Better yet, @tndkemp, not owning a self-driving car and instead hiring one - similar to taxis and Uber. Fewer cars, fewer infrastructure requirements, lower costs, and happier people.
1 Like
Hi @jen, I’m a little sceptical that angled parks are a more efficient design. I have seen a few angled carparks and it seems that you can’t fit as many car spaces in the same area.
My local shopping centre has a few sections where the bays are marked ‘small cars only’. Quite a few 4wd owners ignore this and park there anyway, which makes using the bays either side of them impossible. I have a tiny car and I’m really great at parking and even I can’t get in there!
2 Likes
I agree the 4wd SUV craze needs to be looked at especially in car parks and a seperate area for them is a good idea. The SUV sales expansion has happened because Petrol isn’t considered an ever diminishing resource, that pollution from these vehicles has been left to the manufacturers pleasure (VW case in point) and the impact of these vehicles on the urban environment hasn’t been considered. Also the ability of people who more than likely got their licence in a little car seem to struggle driving the larger SUV’s. So perhaps a special licence needs to be issued for Large 4WD’s. Currently 5 of the top 10 vehicle sales in Australia are SUV’s. TV and Social media advertising is littered with SUV’s that are touted as good for everything but two seconds later you’ll be needing it to tear around the Bush or outback as everyone does that…really? People don’t realise the huge cost to society these vehicles have. All cars from around 2000 onwards have far more sheet metal in height on their sides to stop 4WD’s from crashing through the windscreen. This means all cars are now higher in their centre of gravity making it more likely to tip over in an accident. They have had to install anti roll software and hardware just so these vehicles don’t roll over in the normal course of driving. Petrol usage is greater as the SUV’s are far heavier vehicles and they pump out more pollution. Instead of low aerodynamic and stable vehicles being the norm these farm/tradie/explorer vehicles are touted as a great commuter vehicles. Pollution Tax and real Government incentives for Hybrids and Electric vehicles would help to rid these urban oddities off our roads…when was the last time you saw an AD for a Nissan Leaf? And where are the plethora of Electric and Hybrid vehicles available from overseas…you won’t see them in our new car dealers.
I would say that unless you don’t drive a car at all, it’s a little unfair to point the finger at someone else because their vehicle creates more pollution than your vehicle does. That’s only my opinion.
2 Likes
Its not only this car (4WD’s) creating more pollution its because of their widespread use that vehicle design had to change and become heavier and more pollutant because you have to stop these urban trucks from entering lower cars cabins. So this means more sheet metal is used than would otherwise be needed requiring even more advanced engines (tech costs) to try and meet pollution levels (VW found a way round that as I suspect others have). Next time have a look at pre-2000 cars and notice how low they are and how their doors aren’t as big and to have cars with higher centres of gravity (as newer ones are) it requires even more add ons to keep them stable. I’ve driven 60 ft buses and I don’t need to swing out as wide as some inept 4WD owners do just to take a normal corner and even though they have huge ground clearance and over engineered suspension yet no one goes as slow as a 4WD owner does over car park speed bumps. If every one else drove pantech trucks then 4WD owners might realise how much they block other drivers view of the road and how frustrating it is to sit behind a sluggish, lane wandering,Indicator Broken? vehicle not design for the urban roads.
Ok, that’s an opinion. But do you think there could be just a tad of generalisation in there?
I think you may have all the grandmothers out there up in arms over how you perceive their driving ability negotiating car park speed humps lol
1 Like
I think there should be a ban on 4WD’s in suburbia, particularly in the inner city. I really do not understand why a person needs to pick up their one child a couple of blocks away in their huge BMW 4WD. It makes the streets in inner Sydney hell.
Aside from that, I think people do purchase 4Wd’s because they think that they are safer. They are not. They drastically cut close disability and are more prone to roll. They also seem to give their drivers a false sense of security rendering them not as alter as smaller car drivers.
If you don’t live in the bush you really do not need a 4WD.
1 Like
What about if you travel to the bush a lot?.
Does this mean you must own two cars?
1 Like
@mch, how wise. You hit the nail on the head - but that is only my opinion. 
Yes, larger vehicles are marginally worse for the environment than smaller vehicles, but I wouldn’t be so quick to assume hybrid or electric vehicles are a better option (they could even be worse for the environment). Suggesting electric vehicles as an environmentally preferable option compared to SUV-type vehicles (@r333r) is erroneous and misleading. The problem lies in the obsession most people have with utilising private transport for every one of their endeavours.
1 Like
Yes, I agree that people generally seem to prefer private transport.
But this is pretty well forced on us as I can’t think of too many supermarkets that have a railway station.
Even if they did, how would you carry the groceries home?
And getting back to the type of vehicle that should be allowed in a supermarket car park.
I get the feeling from some of the posts that it would be small hybrid or full electric small car.
