Clothing Donation Bins Blocking City Parking Space & Meter - SF 311 & DPW Doesn't Care

For the past month, I've been noticing these white donation bins at the corner of Portola and Evelyn.  There used to be just one bin dropped off, but a second one showed-up just a couple of weeks ago.

What's unusual about this is the bins are dumped in a city parking space and in front of a city operated meter.  Since both bins take over a majority of the width of the parking stall, no vehicle can park there, therefore the city cannot generate any money on the meter.

My basic knowledge about these donation bins is they are supposed to be on private property with the permission of the land owner.  But this is on public property and I know the city would not welcome this, especially if its blocking a parking meter that makes money for the SFMTA.  If this bin was in a public metered parking space on Irving Street, you'd get a lot of ticked off people.

Contacting 311

I sent a tweet to San Francisco's 311 with the same photo you see on this blog entry.  I was expecting the city to give a proper response to get those bins removed as soon as they can... But here's the response I got back:

@agentakit As per SF DPW, they don't go out and collect the bins. You can call the 800 numbers on the bins. Thank you.^KH
— SF311 (@SF311) January 28, 2013

Seriously?  DPW wants me to call the bins in?  Wouldn't it be more effective for the city, SFMTA or DPW to make the phone call and demand it to be removed from public property?  The city's voice is much more powerful than a citizen making such a request.

311 got on my nerves.  Here's my response to those lazy pricks at 311 and DPW:

@sf311 I'm not calling them, the city should because they are losing parking revenue on a city meter.
— Akit (@AgentAkit) January 28, 2013

UPDATE 8:27AM:
It looks like I got the city's attention real fast:

@agentakit Issued SR#1944688.The City's goal is to inspect within 5 business days and require the responsible party to correct
— SF311 (@SF311) January 28, 2013

@agentakit immediately and/or issue a Correction Notice or Notice of Violation of the Public Works Code.Thank you. ^jr
— SF311 (@SF311) January 28, 2013

Akit's Opinion

I'm very disappointed at 311 for their laziness and DPW for making me do the job of calling them.  I reported the problem, and they should make the effort to remove it.  For all I care, get a forklift and remove it if the company who dumped it there in the first place doesn't take it away in 24 hours.

I don't know what kind of people the city hires to respond to 311 requests, but I've had my share of idiots responding back.  Here's one idiot who can't read where exactly the problem is:

@agentakit Please let us know which N stop specifically, and what type of pavement defect. If a pothole, how large, deep etc.Thank you.
— SF311 (@SF311) December 22, 2012

Strange Observation About the SF Parking Meters - 25 Cents an Hour?

Parking in San Francisco can be a challenge, and those pesky parking meters can empty your pockets of quarters in no time.

Even the city owned garages have odd prices.  Now they charge more for times when parking is in high demand, but gives a nice lower price during less demand.

I've had an interesting experience today when I had to go to a dental appointment this morning in Japantown:

Since my appointment was at 9AM, I arrived too early in the neighborhood, so I parked in a parking space just across the street from the dental office.  The meter said starting at 9AM, the parking fee would be $2 per hour.

Since I had some time to burn, I got back in my car since it was cold and played around with the SFpark iPhone application.  It was correct that the parking would be $2 an hour, so I toyed around with the application to see how much it would cost to park somewhere further.

Around the corner from where I parked, the 9AM price was $1.50 an hour.  Not bad for a small 50 cent savings, but how about on Geary Boulevard?  I found out the parking on Geary Boulevard is just 25 CENTS PER HOUR from 9AM to noon.  What a heck of a bargain and it was just an extra couple of minutes walk from where I was currently parked.

Really?  Just 25 cents?  That's a huge difference than on Post Street where it would have cost me $2 a hour.

Also, one of the perks of parking at one of those smart looking meters is I can pre-pay the meter.  Since my appointment was at 9AM, I put 50 cents in the meter for two hours at 8:45AM, and the meter won't deduct the money until 9AM, therefore the meter would expire at 11AM.

The SFpark app sure did help me save some money on parking.  It's good when you are looking for cheap parking in the morning when there are few cars, but if it's a busy day and parking is pretty bad, the app won't help you because you'll take any parking space you'll find and pay whatever price it says. (Disclaimer: Don't use the app while driving)

I highly suggest purchasing a SFMTA Parking Card.  It's accepted at all city parking meters, and it's better than a credit card because not all city meters accepts Visa or MasterCard.

