50 More On-Street Car-Share Spaces Proposed — Support One Near You

About 50 on-street car-share parking spaces could be approved at an SFMTA engineering hearing tomorrow. That’s your chance to write in, or show up at City Hall, to support a smart move by the SFMTA: placing car-share vehicles in convenient locations citywide, and putting everyone within easy reach of this alternative to car ownership.

An on-street City CarShare spot in Bayview. Photo: City CarShare/Twitter

The 50 locations are the first set of 900 on-street car-share spots planned by the SFMTA, following a successful pilot program of 12 spaces around the city. The on-street expansion was originally set to start rolling out last September, but was delayed for unknown reasons. The spaces will be used by City CarShare, Zipcar, and Getaround, and the SFMTA plans to have 450 available by the summer.

Reserving curbside parking spaces for exclusive use by car-share puts shared vehicles closer to more residents, making the service more convenient. Until now, car-share organizations have generally only been able to procure reserved spaces in off-street parking lots or garages, or at paved-over sites like gas stations that are often prime sites for redevelopment.

The SFMTA’s car-sharing policy document [PDF] cites a 2010 nationwide study which found that every car-share vehicle replaces as many as 13 private automobiles. Some auto owners who don’t drive often give up the hassle of car ownership (or second car ownership) after joining car-share, while other residents may choose to not buy a car in the first place because car-sharing grants them access to a car.

Nonetheless, there are reports that some neighbors of proposed car-share spots don’t buy the stats, and oppose the reserved spots because they see “their” parking being removed. One merchant at my street corner has a sign posted in her window telling people to oppose two proposed spots nearby, and didn’t seem swayed by my arguments that it would make more parking available. (As a car-share user myself, I know that it stops me from considering buying a car, and thus occupying a parking space.)

Below is the list of proposed locations for on-street car-share, taken from the hearing agenda [PDF]. Comments can be emailed to sustainable.streets@sfmta.com, or you can speak at the hearing on Friday at 10 a.m. in City Hall, Room 416.

14. ESTABLISH – TOW-AWAY NO STOPPING EXCEPT PERMITTED CAR SHARE VEHICLES

A. 9th Avenue, west side, from 11 feet to 33 feet north of Geary Boulevard (22-foot zone removes Post ID #109-03970, for 1 car share parking permit space–C078)

B. Clement Street, north side, from 73 feet to 85 feet west of 24th Avenue (12-foot zone removes Post ID #360-23140 along angled parking space, for 1 car share parking permit space–C097)

C. Gough Street, west side, from 63 feet to 143 feet north of Geary Boulevard (80-foot zone removes Post ID #443-13090, #443-13070, #443-13050, #443-13030, for 4 car share parking permit spaces–C153, C154, G151, G152)

D. Union Street, south side, from 96 feet to 116 feet west of Gough Street (20-foot zone removes Post ID #691-17110, for 1 car share parking permit space–G022)

E. Chestnut Street, north side, from 25 feet to 47 feet west of Avilia Street (22-foot zone removes Post ID #354-22320, for 1 car share parking permit–G130)

F. Euclid Avenue, north side, from 18 feet to 58 feet east Laurel Street (40-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z048 & Z100)

G. Greenwich Street, north side, from Powell Street to 17 feet westerly (2 perpendicular parking spaces, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–C012 & C116)

H. Jones Street, east side, from 15 feet to 37 feet north of Clay Street (22-foot zone, first parking space north of red zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–G013)

I. Jones St, west side, from Washington Street to 37 feet northerly (37-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z064 & Z083)

J. 21st Avenue, east side, from Judah Street to 38 feet southerly (for 2 car share parking permit spaces–C075 & C145)

K. 25th Avenue, west side, from 17 feet to 58 feet north of Noriega Street (41-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z007 & Z112)

L. 20th Ave, west side, from 22 feet to 66 feet south of Irving St (44-foot zone removes Post IDs #120-13030, #120-13050, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z029 & Z116)

