Posts Tagged ‘sf park’

The Legacy of SFPark: Scores of Unused Parking Spaces at New, Federally-Subsidized Meters

Tuesday, July 23rd, 2013

[UPDATE: Confession time - I've never used a "smart" parking meter, so I don't know what they look like. I know the SFPark meters have blue stickers on the sides, that's about it. So the new meters depicted below are not SFPark meters and, ergo, they were not advertised as being "good for all drivers." Anyway, read the comments to see my error.]

So SFPark is “good for all drivers?”

Perhaps for some, but not for those who used to park here, in the project-y Western Addition.

Turk on a weekday:

Click to expand

Hey SFPark/SFMTA/DPT/MUNI, why not try market-rate pricing instead?

You know, pricing lower than what you’re charging now.

Just asking…

Oh, and is SFPark good for federal taxpayers?

Discuss.

Oh and is the Central Subway good for federal taxpayers?

Discuss that too, if you want…

DPT SFPark Fail: Expensive Sensors “Bedeviled by Electromagnetic Interference from Overhead Trolley Lines” per NYT

Wednesday, December 26th, 2012

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.”

Heh.

Click to expand

And the Leader of the Great SoMA Mission Bay Dogpatch SFPark Parking Revolt is Now… Supervisor Jane Kim?

Wednesday, July 18th, 2012

Apparently:

 “People should have to pay for parking. I’m just wondering if there is a less punitive way of doing it for residents,” she said. “I was hoping for more thoughtful alternatives.”

Well that’s Phase 1 – it’s a start.

Phase 2 just might be Direct Action, taking it to the streets to pull up the infernal SFPark meters up by their very roots.

Like this. Achtung, Baby!

Click to expand

Until that time, the Revolution will continue to be led by Meter Madness and the SFPark.info.

In struggle…

1 PETITIONS

They’re Ba-aaack! The SFMTA Tries to Impose SFPark on Mission Bay Once Again – Plus SFPark.info Website

Friday, May 25th, 2012

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!

“Mission Bay parking planning community meeting – Saturday, June 16

Posted on 05.25.12 in AnnouncementsParking Planning|Share:Bookmark and Share

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.

Mission Bay parking planning community meeting 
Mission Creek Park Pavilion, 290 Channel Street, one block west of 4th and Channel Streets
Saturday, June 16
3-3:30 p.m. – Open House
3:30-4:30 p.m. – Public Comments (sign up by 3:20 p.m.)

The SFMTA seeks public input on the following:

  • Special event pricing to better manage parking demand during large events like Giants games and reduce congestion.
  • Extended meter hours to open up evening parking, particularly during evening games. This is separate from the SFMTA’s citywide Sunday metering proposal.
  • New meter installation schedule for meters approved in 2002, which will have SFpark demand-responsive pricing to ensure an optimum level of open parking spaces as Mission Bay grows.

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.

CLICK HERE to learn more about Mission Bay parking planning
CLICK HERE for directions to the meeting venue, including nearby public transit

Please feel free to email us if you have any questions about the location or the project.

You can also stay up to date via Twitter and Facebook.”

Federal Workers Elect to Not Participate in San Francisco’s New “Market Pricing” Parking Scheme

Monday, April 16th, 2012

See? The Feds park at meters all the live-long day, but they never pay nothing.

Click to expand

Oh well.

 

San Francisco’s SFPark is Nothing But a Big FU to the 99% – Here’s Why Rich People Love the SFMTA’s New Program

Wednesday, February 15th, 2012

Do you know how long you can park at these new SFPark meters? Like four hours, baby. Just pop in your credit card.

Do you know who appreciates that? Rich people, the demographically-desirable who drive BMW’s and Mercedes Benzeseses.

Here’s five in a row. Thanks SFPARK!

Click to expand

Here’s an exercise. Just as you can add “in bed” to your fortune cookie message, you can append the phrase “FOR RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS” to any statement from the horrible SFPark people from the horrible SFMTA. Like this:

“SFMTA established SFpark to use new technologies and policies to improve parking in San Francisco FOR RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS. Reducing traffic by helping RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS find parking benefits RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS. More parking availability makes streets less congested FOR RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS. Meters that accept credit and debit cards FROM RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS reduce frustration and parking citations FOR RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS. With SFpark, RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS can all circle less and live more.

