Parking giant says Uber, Lyft have cut parking business up to 50 per cent in some venues

by Jeanette Steele :  therecord – excerpt

SAN DIEGO — The parking giant Ace Parking says that Uber and Lyft are eating into the parking business — with as much as 50 per cent less traffic at nightclubs and a 25 per cent drop at restaurant valets.

A death knell for paid parking? No, Ace and others say they are going high-tech to survive.

For consumers, the bright side may be lower parking prices.

In downtown San Diego, this trend could colour how much more parking is built, as the city updates its policy this year.

In a September email buried deep in an environmental report, Ace Parking CEO John Baumgardner laid out the ugly truth for the parking business.

At San Diego hotels serviced by Ace Parking, overnight parking has declined 5 per cent to 10 per cent. At restaurant valet stands, business is down 25 per cent.

And, most dramatically, nightclub valets are seeing a 50 per cent drop off… (more)


Could Department of Livable Streets fix SF parking and traffic?

By Matier & Ross  : sfchronicle – excerpt

With the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s parking and traffic management becoming a bigger political issue, plans are being revved up for a City Charter amendment that would hand those jobs to a new Department of Livable Streets.

The MTA board would still hear all parking and traffic matters, but the Board of Supervisors would have the final say over parking rules, stop signs and the like.

“The buck stops with the Board of Supervisors,” said Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, one of the initiative’s sponsors. “I don’t want to be held accountable for something I have absolutely no control over.”..

Safaí cited his frustration over the MTA’s decision to reject a two-year effort by his Excelsior constituents to get a four-way stop sign at the corner of Avalon Avenue and Edinburgh Street — where a pedestrian was later killed.

Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who is co-sponsoring the ballot move, said the final straw for him was hearing that Mayor Ed Lee, with support from the MTA, was negotiating with ride-hailing giants to turn parking spaces into designated pickup stops for Uber and Lyft.

Safaí and Peskin need four more supervisors to sign onto the Charter amendment to get it on the June 5 ballot. They’re confident they’ll get there…(more)

Now we know more details about the proposed SFMTA Charter Amendment and what pushed the supervisors over the edge – lack of response from SFMTA to a citizens’ request, and the privatization of public streets. We have all experienced these problems and been helpless to solve them. The elected Board of Supervisors should be able to get a bit more done to clean up this mess.
If you agree with the plan to put the Charter Amendment on the ballot, let the supervisors and everyone else know. Contacts

Advocates Align to Fight Proposal to Split Muni/SFMTA
The San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR), the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, Walk San Francisco, and the San Francisco Transit Riders have come out hard against a proposal to split Muni, operator of San Francisco’s buses and trains, from the rest of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, which also oversees street design, stoplights, signs, and taxi and parking regulations.
The Board of Supervisors will decide whether to put the amendment on the June, 2018, ballot tomorrow/Tuesday, 2 p.m., at its regularly scheduled meeting.

SB-182 is on the Governor’s desk now to be signed. We need to stop it.

SB-182  would prohibit cities from regulating TNCs by handing regulation of the TNCS over to the state PUC. We just heard today at the SF Supervisors’ Land Use and Transportation Committee hearing that the TNCs are responsible for most of the traffic violations in the SOMA area and the downtown area. We also know that TNCs are responsible for a huge percentage of the vehicle miles traveled in SF and that they spend more time driving around without a passenger than most residents spend in our cars.


Links to the governor: Calling the office may be the best way to get the message to him. Email form is on this page:

Mailing address:
Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: (916) 445-2841 
Fax: (916) 558-3160

Details on the bill:

SB-182, Transportation network company: participating drivers: single business license.

The Passenger Charter-party Carriers’ Act authorizes the Public Utilities Commission to regulate charter-party carriers in California, including transportation network companies that provide prearranged transportation services for compensation using an online-enabled application or platform to connect passengers with drivers.

Existing law authorizes the legislative body of an incorporated city and a county board of supervisors to license businesses carried on within their respective jurisdictions and to set licensing fees for those businesses.

