In parking lot layout, customers generally prefer stall orientation at which angle to the aisle (consider ease of use and familiarity in public car parks)?

Introduction / Context:
Stall orientation affects driver comfort, maneuvering effort, capacity, and circulation. While operators may optimize for capacity and flow, customer preference often reflects familiarity and straightforward approach geometry.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Public parking with mixed-skill drivers.
• Typical bay widths and aisle widths provided per local standards.
• Two-way aisles are common with 90° layouts.

Concept / Approach:
Perception of ease by customers is influenced by simple alignment (head-in parking), predictable reversing, and finding spaces without specialized one-way circulation. Perpendicular (90°) parking is ubiquitous in many public facilities, making it the most familiar and often preferred by casual users despite somewhat higher turning effort than shallow-angle stalls.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Compare turning paths: angled stalls (60°–75°) reduce steering angle but require one-way aisles and wayfinding discipline.90° stalls allow access from either direction in two-way aisles, simplifying wayfinding.Users often perceive 90° parking as straightforward and familiar, hence “preferred.”

Verification / Alternative check:
Many municipal lots and retail centers adopt 90° stalls for general customer use. Although angled parking can ease entry/exit, its operational constraints (one-way aisles) can confuse users, especially in constrained sites.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• 60°–85°: operationally efficient in some layouts but not as universally familiar to the public.
• 75°: a compromise option but still typically requires one-way circulation and is less common in general-purpose facilities.

Common Pitfalls:

• Equating operator preference (capacity, aisle flow) with user preference.
• Ignoring the impact of signing and one-way patterns on user comfort.

Final Answer:
90° to aisles