Neighbor MM spotted handbills from the so-called “Northeast Bernal Parking Alliance” drifting around Precitaville. Apparently, there’s a meeting tonight, Tuesday, July 28 at 7 pm at the Precita Valley Neighborhood Center to discuss a proposal to turn much of North Bernal into an official Residential Permit Parking (RPP) zone. Neighbor MM writes:
Perhaps you have seen these around? I am always a little suspicious about things like this with no email address or URL, and I can’t find anything online when I search Northeast Bernal Parking Alliance. Which leads me to believe this is the work of one irate neighbor who is about to ruin things for all of us. My opinion: While I’ve noticed some parking problems, notably neighbors leaving their cars in the same spot for weeks or months on end, people need to realize that once you call in the DPT – there is no undo. Sure one person from Google might get a ticket, but once the DPT begins patrolling the streets and marking up cars, we the residents will get the bulk of the tickets. Nearly every driveway on my street sports at least 20 cars that are parked in driveways and are kind of sort of a little bit blocking the sidewalk. Ticket! When we go away and have relatives housesit? Ticket! A friend from another neighborhood coming by for lunch and a long walk? Can’t park here! I lived in the Mission prior to Bernal and residents fought to get two hour parking on our street and I didn’t think much about it – until I realized my car was registered in San Mateo, not San Francisco, and I couldn’t get a permit. It was a huge pain for me, and all the things I mentioned above happened. It is not worth it. It is already illegal to park for more than 72 hours and that takes care of the big problems. People parking for the day? Shrug. In many cases it is merely an exchange. I leave and drive to work and someone takes my place, leaves at the end of the day and I take it back. It’s okay. I’ll go to this meeting but I urge people to consider what it means when the DPT starts patrolling. YOU get the ticket, not some imaginary bus riding tech worker from the Marina.
Hmmm. We do wonder: Why does the graphic on the handbill include so many question marks? Who is the “Northeast Bernal Parking Alliance?” Who are they allied with? Is this another one of those Ron Conway organizations that seeks to further gentrify San Francisco? Or is it instead the leading edge of yet another imperialist Calle24 plot to annex North Bernal and transform it into a private parking preserve? To get answers to these and other questions, attend the meeting tonight: 
Bernalwood 
I’m pretty sure the NEBPA is just Nigel Phillips, my neighbor on Harrison St, who’s been blowing up Next Door (Precita Park) with his parking “woes.” You can read several long threads there if you’re interested. He’s just upset that some people have driveways and he doesn’t, and life is unfair. Thanks for shining a light on this madness!
Neighbor Sarah
Actually Sarah it’s me and Chris Hall from Florida Street and a slew of other frustrated neighbors who’ve expressed interest and put this together. I initially attended a meeting a few weeks back at the Precita Center hosted by another neighbor from NW Bernal who are mid-process for the RPP. Actually, I’m not “just upset” that I don’t have a driveway and some do and no, I don’t think life is unfair. I wish you would not assume to know my reasoning behind this and resent your need to drive ill will towards me personally and in a public forum. Rather; attend the meeting and, if you have a point or opinion, make it there.
I live near P.Rever and i walk by ogden st and the same vehicles have been parked there over 7months they are covered in dirt yes they rotate them but no tickets nothing i asked DPT. Employee a few weeks ago and turns out that OGEDEN ST AND GATES AND BANKS and PRENTISS are all PRIVATE property the dirt road is owned by the house next to it its kind of stupid but im glad i asked instead of talking SH**T about them and how they don’t move their vehicles hahaha its just parking i i usually park 4 blocks away and its not going to kill me to get a little cardio
Hi Nigel. I was at the meeting and talked to someone on Florida just a few hours ago. They maintained that you have three cars and a fourth car from a “woman who works with you.” I wonder if this is correct?
I haven’t been following it closely, but this has been an active topic on Nextdoor – you can contact the organizers that way.
Seconded. It’s been a very robust dialogue so I encourage folks to join NextDoor and be a part of the conversation. It’s being coordinated block by block so not everyone has to participate if their block doesn’t want to.
Imagine the scenario where your block doesn’t participate, but all the blocks around you do…. I wonder what happens then? Hmmm….
That happened to me when I lived in the Mission — all the blocks around me had it, but my block did not.
The answer, of course, is that parking your un-permitted block becomes even more insane as everyone everyone everyone tries to park there.. So I led the charge (via a signature drive) to get permits for my block too, and we joined the RPP district. Classic Prisoner’s Dilemma kind of scenario.
Agree with MM. There would also likely be an increase in tickets for cars parked on the ‘wrong’ side of the street, some of the streets may start to become one-way only. Unfortunately I’m not able to attend the meeting tonight but I say keep us off the DPT radar as much as possible.
Unfortunately I can’t make the meeting, but I would love to see residential parking permits on all of Precita Ave (especially the 100 block, where I live) and I’d definitely sign any petition.
Last month I was moving my car from Mirabel Ave. (30-40 address range) and was reading the earlier Parking Alliance notice attached to a gate. The woman who apparently lived there asked if I’d received the notice at my residence, and wanted to make sure I knew about the (first) meeting. She asked if I lived on the block and looked kind of alarmed when I told her I was a renter from the street below her.
It would be fantastic if someone addressed a bigger parking problem in the neighborhood: the over-abundance of months-long construction parking permits that have taken several spaces out of commission. Big trucks w/ entitled contractors, skip loaders full of dirt, 4-6 months of parking loss for each project. Maybe the city can regulate how many of these are issued for a given neighborhood simultaneously.
Residents angry at perceived outsiders vs. residents who like to block their own driveway without getting ticketed … get your tickets to the fight now!
Blocking your own driveway isn’t a ticketable offense, and why should it be? If you block your own driveway you can move the car, if someone else blocks it you can’t use your driveway. I’m really tired of people who squeeze into a too-small spot and think they’re good because they’re only over the driveway by a few inches; it makes it a pain for the homeowner and it’s inconsiderate. Tow, tow, tow.
Huh, turns out you’re right, it is legal (and not just unofficially sanctioned). I was unaware of that.
https://www.sfmta.com/getting-around/parking/how-park-legally
Correct, Blocking your own driveway isn’t a ticketable offense,but blocking the sidewalk is. So you can park across your driveway, however you cannot park in your driveway if your car extends into the sidewalk area.
BP: Yeah, it actually works out pretty well. We only have one car at the moment, but when we had two we’d park one in the driveway and, even if there was a regular spot available, we’d block our own driveway. This meant we’d frequently play musical cars in the morning if the car in the driveway needed to move first, but at least it left a spot open for our neighbors.
What’s really annoying is when someone squeezed into a too-small spot and over ran our driveway by a few inches. At best that meant we couldn’t block our own driveway, so we had to tow the blocked car, which means waiting for an hour before we can park. It’s also not uncommon for folks to block our driveway so much that we can’t pull a car in or out; it’s a very steep driveway. When this happens someone is essentially taking two spots from the neighborhood. I probably should just let it go (obligatory Frozen reference), but I find it terribly inconsiderate. I know it sucks to be towed, but we’ve gotten to the point where we have no choice but to tow almost everyone. That’s led to more than one nasty encounter when the driver finds out, unfortunately.
If residential permits help with this, and I think it will, I’m all for it.
@ unfed 10:00…Too true, I had an A-hole neighbor, who has since moved, TY Jesus, who called SFPD on our “own” vehicle blocking our “own” driveway! The ticket was voided, to say the least.
Permits would be a good thing for all of Bernal Heights, it would eliminate some neighbors & their friends from using BH as Airport Parking while they go on vacation… We had this issue with some neighbors in my hood in South Bernal.
Unfed, an RPP will only help you if the people blocking your driveway don’t also have a permit. Do you think these people are from outside the neighborhood?
Oh, I should point out that even if you’re blocking your own driveway, I believe you’ll still need to pay for a residential permit.