Don't Freak Out: Don't Pay the Meters on Sundays (For Now)

The city is already starting to update the parking meters with new signage stating Sunday parking will be enforced in the city from 12 Noon to 6PM.

But wait... before you start feeding coins into that meter, you should read the other side of the meter that says Sunday enforcement is effective January 1, 2012.

I took a picture of this meter on Portola, nearby the Round Table Pizza.

Why 12-4PM enforcement on Sundays?  Local church leaders asked the city not to enforce prior to 12 so their members can attend church without fear of being ticketed.  As for me, I can still score free parking before noon to get a haircut.

Also, the meter I looked at says the maximum amount of time you can feed a meter is double the time of the regular Monday-Friday maximum.  I'm not sure if this 2X policy will be effective in neighborhoods with major parking problems (e.g. Noriega, Irving, and Clement).

Also, be aware that meters within the jurisdiction of the Port of San Francisco, including near Fisherman's Wharf operate 7 days a week, including holidays; so if it's Sunday and you are parked nearby the Famous Bushman, make sure to feed the meter.

Would You Support Sunday Meter Enforcement?

Parking meters in San Francisco. Yeah, you know those meters, the ones that a quarter only gives you eight measly minutes and you always have to keep a fat roll of quarters in your car. Or for you suckers who parks in downtown or those new “smart” meters, you get much less time for that 25 cents.

But if you are familiar with what’s going on now, this could be the moment when you’ll jump out of your chair and cheer or get really pissed.

Would you support Sunday meter enforcement?

It’s a difficult decision for the city to make. In one point of view, no meter enforcement on Sunday has been a tradition in our city, except around Fisherman’s Wharf where the Port of SF loves tourist pocket change 7-days a week, including holidays. In another point of view, the SFMTA is broke and needs money, and a bunch of churches are against the idea.

Here’s my thoughts about it. I’m really undecided if I would support it or not:

In support of Sunday meters:
Parking in popular neighborhoods is so bad on Sundays, you literally have to circle the block several times until you get lucky to score a parking space. Have you ever tried parking on Irving Street between 19th and 26th Avenues? It’s pure hell on Sundays; you have to make a choice, either park there before 9AM and do your shopping, or take a risk during the rest of the day to get parking while vultures are double parking just waiting several minutes for some car to back-out. At least with meter enforcement, cars keep going in and out of parking stalls all day long and that means a better shot for people to get their business done; this also means that businesses can get more brisk business on Sundays, instead of cars parked in a stall for more than a few hours.

Not in support:
Why is the SFMTA broke? Because the system is broken and their hairbrained ideas suck. We shouldn’t pay for the meters just to feed the wallets of SFMTA employees. It’s the same as raising parking ticket penalties, the MTA thinks it’s a good way to raise more money to fix their bloody red budget. If the agency stopped wasting money on stupid projects, such as the Rose Pak (Central) Subway, and giving out free Muni rides to all of SF’s youth, maybe this agency can stop leaching off our wallets. The more the SFMTA wants to take more money from our wallets, the citizens will get their revenge on election day with ballot measures to kick the agency’s ass.

It’s really a tough choice to make; break tradition to make more money and keep cars moving, or continue to maintain tradition. I’d support Sunday meters if the SFMTA can make an effort to provide improved public transit choices, like running limited bus lines like the 38L on Sundays.

The Winners & Losers of the SFpark Program

SFpark has been around for approximately nine months as a big experiment where us lab rats (citizens & visitors of SF) pay for parking on a market demand system with new parking meters that takes your credit cards, allows longer time to park, and an app that shows people about parking availability and prices (which initially failed).

