There is no any advantage of Uber and Lyft in New York because of the congesting they created on New York streets. They also do not pay any MTA taxes and refused to have wheel chair accessible vehicles on New York Streets. They also use surge prices which could be double fare of yellow taxi. Because of Uber and Lyft, all New Yorkers will start paying additional $3 after Jan. 1, 2019. This $3 is called congesting surcharge. Besides Wall Street Banks subsidized each Uber and Lyft fare, so now each fare is below the real fare in order to get more their vehicles on the NY streets and take yellow taxis fares. It is the reason that yellow taxi drivers committed suicide because they did not earn enough money to feed themselves and their families. NY yellow taxis also paid $1 billion MTA taxes which support subway and buses in New York. Uber and Lyft did not. NY Council put the cap on
new Uber and Lyft licenses but allow to issue new licenses for wheel chair vehicles, but Uber and Lyft does not like it. I believe that it is good for New Yorkers that NY Council voted for the cap on new for-hire vehicles licenses.
3
The advantage of Uber is also its biggest problem. The low cost means that drivers are making far below a living wage, as most studies I've read have shown.
3
Of all these complaints, in the article and the comments, no one seems to answer the underlying question of their complaint: Just how, exactly, will keeping the number of Ubers the same reduce the number of Ubers?
Here's the best Plan C: Improve public transit so more people will take it instead of for-hire vehicles. The result would be less traffic congestion and cleaner air.
8
The failure to regulate Uber/Lyft until now is political malpractice. Nothing better demonstrates plain nonpartisan political incompetence than virtually complete failure to control traffic. Although De Blasio was heavily supported by the taxi industry he was still unable to protect it, with resulting damage to the taxi business and a massive increase in traffic congestion. At the same time, Governor Cuomo, busy macho feuding with De Blasio, cash starved the subways, causing their further deterioration. App-hail car services are not a substitute for a functioning subway, the only effective volume means of NYC mass transportation. Even before these new car services, Manhattan traffic hardly moved. A decline of about 2mph traffic speed when the starting point was about 7mph shows that traffic congestion control was needed even before the advent of these new car services. Allowing Uber/Lyft to roam unchecked in the boroughs doesn't answer how this traffic will move once in Manhattan; and if these services nefariously continue to entice a horde of competing drivers, they will also further congest traffic in the boroughs. Finally, these app services should not receive a disproportionate portion of the transport dollar needed to finance the means of actual transport simply because they slightly increased the speed of performing the old, established radio cab/car service function of connecting a dispatched driver with a passenger who telephoned in seeking car service.
2
As a lifelong New Yorker, who does not use Uber or Lyft, New York City taxi cabs are experiencing the realities of a free market system. After decades of refusing to improve service, increasing rates to far beyond what is reasonable, and scamming ppl by taking the most circuitous routes they can find to extract even higher fares, now they want to complain that an improved service for consumers is unfair to them. No one on the New York City Council, the mayor's office, the state legislature, or Governor has demonstrated any concern for how the people who work, live and pay taxes in this city are supposed to get to their jobs to afford to live, and pay taxes in NYC.
They threw us outer borough residents a bone with green cabs that more often then not refuse to take us from the Bronx right across the bridge to Queens. Even though that's the entire purpose for them to exist separate from yellow cabs. Those drivers act like they are doing us a favor if they take us to our destination. The city needs to get rid of the meters and charge for distance. With traffic these days no one wants to spend $30 to go 6 miles.
7
I feel shame for your comments. Six drivers committed suicide because there are too many for-hire vehicles like Uber and Lyft and you folks talk about how you love Uber and Lyft. You folks did not understand that Uber and Lyft establish gig economy where ten drivers from Uber, Lyft and yellow taxis compete for one fare. So, drivers stay longer to earn just enough to feed themselves. Uber and Lyft won anyway because their model is gig economy where they did not pay MTA taxes and do not need to buy wheel chair accessible vehicles. Besides NYC Council would like to issue no limit of new licenses for wheel chair accessible vehicles for Uber and Lyft, but they do not like to spend money on them. Uber and Lyft enjoyed gig economy where there are too many drivers on the NY street and where no MTA taxes, no wheel chair accessible cars.
