--to show that a car has been sitting at the same meter for too long. Or maybe they don't any more, I don't know-- could be dating myself.
More to the point: Fine with me. No reason construction workers or anyone else should get to take up a space all day. Even better if they're from the 'burbs.
Oldest trick in the book for tradesmen who think they're special snowflakes and shouldn't have to pay for parking like everyone else...jam the meter, put note on car or meter.
Too bad most cities/towns now have a 15 minute rule- if the meter is jammed, you only get 15 minutes.
I remember carpenters drilling holes into meters on Newbury Street to insert a nail (head sheared off flush to the surface of the meter) which would hold the little needle in the meter up at the two hour position all day. Meter maids caught on fairly quick to it though.
....also got caught jamming the meters near the restaurants they parked cars for. They should just convert all meters to those pay-at-the-station-and-stick-the-receipt-in-your-window ones they have on Newbury street. If one machine is broken you go to the next one to buy your ticket.
Watch how fast the shit hits the fan when Rich Restaurant Patron finds out their luxury car is impounded in the city lot because the valet parking company was parking their car in a metered space where the meter had been tampered with.
It'd stop people from interfering with meters if the law was that any vehicle found in a space with a jammed/disabled/broken meter is immediately impounded.
Boston (and NYC) let you park for an hour if the meter is broken. I haven't heard of a similar rule in any other Boston-area towns. What towns are you thinking of?
I recently had a job interview just down the street from the old Crate & Barrel and found a spot about three blocks away. I waited until the last minute to put in my money so I could get the full two hours. I couldn't tell my interview to cut it short because I might get a ticket! My meeting went 2 hours and 15 minutes. I ran up the street in 95 degree heat, in my interview suit, to rush to my spot. No ticket, but as I started pulling out of the spot, I saw the meter maid round the corner! I don't know how you are supposed to do business in these towns when they don't even give you a place to park. I could have taken the red line, but with only Alewife to park at, and that being full by 7:30 am I would have been 3 hours early for the appointment!!
...but I DID get the ticket. I was in a 2-hour spot. Interview went great.....and took 3.5 hours.! Went downstairs, had a ticket on my windshield. At least I got the job.
I guess the answer is, splurge for a garage spot during your interview, take the T once you get the job~!
I don't know how you are supposed to do business in these towns when they don't even give you a place to park.
Can you explain this comment a bit more? Last I checked, driving is a privilege and parking is as well. Moreover, a car takes up an awful lot of space in a very old part of the urban environment.
Not a failed experiment in social engineering, but an example of the inappropriateness of driving everywhere in parts of the city built before cars existed. So, we bulldoze everything for parking? Like thriving downtown Hartford or Detroit?
Last I checked, there are lots of ways to get to Harvard Square that don't involve a personal internal combustion device. I have 14 and 12 year old kids who have this one figured out and do plenty of business there, believe me.
put up multi-level parking decks instead of single level lots. But, what do we do instead - we say you can't add ANY parking capacity.
If we truly want to encourage people to use other means of transportation (a reasonable concept that I DO believe in), then we should be expanding parking capacity at outlying stations AND improve the freqency of the train, subway, and bus services from those outlying stations into downtown areas.
And parking at Alewife and taking the Red Line in for a 10:00 or 11:00 job interview isn't a practical alternative for one simple reason - the lot fills up by 7:30 in the morning.
Improve transit to where people live, and acknowledge these things that the T seems to be utterly clueless about:
1. not everybody works downtown
2. not everybody uses the T only to get to work and back in the rush hour direction
3. not everybody works between 8 and 6 or can shift schedules to the early end
4. not everybody wants to go downtown to get to work
5. a 1.5 hour commute to get 10 miles is not acceptable - rapid transit lines need to be extended
I've seen this done in a city that has nearly doubled its population and massively expanded light rail and trolley service and cycling amenities while reducing car use. Comprehensive regional commitment to an integrated transportation infrastructure anybody?
Swirly,
I do agree that we need to drastically improve mass transit for all of the reasons you list. If it was easier or more convenient, people would use it. With the price of gas, I'd be glad to take it, but it is too hard to get to. I also agree that not everyone is trying to use it for the 9-5 world. Some of us actually need to get around during the day as well!
There is no easy way, but I agree expanding rapid transit would be a welcome use of my tax dollars. When I lived in the city years ago, I rode the bus to work and then to the grocery store and walked home. But once you get out of the city, that is really hard to do.
