVs are just as wide as typical cars. Its the length and height where they are different.
    How wide is a Hummer?
    WALSTIB

  17. #17
    Cyburbian donk's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    skating on thin ice
    Posts
    6,958

    Re: Width

    Originally posted by Tom R
    How wide is a Hummer?
    From www.hummer.com

    H1=86.5 inches (excluding mirrors) Track width = 71.6 inches
    Length = 184.5 inches

    H2 = 81.2 inches Track width = 69.4 inches length =189.8 inches
    Too lazy to beat myself up for being to lazy to beat myself up for being too lazy to... well you get the point....

  18. #18
    Cyburbian Rem's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,530
    Originally posted by Cardinal
    The problem with on-street parking, whether parallel, angled, or perpendicular, is that we (or at least mostly the transportation engineers) have no desire or intention of slowing traffic.......
    We seem to have gotten past the traditional arm wrestle with the engineers on this issue and we have some good examples. Maybe the size of the centres we are working with are smaller than you may be referring to but provided a state road is not involved, we do not have a problem with designing for slowing traffic. Our engineers listen to us on our own roads.

    We have a good four lane example nearby - the travelling lane next to the parking is like a browsing lane - cars move slowly waiting to find a park, allowing safe entry and egress to spaces. The second lane (next to the median) moves without restriction but slowly because there is a roundabout at each end of the block, a pedestrian crossing mid-block and a bus stop (both sides of road) mid-block. I will try to take a pic. or two to describe it better.

  19. #19
    Cyburbian Rumpy Tunanator's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Intervention
    Posts
    4,475
    Originally posted by Cardinal
    The problem with on-street parking, whether parallel, angled, or perpendicular, is that we (or at least mostly the transportation engineers) have no desire or intention of slowing traffic. Which do you want to prioritize, moving traffic quickly, or character and economic vitality?
    -More and more cities are putting in traffic calming devices to slow traffic, such as roundabouts and traffic circles. In Buffalo they restored 2 original roundabouts on Richmond Street. Really solved the speeding problem because of timed signals and is asthetically pleasing.
    -You mentioned the widening of roads and I know of one community organization here, Forever Elmwood had the street narrowed to promote the slowing of traffic, as well as pedestrian foot traffic.
    -I want character and economic development!
    A guy once told me, "Do not have any attachments, do not have anything in your life you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you spot the heat around the corner."


    Neil McCauley (Robert DeNiro): Heat 1995

  20. #20
    Cyburbian Jeff's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Mr. Cool Ice
    Posts
    4,161
    "Roundabouts" would never work here. All anyone thinks of when you describe them are the Jersey Circles, and what a nightmare they are, I got lost in one once.

  21. #21
    Cyburbian Duke Of Dystopia's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cyburbias Brewpub, best seat in the haus!
    Posts
    2,672
    Originally posted by Jeff
    "Roundabouts" would never work here. All anyone thinks of when you describe them are the Jersey Circles, and what a nightmare they are, I got lost in one once.
    Everyone says that about roundabouts when they first encounter or suggest them. After a while, people get used to them and then start liking them. Same things I heard about putting them into a suburb of Green Bay. Now they are planning more of them.
    I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

  22. #22
    Cyburbian otterpop's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Down by Dun Ringill
    Posts
    5,995
    Blog entries
    6
    Our county doesn't have parking space standard, but when I worked in Ketchikan, Alaska, we had a 9 by 20 foot requirement and that seemed to be fine.

  23. #23
    Cyburbian Rem's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,530

    Angle Parking Solution

    I've gotten around to loading the pictures of (IMO) a successful use of angle parking in a commercial centre.

    These pics are of Warners Bay. The road carries about 20,000 vehicles a day (2001 count). Through traffic tends to use the centre two lanes and parking browsers, the outside two lanes.

    First photo shows the entry to the commercial centre - announced by the roundabout. Retail/commercial on the left, and a narrow foreshore park and the Lake on the right.



    This photo I am standing on the roundabout from pic 1, looking along the angle parking on the left. Note the white car backing into a space and the mid block pedestrian crossing.


    In this pic I am standing on the footpath (sidewalk) to give you a view of the cars angle parked from behind. There is some etiquette needed for drivers not to sit in their parked cars with the engine running - it makes the footpath less comfortable for diners in the cafes that occur along here. This can be an issue on hot days when Boy wants to run the air conditioner while Girl is in the shop.

  24. #24
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,953
    Nice, but... people back into parking stalls? That isn't even legal here.

  25. #25
    Cyburbian ludes98's avatar
    Registered
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    1,263
    I have seen back-in for angled parking. I thought it was strange, but it does allow better views when leaving. Reverse lights are pretty easy for the car behind you to see when you want to park.

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 ... LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Parallel parking space dimensions
    Design, Space, and Place
    Replies: 22
    Last post: 07 Sep 2012, 5:31 PM
  2. Parking space guidelines
    Transportation Planning
    Replies: 3
    Last post: 05 Jun 2012, 1:19 PM
  3. Parking space size
    Design, Space, and Place
    Replies: 11
    Last post: 29 Jul 2011, 10:40 PM
  4. Replies: 34
    Last post: 17 Oct 2007, 3:40 PM
  5. Replies: 62
    Last post: 06 Jul 2005, 10:24 PM