Folks, gig economy is not good for drivers. Besides, Uber and Lyft by their business model with a lot of vehicles on NY streets are responsible for congesting tax of $3 on all fares after Jan. 1, 2019. So, everybody in NY will pay additional $3 to each fare. But Uber and Lyft will not pay any these taxes, they just will collect them from driver's fares. We must be grateful to NY City council that they put a cap on new licenses for Uber and Lyft which might help stop suicides among drivers and might be forces to put extra wheel-chair accessible vehicles on NY streets.
6
Perhaps there should be a type of license for the app-based vehicles which only permits them to pick up passengers in the boroughs, like the green cabs.
4
If the issue is too many cars on the road in Manhattan and congestion then solve that problem with a congestion tax. Why should the city cap Ubers and Lyfts which are often shared rides while ignoring the taxi industry (which is not a shared ride system) and individuals driving their own cars. I guess we are going to have to follow the money from the taxi cab industry into the politician's pockets.
5
I'm not sure I agree with this decision. It's not government's place to remove or reduce a viable transportation option (Uber) that its citizens appear to be pleased with. People who don't own their own cars need options; Uber is a very good option to put in their basket of options (public transit, bike share, walking, regular taxi). The more options people have, the easier they can get around. If you want to reduce congestion in Manhattan, you have to look at tolling the now-free East River bridge crossings. This is a fair way to reduce the incentive for people to drive into Manhattan toll free today.
2
Sounds like a lot of anger misdirected at Blasio for not "finding the cure for cancer." oh no i meant for not "Being heavily involved in Donald Trumps infrastructure weeks?" no no I mean for not directing the Federal Dollars that should be available for a city that is the basically the economic engine on the East Coast. Mayors have access to Federal money right? oooooooooooooooooooh they dont? gees what can Blasio do then? Please someone tell me im honestly asking how much he can do? what resources does he have that you imagine he can draw on to fix something as huge as transportation. This is why the left looses all complaints and misdirected animus.
2
The Daily podcast covered the struggles of NYC taxi drivers well, but I just am not going to start hailing taxis. Nope. I have had so many bad experiences with taxis. I’m a petite Asian woman, and I believe taxi drivers often find it easy to extort extra money from me by obnoxiously taking inefficient routes to get from A to B and insisting it’s the fastest way and that I’m an idiot and don’t know better. I literally told a taxi driver to just LET ME OFF NOW because she insisted taking these crazy side streets, and I see now she just thought she could milk me for a little extra. Oh, yeah, she also berated me for not knowing where I was going in the process. I lived in the neighborhood, and knew it quite well. Nope. Nope. Nope. I tip my drivers, and this is just not going to change for me.
9
Maybe this wouldn't be such an issue if the yellow cabs didn't force me to utilize Uber and Lyft by ignoring me, a woman of Hispanic descent. Oh, and if the driver's didn't constantly refuse to drop me off at my outer borough residence before they let me into "their" cab maybe I would be on their side.
Other issues: Unreliable meters and the yellow cab unions' contribution to the Mayor.
9
@NY
Two fact checks here:
1) Unreliable meters? Since the high-tech system -- the credit card readers, the "Taxi TV", and GPS tracking -- has been in use in all yellow taxis in 2008, the meters have been completely reliable and virtually tamper-proof. Fast meters were once a common complaint, but I haven't heard a single grumble from passengers about them since then.
2) There is no such thing as a yellow cab union. The Taxi Workers Alliance is an advocacy group for all types of drivers, but it is not a union. It has no clout (i.e., the ability to call for and enforce a strike) with city hall nor with the owners of taxi garages. If there were an actual union (like the Transit Workers Union) we would not see the working conditions which have been the norm for decades -- 90% of the drivers from third world countries working 12-hour shifts with no benefits.
6
Wow, did anyone here happen to read the article today about climate change? Guess not.