That’s fine, but then lets talk about how bad batteries are for the environment.
2 Likes
There is great dialogue happening around this issue, but we are drifting a bit, and that’s ok as long as we continue to remember the core issue.
No one is saying that 4WD’s or small cars should be banned or discriminated against.
That is not the purpose or intent of the thread.
What we’d like to see is a shopping experience that is fair to ALL.
To my way of thinking it means giving 4WD’s or larger vehicles (which obscure the view and thus compromise safety) a section of their own which does not disadvantage those drivers, as far as access to the front door of the supermarket is concerned. It need not be any particular area, but could be as simple as using every second row of parking bays.
At the same time, smaller car drivers have to be spared the inconvenience of restricted visibility, seemingly not understood by the drivers of the vehicles responsible for that visual obstruction, by virtue of the parking placement of the larger vehicles.
We already have “Handicapped” sections - no one has any issues with that.
And that introduction raised no eyebrows.
And I think the same will happen when the segregation of large and small vehicles occurs.
Yes, it is coming - no doubt - it has to.
Not everyone will comply - at least not immediately.
There are always hard noses. And I expect some smaller vehicle drivers would STILL want to park amongst the big boys, and vice versa.
But common sense and decency usually prevails over time - just as it has with the handicapped parking allocation.
The airing of views has been great, and I am glad I have put off making the submission so far.
Some good points raised eg that some supermarkets/shopping centres already do have the kind of segregation we speak of, and it is working a treat. I have had private emails about this - thanks to those who took the time to write.
Generally people will feel threatened if they are asked to change habits, or think they are about to be treated unfairly.
That’s not going to happen - relax. Many fears have already been uncovered, by virtue of the comments made. I see that as a great thing, because it does indeed show the kinds of things to be avoided in designing parking, and allocating parking bays fairly.
Would love to hear some hypothetical designs now, so that any disadvantages to any party can be pre-empted and sorted early.
I know there are many traffic engineers who already have ideas on this - perhaps retired and with good experience in this area… Do you know one? Would they be willing to comment here?
Thank you to all - please continue.
1 Like
I was making the point that ALL vehicles have had to put more sheet metal on their sides and become higher off the ground all to accomodate the 4WD expansion. The best example of this is the Honda Odyssey in the 90’s it was a low aerodynamic people mover now its like all the rest higher up to stop 4WD’s plunging into the cabin. If we adopted Hybrid and Electric vehicles built by renewable energy plants from 2000 (and Yes all the Technology was already available) onwards pollution would have been greatly reduced. Less steel would have been produced. Cars would have required less technology to keep them safe, development of battery,supercapacitators and fuel cell vehicles would have been far more advanced. Alas The two major parties and the fossil fuel industry have kept that all back. I agree we should wean ourselves off personal transport and Again the CSIRO developed an electric transport pod that was available on call to residents and its even been trialled I believe in a small Danish city and one of the New Sustainable cities being built in the Middle East. The obsession with 4WD trucks in cities should be called out.
The UNSW invented the Vanadium Redox battery back in the late 1980’s it only changes its recyclable liquid to charge and as luddites run Australia this battery is being sold back to us as baseload for renewable energy. It was also going to be part of a system in vehicles where you dropped the battery out and put in a newly charged one “Better” an Israeli company even trialled it in Victoria using the Renault Versance ? electric car. Lithium Ion batteries are also more recyclable than you think. Fuel Cells and Super capacitors were also in the mix and Toyota makes a fuel cell car now. The Lead Acid battery argument is long dead and as more research goes into better batteries and recycling it can only get better. Remember Petrol engines needed decades to make them viable as the roads and petrol stations didn’t appear overnight. Nor did the cleaner fuels/oils, better burning engines,wreckers yards or catalytic converters.
1 Like
Obviously you don’t reverse in so far that you can’t access the boot.
In a small car park that is true.
However in a larger carpark there are savings in having narrower driving lanes.
Yes @Leptobrama. Actually that would be impossible with my design since there is a wide walkway behind all of the cars.
And bumps or other means determining how far back to reverse are integral as well.
1 Like
Larger vechiles parked at supermarket pedestrian crossings obscures the view.
I slow right down to check for pedestrians.
Potential accidents if drivers don’t check and slow down.
Have witnessed it many times.
2 Likes
I totally agree with all your comments and also your solution for 4wds re car parking.
I find it dangerous backing my car when squashed between these Big Brutes.
Well done. …regards…Val
Adopt European Parking Practices
Many super markets did modify the size of parking fields for scooters and bicycles, normal cars and SUV’s.
Closest to the shopping entries are places for electric cars, scooters and bicycles.
Next are normal cars and there are overhead panels which restrict SUV’s from access
Farthest away from the entries are special bigger fields for SUV’s.
This is also to promote more economic transport 
Have a nice day
Chris
4 Likes