I agree! A bunch of houses on my street (Precita and Florida) were doing construction all at the same time, taking up tons of parking with their permits. I noticed a parking permit stayed up deterring people from parking there, even though it expired. Someone had obviously changed the dates like turning 7’s into 9’s. I took it upon myself and cut it down.
I do believe that once you open your doors or street to DPT there is no turning back. And it will be ticketville if you’re like our above person. Also whomever wrote that opinion is clueless as to how permits are issued. All a person needs for a permit is a utility bill in their name or some bill showing they live there. Has nothing to do with where you registered. SMDH.
AS I write this I’m doubled parked outside my own home on Maribel. There is NO parking at 10am currently. Those people that work 8-6 shifts don’t give a damn about there being no parking during the day. For the rest of us that work split shifts or odd hours it’s a nightmare. It’s overdue for limited parking. I’ve suggested 4 hour limits. It’s long enough for Mr Opinion to have lunch with his friends but not too long to infringe on the rest of his neighbors.
Also I have to move my car every 2 hours at my job, I’m sure his visiting house sitters can do the same.
One more thing if your car is blocking just an “tiny bit” of the sidewalk you won’t get a ticket, if it’s blocking 90% (which is what I see all the time) you will. If a handicap person can’t get past without going into oncoming traffic, that car blocking deserves a ticket. There are some selfish people out there and I’m personally tired of it.
Your first sentence is the most important one in the entire discussion. You’ll never get away with any of the little cheats and sneaks once you give DPT a reason to sweep your block on a regular basis…
Does no one remember: you have to invite the vampire in before it can bleed you dry…
If you have such a perception of the DPT, why not get rid of your car and live a life of eternal bliss?
Byrd Bodega- alternatively, get rid of DPT 🙂
The real problem is not cars on the street ,but cars NOT in garages. Every time I see someone with their garage door open while passing by all I see is massive amounts of hoarding. If people parked in their garage there would be plenty of parking for those without garages on the street.
Also, I second the sentiment of an aversion to having a mta writing tickets in our neighborhood. I would voice opposition to this movement
People should be allowed to park in front of any garage that is known to be used as full time storage. I read about a scenario where MTA could ask a homeowner to prove that their garage can actually fit a parked car before towing an offending car.
The status quo seems fair. You can get ticketed if you park in front of a garage, no matter its current use. Don’t forget, we don’t know what’s going on with those homeowners and their garage. Just because we don’t like something doesn’t mean we get to ignore the rules.
In the same spirit, if you call to have a car TOWED from in front of your garage, you have to show that it is useable as parking before they will tow under MTA authority (tow companies are slimeballs so all bets are off if MTA isn’t involved).
People who have never been towed forget how infinitely worse a tow is than a ticket. Did you know that if your tow fees and storage charges exceed the value of the car (easily happens in a week or two), you can’t even abandon the car to the tow company? You have to pay HALF of what you owe and THEN you can abandon it. That’s why I try everything possible before having someone towed. It can be devastating.
I tried this when I lived in Noe Valley. No dice. Garage+Driveway means a ticket.
This will be expensive
For those of you wondering what it costs: $111
https://www.sfmta.com/services/permits-citations/parking-permits/residential-area-permits/rpp-types/permanent-residents
And for people like me who have a garage and will only need parking for your friends/visiting family to park on your street: $13/day/night
https://www.sfmta.com/services/permits-citations/parking-permits/residential-area-permits/rpp-types/short-term-permits
And well worth it, IMHO.
If… and only if… you park on the street
For everyone else it will be a financial burden.
To be honest I’m ambivalent about it, but I just want to be sure everyone is aware where the lines are drawn between who benefits and who suffers.
On top of that, while $111 may be chump change for you, for many that’s a lot of money.
I’m currently split on the permit parking issue. If it is likely to result in more ticketing for non-permit offenses I will be switching to the anti-permit side.
My other issue is that the permits are PER VEHICLE, rather than per-address. I technically have three vehicles in my household (a truck plus two motorcycles), and at most two of them fit in my garage at any time. If I could a permit between vehicles I probably wouldn’t have any problem, but otherwise it’ll be aggravating. My usual state is that the pickup truck lives in the garage as I rarely use it and its hard to park, and the two bikes are on the sidewalk (and potentially ticket-able if an agent is being cranky) or street, but when I’m doing a big DIY home improvement project that switches as I need the garage space for a workspace but usually have room for the bikes.
I’m guessing for folks that actually live here getting more parking spots will be worth the $9.25 a month.
Twenty+ years ago when I was a poor student and I couldn’t afford to pay my tickets and renew my tags, I knew I could dump my car in Bernal for weeks with expired tags and no one would bother me. I suppose those days of parking forever are over but I’m sure half of the big trucks and RV’s that park on my street (of parking abundance) don’t live anywhere near here.
It also means a trip to DPT during office hours, IIRC.
Maybe the people who want RPP can subsidize the people who don’t.
Where are the data? Or will we be making this change based on the gut feelings and animosity of the locals?
Yes. Absolutely. Like almost every other piece of legislation or public rule-making. Data doesn’t matter. Only feelings.
It’s a great way to govern.
I am sure the U.S. Constitution was written without data. 🙂
We need more science!
When I lived in Bernal we fought off the folks who wanted to have parking permits. Why? Because that was one more tax we didn’t need. And parking permits are a tax. So what if someone parks in a space for a few days? Are there not other places to park?
Apparently you’ve never seen people from other neighborhoods who use Bernal to rotate parking for their too many cars, as I have.
I would describer this as a motivational fee: It motivates people who don’t use their garage to clear it out and park their car(s) in the garage rather than the street, and for that reason it’s a good thing.
While I hate to see a parking limit in North Bernal, I have come to realize that since everything to the North of Cesar Chavez is now limited parking, some people are leaving their cars in Bernal and then take transit to get to their jobs in town and there are also some people leaving their cars in Bernal when they are traveling. Another problem throughout the city is due to the expense of housing. It wasn’t long ago when two people shared an apartment. Due to the city’s disastrous housing situation, now three or four people share quarters and this has impacted the parking situation. I am happy that Precita Park is a very different place than it was 15 or 20 years ago. Now it attracts people to enjoy the neighborhood’s outdoor space. These are just some of the woes of our residential parking problems.
All great perspectives!! Looking forward to seeing all of you there tonight for a well balanced discussion.
Ron Conway, I love it! No mysteries here folks, just a neighborhood meeting to get facts and listen to opinions and take actions. It’s got a fancy name to give it and the area some focus and definition, quite clever of Mr. Hall I have to say.
This is the first good argument against parking permits I’ve read. It’s very much worth considering what it means once enforcement start patrolling for more than just permit-related parking offenses.
Don’t rush to judge or label this as mysterious. It’s far from that. This is a process and it’s in its early stages if you care to join in. There has been a straw poll. There will be more petitioning and polling. There is a meeting tonight, which will I assume have data. This has all been very much out in the open, and discussed, on https://precitapark.nextdoor.com
Personally, I am all for neighborhood permitting. I’m tired of people hogging spots for a week at at time on Manchester street in particular. It can be hazardous. It attracts car thieves, for one. And yeah, if you live in the Mission and park in Bernal, then too bad. The gravy train is coming to a halt.
FYI: Nextdoor is a closed forum. You can only view the conversations there if you are a member. Not a member? Cannot view. Not so “out in the open.” Don’t mean that as a criticism of the organizers, but rather as a comment on the limitations of NextDoor as a community forum.
And it has many other limitations which caused me to cancel my membership after a short tryout.
Moderators (and the most vocal users) want the site to be “Public Bulletin Board about Lost Puppies and Mattresses for Sale.”
People complain endlessly if serious discussions take place for longer than a few days.
It has been said many times before, but if there is a car on Manchester “for a week at a time,” why not just call for enforcement of the 72 hour rule?
People hogging spaces for weeks at a time is manageable under the present laws, have them tagged and towed if you like. Presumably you can do this to cars with a neighborhood parking sticker too. This proposal is to address something else: People who don’t want cars parking for more than a few hours at a time. The MTA even has signs they encourage you to put on cars parked 72 hours or more:
Click to access Remember%20to%20move%20your%20vehicle%20every%2072%20hours%20to%20avoid%20a%20citation.pdf
yeah, i know about all that stuff. I don’t want to deal. I don’t want to have to call all the time. Why should I have to bother? People should park in their own neighborhoods. The rest of the city works that way. And that is why they come over here. If the rest of the city repealed the neighborhood permits, it would be a different story.
Kenny? How do you know WHERE the vehicles parked there for “weeks at a time” come from? Has DPT done any studies and shared their findings with you? I know that they do that, they scan plates at various times of the day and then search registration info. I was involved in a disastrous study for RPPs and mixed length meters in an UMU zoned area with a mix of housing, PDR and retail.
You are too lazy to be bothered calling on cars parked in excess of 72 hours, but you will relinquish the “parking liberty” of Bernalwood to the DPT invaders? Once the RPP is there, even if the residents decide they no longer want it you cannot get rid of it! Be wary of enacting this. Even if you have a garage now that you can park in, your situation may change, or you may have visitors that need to park.
OK, but all ya gotta do is ask to join. As far as the meeting being out in the open, there are signs posted advertising it in the neighborhood. I’ve seen I think three of them. What else are people supposed to do? It’s pretty out in the open dude.
I live in Bernal and it’s never taken me more than 10 minutes to find a parking spot, maybe I have to walk up/down a hill but it’s so much easier than when I was in the mission. Are there particular problem areas in Bernal?
This is such great revenue for SFMTA! They get $100+ every year from every car owner who needs a sticker and then they get to ticket unstickered cars in a concise pattern of streets every two hours. SFMTA grows and thrives. …Hear the sarcasm…
+1
The price should really be dropped. It should be an administrative fee, $25 a year max.
Perhaps if DPT/MTA would actually enforce a 72 hour limit rather than the effective 8 day limit they now enforce, the parking wouldn’t be an issue.
Rusty, that’s exactly wrong. The problem with street parking is that it’s free and overconsumed as a consequence.
Cmon man, ‘mysterious’? It sounds like a perfectly well-intentioned and public effort to organize neighbors. A SFMTA rep will be there to describe the permitting process. Nextdoor is not closed if you live in the neighborhood – do you really want to open the discussion to every troll on the internet? Doesn’t sound like a conspiracy to me.
He didn’t say conspiracy. You did. Why did you say “conspiracy?” What are you up to? Who else is involved? 🙂
Part of the scourge of parking woes is due to “neighborliness” on the part of people who just can’t bring themselves to report parking violations involving fellow residents, who are imperfect in their parking habits. Some “locals” are worse than many “outsiders,” as outsiders may not be in actual violation of any laws; they simply don’t live here, which may bug us but does not mean they cannot park here up to 72 hours, and many park here just during the workday. I think there are as many local residents who abuse parking, if not far more, than those who come from elsewhere (except Colorado and Connecticut; you know they are scoundrels).
Even as the situation of parking worsens, the number of people who will actually report a vehicle that has been parked for a long time–and with, perhaps, and out-of-state license plate–may not be enough to curb the tight and illegal parking issues. Maybe some of us are soft–YIMBY to illegal parking? Sometimes it seems so, which is a human weakness but not a hurtful flaw.
There is also a neighborliness (or just a kind of halting frustration with the close and familiar, and the sense that affecting others’ lives negatively is not good if you can deal with the status quo) that sometimes makes being “vigilant” (in not a pejorative sense) very uncomfortable on the conscience. To get around this, parking may become more of an issue of legislating preferred use, not really enforcing regulations that already exist. So maybe plans being proposed are the best way: confront issues directly instead of people directly, and bring about sweeping change via a bureaucratic process instead of trying to patch the problem one illegally parked car at a time.
Case in point: There is an aging, disabled man on my block who owns 4 large vehicles that he parks on this block and the surrounding streets. Often some of his vehicles will sit there for weeks; I think one was parked and unmoved for about 6 months last year–right in front of my residence, leaking something that could not be identified. I have no idea why this man has 4 vehicles; there does not seem to be any need. I have not parked in front of my residence more than a couple times in the decade that I have lived here, since one of his vehicles is always there.
Still, I have not filed a complaint even when he’s in clear violation of the law–which puts me squarely in the group of being too weak of mind to do my part to report some violations. (I have filed a few complaints about parking, just not against him.)
Is it “neighborly” not to file a complaint–or is it the opposite, as having this man actually follow parking regulations would help the broader neighborhood (and may lead to his getting rid of some of his vehicles)?
By my romantic thinking that has no fondness among Bernal’s Reagan Democrats, he was here long before I was, and he will be here after I am gone. We have had many congenial conversations, and bringing up his gluttony for vehicles has never seemed like a doable segue. He has seen many changes in this neighborhood; his home, a small, decrepit shell with questionable items collected out back, sits between and across from properties that are now worth well over a million dollars. I don’t think he has many advantages in life (besides perhaps being to sell his property just for the land beneath it, but I don’t know if that’s an advantage if he is unlikely to do it; why would a man who owns 4 huge vehicles in Bernal decide to do something as sensible as become a millionaire? He’s not in life for the money).
Anyway, I can park somewhere else and let him live his life with a little more comfort. Some may not agree that this approach is acceptable, as I am enabling lawlessness, but I think my neighbors largely agree: I don’t know if I have ever seen the man get a ticket (though he has gotten a few warnings under his wind shield wiper).
My dream is to move to the East Bay, where I would have a garage, and no need to talk about parking permits.
If you can’t bring it upon yourself to report wrongdoing, or even address the issue with Mr. Too Many Vehicles, or justify it by deciding “he was here first,” don’t expect the situation to improve.
By calling the DPT on a vehicle that’s parked in front of your residence for months on end, you motivate the owner to come up with a more realistic and acceptable plan.
You haven’t lived and gone to hell until you have tried protesting a parking ticket in the SFMTA office at SFMTA South Van Ness. All letters and photos are rejected automatically. And you will be paying 100$$$ annually for the privilege!
Glenn Park gets RPP because of the Bart station. No airport idiot is going to park in South Bernal to walk to Bart pulling a suitcase. I am sorry that you North Bernal are inviting SFMTA to your neighborhood. Maybe it is the google busses ez entry to 101…? Get creative on that —-or you will so pay the price. No friends able to park and visit for any length of time. Oh yeah buy them a permit too. Ticketed for minor infractions. Todd Lapin thinks of a pretty good list. Pretty soon you will be asking for street cleaning . Invite that in to hassle the parkers? Good luck with that. Build the cost into your retirement budget! SFMTA helps finance schools, parks and the city coffers. Thank you! This will ship the parkers to the next neighborhood and the next and the next and the next and the next.
I’m curious about the comment of street cleaning being a blow to one’s planning? Is this due to the parking ticket cost when you forget to move your car? Steep no doubt, but you learn pretty quickly after the sting of the first one or two.
To me, street cleaning in the perfect thing to solve the long term / vacation parking issue. We have it on our street, and it is just enough to keep the parking places in rotation and keep anyone from parking in one spot too long (yes, longer than 72 hours, but I’m fine with that.)
Ummm… shouldn’t street cleaning’s number one purpose be to clean the streets?
I have a hate for street cleaning, but I’m stuck with it. However it only occurs once a week, and a $65 ticket is still a lot cheaper than parking at the airport.
WHAT?!?! MTA finances schools parks and the General Fund?!?! Since when? That HAS to be wrong.
Yeah sure. MTA funds general fund. GENERAL FUND funds city including schools parks, police. It’s called the city budget. What do you think MTA funds?
