Skip to Content
Streetsblog California home
Streetsblog California home
Log In

It's a familiar compromise when adding a protected bike lane or other safety measures on a shopping street: SFMTA or OakDOT or whatever city's transportation agency will promise merchants to replace any lost car parking by converting adjoining streets from parallel parking to angled.

The problem, according to a new study, is moving the parking also moves the danger for cyclists and other vulnerable road users to that adjoining street. "Though angled parking is defended as a traffic-calming measure, numerous studies indicate that this layout is associated with higher rates of collisions than parallel parking," writes Marcel Moran, author of What’s your angle? Analyzing angled parking via satellite imagery to aid bike-network planning and a researcher at the Department of City & Regional Planning at the University of California, Berkeley. Moreover, "Such a layout takes up nearly double the space in the right of way as does parallel parking, which leaves even less room for bike lanes."

It also defeats a goal of reducing CO2 emissions, by continuing to take space from the street to provide free or nearly free parking to motorists, which just encourages more driving. "Such parking contradicts municipal priorities, including decreasing the use of automobiles," finds Moran.

Figure_5
false

As he quantifies in the study, San Francisco omits parking angle from the city's parking census. Therefore, good data doesn't exist correlating speeds, collisions and its interaction with angled parking. Moran makes up for this using "satellite imagery to resolve this data gap, and calculates that San Francisco dedicates 50 miles of street curbs to angled parking. While some assume angled parking is a planning response to San Francisco’s famed hills, the majority of it occurs on streets with no incline at all. As to angled parking’s traffic-calming effect, this benefit appears to be non-existent in San Francisco; average vehicle speeds differed by less than a half-mile per hour between angled-parking streets and adjacent non-angled streets."

A look from the study illustrating how angled parking takes space that could otherwise be used for protected bike lanes
A look from the study illustrating how angled parking takes space that could otherwise be used for protected bike lanes
false

From Streetsblog's view, the study is compelling--and it doesn't mean all angled parking is out of the question, if there's still enough room for safe bike infrastructure. This view of Bay Street shows in some rare instances it might be possible to accommodate both, in this case with back-in parking:

Pic of Bay Street from SFMTA
Pic of Bay Street from SFMTA
false

But on most streets, the "compromise" of adding angled parking to make up for loss of parallel parking or as a traffic calming measure is based on false assumptions, as Moran's study shows. And planners who design angled parking into projects are just kicking the city's safety and emissions goals down the road--or, more accurately, around the corner.

Read the full study on Sage Journals.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog California

Monday’s Headlines

Lots of news. Only some is hostile to cars.

September 29, 2025

States Have More Power Than They Think to Fund Sustainable Transportation

As the Trump administration claws back money for sustainable modes, states have a big opportunity to fill the gap.

September 28, 2025

Save the Date: Attend a Talk with High Speed Rail CEO Ian Choudri

Streetsblog's editor will host a Q&A with the head of the California High Speed Rail Authority at Manny's in the Mission, October 22.

September 26, 2025

The Week in Short Videos

Yes on Prop 50, No EV Rebates, Listen to StreetSmart!, and more money for states with a high percentage of married people.

September 26, 2025

Friday’s Headlines

Too late, Tesla!

September 26, 2025

Advocates: Congress Must Stop Trump From Illegally Holding Back Sustainable Transportation Bucks

Congress has a chance to restore order, seize back their power of the purse, and stop Trump from "pocket-rescinding" hundreds of millions for good transportation projects.

September 26, 2025
See all posts