No one suggested that we "bulldoze everything for parking", I am simply saying you may need more than two hours to conduct business without the threat of a $40 dollar ticket. I am thrilled that your kids can ride their bikes or walk or take a bus to Harvard Square, but not everyone lives on a bus route or near the T. Walking ten miles from my house to a job interview seems a little over the top. I'm glad you think driving is a privilege, and parking is as well, but I'm pretty sure that people had to 'park' horses and buggys back before cars existed. I don't feel bad for having a car and using it. All I was trying to do is get a job, which after a year of not having one, I would be glad to take the T to get to!
I've had job interviews in Harvard Square, and I drive there occasionally too.
Knowing that most meters are only a couple of hours because they are designed to prevent all-day parking, I asked the interviewer what the best options were, and if there was parking available. I was directed to a lot 3 blocks away that was a bit hidden down an alley that wasn't terribly expensive. I ended up finding three hour spots in the public garage near the Charles Hotel.
Nobody made you park at a meter, and your complaint that "there wasn't a spot just for your car" in an area with 1600s street layout is naive and amusing to say the least, given the notorious parking issues in Cambridge.
So your point is the government needs to supply more publicly subsidized parking spaces because private lots are too expensive? Are you willing to pay more taxes for this? I think its ridiculous the amount of subsidized spaces there are in the Boston area as it is, since the cities are losing so much money compared to the market rate for spaces.
Plus, if the meters were all day parking, do you really think that there would have been any spaces for you to park? No, everyone who works there would have parked in the cheap subsidized spaces early int he morning (just like the subsidized spaces at Alewife) and you would have had to park at one of the market rate lots.
And, guess what Anon, municipal parking garages charge their patrons to park cars there, just like the private garages do. Only, the municipal garages are actually affordable for the person who needs to park longer than the arbitrary two-hour limit set on meters, but doesn't need to park all day. Cities and towns like Lowell, which has several downtown municipal long-term garages, have found them to be effective in discouraging people from feeding meters or moving their cars every two hours.
In the real world, you don't have to be a member of the upper classes to own a car in the United States in 2010. Retail clerks, waitstaff, and janitors are examples of 3 professions where people often drive to work, even in urban parts of Boston, because they get off duty after the T closes.
And governments should provide on-street parking. It's a good way to provide a valuable service without bulldozing large parts of an existing city, and the local government is the only obvious entity to provide it, since the streets are for everyone.
Seriously, your interview was 2-3 blocks from Harvard Sq. T station, which is a ~15 minute ride from Alewife.
Or you could say to your interviewer, "by the way, I'm sorry- I'm parked at a metered spot and I've got about two hours on the meter. If it looks like we're going to go over, would you mind if I popped out for a minute to feed the meter?" Unless they're primma donnas, should be fine (people like chances to check email/voicemail) though they'll probably be wondering why you didn't T it. Or somehow work it into walk to the local coffee shop. People like getting out...
Alewife is full? Fair complaint, the garage should be expanded, but you have other options.
Park at a garage in the area. Harvard square has plenty of garage and lot parking. It isnt cheap, nor should it be.
Take the bus from your home.
Take commuter rail to porter.
Park in arlington (at a cheaper lot) and take the 77.
Yeah, we should totally buldoze Harvard square to put in more parking, oh wait, then no one would want to go to Harvard Square.
Much of America has tried the approach of providing unlimited parking, and that's why much of america has no public space other than the mall foodcourt.
Talk about failed social experiments.
And Just Wondering, if you can't get to Alewife in time to get one of those spots, we have this invention called the commuter rail- it allows people to park their big bulky vehicles further out, where real estate is less valuable, and come into the city, where there are a wealth of public transportation connections to get them to their destination (jobs) without ruining the city by turning it into an enormous parking lot.
Comments
This is why they put the chalk marks on car tires
--to show that a car has been sitting at the same meter for too long. Or maybe they don't any more, I don't know-- could be dating myself.
More to the point: Fine with me. No reason construction workers or anyone else should get to take up a space all day. Even better if they're from the 'burbs.
yeah, "meter jammed on him" because he jammed shit in it
Oldest trick in the book for tradesmen who think they're special snowflakes and shouldn't have to pay for parking like everyone else...jam the meter, put note on car or meter.
Too bad most cities/towns now have a 15 minute rule- if the meter is jammed, you only get 15 minutes.
