-
-
-
Follow Streetsblog
Recently Posted Jobs
- Design Intern (Part-Time), Yesterday
- Campaign Manager, 2 weeks ago
- Policy and Government Affairs Manager, 2 weeks ago
- Field Director, 4 weeks ago
- Designing Cities Fellow, 6 weeks ago
Word On The Street
“So sad for the victim. So disgusted at the response and at a general culture that encourages drivers to be aloof and oblivious.”
– bicicletera In response to "Man on Bike Killed by Garbage Truck Driver at 16th and South Van Ness"
-
-
Recent Comments
Hot Topics
EYES ON THE STREET
Contribute to Streetsblog San Francisco
Email tips@sf.streetsblog.org or send them anonymously. Tag your photos, links, and videos with "streetsblog".
Calendar
- Sunday, May 26
- 8:30 amTour de Marin
- 10:00 amSFBC Rec Ride: Tour du Fromage
- Tuesday, May 28
- Wednesday, May 29
- Thursday, May 30
- Sunday, May 26
Archived Articles
Categories
Blogroll
Copyright Notice
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Jim Frank
This is great! Better boarding islands and more housing located near transit.
The whole area on Ocean south of Phelan has improved so much in the past few years. Great sidewalks and shops, improved crosswalks and LRV tracks. This the fruition of years and years of planning: the Balboa Park EIR which increased bldg. heights along the corridor, a new ocean street entrance to the BART Station, better bike and pedestrian access to the station.
Now let’s see a BRT on Geneva all the way down to Visitation Valley to meet up with the T-Third.
in response to Revamped Muni Bus Loop Opens at City College Ocean Campus
Ryan Brady
It’d have to move occasionally. You can be cited for leaving a vehicle in the same place for more than 72 hours in San Francisco.
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
mikesonn
I look forward to my cut since the city feels the need to put my life in danger for several parking spaces, figure they can at least contribute to my life insurance fund.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
That’s what I was trying to get at, Mario. The story is usually framed as the SFMTA against people who “need” to park, but it’s very probable that what SFMTA is doing by adding parking meters is HELPING to make driving easier.
And as far as replacing meter revenue goes, if they can’t eat the cost for one month (and be a little bit more in the red than they otherwise would be) they could probably get the auto industry, local or national, to underwrite it (Audi sponsored the Powell Street Promenade, after all).
Basically, this fight over parking meters is exhausting– and I’m not even sure it will result in more livable streets. A trial like this could give everyone a new perspective and help us move on to more important issues.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
voltairesmistress
Same. A friend created an art studio for drawing and painting in a classic refurbished camper. He then parked it on various streets and did his art there, while renting a room elsewhere. He would move the van every couple of days. His only problem was neighbors who would vandalize the van out of resentment. Another acquaintance lives in his van and holds down a job with working class wages — almost only way for him to live and work in San Francisco.at that wage level. Frankly, I think these arrangements are inevitable though rare, since most people want to live in more conventional ways. Like all such arrangements on the margins, they work as long as they are relatively rare and flying beneath the radar. Otherwise, others’ desire for order, rules, convention, and just plain resentment lead to their expulsion.
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
Mario Tanev
In truth, they may not notice either way. Drivers account for only 15% of their clientele and they don’t pay much. So if meters are removed, business will probably drop a bit, but maybe not enough to make it hurt. Probably more people will be induced to take public transit or walk.
In fact, as smart as SFPark is, and despite some benefits of reducing circling and dispersing parking demand geographically, any improvement to parking may lead to more drivers, since regardless the price, on street parking is still pretty cheap.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Andy Chow
http://www.californiacityfinance.com/Votes1211final.pdf
My feeling is that unless there’s some sort of self control (which I don’t think there will be), the cities and local authorities eventually will have such a high tax rate that there would be some kind of Prop 13 revolt. Right now voters are passing taxes 1/2 cent here and a quarter cent there but they add up. Once the cities and local authorities are out of their budget hole in a couple of years I think the sentiment will change.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
Hey, I know one Olympic bike racer who was able to pursue her dream by living in an RV in someone’s driveway. Lots of quality people get by living in vehicles on the street. I am not advocating a van-based B&B, though.
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
murphstahoe
Sometimes taxes fail but more often than not they pass.
Would you like to give a citation? Doubtful – as your assertion is patently false.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Andy Chow
In the Bay Area most of us are pretty comfortable raising taxes for a lot of things. Sometimes taxes fail but more often than not they pass.
I do not agree with the idea of spending a lot of money to get things done (that’s why I advocate for Caltrain and against BART expansions). But the general mindset for voters is that unless the project causes some serious impact on them (like original high speed rail through Peninsula), spending and building more is fine.
In a more political conservative areas, transit spending will get more scrutiny but highway expansion will still get the pass.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Lenguist
San Jose Avenue & Day Street. The long blank wall of the back of the Safeway has provided cover for all sorts of unsavory activities over the years. Took us forever to get street sweeping on this block to provide a little turnover.
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
Anonymous
I think one of my neighbors has been doing this for a while. Nice big RV parked in front of his house. Often, it has a power cable running to it from inside.
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
voltairesmistress
This would be great on Polk Street and surrounding streets. They are hostile to the SFMTA. See how much the merchants like catering to car-bound customers then when left to an unregulated environment.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
voltairesmistress
“The city is actually starting to shoo out RVs with overnight parking restrictions
on large vehicles, but only because they’re encroaching upon car-owning
residents, who are apparently more entitled to store their vehicles in
that space than homeless people are.”
Thank you, Aaron, for calling out this hypocrisy for what it is.
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
murphstahoe
they will choose building a subway because it doesn’t require any sacrifice
Then they are complete idiots, to not understand that the subway (or freeway or bay bridge) is paid for with their tax dollars. Which is par for the course. The only thing that is apparently paid for with tax dollars is “things I don’t like” whereas “things I like” are paid for with magic fairy dust.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
KillMoto
Bloody brilliant.
I wonder if the trivial cost of a local parking sticker plus a registration and an old (possibly inoperative) panel van would be less than a storage unit. I can have like 300 cubic feet of storage, right outside my place, all for a very low fixed cost. To hell with drivers – without a per hour cost for curbside parking, Ima gonna git me some (nearly) free storage!
in response to How to Turn a Free Parking Space Into a Subsidized Hotel
Ted King
This is a welcome change for those riders who could take either the 8X or the 43. Now the stops are adjacent to each other which permits an easy flip-flop depending on which one is next to depart.
I’m a CCSF alumnus who’s ridden through the Ocean and Phelan intersection many times. Innumerable times while waiting for an 8X (or its predecessor the 15) I winced at the sight of a 43 rolling by a block away heading towards a stop near my destination.
in response to Revamped Muni Bus Loop Opens at City College Ocean Campus
Andy Chow
The fact is that most politically liberal/progressive folks drive and that many will not buy the “market based” (politically conservative) sentiment towards automobiles. In fact if given a serious choice (like building a subway line to deliver fast transit with little to no sacrifice to auto access and capacity), they will choose building a subway because it doesn’t require any sacrifice and it would bring jobs, jobs, jobs.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
mikesonn
That makes no sense at all.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Andy Chow
On the other hand you have people waiting on the sides of freeway to wait a couple of minutes to cross the bridge and save $2.
The traditional progressive thought is that the society shouldn’t be nickel and dime people. So charging for parking is a conservative thought. On the same line, would you support getting rid of the fast pass and instead Muni deduct each fare for each boarding from Clipper (assuming that the one way fare would be lowered to offset the loss of pass)? That way people no longer have to rush to buy a pass each month and can save money by not riding Muni some of the times.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
It’s no use. This group would rather moralize and feel superior than get creative and actually accomplish something.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
That’s why you buy them off by cutting them in on a share of the revenue stream.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
Not actually — the city put in the trees and then years later decided it wasn’t going to maintain them.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
lulz, have you been in a critical mass before? It’s not a tour highlighting how terrible our infrastructure is and how stressful it is to bike most days. It’s about the experience of taking back the streets and that IS transformative, even though it’s temporary.
Now I do think cm has its problems and pedestrians are often given the short end of the stick, but it’s a really neat experience to bike with hundreds or thousands of people. Here’s an interview about it from January if you’re interested:
http://www.againstthegrain.org/program/650/tues-11513-critical-mass
The history is that without critical mass the sfbc would still be a small marginal voice and not the 12,000 member org that it is today. I’m not saying that’s true, but that’s the story that gets told.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
voltairesmistress
If it takes a cm ride to create a transformative experience, that rider has not spent any time on the streets. Simply riding most days will convert most of us into advocates. The attendant dangers do that.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
voltairesmistress
Jim, cm rider collided with this pedestrian on a church st sidewalk. In my 44 years of riding I have not seen one positive gain from critical mass. Have, however, seen much gain from other bike and ped activism. So, no, I don’t attribute any political results to cm hooliganism that I have witnessed.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
voltairesmistress
The supervisors’ false populism may be heart-felt but it is ignorant. I see no alternative to combatting it except reference to factual studies backed up by vocal constituents who have come to understand economics of parking and street design. It will be a slow but steady change in attitudes. Would help greatly if we could make significant progress in funding tep and viable transit, because drivers rightly see the transit alternative as more irksome than driving and parking.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Sprague
That’s a beautiful idea (especially along the less hilly northern section of the street). Existing garages could be accessed by motor vehicles travelling at walking speeds (as is the case with “Wohnstrassen” in some German language countries).
in response to Separated Bike-Ped Path Coming to Mansell Street in McLaren Park by 2016
mikesonn
All those drivers pushing their way through crowded intersections! Give them an inch and they’ll force their way through throngs of people! Hell, they use to just use Muni when it was trendy, now everyone wants the latest Prius. It is just fad.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
John Stechschulte
That doesn’t surprise me–they’ve already crystallized on their position, and I don’t expect them to be willing to compromise.
It’s not the angry extreme who shows up at hearings who needs to be won over. It’s the vast middle who might lean one way or the other, but is open to reason.
