After tussle with bike-share startup, San Francisco says it’s sick of disruption

When their shifts end, Uber drivers set up camp in parking lots

By Eric Newcomer and Olivia Zaleski : chicagotribune – excerpt

In the 1970s, the Safeway grocery store in San Francisco’s gleaming Marina neighborhood, known as the Social Safeway, was a cornerstone of the pre-Tinder dating scene. Armistead Maupin made it famous in his 1978 book, Tales of the City, calling it “the hottest spot in town” to meet people. For years afterward, locals called it the “Singles Safeway” or the “Dateway.”

Forty years later, German Tugas, a 42-year-old Uber driver, got to know it for another reason: Its parking lot was a safe spot to sleep in his car. Most weeknights, Tugas drives over 70 hours a week in San Francisco, where the work is steadier and fares are higher than in his hometown, Sacramento. So every Monday morning, Tugas leaves at 4 a.m., says goodbye to his wife and four daughters, drives 90 miles to the city, and lugs around passengers until he earns $300 or gets too tired to keep going. (Most days he nets $230 after expenses like gas.) Then, he and at least a half dozen other Uber drivers gathered in the Social Safeway parking lot to sleep in their cars before another long day of driving… (more)

What do Uber drivers in San Francisco have in common with San Jose cops? They both sleep in parking lots.

Permanent street parking eyed for shared cars

By Jerold Chinn : sfbay – excerpt

“There’s a fundamental sense of inequity.”

San Francisco’s transportation agency is contemplating whether to make its on-street car-sharing parking program permanent.

Last Friday, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency released its findings on a two-year pilot that allowed three car-sharing companies – City CarShare, Getaround and Zipcar – to use 200 curbside parking spaces throughout The City.

Andy Thornley of the SFMTA’s Sustainable Streets Division, shared the findings at the transit agency’s Policy And Governance Committee last Friday with some promising results…

There were some setbacks for both City CarShare and Getaround when it came to the availability of vehicles because of vandalism, theft or attempted theft of car-sharing vehicles, the report said.

The availability of Getaround vehicles were also affected because the company does not own its own fleet, as it is a peer-to-peer concept where the company relies on vehicle owners to make them available for members.

Construction and street closures also played a role in putting car-sharing parking spaces offline, said Thornley…

“You have turned a piece of the public realm into a private spot for an individual who lives in the neighborhood and that’s pretty perverse…

Currently, the car-sharing companies can remain in the designated car-sharing parking space even during street sweeping days as long as they clean and maintain the parking spaces themselves.

Peskin said this was giving preferential treatment to the companies and it was not fair for residents who get up early in the morning to move their vehicles while car-sharing vehicles can remain at the curbside parking space:

“There’s a fundamental sense of inequity.”

Read the full pilot evaluation on the SFMTA’s website... (more)

Inequality equals discrimination and that is not legal. Ever wonder why the SFMTA costs the city more than any other in legal settlements? This is one of the reasons. Must be nice to have access to unlimited legal funds. How long can city afford to defend the SFMTA and protect the uninsured, undocumented, and homeless residents they have promised to support?

How smart are these SMART systems that are disrupting our city for the benefit of the few?