So after all these months, who are the winners and losers? Let's take a look:

Winners:

1. SFMTA/government - they rake money hand over fist because they jack-up parking rates during peak times and also accepts credit cards for those who doesn't like carrying a roll of quarters. Can that extra money help fix Muni?
2. Off-peak parking rates - If you park in a garage like Japantown's, you pay only $1 per hour for parking before 9AM and after 6PM. The street spots are all taken, so the garage's $1 per hour fee is nice; especially they do it by the half-hour, so if you don't need a full hour, it's just $0.50 for every 30 minutes.
3. Clear signage at garages - It's easy to know what the parking rates are with their big clear signage at the garage entrance.
4. Walking an extra block - The SFpark map shows the parking rates for the pilot program's area. In some cases, just one block away, the parking rate is LOWER. For example, on Webster street, from 12PM to 3PM, it's $2.50 an hour, just across the street is just $2.00 an hour.
5. Neighborhood stores & restaurants - With lower rates at non-peak times, it means more people will visit the neighborhood and patronize. For $1 an hour in the Japantown lot after 6PM, merchants can help bring in more of the dinner crowd.
6. Parking still free at meters - Sundays, some holidays, and before 9AM and after 6PM is still FREE!

Losers:

1. The parking meters - It's nice to know that just a block away parking might be cheaper, but the meters don't tell you the parking rate until you park your car and read the little screen telling you that.
2. Extreme variable parking rates - If the city authorized special parking rates for "special events" you could be paying outrageous parking fees (between $5 and $40), even if you have no interest or want to participate in the "special event."
3. SFpark app - It's illegal to use a phone while driving, so how in the heck will you know what the parking rate or availability is?
4. Peak-parking rates at garages - $2.50 an hour in the Japantown lot vs. going down the block and getting lucky with a street space for $2 an hour is a big deal for this broke blogger.
5. PayByPhone service - 45 cent fee per transaction? At least using a traditional credit card has a ZERO fee.
6. Future NFC payments for parking - There's very few NFC (near field communication) cell phones, such as the Google Nexus S that does NFC; the ever popular iPhone 4S and older iPhone models don't have NFC.
   
7. Attitudes of consumers - To me, a change in the parking rate doesn't force me to drive less, park further away, or take the bus; if I find a parking space and it says $3 an hour, I'm going to pay it because I've already been driving around the block several times finding some kind of parking space.

Akit's Opinion
In my opinion, I like SFpark because the off-peak rates are very attractive, but the peak rates just wants to make a bigger hole in my wallet. How long more until parking garages and meters will take Clipper cards?

Side note: Sorry for prematurely publishing this blog post. I wasn't finished typing and editing; and accidentally hit the publish button.

SFMTA's SFpark App - Low Memory Warning? Yeah, it SUCKS

Dear SFMTA,

I know you are all so happy about the SFpark program that your super boss, Nat Ford decided to attend the ceremonies to this new program while skipping on the Caltrain Board meeting.

I'd hate (love) to tell you, your new SFpark app just sucks.

Why in the hell do I keep getting this message saying I have a "low memory warning" and you throw me into a useless "light weight view" where I can't even see block by block what parking is available and the cost of parking?

I don't have low memory in my iPod, you fools. I have some games that uses tons more memory than this lame SFpark app, such as a 3D game where I hit home runs (and drains my battery).

Seriously, fix the damn app. Fix the low memory error by jacking-up the tolerance level.

Respectfully (and pissed off),
Akit

P.S. Muni still sucks. Someone caught another incident of a train door wide open in the subway.

Parking Meter Hours Extended? Not the greatest idea

If San Francisco has learned anything, extending the meter enforcement hours is a really bad idea. Remember how bad it got in Oakland when meter maids went nuts ticketing the hell out of every little thing and extending parking hours to 8PM? Business lost at least 30% of their customers, and the people got their wish by scaling it back to 6PM.

If you notice on this map supplied by the Chronicle, we are screwed.

By the look of this map, it almost looks like every single parking meter is highlighted with proposed changes, including the ones at SF State University that would be extended to 9PM (pointless idea, most students leave the campus at 4PM).

Sure, I can understand the city is broke, but if you raise parking rates, how much will that affect the businesses such as restaurants and stores? Will they pay for parking after 6PM in the city's hot spots or neighborhood places? The answer is no. And once business drops, that's less taxpayer money the business owes to the feds, state, and city/county, which means that it doesn't just affect our city, it affects our state and nation.

In some areas, meter hours extension is not necessary. Take for example, Irving Street; Irving is popular during the day hours, but there's not many people around during the dinner hours where most people either do take-out, or for the lucky few, find a restaurant to sit down and have a nice dinner.

