<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Smart(er) Parking in the Future</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:30:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: belgand</title>
		<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7816</link>
		<dc:creator>belgand</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/#comment-7816</guid>
		<description>Ideally we would have parking meters that accept Translink, much like the Octopus card in Hong Kong. Of course, that would assume that we ever manage to get Translink rolled out properly and supported on transit. Or that we can manage to get people to actually use it then. For some reason even FasTrak has hideously low numbers and my girlfriend was opposed to both it and Translink unless she got some kind of discount. You&#039;d think that convenience, ease of use, and everything else would be enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ideally we would have parking meters that accept Translink, much like the Octopus card in Hong Kong. Of course, that would assume that we ever manage to get Translink rolled out properly and supported on transit. Or that we can manage to get people to actually use it then. For some reason even FasTrak has hideously low numbers and my girlfriend was opposed to both it and Translink unless she got some kind of discount. You&#8217;d think that convenience, ease of use, and everything else would be enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bay Area Issues, Links for July 14th, 2008 &#171; Spot Us - The Blog</title>
		<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7814</link>
		<dc:creator>Bay Area Issues, Links for July 14th, 2008 &#171; Spot Us - The Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 23:53:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/#comment-7814</guid>
		<description>[...] New technology to ease parking pains in Cit [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] New technology to ease parking pains in Cit [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Hatch</title>
		<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7811</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Hatch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 08:07:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/#comment-7811</guid>
		<description>Actually, what they reported in 2005 was the background I retold in my first sentence. My second link should be familiar to you. That, of course, was the Port of SF doing a study, and this is SFMTA deploying a new system. Same company is involved, but these are two different stories.

The larger point of my question at the end is this: the SF Chronicle is getting scooped on local stories of national importance, and thus losing any potential claim to relevance, due to an apparent editorial policy of over-reporting local trivia. (The name Edgerly comes to mind in this connection.) This is a perfect example of the problem: the Chronicle reported the trivial story and dropped the ball on the big story. They do this over and over, and we deserve better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, what they reported in 2005 was the background I retold in my first sentence. My second link should be familiar to you. That, of course, was the Port of SF doing a study, and this is SFMTA deploying a new system. Same company is involved, but these are two different stories.</p>
<p>The larger point of my question at the end is this: the SF Chronicle is getting scooped on local stories of national importance, and thus losing any potential claim to relevance, due to an apparent editorial policy of over-reporting local trivia. (The name Edgerly comes to mind in this connection.) This is a perfect example of the problem: the Chronicle reported the trivial story and dropped the ball on the big story. They do this over and over, and we deserve better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lern</title>
		<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7809</link>
		<dc:creator>lern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 00:40:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/#comment-7809</guid>
		<description>Uh, hate to break it to you but the Chron wrote about this metering project back in December 2005. 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/27/BAGHRGDHV21.DTL&amp;hw=streetline+networks&amp;sn=001&amp;sc=1000</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh, hate to break it to you but the Chron wrote about this metering project back in December 2005. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/27/BAGHRGDHV21.DTL&#038;hw=streetline+networks&#038;sn=001&#038;sc=1000" rel="nofollow">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/27/BAGHRGDHV21.DTL&#038;hw=streetline+networks&#038;sn=001&#038;sc=1000</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Hatch</title>
		<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7807</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Hatch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:50:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/#comment-7807</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Mark!

That&#039;s a good question. I would say probably no for two reasons: I think (correct me if I&#039;m wrong) that all SFMTA spaces are metered anyway, and that unmetered garages and lots are private businesses. I&#039;d guess that unassisted market forces have already found the sweet spot for private spaces (that is, the price is as high as it can be without driving too many people away when demand is low, and they still sell out during peak demand) or they have instituted some form of demand pricing anyway, for example, those lots that cost less on Sundays. But that&#039;s just an unresearched impression I have!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Mark!</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a good question. I would say probably no for two reasons: I think (correct me if I&#8217;m wrong) that all SFMTA spaces are metered anyway, and that unmetered garages and lots are private businesses. I&#8217;d guess that unassisted market forces have already found the sweet spot for private spaces (that is, the price is as high as it can be without driving too many people away when demand is low, and they still sell out during peak demand) or they have instituted some form of demand pricing anyway, for example, those lots that cost less on Sundays. But that&#8217;s just an unresearched impression I have!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Pritchard</title>
		<link>http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-7806</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Pritchard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sf.metblogs.com/2008/07/12/smarter-parking-in-the-future/#comment-7806</guid>
		<description>Nice post, Jeremy!

I wonder if they&#039;re also going to try demand pricing for parking spaces.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post, Jeremy!</p>
<p>I wonder if they&#8217;re also going to try demand pricing for parking spaces.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

