MOTORISTS FAVOUR NOSE-IN PARKING

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 6852, 6 March 1929, Page 8

MOTORISTS FAVOUR NOSE-IN PARKING

Saves Space and Time

CONSIDER BACKING OUT NOT DANGER, IT SEEMS

As a result of a meeting of Palmerston North motoritss held last evening, the Borough council is to be asked to alter the system of parking cars from the tail-in to tho head-in method.

The meeting was called by the Manawatu Automobilo association, in order that the council, which previously refused to alter the present system, might hear what motorists themselves thought about the question. Air. E. R. B. Holben presided. The chairman stated that the A. and P. association had passed a resolution in favour of the head-in method. Lady motorists especially would favour the new style, as they found it very difficult to back in against cars that were parked at all angles to the road and with varied intervals between them. Parking head-in was no innovation and the speaker named cities and towns that had adopted the method with success. It was much simpler to drive in at an angle and back out, instead of having to swing across the road and then back in, often having to make

several attempts to get in properly. There was an argument the new method, namely, that the dnver in backing out could not see what was coming up behind him but the speaker contended that traffic as a rule did not •hug the line of parked cars. It kept well out and drivers of those cars would be able to keep clear of motors backing out. A further argument in favour ot the new method was that there would be no luggage carriers protruding over the footways. The motorists shoul band together and get the council to accede to the request of the majority. There would always be somo who favoured the tail-in method, for the reason that they could see what was ahead of them when moving off but to the speaker’s mind, the advantages of the proposed method outweighed the disadstated that ho believed that car owners and the council would be liable if at night somo one tripped over protruding luggage carriers and was hurt. / Mr. J. Ireland supported the now method, on tho ground that it was easier and quicker. , , Mr H. E. Edmunds contended that one of the biggest advantages of the head-in method was that in backing out. motorists travelled slowly, whereas when moving off when tailin, they went away with the foot on thewcet orator. He also mentioned that on certain parking areas in the town the kerbings were so high that exhausts of cars had been damaged. Mr N. Mackio thpught.that if tne council enforced its new by-law that cars should turn only at intersections in the business portions of the town a great deal of danger from backing out would be obviated. He had yet to find a tail-in enthusiast who could find a solution for the waste. of space in parking ' that -accompanied that method. With - a growing motor traffic economy of space was essential. Mr. G. Pattle also' favoured the nosi, arguing that very often when motorists set out from parking areas, their engines were cold and he thought drivers would be giving more attention to their engines than to oncoming traffic. He also foresaw difficulty m getting into cars when they were parked closely together, especially for women. Mr E. Edwards supported the change for reasons given by previous speakers. In answering Mr. Jaggard, the chairman stated that 90 per cent of the cars in nse to-day could, bo started without trouble, even if left standing overnight. Most motorists were very considerate for other cars but backing in, they often could not avoid being inconsiderate in their anxiety to get parked and so out of the way of traffic. , * Mr. Edwards moved that the ing support the parking of cars headin and that a petition be circulated. The chairman seconded the motion. Mr. Edmunds stated in reply to Mr. laggard’s opposition that in backing out, cars were in low gear, which in it«elf facilitated the rotation of a cold engine. As to the second, objection, he had no doubt the council would line out the parking areas, as had been dono in other towns and thus give cars T>lenty of room. . . f Mr? Mackie suggested that if a deputation was to wait on the council, it should go along with that from the A. and P. association. Mr. H. J. Turner thought that tralnc was obstructed more by cars trying to back in than it would be by cars The motion was carried, Mr. Jaggard alone dissenting. / , The petition to be circulated reads

as follows: —“We, the undersigned residents of Palmerston North, respectfully request the council to reconsider its decision not to allow motor vehicles to be parked' head-m. We are strongly of opinion that parking head-in is the cuiclccst and most convenient method, ft induces closer parking and consequently less loss of space. It prevents the overhang of cars across the footpath and obviates the risk of damage to vehicles by colliding with verandah p o cts, etc. The risk of accident from vehicles backing out when parked headin at an angle of 30 degrees is no more than when parked tail-in. as at present.”