"creates a predatory private market for public parking spaces that San Franciscans will not tolerate" Right, because I've never driven around Nob Hill for an hour trying to find parking, only to have to give up and pay $25 for a garage. The response from the city makes more sense if you've never actually had to do street parking in the city. When I'm at my wit's end, driving around the same streets continuously, I'd…
What about people who can't pay $7? That's what public services need to think about.
Other than the money going to private companies rather than the city, how is it any different from a parking meter? In my city, there are no parking spots that are walking distance from downtown that do not cost money to use.
I don't know what to think. Devilishly clever. Instant new market. But so detrimental if it catches on... People who live paycheck-to-paycheck wouldn't be able to afford this. If it becomes very popular, those without disposable income may be unfairly abused by the system. Till now, finding a spot has been random lottery. Pay-for-privilege will leave struggling families out in the cold (perhaps literally). Yet to pun…
It's not draconian; it's counter to the goals of paid public parking.
Public parking is designed to ensure spots are available. This is why many cities have meter parking with a 2 hour limit; to discourage people from parking on the street all day long (there are garages for that).
This type of app encourages people to occupy spots by camping out in them and selling them to the highest bidder. If your goal is to ensure parking spots are available to people that need them for short-term parking, allowing that behavior seems counter-productive towards your goal.
I don't know what to think. Devilishly clever. Instant new market. But so detrimental if it catches on... People who live paycheck-to-paycheck wouldn't be able to afford this. If it becomes very popular, those without disposable income may be unfairly abused by the system. Till now, finding a spot has been random lottery. Pay-for-privilege will leave struggling families out in the cold (perhaps literally). Yet to pun…
Your logic applies equally to private jets. Guess what? There are other modes of transportation than cars. Shhhhocker. Reality: This will harm middle class people who live paycheck-to-paycheck, not struggling families.
"creates a predatory private market for public parking spaces that San Franciscans will not tolerate" Right, because I've never driven around Nob Hill for an hour trying to find parking, only to have to give up and pay $25 for a garage. The response from the city makes more sense if you've never actually had to do street parking in the city. When I'm at my wit's end, driving around the same streets continuously, I'd…
It's easy to see this as a foolish reaction of "there is a market? But markets are unfair because money, so let's stop it!" by the city of San Fran. In fact, it would take remarkably little to make me believe San Fran was that foolish. However, these apps also create incentives for people to not give up their spots until someone pays. It's an incomplete market, where someone sits on a shared resource until paid to mo…
Why "should" SF be auctioning off these spots? To maximize revenue? Is that why public services exist? Are they doing a larger disservice to the people of SF by NOT auctioning them off, thus raising the price to park, over having a lower price solution to $25 parking garages? Maybe SF should build a couple of public parking garages themselves if they, as a public service, wish to continue to offer more affordable public parking. The residents of the city need affordable parking. Unless, their goal is to get less people to drive in the city and take public transit. There are so many factors at play here. So many agendas and concerns. So I repeat my question... for what reasons "should" SF auction off the spots? What are its ramifications? I have no skin in the game, I'm just an east coaster. These issues are hardly ever so cut and dry as to whether a market exists or not.
The problem with this business is not that it forces people to pay high prices for high value parking spaces, rather it's that it incentivizes people to camp out in high value spaces, and that the revenue accrues to the campers and not to the city. If this app is popular at all, it's probably an indication that the city isn't charging enough for parking.
> and that the revenue accrues to the campers and not the city Then the city should build their own version and get the money that it feels it is entitled to.
I really don't understand this mindset.
Parking spaces are a public resource. The city sets tariffs at a level it feels reasonable.
Why should this public resource be priced at the highest rate the market will bear? Why should everything in the world basically only be available to those who can pay the top possible price for something?
Hey, I should do this with tables at popular restaurants during peak hours too. That's not being an asshole, it's letting the market decide!
You can book a table at restaurants. Maybe booking a parking would be a thing to look at instead.
Being paid for leaving the place actually creates market for people who would bend the rules for profit. For example get a low-mpg/electric car that you drive around, take any space, then immediately resell it. Even worse, if you get together with others, you probably could create enough artificial resource scarcity to lift the prices to the level that makes doing this all day long profitable.
If SF can devise a system that notifies drivers of a free parking spot for less than it currently costs - go ahead and implement it. But I have admit that I doubt there is a cheaper way. And city probably has more important problems to solve.
A decent transportation infrastructure -- whether it's cars (with associated parking) or trains or buses or bikes or footpaths -- is an essential function of local government.
AIUI, this is people paying for, and parking their car in a city-owned car parking space, and then giving up that space to someone who's willing to pay more money for it. This is simply arbitrage, and it's legal when Wall St fatcats do it, it should be legal for everyone. If the city objects, they should charge the market-clearing price for parking. If that leads to a problem where only rich people can park, then Cal…
I see it as something very close to protection racket. This app creates an incentive to take the space for longer than necessary and get paid for freeing it up. Maybe as an add-on you won't get your car scratched for an extra payment?
I don't know what to think. Devilishly clever. Instant new market. But so detrimental if it catches on... People who live paycheck-to-paycheck wouldn't be able to afford this. If it becomes very popular, those without disposable income may be unfairly abused by the system. Till now, finding a spot has been random lottery. Pay-for-privilege will leave struggling families out in the cold (perhaps literally). Yet to pun…