[Carfreeliving] Matier and Ross: Illegal parking still has cu rb appeal

[Manish Champsee]

The fact that the fines are greater than the meter collections doesn't
necessarily mean that "that is where the money is", it means that
people aren't following the rules and indicative of lax enforcement. 
In the town that I went to college in, a private company handled
parking meters.  If your meter expired, you were given a 15 minute
grace period at which point your car was towed.  If you showed up 16
minutes after the meter expired, you could bet that your car was gone.
 (They were also notorious for towing people who were in compliance,
but thats another matter).  Anyway, you can bet that people were
vigilant about putting money into the meters.



On 3/13/06, Brinkman, Cheryl <Cheryl.Brinkman at mckesson.com> wrote:
>
> Which also shows that the parking meters are too cheap, and it would
> probably be cost effective to hire more PCOs, and put cameras on street
> sweepers.
>
>
>
> "As for the meters themselves, they generated just $24 million in revenue
> last fiscal year -- which once again shows that when it comes to parking,
> the real money is in the tickets."
>
>
>  ________________________________
>  From: Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org
> [mailto:Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org] On Behalf Of
> Tom Radulovich
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:32 AM
> To: Carfree Living
> Subject: [Carfreeliving] Matier and Ross: Illegal parking still has curb
> appeal
>
>
>
> Illegal parking still has curb appeal
> - Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross
> Monday, March 13, 2006
>
>
>
> Next time you get a parking ticket in San Francisco, here's something to
> think about -- you're one of the hapless few.
>
> On any given workday, 1 out of 3 vehicles parked in downtown San Francisco
> is breaking the rules -- it's either camped in front of an expired meter, in
> a street-cleaning zone or maybe at a curb painted a color that signals a
> potential infraction.
>
> And the chances that car will get a ticket? Only about 1 in 20, according to
> a new in-house survey by the city's Department of Parking and Traffic.
>
> Department workers who checked 13 downtown and neighboring commercial
> districts from Jan. 31 to Feb. 9 found that parking control officers were
> toughest in the Financial District, with a "capture rate" on parking
> violators of 14 percent.
>
> Best place to get away with it: Stockton Street in Chinatown, where trucks
> double-park by the score and regularly overstay their welcome at meters. The
> capture rate there is a mere 1 percent.
>
> Municipal Transportation Agency spokeswoman Maggie Lynch said the ticket
> shortfall isn't from lack of trying.
>
> "Unlike some cities, our parking officers have to do a lot of other things
> as well, like direct traffic,'' Lynch said.
>
> One of the more interesting finds, according to the report, is "use (and
> likely abuse)'' of placards for the disabled in the city. About 1 in 10
> parked cars surveyed had the blue placards, which allow drivers to park free
> and for as long as they like.
>
> In May 2004, there were 32,866 placards for the disabled registered to San
> Francisco residents -- an increase of 54 percent since 1995. That same
> month, 3,674 temporary placards were issued.
>
> The explosion in the blue placards prompted Parking and Traffic staffers to
> make a couple of interesting -- and no doubt controversial -- suggestions.
>
> They include installing meters in blue zones, but without any time limits on
> them.
>
> Or allowing a "generous" time limit for the placards -- but a time limit all
> the same.
>
> "Those are just staff suggestions,'' Lynch said. She said she wasn't sure if
> the city's new transportation director, Nathaniel Ford Sr., had even seen
> the report yet.
>
> In any case, any change in disabled parking rules would need state approval.
> You can imagine how many politicians would want to take on that issue.
>
> By the way, according to the Municipal Transportation Agency's 2006 fact
> sheet, the city issued 2 million parking tickets last year -- for a take of
> $84.9 million.
>
> The biggest share of tickets, 33.7 percent, went for street-cleaning
> violations, followed by parking meter violations at 27.5 percent.
>
> As for the meters themselves, they generated just $24 million in revenue
> last fiscal year -- which once again shows that when it comes to parking,
> the real money is in the tickets.
>
>
> Tom Radulovich
> Executive Director
> Transportation for a Livable City
> 995 Market Street Suite 1550
> San Francisco CA 94103
> 415 344-0489
> www.livablecity.org
> tom at livablecity.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
> To unsubscribe:
> mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
> or, for all options, go to:
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>
>