The city is considering removing parking spaces in several neighborhoods to make way for Uber and Lyft loading zones, with the hopes of alleviating double parking and other hazards that the ride company drivers present to every day traffic.
On of the zones includes Clement Street between 5th and 7th Avenues. Other neighborhoods where loading zones are being considered are Hayes Valley, Inner Sunset, the Marina, Noe Valley, Bay Street near Fisherman’s Wharf, and SOMA.
This latest accommodation for the ride companies seems to be part of a bargain to extract their oft-requested ride data. According to the Examiner, “In exchange for use of space, the ride-hail giants would hand over driver trip data to help The City ease traffic congestion that drivers have said is exacerbated by Uber and Lyft vehicles double-parking.”
The data the city is seeking from the ride companies includes the number of pickups and drop-offs at various intervals in the provided city curb spaces, data on the number and location of instances when ride-hail drivers slam their brakes while driving, raw GPS data of vehicle locations, vehicle collision data and wheelchair accessible trip data.
Part of the plan also proposes that some streets be “geofenced,” which would electronically limit where ride company drivers could pick up passengers.
The city plans to pilot the loading zone concept in one location before rolling it out to the other neighborhoods. Board of Supervisors President London Breed told the Examiner she would welcome the pilot in Hayes Valley within her district.
When asked about the plan, Richmond District Supervisor Sandra Fewer told the Examiner she believes “a “community process” is necessary before considering the pilot”.
The impact of Uber, Lyft and other ride companies on San Francisco traffic is a topic of constant debate. In June 2017, the SFMTA released a report that claimed Uber and Lyft account for 15 percent of all vehicle trips inside San Francisco. In 2016, the San Francisco Treasury Office provided data that showed there were 45,000 active Uber and Lyft drivers who drive in the city.
Sarah B.
Clement has always had tons of double-parking, and this has been the case way prior to Uber & Lyft existing. Seems like a very poor choice of location for a potential pilot.
Nope, nope, nope.
How do we send our opinion? Clement is super congested already, this is just going to exacerbate the problem.
does anyone even take uber or lyft to clement? what an odd proposal! they need this pilot in soma or the fidi.
Here is contact information for Supervisor Fewer’s office Sandra.Fewer@sfgov.org and SFMTA Board mtaboard@sfmta.com
No, no, no, no, no!!!
These so-called “ride share” companies (which are actually just illegal cabs, because 45,000 drivers from out of town certainly don’t just happen to be going your way!) can’t be allowed to take away more neighborhood parking. On commercial streets, they should be limited to pickup and dropoff at corners only, no double parking, no waiting, and if the pickup isn’t there when you arrive, go around the block.
No, no, no, no, no!!!
These so-called “ride share” companies (which are actually just illegal cabs, because 45,000 drivers from out of town certainly don’t just happen to be going your way!) can’t be allowed to take away neighborhood parking. On commercial streets, they should be limited to pickup and dropoff at corners only, no double parking, no waiting, and if the pickup isn’t there when you arrive, go around the block.
“Clement has always had tons of double-parking” – well, that’s exactly it’s a good candidate for a loading zone.
Alai, thanks for taking half of my comment in a poor attempt to make your point. Creating a loading zone for Uber/Lyft will do nothing to improve Clement St due to tons of other double-parkers, delivery trucks, etc.
Read the article again, read my comment again, and then consider not making comments until you have all the information in the future.
Please write Supv. Fewer. She my be our only hope to stop this thing. On top of screwing up traffic even more, paying Uber what amount bribe to give us the data is a very bad precedent.
Personally, I don’t use either of those services as they (as I understand it) refuse to weed out potential criminals by using finger printing databases the way taxi companies are required to.
And if you’re a passenger in an Uber or Lyft car involved in an accident…..you’re S.O.L.
Then there’s most recent taint on Uber not being honest about the data breach which also illustrates their lack of transperency.
And considering how much traffic congestion they *add* to the city I say ‘nope.’
Use fire hydrant red zones for picking up and dropping off.
Drivers will be in their cars at all times, and therefore in the unlikely event of a need to use the fire hydrants obviously the drivers will get out of the way.
instead of getting rid of parking spaces, how about getting rid of uber and lyft. they are making traffic and congestion a nightmare in SF>
Love the idea. I have 100 staff under me and I have had each of them write to Supervisor Fewer supporting this multiple times. Her inbox is going to be overflowing with support!
Michael, that sounds like an abuse of power, asking subordinates to participate in a political effort. Tsk, tsk.
Jimbo, are you a laggard?
in what way are you asking if im a laggard?
if you are asking about tech, then definitely no. I was a very early adopter of uber, but the lack of regulation in terms of number of cars in the city is making it unbearable. there were too few taxis before uber, uber stepped in and filled a demand. now there are too many ubers clogging streets. unfortunately the idea that uber would ease congestion by getting people out of their cars has proven the opposite. its so cheap and easy that people are now taking personal cars (including uber) more than before.
@KEITH – My initial thoughts exactly. A better “choice of location” might be renting parking space in the 6th Ave parking lot that is shared with Fart-n-Smile.
I have a Uber-Lyft drop off spot in front of my residence. Corner four flats have become their favorite places to pick-up, drop-off, park and have lunch while playing their radio’s loud, as well as depositing bottles of urine.
Of course this happens at all times of the day and night. For those not living in four flats, note that the garage bays make it so that there are no spaces for cars to park, but it makes it perfect for Urber-Lyft drivers. Also note for those of you who do not live in four flats, the bedrooms are on the street side and not in back.
So, after 30 years of living in a corner four flat with only occasional folks parking under our windows at night and making noise, it is now a routine occurrence. We are considering filing a “quite enjoyment of domicile” lawsuit against Urber and Lyft for the behavior of their contractors-employees.
Since they can and do geo-code they can “fence” places that their people cannot stop at. If it continues we will seek relief as it is either that or get a lot of sleepless nights.
JD – your comment seems rather exaggerated and not true. But I look forward to hearing how any judge laughs at you when you file that lawsuit.
How about they quit stopping/parking illegally in the road? Would this also include tickining ubers/lyfts for their bad behavior? That’s the root issue, putting these spots does not guarentee use, especially if it is inconvenient at all. I see Lyfts, Ubers and taxis all double parking in favor of pulling into loading/unloading zones that are within 10ft of their vehicle all the time.
Stop allowing bad behavior, get to the root of the issue. Also, looking at the bad behavior passengers here. Stop calling cars to pick you up/drop you off illegally. You are also part of the problem.