M. Fillmore Street, east side, from 9 feet to 29 feet north of Page Street (20-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–G017)

N. Fillmore Street, west side, from Waller Street to 18 feet northerly (18-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–G029)

O. Oak Street, north side, from Central Avenue to 20 feet easterly (20-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–G138)

P. Belvedere Street, west side, from 22 feet to 42 feet south of Haight Street (20-foot zone removes Post ID #329-00030, for 1 car share parking permit space–G148)

Q. Mint Street, south side, 37.5 feet to 53 feet west of Mission Street (15.5-foot zone removes Post ID #567-00865 and #567-00866 along 2 perpendicular parking spaces, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–C025 & C126)

R. Pearl Street, east side, from Market Street to18 feet southerly (for 1 car share parking permit space–C034)

S. South Park Street, north side, from 11 feet to 29 feet west of 2nd Street (18-foot zone removes Post ID #671-00040 and #671-00060, second and third perpendicular metered spaces from 2nd, for 2 car share parking spaces–G062 & G063)

T. Monterey Boulevard, south side, from Detroit Street to 33 feet to 55 feet easterly (22-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–C087)

U. Henry Street, south side, from Sanchez Street to 3 feet to 40 feet westerly (37-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permits–C003 & C109)

V. Elizabeth Street, south side, from Noe Street to 38 feet westerly (for 2 car share parking permit spaces–C056 & C139)

W. Belcher Street, west side, from 14th Street to 20 feet northerly (20-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–G030)

X. Dolores Street, west side, from 30 feet to 52 feet south of 18th Street (22-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–G079)

Y. Sanchez Street, east side, from 3 feet to 16 feet south of 16th Street (13-foot zone, first perpendicular parking space, for 1 car share parking permit space–G144)

Z. Andover Street, east side, from 22 feet to 62 feet south of Cortland Avenue (40-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z071 & Z135)

AA. Palou Avenue, south side, 15 feet to 33 feet west of 3rd Street (18-foot zone, for 1 car share parking permit space–C094)

BB. Newhall Street, west side, from 22 feet to 62 feet north of Egbert Avenue (40-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z018 & Z125)

CC. 20th Street, south side, from 72 feet to 113 feet west of 3rd Street (41-foot zone, for 2 car share parking permit spaces–Z069 & Z145)

DD. 20th Street, south side, from Minnesota Street to 18.5 feet westerly (18.5-foot zone, perpendicular parking space, for two car share parking permits–Z151 & Z152)

  • voltairesmistress

    Hi folks, Please check out the list of 50 first parking spots and support the one closest to your home or workplace, or just click the link above and write in support more generally. Car share is really important to even avowed car owners, because it reduces multiple car households, frees up parking, and reduces the number of short, casual car trips by triggering people to make a choice of biking, transit, or walking for the brief errands.

  • 94103er

    Can anyone comment re whether this might open the city up for Car2Go? I think the one-way rental of cars is a real game-changer, even if I’m generally not a fan of cars.

    In the meantime, It’s a shame that Car2Go doesn’t think it worth diving into other nearby markets like Palo Alto, Oakland, etc. It could really help a lot of people decide to get rid of cars or hold off on buying a second one. My Seattle relatives are a testament to the latter and hopefully I can convince them someday that biking is safe, too.

  • sebra leaves

    This looks like unfair competition among other things. Way to go to convince people to vote to increase their vehicle license fees and give the MTA more money. Good luck with that.

  • voltairesmistress

    Sebra, proponents of cheap driving will find any excuse to explain away the opposition of most drivers to pay their fair share. VLF’s inevitable failure is just another excuse for you to make a specious argument that it’s failure is a rational response to parking policies in SF. The proposed VLF increase is polling at 25% but needs 67% to pass. It is an exercise in futility to attempt to get drivers to pay by choice for the true cost of their car use. Ending the externalized cost of car use has to be imposed by law by representatives weighing public benefit versus individuals’ costs. Allowing policy decisions to be left up to clueless drivers used to pushing their costs onto the general public is no way to further good but painful public policy.