This bill would prohibit any local jurisdiction, as defined, that requires a driver, as defined, to obtain a business license, as defined, to operate as a driver for a transportation network company, from requiring that driver to obtain more than a single business license, as specified, regardless of the number of local jurisdictions in which the driver operates.

Local Readers blast their horns about Uber and Lyft

By David Talbot : sfchronicle – excerpt

Tuesday’s column about the flood of Uber and Lyft cars on the streets of San Francisco triggered a tsunami of reader email and social-media outbursts. So I’m turning over today’s platform to my impassioned readers. The public is clearly reaching its tipping point on the out-of-control ride-hailing industry. The last time something like this happened, Airbnb cut a sensible deal with the city. So who knows? The boys-will-be-boys bro-ocracy at Uber might also finally accept some reasonable regulations…

My column also provoked howls from those who thought I was unfair to the ride-hailing corporations. “The reason people take Lyft and Uber is because Muni and taxis suck,” stated Jamey Frank. “Neither are reliable nor convenient, especially for my disabled parents. We take (the TNC) cars rather than climbing down a filthy (Muni) staircase due to a broken escalator and elevator, to a filthy and dark platform and wait a random amount of time for a train. … The MTA’s policy is not solution-based. Instead, they prefer to punish people out of their cars through red lanes, road diets and parking confiscation, creating huge amounts of artificial traffic congestion. But no amount of driver punishment overrides the fact that San Francisco has one of the least reliable, least pleasant transportation systems in the world.”

Speaking of solutions, Philip Macafee proposes a sensible new approach on his website, the Rideshare Justice Project ( “The web, mobile devices and GPS location technology offer a great advance in secure, trustworthy and fair transportation,” he writes. “But only if implemented properly. States and municipalities need to step up to the plate by setting standards that blend the benefits of game changing new technology with time proven practices of reinforcing good behavior on the part of workers. (They also need to ensure) fair wages and safety for drivers. And they need to do it before the problem gets worse.”

I like what he’s driving at…(more)

Comments go to

SF demands data from Uber, Lyft on city trips, driver bonuses

By Carolyn Said : sfgate – excerpt

It’s a San Francisco truism: Every other car on the streets these days seems to sport a logo for Uber or Lyft — and many double-park or block traffic as passengers climb in or out.

Now the city wants Uber and Lyft to share details on how many ride-hailing cars are roving the streets and when, so it can ensure that they comply with local laws; assess their impact on traffic congestion, safety, pollution and parking; and ascertain whether they are accessible for disabled and low-income riders.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera on Monday subpoenaed Uber and Lyft to disgorge records on four years of driving practices, disability access and service in San Francisco. The companies have steadfastly declined to share data other than that they have about 45,000 drivers in the Bay Area… (more)

The “Sharing Economy” has lost favor in San Francisco as citizens and politicians now realize the circle of benefactors is very limited.

SFMTA Blames Uber And Lyft For San Francisco’s Traffic Woes


San Francisco has the third worst traffic in the country, and the Bay Area at large has seen a 70 percent increase over the past six years. As with many things in life, the factors behind this are likely complicated and multifaceted, but that hasn’t stopped officials with the SFMTA from laying the blame on one culprit in particular: The ride-hail industry.

According to a state regulatory filling submitted last week to the California Public Utilities Commission on behalf of the SFMTA, drivers with Lyft and Uber are a significant factor in making San Francisco’s roads so congested. “For example, in San Francisco alone an estimated number of 45,000 Uber and Lyft drivers now operate in the City,” the document reads. “This number far surpasses the estimated 1,800 taxis operating in San Francisco.”

That number comes from the SF Treasure’s Office, and at least partially explains why it seems like Ubers and Lyfts are everywhere — because they pretty much are. And just in case the conclusion to be drawn from this is unclear, SFMTA wants you to know that “Much of the increase San Francisco has experienced in vehicular traffic can be attributed to the huge increase in the number of TNC [Transportation Network Companies like Uber and Lyft] vehicles operating on city streets.”… (more)

SFMTA has to blame someone for the traffic. Next they will be blaming all the soccer moms and the shuttle buses (Opps?) for traffic. IF those shuttle buses would just stay out of the city, like SFMTA told them to? Could they be having a really bad day and forgot who to blame?