Lovely Rita
I remember carpenters drilling holes into meters on Newbury Street to insert a nail (head sheared off flush to the surface of the meter) which would hold the little needle in the meter up at the two hour position all day. Meter maids caught on fairly quick to it though.
and the valet drivers
....also got caught jamming the meters near the restaurants they parked cars for. They should just convert all meters to those pay-at-the-station-and-stick-the-receipt-in-your-window ones they have on Newbury street. If one machine is broken you go to the next one to buy your ticket.
or they should impound the vehicle
Watch how fast the shit hits the fan when Rich Restaurant Patron finds out their luxury car is impounded in the city lot because the valet parking company was parking their car in a metered space where the meter had been tampered with.
It'd stop people from interfering with meters if the law was that any vehicle found in a space with a jammed/disabled/broken meter is immediately impounded.
"if the meter is jammed, you
"if the meter is jammed, you only get 15 minutes"
Boston (and NYC) let you park for an hour if the meter is broken. I haven't heard of a similar rule in any other Boston-area towns. What towns are you thinking of?
Exactly how are you supposed to do business there
I recently had a job interview just down the street from the old Crate & Barrel and found a spot about three blocks away. I waited until the last minute to put in my money so I could get the full two hours. I couldn't tell my interview to cut it short because I might get a ticket! My meeting went 2 hours and 15 minutes. I ran up the street in 95 degree heat, in my interview suit, to rush to my spot. No ticket, but as I started pulling out of the spot, I saw the meter maid round the corner! I don't know how you are supposed to do business in these towns when they don't even give you a place to park. I could have taken the red line, but with only Alewife to park at, and that being full by 7:30 am I would have been 3 hours early for the appointment!!
Happened to me in Boston too
...but I DID get the ticket. I was in a 2-hour spot. Interview went great.....and took 3.5 hours.! Went downstairs, had a ticket on my windshield. At least I got the job.
I guess the answer is, splurge for a garage spot during your interview, take the T once you get the job~!
congrats
Hey Sam,
Glad you got the job. I wasn't so lucky:-(
At least you can now call that a business expense!
Damn, sorry
yeah I was lucky, sorry you didn't get the job.
It's called
"Let's try to discourage people from driving by not providing adequate parking spaces to meet the anticipated demand."
It's also called "failed experiment in social engineering".
Um, huh?
Can you explain this comment a bit more? Last I checked, driving is a privilege and parking is as well. Moreover, a car takes up an awful lot of space in a very old part of the urban environment.
Not a failed experiment in social engineering, but an example of the inappropriateness of driving everywhere in parts of the city built before cars existed. So, we bulldoze everything for parking? Like thriving downtown Hartford or Detroit?
Last I checked, there are lots of ways to get to Harvard Square that don't involve a personal internal combustion device. I have 14 and 12 year old kids who have this one figured out and do plenty of business there, believe me.
Not bulldoze everywhere, but perhaps
put up multi-level parking decks instead of single level lots. But, what do we do instead - we say you can't add ANY parking capacity.
If we truly want to encourage people to use other means of transportation (a reasonable concept that I DO believe in), then we should be expanding parking capacity at outlying stations AND improve the freqency of the train, subway, and bus services from those outlying stations into downtown areas.
And parking at Alewife and taking the Red Line in for a 10:00 or 11:00 job interview isn't a practical alternative for one simple reason - the lot fills up by 7:30 in the morning.
Another Option
Improve transit to where people live, and acknowledge these things that the T seems to be utterly clueless about:
1. not everybody works downtown
2. not everybody uses the T only to get to work and back in the rush hour direction
3. not everybody works between 8 and 6 or can shift schedules to the early end
4. not everybody wants to go downtown to get to work
5. a 1.5 hour commute to get 10 miles is not acceptable - rapid transit lines need to be extended
I've seen this done in a city that has nearly doubled its population and massively expanded light rail and trolley service and cycling amenities while reducing car use. Comprehensive regional commitment to an integrated transportation infrastructure anybody?
I agree
Swirly,
I do agree that we need to drastically improve mass transit for all of the reasons you list. If it was easier or more convenient, people would use it. With the price of gas, I'd be glad to take it, but it is too hard to get to. I also agree that not everyone is trying to use it for the 9-5 world. Some of us actually need to get around during the day as well!
There is no easy way, but I agree expanding rapid transit would be a welcome use of my tax dollars. When I lived in the city years ago, I rode the bus to work and then to the grocery store and walked home. But once you get out of the city, that is really hard to do.
Agreed on all points.