But on a slightly brighter note, I do support Sunday meter enforcement, but only in certain areas. Places like the businesses on Irving, Clement, Geary between Park Presidio and 25th Avenue, and the 9th Avenue (Inner Sunset) areas really need Sunday enforcement because parking is such a pain in the ass in these areas. On Irving, I labeled one person an "old vulture" because she was double parking on Irving FOREVER waiting for any car to move and take on the spot; while I was going around the block and seeing her several times.

This idea sucks, and it's time to give the SFMTA a piece of our minds and our middle fingers. If you can go to a public hearing, give it to them. If you can't make that, how about just raiding a Board of Supervisors hearing?

The Worst SFMTA Muni Fee Hikes and Route Changes

If you haven't noticed the "NextBus" signs at most bus stops, it is telling people about the big changes that might happen to SF Muni as early as July 1, 2009. While some of their proposed ideas won't cause too much ruckus, like raising the fare of special event service and raising motorcycle parking rates, some of their other ideas are just outright nuts or are missing some important questions that needs to be answered. Just how many brain cells are the folks at the SFMTA missing?

First up, the increases in fees:
The SFMTA released a PDF document of the possible changes to paying for transit and parking services. Here's my opinions on some of the craziest ideas:

• Charge a 50 cent fee for transfers. Are they just nuts? The bus drivers freely place the transfers on a rubber band attached to the farebox and people take them as they pay their fares. Most bus drivers don't even pay attention to the fare box and usually assume that people paid their full fare. Does this also mean when I pre-purchase a transfer for the ride back from the Giant's game that I will also pay the additional 50 cent fee, or since I just want to take one ride so I can transfer to BART (a much more reliable and trustworthy system) that I will not be charged this fee increase? Remember folks, over ten years ago, SFMTA eliminated transfers and the passengers revolted so loudly, that in six months, transfers returned.
• One huge question: If transfers will be 50 cents, then what is OFFICIAL PROOF OF PAYMENT for passengers who don't want a TRANSFER? What will Muni issue as POP to prevent you from getting a ticket for fare evasion? This means totally restructuring the POP program and printing new POP (non-transfer) tickets and passengers who don't want a transfer now has to carry a piece of paper that really makes no sense at all. Smart people may realize that they can carry this POP receipt, board a back door of another train or bus, and get away with "proof" when a fare inspector asks for a receipt.
  
• "Premium pass?" Well, they ripped-off my original idea, but why add express buses to the list as a "premium" service? BART and the Cable Cars are the true "premium" service. Plus, if I was carrying a regular (will now be known as "cheap") pass, what is the surcharge for riding the express? How about the 9X? People may just decide to enter from the rear door more often to avoid the premium charge.
  
• Extend parking meters to 10PM instead of the usual 6PM. Just how much more money will it cost DPT meter maids to patrol the meters that late (including vehicle maintenance)? Plus, I don't think the meter maids union will like the idea of forcing employees to work the night shift, when they could be at home eating dinner with their family.
• Sunday meter service? Not a bad idea for places like Irving street, but the question comes up again, how much more money will it cost for the meter maids to patrol on a Sunday? Plus, I depend on the fee-free meters on Sunday for major Japantown events due to my large amount of hours I volunteer there.
• Increase parking garage rates. I agree that some city owned garages could use a fee hike, but I disagree with raising fees on the already expensive garages, like the garage next to the Metreon and Westfield (SF Centre).

Changes/termination/reduction in vehicle route service (this can vary, depending on which "option" they pick):

• Cutting out the Ocean Beach branch of the 38-Geary is a really bad idea. I have a feeling that by eliminating this route, they won't increase the number of 38L-Geary Limited and 38-Geary Ft. Miley branch vehicles. Each Richmond district terminal locations are at capacity; for example, the 38L's terminal can take up to three articulated 60 ft. buses at one time, and usually if there is a fourth one, it has to illegally park next to the Seal Rock Inn. Also, if they don't increase buses to make-up for the loss, the vehicles will get even more crowded, like insane crowded.
• Removing N-Judah service on the Embarcadero on weekends. Not bad, but does this mean a reduction in train service for the thousands of passengers leaving the baseball game and depending on Muni to get them to BART Embarcadero?
• 66-Quintara service eliminated west of 19th avenue? Then the route will only go ten city blocks, from 9th Avenue to 19th! That's too damn short.
• 18-46th Avenue service to follow possible eliminated 38-Geary Ocean Beach branch service is a really terrible idea. That line serves the Cliff House, and is the perfect connection for tourists to visit the Legion of Honor. Plus, the hills are so steep, the 18 is necessary for people who have disabilities or limited mobility. Also, forcing it to serve the Ocean Beach branch will make the route EVEN SLOWER (plenty of stop signs). The current 18 route is quick since it goes through traffic signals, very few stop signs, and drives on a main drag (Pt. Lobos/Geary). Hey Supervisor Eric Mar, the Richmond could really use your influential power to stop them from pulling this stunt.
  
