Residents in the Mission, Dogpatch, Bernal Heights fight predatory parking policy
 |
The Townsend Street meter project is a perfect example of bureaucratic waste: millions wasted to stripe, sign and install meters on the 300- 400- and 500-blocks of Townsend and NO ONE parks there anymore, unless they have a handicap placard. |
A coalition of residents in the Mission, Dogpatch, Potrero Hill and Mission Bay have launched a website to protest the SFpark program:
Residents across San Francisco are saying that the SFpark Experiment is an EPIC FAILURE, run by a $20M grant from the federal government, it has no oversight, and has done little outreach to find out what businesses and residents need for parking in their community.
It's clear that SFpark doesn't have a clue about the community which it is serving planting meters all over the city in an attempt to "regulate parking" that in many areas doesn't need regulating.
People in the neighborhoods are already paying property taxes, business taxes, vehicle license fees, sales taxes (SFCTA brings in $70-$80 million a year in sales taxes for city transportation projects) gas taxes, residential parking fees, and, if they're unlucky or careless, parking tickets.
This is a transparent attempt to raise taxes on citizens to support over EIGHT THOUSAND City employees making over $100,000 a year under the guise of “going green.”
A previous post on the issue
The Dogpatch Howler
Mission Local's excellent coverage
Labels: Anti-Car, City Government, Neighborhoods, Parking, Predatory City
posted by Rob Anderson @ 11:08 AM
9 comments
9 Comments:
"FIX THE MUNI"
Really? THE MUNI? What are these people, 5 years old?
So much wrong with this:
$3.50/gal used for "math" of driving vs Caltrain. Keep dreaming.
"CalTrain is hanging by a fiscal thread already"
Yes, but trains are standing room only during commute hours. Needs dedicated funding, not park'n'ride passengers.
"Job Killing"
Zenga is right off Townsend and is thriving. Metering has nothing to do with those buildings being empty.
NO ONE parked there before, unless they have a RV they were living in.
It used to be packed along Townsend, with art students' vans, and little old RVs, tour company vehicles and the like. I will say that it's pretty empty a lot of the time these days (I go through there twice a day, 5-6 days a week), and the city should lower the cost until it gets busier, since that's how the system is supposed to work.
First, the 400- and 500- blocks of Townsend aren't even in the SFPark program. The 300- block is in SFPark, but is listed as "insufficient data" on the website, presumably because it's new. When the next adjustment happens, we'll be able to see if it's really empty, and if the price will drop.
That said, the neighboring block of 200 Townsend is around 65% occupancy at $3+ per hour, so it's not exactly empty, and it seems unlikely that 300 will be, either, once the data is in.
That said, there's no reason why every new meter shouldn't start at 25c an hour, and gradually rise to equilibrium. It would surely make for much better PR. I guess that SFPark is still officially a 'pilot' program, so not every new meter is automatically included.
Incidentally, there are a number of blocks which now have meters at $1 or less, including one at 25c.
I love that Rob hasn't responded to any comments, a true sign that he is full of shit.
Because the folks in Dogpatch and Portrero are responsible for the post and the website it's based on, moron, which means you're both stupid and chickenshit for being anonymous.
So, Rob, does that mean you don't have anything to say?
I say that installing parking meters in the neighborhoods is bad public policy designed to raise money for a improvident, wasteful city government and should be resisted.
Post a Comment
<< Home