A handful of San Francisco’s curbside parking meters will hit the $5.25 mark for the first time as the city continues its quest to find the sweet spot for pricing.
The Municipal Transportation Agency announced the seventh parking-rate adjustment under the experimental SFpark program, which attempts to manage parking with meter rates. The goal is to set the price so there’s approximately one parking spot always available on every metered block. The cost is adjusted based on demand…
The meter rates aren’t the only things changing. So are the parking policies. The agency plans to expand meter operations into the night around the Giants‘ China Basin ballpark, and starting citywide on Jan. 1, drivers will have to start plugging the meters on Sundays…(more)
“The most the city will be able to charge under the SFpark program is $6 an hour, unless there’s a special event, such as a ballgame or street fair. The cap for those times has been set at $18 an hour.”
How much is too much? The voters may have reached their limit. This could be a hot ticket item for debate among the District Supervisor hopefuls who are running for election.
Petitions to stop these action are in the final stages of development. Follow this blog for updates.
I just received a ticket on Howard between Steuart and The Embarcadero on the South side of the street (the ballpark side). It was for 7.2.25 Red Zone and the fine is $98. There used to be meters here and they suddenly took them away. I was just assuming that they were changing the meters to the new, hungrier meters and that I happened to catch a free day. Much to my chagrin, that was not the case. I cannot figure out why it was for a red zone. How do I contest this and have half a chance at winning? Will they just say, “We’re right, you’re wrong, pay the money, MUNI needs a new pair of shoes”?…
Remember the 100-foot rule?… And lastly, it makes no logical sense to take these spots away…It doesn’t seem fair, and it makes interpreting the traffic laws like a game of TEGWAR (The exciting game without any rules)…
By James Brasuell :la.curbed – excerpt – to comment hit the quote
The American Planning Association has made surprise objections to AB 904, a state bill that would lower parking minimums for housing and commercial projects adjacent to transit. An updated version of last year’s AB 710, which failed to pass the State Senate, AB 904 appears to be an urban planner’s dream come true: the bill would require cities to reduce parking requirements in transit-rich neighborhoods in the hopes of lowering the cost of construction and making housing and commercial buildings easier to build in areas served by public transit..
Last year’s AB 710 died because of opposition from affordable housing advocates and the League of California Cities; the latter has already expressed opposition to the new version of the bill because it “prohibit(s) communities from determining the level of sufficient parking appropriate for their neighborhoods.”…
B 904 already passed the Assembly in January, with a unanimous vote. The bill is expected to appear before the Senate Governance and Finance Committee on June 27. If you want to bone up on the issue ahead of the next round of hearings, the California Infill Builders Association has posted an FAQ sheet about the bill on its website (pdf)..
It is time for the voters who opposed the anti-car attitude to speak up and stop this madness. The breakdown in BART last week brought most of us to a rude awakening that we cannot rely on pubic transit for all our needs. When one system goes down they are all impacted. We need a balanced transit plan that includes cars and parking spaces.
Americans want the freedom liberty that comes with owning a car. See some of our reasons why and take action to protect your rights.
Oh, and also to speed up the 21 Hayes bus.
Oh, and also to make local homeowners happy. Well, to make some of them happy anyway.
Check it, the stops near Central Avenue,* Broderick, and Scott are all on the chopping block: