From Shelia Dunn, NMA Communications Director
This NMA weekly E-Newsletter #484 appeared in April 2018. Ridesharing is still not the solution but indeed-much of the problem for traffic congestion. Some new linked articles appear at the bottom of this post.
The math is simple. More cars on the streets equals more traffic congestion.
Ridesharing companies such as Lyft and Uber have tipped that delicate balance between street traffic and transit alternatives.
Many city officials are finally taking notice.
In a recent Boston survey of 944 rideshare users over four weeks in late 2017, nearly six out of 10 respondents said they would have used public transportation, walked, biked or even skipped the trip if the ride-hailing companies with their app-easy services weren’t available.
According to a June 2017 report, San Francisco, the birthplace of Uber, rideshare vehicles of all stripes rack up over half a million miles every day on city streets. Uber and Lyft are regulated at the state level by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), while cities and counties regulate taxi services. This is a problem because San Francisco can do very little with the 5,700 extra vehicles per day on city streets in addition to regular commuter and commercial traffic. Both companies refuse to share usage information with the city, which resulted last summer in the San Francisco city attorney subpoenaing Uber, Lyft and the CPUC for their data.
The Chicago Tribune reported in February that the number of registered rideshare vehicles quadrupled over a three-year period, going from 26,800 in March 2015 to 117,557 last December. Cab Union spokesman David Kreisman said the number of taxis operating in the city is limited to 6,999 to reduce congestion and assure coverage but there are no such limits on ride sharing.
Ron Burke, executive director of the Chicago Active Transportation Alliance said, “Uber and Lyft have not delivered what they said they would—fewer cars, less traffic and more mobility.” He added, “They’re convenient and people like them, but it appears that they’re creating more cars and more traffic in the downtown area if not elsewhere. That’s not a sustainable trajectory.”
The predictable response from cities is to increase the taxing of ridesharing services, making the cost less attractive to passengers.
Late last year, Chicago implemented a 15-cent increase to the already existing 52-cent fee for every rideshare trip. In late March, instead of congestion tolling in Manhattan, the state budget included new rideshare and taxi trip fees, with some of the collected revenue being diverted to help fund the subway system. Cities in Massachusetts, California, Georgia and Washington D.C. have also raised or are thinking about raising rideshare fees to provide financial supplements for transit alternatives. Raising fees though will not really help urban core traffic congestion.
The most disturbing element to this cultural phenomenon is the push by some cities to alleviate core traffic by hitting up motorists for more fees. Seattle may well be the first city to have congestion tolling in the United States, with Mayor Jenny Durkan recently telling reporters that she plans to set up an expensive ring of automatic tolling gantries. (Who wants to bet that congestion or not, the tolling will continue once in place?)
Nevertheless it is hard to ignore the fact that something has to be done to ease traffic congestion in larger metroplexes. Uber reports that in the Seattle area it has 15,000 active drivers with 800,000 active riders. That is just data from one ridesharing company.
The math is simple─more cars on the road leads to traffic tie-ups and longer commute times. Ridesharing services offer a convenience that is quickly being overshadowed by the realities of urban core congestion.
Below are some additional articles since we first wrote this newsletter.
- San Francisco Calls For Changes To Ridesharing Industry
- Study: Half of San Francisco’s increase in traffic congestion due to Uber, Lyft (Really?)
- San Francisco seeks driverless car data from state regulators to investigate traffic congestion
- San Francisco Editorial: Uber, Lyft must work with city to ease traffic congestion
- San Francisco Ballot Initiative Would Tax Ridesharing Companies, Internet Sales, and Robot Cars
- California becomes first state to regulate environmental impacts of ridesharing companies
- Hailing Rides Down Crypto Lane: The Future Of Ridesharing
* * *
The Car of the Future Weekly Blog is sponsored by the NMA Foundation, a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting your interests as a motorist and citizen through the multi-faceted approach of research, education, and litigation. The Foundation is able to offer this assistance through tax-deductible contributions.
* * *
If you are interested in learning more about the Car of the Future check out the following NMA resources:
NMA Driving News Feed—Over 50 Car of the Future stories are placed each month in the NMA Driving News—the go-to source for all your driving news information from around the country.
NMA’s Flipboard Magazine called Car of the Future—Over 50 stories are placed each month in this magazine devoted to the Car of the Future. Stories featured include future car politics, industry news and thought pieces.
Follow the National Motorists Association on Pinterest Here OR
Follow individual Boards that have a specialized focus on the Car of the Future:
If you have an interesting story about the Car of the Future, please feel free to send us a link to the NMA Email address firstname.lastname@example.org.
Thank you for your support!