4
If you don't want to be stuffed like a sardine, don't live in NYC.
7
Uber and Lyft (which I use) has been super convenient for me. But the price paid by the drivers, who are working long shifts on little pay, is not worth my (or anyone's) convenience. I use Lyft because I know when my ride is coming. I'm happy to pay more/wait longer if it means my driver is getting a living wage. I'm glad this creepy industry is finally being looked at. All you guys whining about how inconvenient this will be are really disheartening. Read the NYTimes articles about driver suicides. Or better yet, talk to your drivers about their quality of life. Ask them when their shift started. Ask them how long their shifts are. Have some empathy. Figure out if someone's life is worth $1-2 more per ride. If it's not...please leave New York. We don't want sociopaths like you here.
9
Why no mentioning of the green taxis (and their app called “curb”)? Their purpose was to serve the “other” boroughs and Manhattan above 110th St...
It was about time for the city to take a little pause and look at these complex issues of a regulated system vs entrepreneurial ones.
And by the way: please listen to the “daily” regarding the taxi driver’s suicide, it is heart breaking...
2
@Maria Karamanou: Curb also works with yellow cabs.
2
How about also capping the number of workers and residents in Manhattan? Why would you ever allow another super-tall building to go up if your city is unable to get people to it? If the tax revenue it generates won’t pay for the extra infrastructure required to support it, what’s the point? Are you in a race to be the first urban center that’s a thousand foot tall by ten mile long solid rectangle of concrete and steel? This is a problem with most major cities, the “build it now and worry about the infrastructure later” mentality. Money and political points always win out over logic. Why do we even bother to offer degrees in urban planning?
15
I studied the TLC and their budget has skyrocketed to $50M each year and because they don’t collect extra fees from regulations and selling car licenses from UBER etc they are loosing money. So money we should send on public transportation instead is spent on TLC Staff !
There are way too many UBER and LYFT Drivers in NYC ! Traffic is horrible as most of these drivers drive around areas with most congestion as their chances of getting customers increases !
I’m very happy to see the city made this decision! I fully support it ! For all of your complaining about not having rides - it won’t impact you at all !
2
We appleknockers heard there’s some sort of commuting problem or subway hassle facing drivers, riders, pedestrians and ride-sharers in and around the teeming, sweltering megalopolis? Gee. Well, forget about escaping to breathable air, sensible prices and accommodating landscapes — your patronage is not wanted and your presence less so. Oh we’ll sell you stuff should you make it north of the infested areas...at thrice the price of course. Coupled with a winter’s worth of unemployment checks, the skiing and skiddoing will be carefree and the schadenfreude will be delicious. Enjoy your politics.
So there are thousands of for hire cars roaming around Manhattan for hours together looking for passengers ( ask any driver when you are next in your Uber/Lyft/Radio Car or yellow taxi) when it is not the rush hour or raining or some thing. And now they have capped the total number of for hire cars to the existing number of cars just roaming around. So what is the big deal. You still have the same number of cars that you had yesterday. Why is every one so riled up? Calm down, take a few deep breaths (Yoga any one) and learn to just slow down. Your car will be there in a few minutes. Just relax.
4
“Ride-sharing” companies want an unlimited supply of drivers. More drivers mean Uber et al can continue to provide zero benefits to their drivers. And they can still punish with fewer rides those drivers who attempt to avail themselves of the flexibility their non-employers tout as a chief benefit of signing up.
And when they've killed off their regulated competition, they will do as they have done elsewhere — raise what they charge riders and and increase what they claw back from drivers.
They want to maintain their leverage over their victims. They don't care about the outer boroughs or minority communities or the congestion that results from their greed. Locusts could learn from Uber.
7
hmmn, well from I distance, I just have to say NYC not quite as progressive as I imagined. The horrible one-taxi company in Santa Fe is now defunct, and not a soul has complained.
Any New Yorker who has traveled abroad knows the plan B always should have been some type of light rail, and this was always obvious. Amsterdam and Berlin are two cities that have made great use of the new high tech high speed trams available in the urban transport market. Even San Francisco and Philadelphia have touched them. This isn't reinventing the wheel but there's an old boy's network in Albany and the suburbs with a brain clot called corruption and an inflamed artery called car-chauvinism. Bloomberg had aspirations to gain greater power and so he wouldn't confront either. DeBlasio isn't visionary (I credit his wife for early child care initiative and well established activist groups for the affordable housing and face it those are the two eggs in his basket the only two. Still some one (Looking at you Chirlane) could take him to Amsterdam for a long weekend to ride trams around. The most obvious place to put them - up the westside highway (traffic calming) from Battery Park to 125th all along the newly developed waterfront thick with new residential buildings. Across the Manhattan Bridge and all the way down Altanlic Avenue out to JFK. From Laguardia to Harlem across the Tri-Boro then a Y fork going south on the west side or Eastside or both to Midtown and up to the Westchester line through the Bronx. An East west loop which goes from Hunts Point past yankee stadium over to the Hudson river then south to the 110 and back round to the Bronx. (Chirlane take notes)
8
By international standards , NYC has an abysmal public transportation system. If you want see how well it could functioning, visit Vienna, Austria. Star by taking the train from the airport right into the City's center.
As long as NYC is incapable of doing so, it should allow any method to improve the ability of peoples without cars to move to their place of work .
That includes Uber
6
This narrow minded decision by the city was based on traffic problems in Manhattan, where mass transit is aplenty. This is an affront to the outer boroughs where mass transit is not readily available. The idea of protecting medallion drivers is also not the city government's job and is a ridiculous reason. This is the free market in action and regulation heavy handed New York City quashed the free market in one felled swoop. Unfortunately the people who will pay most dearly for this short sightedness are the minorities in the outer boroughs.
5
@Mike L Many folks who live within the city don't realize this. It's disappointing to be honest. Not everything revolves around Manhattan.
2
Yeah. Should really clear up our fast, efficient, clean, and on-time subway "system."
1
Reading this article, I'm amazed at how many low-wage earners are spending hard-earned money on what are essentially cabs. A nanny? A barista? That's nuts.
I have plenty of money and never take cabs of any kind. Maybe that's one of the reasons I have plenty of money. I live pretty near a subway now, but when I didn't, I still walked it or took a bus to it. It's a free transfer.
Also it seems weird that a nanny is being chauffeured around by a Lyft or Uber driver-- and both driver and passenger are struggling to support themselves.... It's a race to the bottom.
Also, with Manhattan in gridlock much of the day, the subway, terrible as it is, can get you places that sitting in a cab of any kind cannot! I'm really perplexed by some people's behavior these days.
8
@Trilby I take a cab despite making decent money because waiting for the bus in my neighborhood is a gamble. More often than not, its 15-30 minutes late and I am unable to get on because it's full. Walking to the train is a non-option as I'm too far out from the train to do so.
1
I agree with you, my primary option is the train and when i like to splurge on a rare uber/lyft ride to work
We are lucky the mta doesn’t charge for zone riding like Paris and it is one flat rate to get me from co-op city to Staten Island
2
Our focus must be on getting ALL drivers a decent minimum wage. Saving medallion value must not have any part in this decision. This is a terrible path that does not help drivers. Yellow cabs must learn that Uber's popularity has more to do with its clean cars, curious drivers, ease of access and fair price.
Instead of banning ride-hail services, work on a plan to remove private cars from the streets. It is ridiculous for parents to pull their cars out of a garage to drive kids across town to play soccer. Let them take a bus, subway or walk. Maybe more walking will help reduce childhood obesity too. As well, no official (US or foreign) needs an entourage of 80 police cars. September in NYC is a joke with all of the UN traffic meandering through town in conga lines of cop cars.
2
It’s just like the people who want to close Amazon because bricks-and-mortar bookshops are hurting. And look what digital photography has done the film-processing labs which used to employ scores of thousands of people. You can’t stop change.
