Hey, I know! Why not base the SFPark on market pricing?
Uh, SFMTA? Just because something “makes money” for you doesn’t mean that it’s good for San Francisco…
We were going to get congestion pricing for just the “downtown core” in the Financh, but now it looks like the plan has expanded to the “Northeast Cordon.”
Here it is, straight from the BOMA people.
“$60-80M annual net revenue”
“If direction from policymakers to pursue further, next step would be environmental review.”
I didn’t take these photos, but I’ll tell you, I’ve seen a lot of corruption regarding free parking for SFGov employees in the SoMA area, so I believe them.
Here’s a photo essay with captions from Jim, who went on a walkabout yesterday.
Take a look:
“There are the People who pay up front to park in a lot, $25-$70. There are the people who feed meters but many of those wind up paying $72 to the City long after the last pitch. And there are those who play the system and possibly cheat and pay nothing for parking in a “red zone” with the help from “winking and nodding” SFMTA Parking Control Officers.
All these photos were taken within a 50 foot circle near 2nd & Townsend at 2:15 P.M. on Sunday April 7, 2013 during the Giants/St. Louis Baseball game.
1) Number 1 shows what the average slug must pay for parking for the Giant’s game at 2 in the afternoon, i.e. $70.
2) Number 2 shows a Handicapped placard vehicle getting free Giants game parking in the “red zone” of the SFFD at Second & Townsend. Handicapped placard holders may not park in “red zones.”
3) What appears to be several private vehicles of S.F. firefighters parked in the “red zone” claiming to be working by their Official Papers on the Dash. Is it mere code for “don’t ticket a fellow City employee?”
4) Several motorcycles getting ticketed (TC27, 219) for expired meters by the PCO who just drove by the “red zones” without seeing cause to stop.
5) Photo of SFFD Headquarters at 9:30 A.M., Sunday April 7, 2013 in case you think a lot of people work there on a Sunday.
Instead of the SFMTA MUNI DPT SFPark happy talk what you’ve been getting from the San Francisco Examiner, why not check out what the New York Times has to say about San Francisco’s expensive SFPark new parking meter program.
“PLACE “smart” in front of a noun and you immediately have something that somehow sounds improved.”
Click to expand
I’ll tell you, when the Imperial Japanese Navy tried to invade Wake Island back in WWII, their first attempt, which involved months of planning, failed. The IJN was highly embarrassed but they knew that it was their job to impose themselves on Wake, to “manage” Wake, so they came back and succeeded on their second try. (And they beheaded a few Marines, but, byegones…)
And I’ll also tell you, when the Imperial SFMTA tried to impose SFPark on the Mission Bay and the Dogpatch and whatnot, their first attempt, which involved months of planning, failed. The SFMTA was highly embarrassed but they knew that it’s their job to impose SFPark, or whatever they’re calling it now, on the area. The college boys of the SFMTA just know, they just know it, that it’s their job to increase the power of the SFMTA and have the SFMTA grow and grow and grow.
Get all the deets on the Second Invasion of Mission Bay right here, and below.
And oh, here’s SFPark.info website, written by people who don’t approve of the worst aspects of the SFMTA and SFPark (or whatever they’re calling it these days.)
All right, now back to the official stuff. Uh, and in case you don’t know it, SFMTA, you suck – more proof of this is that your website has “insecure content.” [UPDATE: Good job, MUNI! You took care of that. Someday, you'll get the hang of the whole "Internet" thing.]
Or so they say:
In closing, MUNI sucks!
The public is invited to join the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) at our second Mission Bay parking planning community meeting. We will discuss the revised plans for parking management in the neighborhood and gather public input. As Mission Bay evolves, we need to ensure that everyone on the road—cars, buses, bicycles, and pedestrians—can travel safely and smoothly.
The SFMTA seeks public input on the following:
During the open house section of the meeting, attendees can review plan details, talk directly with project planners, and submit written feedback. The public comment period follows.
Please feel free to email us if you have any questions about the location or the project.
All right, let’s see here, by the numbers:
1. “Parking Availability” – What this means is that the SFMTA is taking money from the Feds to put in new parking meters and raise prices on existing meters.
2. “Pricing” - What this means is that the SFMTA is taking money from the Feds to put in new parking meters and raise prices on existing meters.
Does that about cover it?
Click to expand
Imagine if you will an organization called, I don’t know, how about SFFOOD.ORG? And instead of its former policy of giving away food for free for the most part but also charging a little bit of money to some people, it decided to give away a smaller amount of free food and then charge a lot of money to more people. And then imagine that if SFFOOD knew you were really hungry, then it’d charge you even more. And then imagine that its slogan would be “Food Availability & Pricing.”
And then imagine they made some bullshit website about how much happier you’ll be spending less time waiting for food you now have to pay for. (You know who values convenience over money? Rich people, that’s who.)
Hello, SFMTA? It’s me, Margaret. The Internet called – it wants its URLs back. Don’t you already have a website, SFMTA? So why do you need a different one for every project you do? Like the CultureBus – you had a special website for that too, right? (Until you lost interest in it…)
And aren’t we going to pay back the Feds the $20,000,000 “grant” or whatever they’re loaning us to pay for the new meters (and bullshit website) from the new revenue? (That’s my understanding – disabuse me of that notion if you wish.)
Hey SFMTA, why don’t you just be straight and tell drivers that they’re just going to have to pay more for parking, just tell them that their free ride is over? Why don’t you tell people that it’s impractical to make them put 72 quarters per hour into a meter so that’s why you want to use credit and debit cards and whatnot?
And why does every policy from the SFMTA have to be advertised as a win-win for all concerned?
Why does the worst-run agency in San Francisco have to be so Orwellian?
Oh, and here’s the kicker:
“After the SFpark pilot phase is complete in the summer of 2012, SFpark will evaluate the effectiveness of the project and prepare a proposal for expanding SFpark across the City for the SFMTA Board to consider after public outreach.”
Can you see those Godforsaken souls way out there at 46th and Kirkham feeding the kitty for them to park their cars in front of their houses?
I mean, what’s stopping San Mateo from putting up their own tollbooths? Or charging a per-capita two dollar fee for all BART riders coming into Daly City Station as compensation for us taking up all their space and breathing all their air?
Just sayin, bro.
These guys with the flashlights at night on Post Street (and other places about town) provide the questionable “service” of pointing out where empty parking spaces are. They’ll guide you in and then expect compensation of an undefined amount.
This casual parking program is certainly cheaper than SFPark, cause, you know, that’s going to add up when we start paying back the Feds the eight figures they’re fronting for all those sensors on the ground.
However, the flashlight people are even more patronizing than the people that made the SFPark marketing materials, because they don’t do anything. I mean, if you’re looking for parking, how could you miss these spaces plain as day?
Click to expand