3 ms·

IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking perm

IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking permits for ELECTRIC cars which need to be constantly charged. I really don't understand who thought that would be a great idea for a parking constrained city like San Francisco. I do miss DriveNow, at least weekly. Having an ActiveE or later, an i3 to run errands or take friends around town was really really great, and the pricing was insane ($60 for 24 hours, all inclusive! It started at $30 when they first launched. I was renting cars for a month at a time because it was cheaper than owning/leasing when you consider that parking at my office building was $700/month).

jonknee 11y ago
> IMHO As one of the top DriveNow customers i'm pretty upset that they shot themselves in the foot here in SF by attempting to get 100's of on street parking permits for ELECTRIC cars which need to be constantly charged. I really don't understand who thought that would be a great idea for a parking constrained city like San Francisco. Since they are paying for the parking I don't really see what the issue is. If the cars are out somewhere being charged they won't be in a parking spot. Using parking spots for shared cars is more efficient and should actually increase the turnover of spots while still providing consistent revenue to the city (without having to worry about enforcement or actually collecting the revenue).