SFpark works by collecting and distributing real-time information about where parking is available so RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS can quickly find open spaces.

To help achieve the right level of parking availability FOR RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS, SFpark periodically adjusts meter and garage pricing up and down to match demand FROM RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS. Demand-responsive pricing encourages drivers to park in underused areas and garages, reducing demand (FROM POOR PEOPLE, THE 99%, THOSE FUCKERS) in overused (OVERUSED BY WHOM? BY POOR PEOPLE, THE 99%, THOSE FUCKERS) areas.

Through SFpark, real-time data and demand-responsive pricing work together to readjust parking patterns in the City so that parking is easier to find FOR RICH PEOPLE WITH MERCEDES AND BMW CARS”

On It Goes…

SFPark: “Let us “manage” your parking the same way we manage MUNI!”

SFPark: “Parking meters everywhere (eventually, including the entire Sunset District!) and for all (except for the specific whites of Pacific Heights). Hurray!”

I Love Big Brother: SFPARK.ORG Goes Full Orwell with Slogan: “Parking Availability & Pricing” – WTFSFMTA?

Thursday, June 30th, 2011

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.)

Do you see why your bullshit initiatives are met with deep skepticism?

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?

SFMTAWTF?

SFPark Has Some Competition – These Fellows with Flashlights Will Tell You Where You Can Park

Thursday, August 19th, 2010

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

Oh well.

GoogleCache Reveals SFPark Program No Longer Promising That “Drivers Will Love SFPark”

Friday, August 6th, 2010

Remember back in the day, back when the SFPark website promised that “Drivers will love SFPark?” Well, I do, and so does the Google Cache, at least it does for now.

Anyway, below you can see the old SFPark homepage, the one that was up until just recently. (The word “love” is highlighted because that’s the search term I used to find it in the cache.) Click to expand:

Even without the highlighting, that phrase stood out as a boner. Why, for instance, would drivers “love” an extra 5000 parking meters on spaces that are currently free? How on Earth do drivers, in general, “benefit” from that?

But, as stated, that love language is gone now, so that’s a good thing. What’s left is a patronizing, cartoonish website with a patronizing, cartoonish video that talks about how a third of traffic (or something) in San Francisco is made up of people looking for parking.  That, of course, is fucking absurd. I’m sure that stat, employed using the passive voice, if you’d note, might be operational in Chinatown during New Year’s or in North Beach on any given Friday night, but otherwise, it’s fucking absurd.

And do people really all turn into agitated George Costanzas when they park, all raging at the machine? That’s what it’s like, IRL? Really? I’ll bet if you asked what people were thinking about when they’re parking you’d get all kinds of different answers.

But what about these despondent folks waiting for a #5 Fulton for an excessively long time? Could MUNI make a “whimsical video” about what’s on their minds?

(How about a dozen “MUNI sucks” thought bubbles? That would fit the bill.)

The primary beneficiaries of SFPark are those who make money directly off of the program- that includes people making the parking meters, people making commish off of selling the parking meters, people who design the cartoonish website, graphic designers, PR types, people like that. It was the same thing with MUNI’s Culturebus- these types of people make their money whether or not a program succeeds, whether or not a program lives on.

Basically, SFPark will allow the City to collect more money from parking meters. That’s good for some and it’s not good for others. It would be refreshing if the people at SFPark would acknowledge that. Why do they spend so much effort selling a program that’s already a done deal?

SFPark will allow the City to charge up to $18 per hour. That’s something that would be physically impossible with the typical, old-school, non-debit card meters that we’re used to dealing with. Can you imagine putting 72 quarters into a meter to park for one hour? (How often would it have to get emptied?)

Not that it’s not worth it for people to pay $18 per hour to park sometimes. I’m sure that there are lots who would love to pay whatever it takes to park on Columbus right in frontof their restaurant in North Beach on a Saturday night. The problem is that SFPark is going to charge $0 per hour to park in North Beach after 6:00 PM, AFAIK. So does that make sense?

But if  Uncle Sucker wants to pay us eight figures to set up this system, that’s its choice.  

Obviously, there will be winners and losers whenever a government institutes a new program like this, so it’d be nice not to have such a pollyannish, snow-job website.

Anyway, losing the “love” language is a slight improvement, so hurray for that.