CAR-PARKING.

Shannon News, 26 February 1929, Page 3

CAR-PARKING.

DISCUSSION OF SYSTEMS. CHANGE ADVOCATED. Should motorists park their cars head in or tail in? This question formed the subject of a full discussion at the Palmerston North Borough Council meeting on Wednesday. Objection was taken by Cr. Eliott to a decision made by the transit committee to adhere to the present method of tail in parking. The speaker said that Wellington, Auckland, and other cities had adopted the head-in system and there appeared no reason why it should not be given a trial in Palmersotn NortK To back in when parking, it was necessary to take a wide turn to swing round*on the road and often a block in the traffic resulted. There were numerous points in favour of head-in parking, including a saving Of space in enabling more cars to be park-. ed and in the prevention of overhang on the footpaths. Cr. Eliott said that dozens of motorists 'iad spoken to him on the subject and all had been in favour of, the ueii-;n melhod. He hoped that the Council would reconsider the position arid, by so doing, agree with the wishes of the majority of motorists.

Support of the previous speaker's remarks was given by Cr. Fitzherbert. He was of the opinion that tlie system should be given a trial and he could not see why the traffic inspector had reported against it. Cr. Fitzherbert then moved that the transit committee be asked to give head-in parking a three months' trial. As a member of the transit committee, Cr. Tremaine was opposed to the suggestion. On wet and cold nights the majority of cars were parked with their hoods up and, if head on parking were adopted, a driver wishing to back out of a parking area could not get a view of traffic behind until he was beyond the rear of cars lined up on each side of him. This fact would tend to lead to accidents,. For day parking he could not see any greater advantage in the h.ead-in method. Cr. Tremaine added that ; several motorists, after having the dangers of head-in parking pointed out to them, had changed their views on the subject and had been convinced that the present method was the better.

Cr. Mansford supported the present system, and based his opinion on a driving experience of several years. Cr. Milverton said that there were difficulties in both systems, but he thought that head-in parking should be given a trial. Cr. Clausen thought that the argument of cars backing in and blocking the footway should not occasion any worry; Cr* Low stated that if nose-in parking could be shown to be more safe at°night he would be in favour of it, but traffic at the rear of a parked vehicle constituted a danger. However, he would support the trial of head-m parking for a month. Cr. Canton was against any change of the present system. A show of hands found a greater number in favour of the present system, and it is to be continued.