This is the funniest story I have read all week. SFMTA complaining about Ubers and Lyfts and claiming there are 45,000 of them, as if this is news to anyone. They really must have their heads buried deeper in the sand than we thought.


Has Uber/Lyft Created More Traffic Congestion In Your Neighborhood?
by Saul Sugarman : Hoodline – excerpt

When it comes to local traffic congestion, SFMTA officials have a bone to pick with Uber and Lyft. In a recent regulatory filing first noted by the Examiner, the agency chided state regulators for failing to properly consider rideshare companies’ effect on city traffic and the environment.

“In 2016, San Francisco was rated as having the third worst traffic congestion in the nation,” reads the December 6th filing with the state Public Utilities Commission. “Much of the increase San Francisco has experienced in vehicular traffic can be attributed to the huge increase in the number of [rideshare] vehicles operating on city streets.”

With an estimated 45,000 Uber and Lyft drivers on the road, the rideshare industry has far outpaced the city’s taxi drivers, which number around 1,800, the agency said.

And while around 20,000 rideshare drivers have complied with the city’s new registration requirements, which include paying a $91 annual fee, that still leaves roughly 25,000 who have not registered or paid up. (Uber and Lyft representatives did not respond to requests for comment.)

The SFMTA also argues that rideshare cars have had a “significant environmental impact” on the city, contributing to “a reduction in air quality, increased traffic congestion, increase risk to pedestrian safety, and transit delays.”

“These are real and tangible impacts to the physical environment, which, pursuant to state law, requires environmental review,” the SFMTA filing reads…(more)

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
After you come off the ceiling, think how you can use these admissions.

San Francisco’s largest taxi company up for sale

By Ryan Levi : KQED – excerpt

The blows keep coming for San Francisco’s struggling taxi industry. The city’s largest taxi company, the bankrupt Yellow Cab Cooperative, is up for sale.

A series of large personal injury lawsuits against the company combined with the growing popularity of ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft pushed Yellow Cab into financial insolvency.

Taxi operator CityWide has already submitted a bid to buy Yellow Cab and its 500 or so cabs. Flywheel, formerly DeSoto Cab, is expected to follow suit.

So what does this mean for the state of taxis in San Francisco? Is this a sign of darker days ahead? Or is it just part of the new ride-share reality?

Mark Gruberg drives for Green Cab and is a board member of the San Francisco Taxi Worker Alliance. Count him among those who see the Yellow Cab sale as particularly bad news.

“I think it’s a very dire warning to everybody else,” he said. “The loss of Yellow does not bode well for the rest of the industry.”

He’s worried about whether the rest of the city’s cabbies will be able to absorb the hundreds of taxi medallions that Yellow Cab is currently operating… (more)

Bay Area Public Transit Agency To Subsidize Uber, Lyft Rides

By Ian Wenik : thestreet – excerpt

NEW YORK (TheStreet) — The Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA), a public transit agency that operates in the California Bay Area suburbs, is testing out a new initiative: subsidized ridesharing trips.

LAVTA, which operates buses in cities such as Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton, is set to roll out the service on a one-year trial in mid-September. The plan will offer riders in certain areas of Dublin subsidized Uber and Lyft fares to local destinations at prices ranging from $3 to $5, according to the San Jose Mercury News.

LAVTA Executive Director Michael Tree explained the reasoning behind the program in an appearance on CNBC’s “Squawk Alley.”… (more)

If you didn’t need more proof that the plan is to privatize transportation systems after the government takes away your right to own your own transportation, this is it. It is the classic”Bait and Switch” scheme.