I’ve successfully fought two tickets. Letters are not rejected automatically.
Also, your comment about the General Fund is incorrect. SFMTA tickets fund RPP signage and enforcement.
Hmmm…I have actually witnessed folks that parked in South Bernal for Airport Parking, by either taking a Cab, or my Neighbors gave them a lift to the Airport, while their Vehicle stayed behind in South Bernal?! 😦
Hmm..Even though you allegedly witnessed this and understood perfectly what was happening. and well even if you are wrong on that account you have neighbors that gave others a lift –you still did not call it in using the 72 hour rule or did not do anything about it. Will you now furnish the fact that you did do something or oh well nothing because -oh dear there is no point….A cab ride is 35$ plus tip from Bernal on the South side. Round trip 70$. The north is no different. I have been living here in South Bernal for 15 years and have never seen such idiotic risky incidents. Even if some wanker who can afford C-notes worth of airfare did try to save long term parking for a week (less $70 plus) it does not add up. Put another way: Would you do this? C’mon leave a note, turn em in for a MTA poster at least on their windshiled leave their wipers turned up and a wanker note. DO SOMETHING.
Hmm..though you allegedly witnessed this and understood perfectly what was happening. and well even if you are wrong on that account you have neighbors that gave others a lift –you still did not call it in using the 72 hour rule or did not do anything about it. Will you now furnish the fact that you did do something or oh well nothing because -oh dear there is no point….A cab ride is 35$ plus tip from Bernal on the South side. Round trip 70$. The north is no different. I have been living here in South Bernal for 15 years and have never seen such idiotic risky incidents. Even if some wanker who can afford C-notes worth of airfare did try to save long term parking for a week (less $70 plus) it does not add up. Put another way: Would you do this? C’mon. leave a note, turn em in for an MTA poster at least on their windshield leave their wipers turned up and a note. DO SOMETHING.
All this will do is create a revenue stream for the city and headaches for residents dealing with DPT.
No to permits.
You make it sound so simple and easy to move your car on moving night for street cleaning. That is not what I saw and experienced for the 25 years I was ruled by it. Absolutely unable to park anywhere due to blocks being cleared, all late night returning residents necessarily park in the attack zone. Those unable to move by 6-7am are picked off in large numbers. You do not mention the noise, the motorcycle scooters, or the installation of ugly signs on both sides everywhere.
Pingback: Today’s Headlines | Streetsblog San Francisco
I live directly over the pedestrian bridge from Hampshire in the Mission and do use Bernal to park when I’m not using my car for 2-3 days. My car is not my own, but a borrowed car from a friend while they live in SF for 6 months (I can’t get a permit in my hood). There is nothing illegal about this, but I understand if residents would like to keep these public streets HYPER local and assume that if they don’t know you, you shouldn’t park there. Fine. I don’t agree with that, but you have a right to organize.
I also spend a lot of time visiting friends in Bernal, hiking in Bernal hill, spending time in Precita Park, and other businesses in the area. I occasionally leave my car longer than 3 days, and have been ticketed because I assume residents are calling in my car. Fine. What I won’t deal with is residents yelling at me, and verbally harassing me which has happened twice by a resident on Peralta (“Go away, you don’t live here, I don’t recognize your car, etc”). If there is a community group forming, please consider agreeing that harassing people is not appropriate. I am non-profit worker and long time resident of SF and being towed would be devastating. Please people, let’s keep this cordial and remember that just because someone lives across Cesar Chavez, they are still your neighbor and deserve respect and may be contributing to this city and your neighborhood in ways beyond car parking.
There is a typo in my comment above, I meant borrowing my friend’s car while he works in NYC, not SF. I’m sure that many people find themselves in similar situations where getting a neighborhood permit just isn’t possible or doesn’t make sense.
Information from last night’s meeting:
Initiation of the RPP process requires 250 signatures or from 50% of the households in the proposed area. The SFMTA representative acknowledged that there is no formal process to block the creation of an RPP zone and that the department needs to address this.