• Shutting-off community service routes at 8:30PM. Being an SFSU employee, I think the 17-Parkmerced plays an important role, especially for students and faculty who work or study late and live within the Parkmerced and University Park North communities. The route may also be helpful for the Stonestown workers who live in one of these communities nearby the SFSU campus. Plus, if Muni metro service is unreliable, the 17 supplements service to SFSU and some of the M-Ocean View routes.
  

Some of my proposed solutions:
I keep emphasizing these ideas, but I'll focus on the best ones that will benefit everyone the most:

• Yes, the Culturebus service must be terminated immediately. The 5-Fulton does a decent job to serve the Culturebus stops, either nearby or just a short few minute walk.
• I previously proposed cutting the fare inspector force. Muni will terminate 28 fare inspector positions. That's a step in the right direction. Just remember to terminate the major assholes who piss the passengers off at every moment. Calm fare inspectors work better to not agitate the already pissed-off public who ride the crappiest service in town.
• Motorcycle meter rates must go up, they pay a super cheap rate for hours of parking, plus no short term limit of one hour.
• If they will charge for transfers, increase the time limit to two hours. Passengers get pissed at the fare inspectors when their transfer expires when they get stuck in the tunnel due to some unfortunate incident.
• Transfers should be FREE for passengers who ride the express buses and pay the so-called "premium" fee. AC Transit gives their Transbay passengers a free local AC bus transfer.
  
• Once the economy goes back up and there's more money for Muni, will this mean the return of the cut service? What promises will SFMTA/Muni back this up with? Do we need them to sign some covenants to make this official?
  

And my best solution ever...
GET TRANSLINK OUT IN FULL FORCE! If they do this, they can...

1. Reduce printing costs on passes and transfers.
2. Faster and efficient boarding of vehicles, meaning fewer delays and more reliable service.
3. Reduce maintenance costs on the fareboxes.
4. Reduce cost of sorting money and change.
5. With BART planning to be on Translink in early June, make the proposed "premium" fast pass on Translink only. Express bus boarding is even faster, and BART doesn't have to mess with demagnetized Muni passes. Then, Muni only needs to print one type of pass, meaning less waste for the retailers who sell them.
6. Stop printing token tickets. There are very few vendors who sell them, and only one takes Commuter Checks. Each token ticket costs the same as a regular fare, so Translink e-cash can easily replace it. Plus, Commuter Checks can be electronically transferred to your Translink account, therefore releasing the leash on riding only one transit agency.
   
7. With all this effciency with Translink, Muni should offer a small incentive for cash payers. Say a 5 cent discount for full cash fares, and if they plan to charge for transfers, a 25 cent discount (25 cent transfer charge). Efficiency has its rewards.
   

So, what can you do to tell your POV about all these damn cuts and fare hikes?
Go to an SFMTA meeting or write to them. Click here to learn more.

San Francisco wants CONGESTION TOLLS? Is our city leaders STUPID?

In just the past week, the following "revenue generating" ideas were created by our city government idiots:

• Variable meter parking rates
• Doyle Drive congestion toll rates

And now... our city is proposing that we also include "congestion tolls" within the downtown region of San Francisco.

And have you seen the map of where they want to put the tolls? It's totally screwed up! They want to create a border on the west side on Divisadero and also cut the Castro district in HALF.

What does this mean for our city? It might mean millions, but also pissing off a ton of residents and commuters to our lovely city. Bridge tolls are already $4 and even higher at the Golden Gate Bridge.

Here are some easy examples of pissing people off:

• Say a commuter lives in Marin county and drives to SF Downtown to do some shopping. They pay $5 to cross the Golden Gate Bridge, pay another $2 for the Doyle Drive congestion toll, plus another $3 for entering the downtown zone. If you have to park at a downtown variable rate meter, you might as well get nailed with another $5 per hour.
• Do you live next to one of the congestion rate borders? What happens if you have to drive to your supermarket to get groceries? You would probably get nailed with a $$$$$ crossing fee every single damn time.
  
• On the Divisadero "border," I would not have any trouble getting to Kaiser Hospital for my doctor appointment, but how about when I want to visit JAPANTOWN? It's only a short hop away from Divisadero and IT'S NOT CONGESTED. Hell, I can find parking most of the time.

Lastly, if our city wants to make this congestion toll, how about fixing the infastructure of MUNI? If you are forcing people to get out of their cars and take public transit, are they ready for the influx of THOUSANDS of more paying (or cheating) customers to take the worst public transit system around? Delays, missing buses, and overcrowding... yeah... great idea. It works in LONDON because they have an excellent public transit system. Ours is crap.

I don't have any money, but if someone would like to volunteer some cash, the prize winner would be the one who gives the most headaches to city government officials. Go after the Mayor, Board of Supervisors, and the SFMTA.

Variable Meter Rates - San Francisco's BAD Idea

Are we San Franciscans at the boiling point? It seems to be that our city government thought of this "great" idea to replace our existing parking meter system with a meter program that will have variable rates for parking.

(I put quotation marks over "great" so you can replace it with other fine words like: stupid, idiot, and f***ed up)

The SF Chronicle reports that the meter rates can vary from as low as 25 cents to as high as $18 per hour. The highest rate will be used for areas nearby festivals, large concerts, and other similar large gatherings.

The Chronicle also reports that the SFMTA Board has UNANIMOUSLY given Executive Director Nat Ford the discretion to set rates and the authority to change the price. WHAT THE HELL? You give the guy who can't even control Muni the MASTER KEYS TO THE PARKING METER PROGRAM? The VILLAGE IDIOT should not get the powers to set rates, because all he'll do is mismanage the whole damn program and all that money will just fill-in for raises for his salary and make the Muni union happy that they are getting another raise directly from the taxpayers and meter profits.

There are a lot of doubts and questions to ask:
1. What is the criteria for setting these meter rates? For example, if the city wants to charge the $18 per hour rate, how many city blocks away from a major event will this rate be used? Where is the cut-off?

2. Will there be an independent audit of this new program to monitor fairness of the meter rates?

3. How can citizens get a fair hearing if they notice frequent abuse of higher rates and want to contest for a lower meter rate?

4. If credit cards will be accepted, what guarantees their protection in transmitting data to charge the card?

5. Just how safe are these meters? Will citizens eventually revolt and the expert hackers will hack the machine to cut the $18/hr. rate to a mere 25 cents?

6. Will there be additional enforcement of disabled parking placard and license plate abuse? (Since they get free parking regardless if it is a meter, timed parking limit, or green painted curb).

7. In what areas of San Francisco will generally get the lower meter rates versus the higher meter rates? (Currently: Downtown, Fisherman's Wharf, SOMA (including near the Ballpark), and even SFSU have higher rates versus other neighborhoods. These are well defined with maps showing the boundaries)

8. Will there be an easy way for citizens to find out what the meter rate is currently, and give an accurate prediction on when the rate may rise and fall? I.e. online, automated phone system, web cell phone access.

Citizens, it is your responsibility to also monitor the program's effectiveness. Use your cell phone camera and take pictures of any abuses to the system. Auditors will not always be out there, but the watchful eyes of citizens will. You can't always trust your local city government and the village idiots who run our city.

Readers, just something to think about:
In the Outer Richmond District of San Francisco, there is a pilot program offering the use of cell phones to be used to pay for meters. One would simply text message the meter code number and the money is added. The service will also text you when the meter is running low and give you an opportunity to "feed" the meter.

But thinking about this concept, isn't the chance to "feed" the meter ILLEGAL? It's illegal to park longer than the posted limit on meters, and "feeding" the meter with coins after the posted limit will get you a ticket (especially if the meter maids chalked your tires). So why is the city permitting cell phone users to also break the law?