.
Feedback

Giants Game Parking: Rates are 'Outta Here!'

Meters near AT&T Park will cost up to $7 an hour on game days.

By Bay City News

Parking near San Francisco's AT&T Park is getting pricier in the evenings and during events at the ballpark starting next month, transit officials announced Tuesday.

Beginning March 4, meters will remain operating until 10 p.m. from Mondays through Saturdays in the area close to the ballpark at Third and King

streets.

The meters will also cost more during days of San Francisco Giants games or other events there, according to the city's Municipal Transportation Agency.

The changes are meant to increase parking availability in the area and reduce congestion caused by vehicles circling around to look for a parking spot, agency officials said.

Between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. on non-event days, the meters will cost $0.25 per hour, while they will cost up to $7 an hour on event days. The first event with the increased meter rates will be the World Baseball Classic, which runs at AT&T Park from March 17-19.

"Appropriately priced parking on our public streets makes sense and supports the city's Transit First policy, especially in this growing neighborhood that is home to AT&T Park and many special events," SFMTA director of transportation Ed Reiskin said in a statement.

The new policy was developed with the input of neighborhood residents and business owners, according to agency officials, who also plan to canvass the neighborhood in the coming weeks to publicize the plan.

Special signs will be posted on meters in the area, which includes streets as far north as Harrison Street, as far east as The Embarcadero, as far south as Mariposa Street and as far west as Seventh Street.

More information about the program can be found online at www.sfpark.org/events.

Copyright
© 2012 by Bay City News, Inc. -- Republication, Rebroadcast or any
other Reuse without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc.
is prohibited.

Don’t be left out of the conversation taking place in Belmont:
Sign up for Belmont Patch's daily newsletter
"Like" us on Facebook
"Follow" us on Twitter
Want to share your opinions with the Belmont? Start your own blog.


Don’t be left out of the conversation taking place in San Carlos:
Sign up for San Carlos's daily newsletter
"Like us" on Facebook
"Follow us" on Twitter
Want to share your opinions with San Carlos? Start your own blog.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Carlos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bob Winters June 18, 2013 at 08:51 am
Best of luck finding good homes, we already have two cats. You may want to consider this advertisingRead More technique: http://i41.tinypic.com/2s17tk0.jpg
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:07 pm
Marl Olbert said this right after refusing to second Matt Grocott's motion for 2 week delay of vote.Read More I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary. both in terms of compensation and provision I think part because he has never been a city manager before. and he had to prove himself. you can make a argument that that wasn't fair. if you think the person is capable for doing the job not necessarily the fact that they don't have the experience. it happens all over the place it happened to me personally it's just a part of the accepted process but another part of the accepted process is that if the person proves themselves you have to keep faith with them and if you don't you're actually sending a message You're saying that you can't trust us and i totally think that Mr. Maltbie is worth the pay, but besides that i think it is a issue of integrity and maintaining the integrity of the negotiation process and the hiring process that's why I'm going to vote yes for it.
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I would like to know who those various people were who gave Mark Olbert that understanding.
Michael G. Stogner June 17, 2013 at 04:54 pm
Council member Mark Olbert one who refused to second Mr. Grocott's motion made an interestingRead More statement. "I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary." I know for a fact that he didn't talk to Matt Grocott who was there. That leaves 3 potentials, 2 of them are deceased and the 3rd was Andy Klein who did not attend that meeting so he didn't vote. I would like to know who the "various people who were" are.
Marc Parent June 11, 2013 at 07:50 am
San Carlos just spent 10 Million after lawsuit from the "Bay Keepers", more activistsRead More wanting more money?
Holly Bell June 8, 2013 at 01:23 pm
Unbelievable!! Many voters are watching this issue closely and will remember this vote. Evidently,Read More these commissioners believe that resident's have no voice in city decision-making. Someone please name those commissioners who disregarded the loud-and-clear preference of the people. Time to clean house.
Bob Farkas June 8, 2013 at 02:01 pm
The two commissioners who voted for turf were John Seiling and Ray Merala. It was Ray's lastRead More meeting as a commissioner since he has termed out after 9+ years of service. I think they felt that the needs of the elite CYSO program should take precedence over neighbors and others who use the park. Youth sports seems a principal influencer at Parks and Rec. as they are the largest organized user of the facilities. I agree with many other opponents of this project that we all need to support adequate fields for youth sports. I just think these needs have to be in balance with those of the rest of the community. It was very disappointing that, although it is field availability which is purportedly driving this initiative, there was no available recent data to demonstrate the problem or an analysis of how much of the problem would be addressed by this measure. To a businessman like me, this seems a very unprofessional approach.
Concerned Taxpayer June 8, 2013 at 07:08 pm
This is purely a NIMBY issue. Lets just all be honest about that. The folks who live across fromRead More Highlands Park were the loudest opponents there and were citing all kinds of crazy issues when they should have just been honest and said,"I really don't want to look at more people and cars at the public park that is across the street from me and was there when I moved in." That is essentially the true gripe. NIMBY!!! A very weak argument and unelectable dishonest. Unless you can create more land we have to extend the use at existing parks and fields. This is very logical. We live in California and having to use astro turf stinks but we also live where there is no more available land to utilize. The commissions punted this to the council pure and simple. Well we already know who will vote against it. I am curious who will vote for it?????
Bill June 5, 2013 at 02:53 pm
This post makes zero sense. Bike lanes are a visual reminder to drivers that they must share theRead More road with riders. For every cyclist who is not observing the rules of traffic, I will show you 100 texting drivers. Removing bike lanes is not the answer.