Besides, SFpark is already running in some areas. If some form of local benefits were implemented in those areas, eventually the results might speak for themselves.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Greg
If you leave even inches between your car and the curb, bikers will go there – even if their right foot is walking on the sidewalk as they bike past you – then they smash your car for daring to not leave them enough room to pass on the right. They do this at intersections both where there is an official bike lane and where there isn’t. At many intersections it’s impossible to get your car really close to the curb to physically block out bikers from passing on the right – of course you should try and get as close as you can – but if you leave even a couple feet, they will pass you on the right. Some really foolish bikers out there. We are now dealing with the bandwagon folks people. They are biking now because it’s trendy. They use to drive an SUV because that was trendy.
in response to SFMTA Drops Protected Bike Lane Proposals for Most of Polk Street
MrEricSir
The idea that SFMTA would take actions based on the result of a study is pretty funny.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
mikesonn
Can’t reason with people who don’t want to reason.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
murphstahoe
What I favor is spending a portion of the parking revenue on
well-defined local projects like repairing and cleaning sidewalks,
planting street trees, burying power lines, funding extra police
presence, etc.
This concept was part of the discussion on evening metering, and the opponents of metering summarily dismissed it.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
John Stechschulte
So, the original poster suggested that some of the money be returned to local property owners. That’s not quite what I’m in favor of. What I favor is spending a portion of the parking revenue on well-defined local projects like repairing and cleaning sidewalks, planting street trees, burying power lines, funding extra police presence, etc.
Even better, define neighborhood groups who get to determine how their share of parking revenue will be spent in their neighborhood. Many cities already have neighborhood improvement districts. Use parking revenue to build community and build infrastructure.
It’s the residents who benefit, not the property owners.
The idea is not that the property owners also own their streets and should get a cut of the revenue, but that the person who chooses to store their vehicle in a particular neighborhood should contribute to the upkeep of that neighborhood.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
Just saying something is politically expedient or good policy doesn’t make it so. Assuming that property/home owners (kind of different) are the most powerful political force in SF shows how little you’ve been involved in politics here.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
What SF are you talking about? The SF I live in is composed of mostly renters and the areas where there are more homeowners are not really commercial mixed-use areas being considered for expanding parking meters. What would it matter if my landlord (who lives in Oakland) were to get some money from a meter that was installed in front of our building? Do you think he cares about a few hundred a year from the meter when the total rent he’s getting from the building is likely $100,000+? He doesn’t even get to vote in SF elections.
I think there are benefits to getting driver buy in with keeping the money invested in that area, but since SF is a rather small city, I think the argument to invest the money city wide makes more sense. If the money was being used in Livermore it’d be a different story.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
Attached is what I see when I click on your link.
in response to Today's Headlines
mikesonn
Exactly!
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
mikesonn
Worked for me.
in response to Today's Headlines
Anonymous
The link works, but the article is behind the paywall.
in response to Today's Headlines
John Stechschulte
I’m not saying it’s fair or right. I’m saying it’s politically expedient, and will lead to better parking policy throughout the city sooner. You’ll have people clamoring to get SFpark in their neighborhood, so that their sidewalks can be repaired and cleaned and their electric lines can be put underground etc.
Also, parking in some areas is in high demand because the local businesses are very successful at attracting customers. If their parking rates are going to be higher because they’re successful, maybe it *is* fair for some of that revenue to stay in the neighborhood.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Anonymous
There’s a big difference in reinvesting parking meter funds into the city’s transportation budget and giving it to residents. The latter not only doesn’t improve transportation, it advances the belief that the residents have ownership of the street in front of their homes.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
murphstahoe
http://healdsburg.patch.com/articles/healdsburg-a-bump-in-the-road-for-bicycle-coalition-s-vulnerable-user-ordinance
in response to Today's Headlines
Jake Wegmann
One more thought: you can try to fight the fact that homeowners feel some degree of control and ownership over what happens in the parking spaces in front of their house and on their street. But you will lose. Even in progressive SF, homeowners are the most powerful political force there is.
As for me, I’d rather get some good policies done rather than be a purist.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
dat
If only we had space in our garage that WASN’T filled with bicycles…
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Jake Wegmann
But it’s politically savvy. It creates a brand new constituency in favor of parking pricing and blunts the opposition from the group of people most likely to fight it. It changes the dynamic — no amount of people like us going on and on about sustainable cities and so forth is going to do that. I think that it’s very, very difficult, maybe impossible, politically to take goodies away from people, especially in a city with as many entitled people as SF.
P_chazz’s idea is essentially what Donald Shoup recommends, although he recommends pooling a cut of the parking revenue and then spending it on items that improve the neighborhood. How ’bout undergrounding some utility lines or planting some trees?
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Ryan Brady
What is this, Monopoly?
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
Karen Lynn Allen
Realized this (with horror) about 2 seconds after I posted. Thanks goodness for Disqus edit function.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF
murphstahoe
It’s amusing how allergic people can be to paying for parking (which would save them time by making parking so much more available) but the toll lanes on 237 are wildly popular to people willing to pay more to escape traffic and save time.
in response to Supes Farrell and Cohen Have Yet to Grasp Why Free Parking Hurts SF