But as long as we have the NIMBY factor to deal with, I doubt many of those longer term plans will happen.
please
No one suggested that we "bulldoze everything for parking", I am simply saying you may need more than two hours to conduct business without the threat of a $40 dollar ticket. I am thrilled that your kids can ride their bikes or walk or take a bus to Harvard Square, but not everyone lives on a bus route or near the T. Walking ten miles from my house to a job interview seems a little over the top. I'm glad you think driving is a privilege, and parking is as well, but I'm pretty sure that people had to 'park' horses and buggys back before cars existed. I don't feel bad for having a car and using it. All I was trying to do is get a job, which after a year of not having one, I would be glad to take the T to get to!
Plan Ahead
I've had job interviews in Harvard Square, and I drive there occasionally too.
Knowing that most meters are only a couple of hours because they are designed to prevent all-day parking, I asked the interviewer what the best options were, and if there was parking available. I was directed to a lot 3 blocks away that was a bit hidden down an alley that wasn't terribly expensive. I ended up finding three hour spots in the public garage near the Charles Hotel.
Nobody made you park at a meter, and your complaint that "there wasn't a spot just for your car" in an area with 1600s street layout is naive and amusing to say the least, given the notorious parking issues in Cambridge.
.
.
So your point is the
So your point is the government needs to supply more publicly subsidized parking spaces because private lots are too expensive? Are you willing to pay more taxes for this? I think its ridiculous the amount of subsidized spaces there are in the Boston area as it is, since the cities are losing so much money compared to the market rate for spaces.
Plus, if the meters were all day parking, do you really think that there would have been any spaces for you to park? No, everyone who works there would have parked in the cheap subsidized spaces early int he morning (just like the subsidized spaces at Alewife) and you would have had to park at one of the market rate lots.
Why should private companies have a monopoly
on long term off-street parking?
And, guess what Anon, municipal parking garages charge their patrons to park cars there, just like the private garages do. Only, the municipal garages are actually affordable for the person who needs to park longer than the arbitrary two-hour limit set on meters, but doesn't need to park all day. Cities and towns like Lowell, which has several downtown municipal long-term garages, have found them to be effective in discouraging people from feeding meters or moving their cars every two hours.
Why should the government be
Why should the government be in the business of providing parking, never mind affordable parking, something only the upper classes will use?
In the real world, you don't
In the real world, you don't have to be a member of the upper classes to own a car in the United States in 2010. Retail clerks, waitstaff, and janitors are examples of 3 professions where people often drive to work, even in urban parts of Boston, because they get off duty after the T closes.
And governments should provide on-street parking. It's a good way to provide a valuable service without bulldozing large parts of an existing city, and the local government is the only obvious entity to provide it, since the streets are for everyone.
But these are construction workers
who are probably carrying lots of heavy tools not easily transported on the T. They deserve a break.
two words: parking permit
File a permit with the city. That's what people who are moving do when they need to park a moving truck.
There's a reason the job title "foreman" exists.
In a transportation pinch
A taxi works wonders.
how about this: you don't drive in, Snowflake?
Take public transportation like the rest of us.
Seriously, your interview was 2-3 blocks from Harvard Sq. T station, which is a ~15 minute ride from Alewife.
Or you could say to your interviewer, "by the way, I'm sorry- I'm parked at a metered spot and I've got about two hours on the meter. If it looks like we're going to go over, would you mind if I popped out for a minute to feed the meter?" Unless they're primma donnas, should be fine (people like chances to check email/voicemail) though they'll probably be wondering why you didn't T it. Or somehow work it into walk to the local coffee shop. People like getting out...
You have a bunch of
You have a bunch of options.
Alewife is full? Fair complaint, the garage should be expanded, but you have other options.
Park at a garage in the area. Harvard square has plenty of garage and lot parking. It isnt cheap, nor should it be.
Take the bus from your home.
Take commuter rail to porter.
Park in arlington (at a cheaper lot) and take the 77.
Yeah, we should totally
Yeah, we should totally buldoze Harvard square to put in more parking, oh wait, then no one would want to go to Harvard Square.
Much of America has tried the approach of providing unlimited parking, and that's why much of america has no public space other than the mall foodcourt.
Talk about failed social experiments.
And Just Wondering, if you can't get to Alewife in time to get one of those spots, we have this invention called the commuter rail- it allows people to park their big bulky vehicles further out, where real estate is less valuable, and come into the city, where there are a wealth of public transportation connections to get them to their destination (jobs) without ruining the city by turning it into an enormous parking lot.
not "meter maid"
for what it's worth, the City of Cambridge calls them Parking Control Officers, or PCOs.