Comments on: Finding money on Oakland’s streets

By: Stefanie

Stefanie — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:54:20 +0000

Trapster® users share the location of police speed traps and red light cameras by simply clicking their mobile phones. It uses your phone’s GPS and Internet to alert you as you approach reported traps and best of all, it’s free.

If you ever get a chance to check out http://www.trapster.com, let us know what you think.

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:40:27 +0000

ELB, in the commercial areas with daigonal parking and the new meter system the meter readers are usually walking now, since they have to in order to get to the front of the cars to see the receipt. They use their cars to get from one area to the next. Giving them bikes would be a problem because they would have to walk or ride their bikes on the sidewalk to check the windshields.

By: East Lake Biker

East Lake Biker — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 18:32:28 +0000

OP- I'm with you that cyclists shouldn't be on the sidewalk, under the vehicle code we belong on the street. In an ideal world everyone would take urban riding classes. This also happens on College. Bike commuters do use the bike lanes, have you been out on Grand during peak times? Back to my original point. Parking enforcement officers on bikes would be non-polluting and would free up lanes. PD occasionally does bike patrols, for example.

By: Oh Pleeze

Oh Pleeze — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 06:35:50 +0000

Meter maids on bikes? How about park rangers on bikes, ticketing the multitude of cyclists who eschew the very expensive and presumably invisible Grand Avenue bike lanes, choosing instead to run pedestrians off Grand Avenue’s sidewalks?

By: Ralph

Ralph — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:14:09 +0000

ahh, that George Zimmer. I haven’t seen a MW commercial in so long, I completely forgot who he was

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:08:19 +0000

CK, that all depends on what the goal of the provision of parking is for the city. And of course, that is not defined. If it was defined, deciding an what the appropriate charge is would be a fairly straightforward proposition. But since it isn’t, you think parking rates should be high to discourage car use, dave o thinks it should be low/free to encourage people to shop and work in Oakland, and the city may think it is to maximize revenue. It is a question of priorities and mission.

By: Chris Kidd

Chris Kidd — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:26:32 +0000

daveo
raising parking fees are regressive only if we don’t provide a reasonable public transit alternative. I’m not saying that we DO have that right now, but we should. And we should jack up parking meter rates too. No more free real estate.

By: len raphael

len raphael — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:15:53 +0000

Ralph, my jesting reference to geo zimmer’s famous promise http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_Warehouse

GS, gotta agree with that link noting how traffic camera can increase rear end collisions. when you believe that the yellow light period has been shortened, the second you see the light turn yellow you slam on the brakes.

By: dave o

dave o — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:13:41 +0000

In the hospitality sector, we stuggle to insure that people have a good experience when they come to Oakland. Agressive parking-fee collection just discourages them from coming here. Oakland already has a reputation for mean-spiritedness in city government, and more agressive parking-fee collection just feeds the bad PR. Let’s bring back the culture and festivities that used to make Oakland a destination.

Also, these parking fee approaches are regressive. Poor people are already highly stressed trying to survive in this bad economic situation. Putting more financial stress on the poor just leads to nasty unintended consequences.

By: gem s

gem s — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:57:22 +0000

I’m an idiot.

Here is the article from Oakbook I was talking about.

Sorry for the uselessly borked link to something totally other.