  • coolbabybookworm

    The VLF needs 50.1% to pass, the GO bonds needs 67%

  • 94103er

    Well shoot, that’s just silly and boy does that all smell like politics. It takes little more than intuition to tell me that Car2Go would encourage more use of public transit and maybe even biking, not less. I know that in Seattle people grab a Car2Go car in the morning when they’re in a hurry to get to work and take public transit home. Then the cars get used again for public transit-then-car evenings out. The rental costs are a strong incentive for these one-way trips.

    These are Smart cars, right, so you can fit more of them into tiny parking spaces. I think that’s increasing efficiency, not a blanket assessment that it’s more cars on the road like Reiskin is saying.

    Obviously bike share is better and cheaper but Car2Go is a good option for now for those who can’t dock near a destination or get to a dock from home.

    Scoot Networks (one-way electric scooters) seems to fill this niche for now, at least. But you can’t load a bike into it if you want a free ride back home.

  • murphstahoe

    Unfair competition between what?

  • sebra leaves

    Since when is painful public policy good? And who decides what is good?

  • gneiss

    I would like to see you argue that the ban on smoking in MUNI vehicles is not good public policy, despite the fact that it is inherently painful to the 18% of people who smoke in California.

  • murphstahoe

    Q: “And who decides what is good?”
    A: “The All Powerful Bike Lobby. Kneel before Zod!”

  • voltairesmistress

    Really? I thought all new fees need a 2/3 majority.

  • ABE

    This is a TERRIBLE idea and yet one more assault on the long term residents of San Francisco. Another corporate giveaway by Ed Lee. Giving away Public parking in overcrowded residential neighborhoods. Exempting carshare spaces from Street cleaning violations. This plan is fine for major boulevards and commercial areas. But NOT for residential areas.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Parking Shared Cars Instead of Private Cars Isn’t Exactly “Privatization”

|
The SFMTA’s endeavor to reserve on-street car parking spaces for car-share vehicles has yielded complaints from some car owners who, ironically, decry the “privatization” of space currently used to store private cars. These folks don’t seem to acknowledge the extensive research showing that each car-share vehicle replaces, on average, nine to 13 privately-owned cars. They should […]

SFMTA to Designate Hundreds of Curbside Parking Spots for Car-Sharing

|
Hundreds of on-street parking spaces across the city will be reserved for car-share vehicles starting in September as the SF Municipal Transportation Agency looks to provide more convenient alternatives to owning a car. Following a nearly two-year pilot designating 12 curbside spaces for the non-profit City CarShare, the SFMTA is planning a major expansion [PDF] […]

SFMTA to Test On-Street Car-Share Parking Spaces

|
Car share members in San Francisco could soon be picking up their vehicles from exclusive curbside parking spaces. The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) is launching a pilot program in mid-August to test at least ten on-street car share “pods” as part of its SFPark program. “On-street car sharing pods (i.e., locations where users […]

SFMTA Plans Major Expansion of On-Street Car-Share Parking Spaces

|
Curbside parking spaces reserved for car-share vehicles could become much more widespread in San Francisco under a proposed expansion of the Municipal Transportation Agency’s on-street car-share pilot program early next year. Last August, the SFMTA implemented 12 on-street pilot spaces with the non-profit organization City CarShare. Now the agency is planning an expansion of more than 100 spaces, which […]

Street Parking in SF: Fees for Car-Share, Free for Car Owners

|
With hundreds of on-street parking spaces around San Francisco set to become available for car-share vehicles, the SFMTA plans to charge companies monthly fees for the conversion of curbside spots that are normally free. So while companies like City Car-Share, Zipcar, and Getaround  — which offer services that make it easier for residents to go […]