  • First they convince you that “parking isn’t free so they can charge you to park on the public streets.
  • Then they claim they can provide the transportation system you need while “calming traffic”.
  • Next they claim they need more money to “improve service” and raise the taxes fines and fees.
  • Next they “improve service by removing bus stops and seats, forcing more people to stand so they can fit in more people.
  • Then, when they have millions of people depending on them for service, they tell you to take the new “smart” corporate car service that they will subsidize so you can afford it.

The joke, if it was a joke, is that we had the private car service when we started on this journey, but now instead of owning our own homes and cars, we rent them from the corporation that can control our every move, and the worst traffic nightmare imaginable.

If this picture bothers you support the Prop L, the SFMTA Charter Amendment:


Bay Area transit system to subsidize Uber, Lyft rides

By Denis Cuff : mercurynews – excerpt

DUBLIN — In a first for California, a public transit agency next month plans to begin subsidizing fares of people who take private Uber and Lyft cars to local destinations rather than riding the bus.

Passengers ordering Uber or Lyft car trips within two test areas of Dublin will be eligible to get door-to-destination service at a big discount under a partnership between the ride-hailing companies and the Wheels public bus system in Dublin, Alameda and Pleasanton.

The Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority, which operates Wheels, said the one-year pilot project could help pave the way for changes in how public transit agencies in the United States serve suburban areas hampered by far-flung bus routes, few riders and little money from fares… (more)


CPUC delays vote on ride-hail regulations until next month

By Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez : sfexaminer – excerpt

State regulators announced late Wednesday they will delay a controversial vote on sweeping new regulations for ride-hail companies like Uber and Lyft.

The California Public Utilities Commission was poised to approve a major overhaul of its regulations for ride-hail companies statewide that would impact thousands of such vehicles on San Francisco’s streets. The vote, scheduled for Thursday morning, was delayed to April 7 amid disagreements over the regulations, including whether such companies can use rental cars to offer rides.

Such contentious issues include whether Lyft drivers can lease vehicles purely for ride-hail use, if Uber drivers should be fingerprinted for criminal checks, and whether unaccompanied children can legally travel in ride-hails.

New high-stakes financial deals, like a partnership for Lyft drivers to lease vehicles from General Motors, Inc. that was announced this week, added fuel to missives between the legal teams of the multibillion ride-hail dollar companies, their critics and the CPUC.

Now Uber, Lyft and others will have more time to hash out the legal ramifications.

The CPUC still plans to discuss the Phase II regulations Thursday but will not vote on them… (more)


Got something to share? Let us know! available on the iPhone AppStore Why Are There So Many Uber Drivers Sleeping In The Safeway Parking Lot?

The other night I had an UberX driver tell me, in detail, how he was attempting to crank out 25 rides that evening, no matter how long it took him, and that I was his ninth fare of the night at around 7:30 p.m. He was talking about the new 20 percent bonus that Uber announced for drivers who complete 100 rides in a week — a major incentive after Uber has systematically cut fares in order to boost revenue, at the expense of drivers’ take-home pay. My driver on Monday said he’d been driving taxis for a living for 26 years, and that he used to say anyone who couldn’t manage to make at least “three bills” a night was a sheer amateur.

But making $300 in a 24-hour period for a rideshare driver could take upwards of 14 hours, and thus you have drivers who come into San Francisco from Fresno, Napa, Stockton and elsewhere sneaking in naps in places like the Market Street Safeway parking lot, as SF Weekly explains — and unlike regular taxis, which cap hours at 12, and Lyft, which disables the app for six hours after 14 consecutive hours of driving, Uber has no such cap. (And there’s nothing to stop a driver from simply switching between apps, as a number work for both Uber and Lyft.)

The paper talks to one driver, a married mother of one from Stockton who’s writing a memoir about her Uber-driving experiences, who takes home around $1,100 after five days — and 60+ hours — of driving, which she does by pulling over for naps where she can, and pulling 12- to 14-hour shifts.

Is this leading to a lot of under-rested Uber drivers on the road? Maybe, though there’s no data to back that up yet.

But this also only add fuel to the argument to make drivers employees, and to offer overtime pay… (more)

%d bloggers like this: