Recent Comment
Share
Parking in
To address the parking beast,
For one year, the city will experiment with smart meters that raise and lower the price of parking according to demand. It will utilize this on about 25% of curbside parking meters, and the nearly 12,000 spaces in lots and garages managed by the SF Municipal Transportation Agency. During off-peak times, parking is cheap, and during peak times, the prices are raised so that demand is lowered to equal the supply of spots. The idea is that if you’re going to drive, and you have some hefty pocket change, you’ll be able to find a spot and you won’t double park or slow up traffic by following someone who looks like they might be leaving their parking spot that ends up being located about three blocks down. The program will also include some tech-y additions, like being able to pay via cell phone, getting text messages when your meter is about to run out, and getting a little extra on the time limits during off-peak parking hours. Additionally, you won’t have to drive around to find a spot, because sensors embedded in the asphalt will track when parking spots are empty so that you can check the availability of spots via the Internet.
Should the program be a success,
Via WorldChanging, SFGate
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Ali, June 19, 2008
Forgetting the privacy concerns of paying for parking via mobile phones given the ID-tied payment systems for new public transport systems, credit card systems in Taxis, and automatic toll payment systems... Installing sensors in order to show free parking spots on the web? Are they bonkers? If the situation is bad enough to need it, there's no way that you can use that information.
And variable pricing. Really? I mean, do you think I'm going to give up and go back home because it's a peak period? Hint: Peak periods are peak for a reason - people want to be in places at the same time because they work together.
Anyway, people will simply look at the outputted bill. Being paid on a mobile means less physical interaction with the money and therefore more separation from the cost anyway, so not only is it a moot point, but it's a complex and unnecessary calculation that just makes parking harder than it should be.
The thing that surprises me most is that a green blog is suggesting this is a positive thing. It means
1. When I'm worrying about my running meter I usually rush things. This means I'm prone to forget things. This means I may need to return. More CO2. The rush to the car often puts me in an agressive mood which can affect my driving style. More CO2.
2. Empty spaces due to reduced time spent in those spaces is an increase in capacity enabling more trips (more CO2) in the same amount of real estate.
3. The price of parking for those continuing to drive with $4/gal gas is going to be a 'maintainence factor' during peak times - deducted from earned salaries/wages on an hourly basis as a cost of work. During non-peak times, prices can actually be a deciding factor, as people during those times are more likely to be seeking entertainment or visiting family. These trips (non-time-sensitive) are the ones that should occur on public transit, but instead, the system encourages people to take these trips in cars by offering cut-price rates.
-
- +0
-
-
written by doug, June 19, 2008
-
- +0
-
-
written by EnviroGadget, June 19, 2008
-
- +0
-
-
written by Papa Hotel, June 19, 2008
When people are forced to pay the full price for the resources they use, all of a sudden things stop getting wasted. If 1pm parking is a more valuable resource than 8pm parking, it should cost more and be used more efficiently.
One study (The Power of Five Percent) demonstrates how dynamic pricing in electric rates help everyone save money and prevent pollution.
http://www.brattle.co.uk/Publications/ReportsPresentations.asp?PublicationID=754
-
- +0
-
-
written by Robbert, June 19, 2008
The bills are Emailed every day at midnight.
The fact that it's an in actual A4 PDF bill format, actually makes you realise more how much you are spending.
We also have variable pricing in Amsterdam. This works quite wel, as people are able to park for short shopping stops, and long time parking is much more expensive.
-
- +0
-
-
written by The Food Monster, June 19, 2008
with Clinch,
Ban cars inside large (over 2 million) city limits, and get this reliable public transportation up and running.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Proud Human Supremacist, June 19, 2008
About the actual post, I wouldn't want that kind of information going over cell phone messages. They aren't exactly the most secure means of communication.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Josh, June 20, 2008
Not looking to vaporize all cars, just keep them out of, or minimize them in, dense urban landscapes. Park 'em on the perimeter, drive 'em when you need to go pick up your widescreen tv or 800 rolls of toilet paper at Wally World. Or, better yet, participate in a car sharing program for those, um, necessities.
Smart pricing and relying on supply/demand to decrease the circling of cars sounds like a great idea. Prices for spots where people may need to walk a bit or jump on mass transit will be cheaper. Those who *must* drive will be able to do so, and park quickly... but it'll be expensive enough during peak that they'll use other methods when possible.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Proud Human Supremacist, June 20, 2008
-
- +0
-
-
written by 0x0065, June 20, 2008
...maybe they are & just intend to 'invent' the USA one.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Boris, June 23, 2008
-
- +0
-
-
written by boohoo, June 23, 2008
There is an amazing book called "The High Cost of Free Parking"
Dr Shoup is an economist that teaches in an urban planning department. Econ is a useful discipline in Planning, but not the be all end all. He didn't get his AICP until 2004, so I would guess he has had little interaction with public and private sector urban planner and transportation engineers. It is possible to earn this distinction by teaching alone (most planners have to work for many years on varied types of projects to do the same). I would like to see if any transportations models support his position (FYI a lot of these programs are proprietary and staff that use it are highly paid, so essentially he would not be privy to many "trade secrets" of the industry)
-
- +0
-
-
written by EnviroGadget, June 23, 2008
The idea in a nutshell is that if there are free parking spots available, people will circle for over half an hour trying to find it - thus creating unnecessary traffic and air pollution.
In the last 70 years or so, we've increasingly become reliant on cars rather than other modes of transport. This has bred laziness and avoids the issue of tackling other transport methods. Regardless of the fee or not, I've seen people furiously compete for a parking spot. Most noticeably in UK cities.
-
- +0
-
-
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
But that aside, alternate payment systems are a good idea, as is the locating a free space from he internet (as this particularly would reduce driving around, which in turn reduces pollution) but all the variable pricing concept means, is that rich people are going to get better parking.
I'd rather it charged more for cars that have a bad bad mileage/efficiency/economy, and less for people carpooling.