SFMTA surveys the proposed RPP area’s actual parking composition. Non-local cars must occupy >50% of the parking spaces in order to be eligible for creation of an RPP zone. It is unclear whether “local” includes cars registered at addresses only on that street/block or if a radius of surrounding blocks is included.
If the survey indicates the required share of non-local parkers, there will be meetings and approval by the SFMTA board. “The board doesn’t want to make unpopular decisions.” (Possibly paraphrased a bit, but that’s what she said to the best of my recollection.)
SFMTA has neither a policy nor process for notifying residents of the blocks immediately bordering a proposed RPP zone.
Creation of a new RPP zone takes 1-3 years. Tacking on more blocks to an existing zone takes only a few months.
Also: Each household (single-family home or apartment) can purchase as many as four permits. Permits for caretakers/nannies are also available (not sure how many per address), so at least as many as five per address.
Residents of blocks adjacent to the RPP zone may petition residents of the RPP zone to be allowed to purchase a permit. The SFMTA offered no information on the success rate of such petitions.
Subjective take on last night’s meeting:
The SFMTA representative was advocating the creation of the RPP zone. She suggested tactics to avoid drawing a lot of attention to the process, such as starting with the smallest allowable zone and adding onto it later. Once there’s an RPP zone on the adjacent block, residents of the unrestricted block will suffer from the displaced non-resident parkers and eventually capitulate.
Many of the concerns expressed are actually about long-term parking, not non-resident parking. This is already prohibited. The SFMTA rep indicated that the department knows that the 72-hour rule is as likely to be used as a cudgel in neighbor disputes as it is to address the long-term storage of non-resident cars. An RPP zone wouldn’t do anything to address overconsumption of the parking resource by residents.
I wouldn’t go as far as to say that she was advocating the creation of an RPP zone. She explained how it is done. I didn’t walk away from there thinking that lady had a dog in the fight.
I was at the meeting and I thought the impartiality of the MTA rep was a thin facade. For example, she never answered the often-asked question about how to petition to not have an RPP. She kept saying, “Just don’t sign the petition.” Finally when someone asked if the anti-RPP petition could be online as the pro-RPP petition is, she said no, “It would be too confusing.”
I honestly didn’t get the feeling that she was specifically trying to push for us to get an RPP, however the fact is that it is her job to assist in the process.
As for the ant-petition, thats really just not how bureaucracies typically work. They define the process needed to make a thing happen, not the process to prevent a thing from happening. If you want to create a petition for something you don’t have to follow an established process, you just have to create the thing and go around getting signatures. If you want an online petition there are many free options for creating one.
Regardless, the process will go forward if a collection of adjacent blocks meet the signature requirement, which I think is likely to happen. The method of blocking an RPP is the same as blocking anything else in this stupid city, show up at the public hearings with as many people against it as you can find and be noisy.
NO! I don’t want my street policed but DPT and I don’t want to pay the City to park my car in my neighborhood. What meeting do I go to?
You can also petition against having a zone. Also, having RRP is no guarantee of actually getting a spot, it just means you get to pay the city for what you already have: jockeying with others for a spot.
@richard everett 7/29/15 22:23
I’ve got a leg up on you…I have been in South Bernal since 1977?! LOL…I got ya tho, I do report the incidents to DPT?! ;^)
Question: with permit parking does that mean I can leave my car on the street for as long as I want?
Right now, I have a car in my garage that I never drive, and I’d love to free up that garage space to build a workshop and leave the car parked on the street.
Also curious, how much are garage rentals going for in Bernal now? Can we just leave our cars on the street with the $111/year permit and then rent out our garages for $300 a month? That sounds like a win to me.
No, the 72 hour rule (as well as street cleaning) still applies even with the permits.
Pingback: Petition Process Underway to Create Residential Parking Permit Area for North Bernal | Bernalwood
Pingback: Fate of Northwest Bernal Parking Zone Unclear as SFMTA Rewrites Rules | Bernalwood