who wants sun in justin herman plaza anyways? eating lunch outside is so overrated.

So, the lowest "average" transportation cost is $7,460? I could see how if I was dropping $350-$400/mo on a brand new car, possibly paying for some parking, I could blow that kind of money on a car in a year. But, that seems pretty darn high to me.

Especially if you consider there are a lot of young people, college students, seniors and hippies living in San Francisco, tooling around on $45/mo Muni passes, I just don't see how this study has any credibility whatever, unless it is somehow adding the government's cost and dividing that up per capita . . .

Even then, if you look at a per-capita GDP of around $42k in California, spending 1/8 of that on transportation within an urban infrastructure sounds reasonable enough to me. That the cost-effectiveness of transportation infrastructure in rural areas crawls past 1/4 per-capita GDP, likely requiring subsidy from urban taxpayers, is hardly a shocker or a new idea.

But it would be nice to clarify just what costs we are talking about here.

Sincerely,
-daniel

A parochial issue? The same workers who depend on public transportation day and in unsafe night are struggling with an employer who is gouging them for healthcare coverage. A parochial issue? I'd say a national issue. As are transit issues as well.

Can we have a little class analysis here, even though it's uncomfortable to think about these things and is not as straightforward as advocating for the bike lanes and other changes that are so important as well?

Thank you Ms. Taylor for your thoughtful blog.

i hate democracy, too.

The program proves that there's tons more revenue available in parking if you are willing to charge market rates.

the program 'proved' what everyone already knew -- parking is vastly underpriced all over america. i suppose i could go jump off the Golden Gate Bridge and 'prove' gravity, too.

there are cities and towns all over america who are doing performance parking, and they've done it without engaging in criminal conspiracies to transfer taxpayer money to private investors. this is not rocket science. no private investors were necessary, no crimes were necessary.

But on the other hand, the City has now given away all control (and potential revenues) for a generation

is that was 75 years is? a generation? are we Vulcans?

There is something to be said for the profit motive

no. no, there is not. it's one of the most corrupting influences in society, and we shouldn't tolerate it.

If a good infiltration base is laid with adequate gap space then these will certainly function better than the alternative. Another benefit is that the presence and proper use of these features can reduce the need for salt by creating a gradient for the melting water to flow into the planters.

If a city were to combine this with porous paving for pathways and streets [also have been tested for icy conditions in Wisconsin -see: The Wisconsin Asphalt Pavement Association (www.wispave.org porous asphalt mix design specifications) and the Wisconsin Ready Mixed Concrete Association (www.wrmca.com list of pervious concrete contractors). FilterPave (www.filterpave.com), porous pavement made from recycled glass was laid in Baraboo at The International Crane refuge walking paths and observation areas.] salt application can also be significantly reduced because there will not be any standing water to freeze and create dangerous conditions.

Also, still in accordance with piling regulations, the planter sites would be well suited for piling snow because it will allow for faster infiltration and reduces the burden on storm sewers.

Hope this provides a good starting point.

Politicians are experts at public opinion, business people are experts at perceived value.

Congestion pricing, anyone? Yet another aspect of driving that is ridiculously underpriced! It's funny how vehemently anti-socialist this country can be, but driving seems to be subsidized more heavily than just about any other institution.

I hope that line goes somewhere else as well or I suspect their dreams of growth are going to go nowhere just like the line.

The program proves that there's tons more revenue available in parking if you are willing to charge market rates. It also proves that politicians are completely incompetent at maximizing the revenue and valuing parking meters. Morgan Stanley was able to increase revenue over 50% in 1 year. We should sign them up in San Francisco, without them we'll getting parking meter rates changed when hell freezes over. We just need to work out a better deal.

The project seems like a total success to me.

i agree completely.

i wish these liberals would just stop their bellyaching. if it wasn't for the magnanimous Mr. Daley and his beneficent partners, Morgan Stanley, the taxpayers of Chicago would never have known that they were sitting on a gold mine. and think, they'll be able to start captializing on that gold mine in a short 75 years -- that's only 3+ generations -- their great great grandkids will regain control of the parking meters. sheesh -- you'd think a polite 'thank you' was in order. guess not.

in other news, i think a Streetsblog Chicago could have stopped this crime from happening. where art thou, oh Streetsbloggeth of Chicagoeth???