If Uber left unregulated would have an Uber car parked every 10 meters in any given city with a wait time of 10 seconds, without regard for congestion, driver profitability, etc. Uber is an out of control adolescent secretly BEGGING for some form of boundaries and discipline from its feckless parents. Yesterday it finally received some. Good for Uber!
8
I ride the subway every day. 90 percent of the time, my commute is fine. This whole "the subways are melting down" narrative is gross exaggerated.
6
I grew up in Brooklyn in the 1950s and 60s when walking and mass transit were the best options. Transit was inexpensive and it worked well.
In the last several years, my wife and I visited our grown daughters and their families in the city. We also occasionally came for entertainment. We find the subways relatively efficient despite the service inconsistencies. The buses, on the other hand are impossibly slow because of other traffic (in this regard limiting Uber and Lyft will help) and slow loading and unloading. Walking - sometimes miles - is faster than riding a bus - particularly cross town. I've also rented bicycles and love the protected bicycle lanes. The only times I've felt the need for Uber was in helping a daughter's family move from one apartment to the next.
My greatest hope for NYC is that it so improves mass transit so that it's clean, reliable, and fast while being reasonably priced - so as to obviate the need to take taxis. Mass transit is inherently more efficient since a bus holds about 50 passengers and a train perhaps a 1000, as compared to an Uber vehicle having perhaps 1 passenger or at most a few. NYC should consider (if they are not already) bus-rapid-transit especially for the outer boroughs, with enforced dedicated lanes, prepaid fast loading, and signal prioritization.
3
Odd that there is no mention of the money the taxi driver union donates to the mayor and city council. Seems like this "dark money" (or the threat of witholding it in the future) was the main force for this change. The congested street argument just provides cover for the politicians.
13
If there are five people in your family — no NYC taxi will take you. We arrived at JFK, needed to get to downtown Brooklyn, and the airport dispatcher insisted we needed to hire TWO cabs. Loaded the Uber app, requested a five-passenger car, and we were on our way...
26
It's called car service people. It worked well enough way way back in the 80's and 90's. It even involves using a phone so Uber users should be able to handle it. You just call and speak with a live human being instead of tap a few times on your phone. Might take a few more minutes but price should be about the same as Uber is now. Also, car service companies tend to be local businesses as opposed to Uber which is now a giant faceless international corporation . . .
13
Public transit is the most efficient way to move people around NYC. The second most efficient is taxis, Uber, Lyft, and the like--those autos are in continuous use most of the day. The least efficient are single occupancy private vehicles that often occupy public real estate (parking spaces) during the 80% of the time they are aren't being used and occupy the pubic roadways searching for a parking space.
We should be encouraging transit use, yes, but taxis and the like as well. It's the private car owner who should be limited and taxed for the extra resources the use.
6
You've got it precisely backwards. The uber cars that are using and overstressing the public roadway, 24/7, and earning a business profit for that use, entirely free of any form of taxation or reasonable charges, are the ones getting a free ride, pun fully intended.
7
@Lawrence ...and parking your private vehicle on a public street costs how much? In a garage in most parts of the city that's $150-$400 a month. Get rid of private cars, or tax them heavily, and the road will suddenly be twice as wide. It's empty cars being stored on public land that are causing our traffic congestion, not moving cars with people in them.
2
Both Uber and Lyft are computer dispatched, and have provisions for congestion pricing. Let the city tap into their algorithms and impose congestion, idling, and location surcharges on each trip. And in uncongested locations with little competition from other services, make sure those surcharges stay at zero.
9
Econ 101
CBS NEWS April 14, 2017, 5:30 AM
"Just four years ago, the cost to purchase a New York City taxi medallion, an essential license needed to operate a yellow cab, hit $1.3 million. A hefty sum but worth it given the lucrative trade in shuttling New Yorkers around the city’s five boroughs. But not anymore.
The price of a taxi medallion crashed to its lowest level in about a decade when one sold for $241,000 in March. Last year, medallion sales ranged from $325,000 to $750,000. What has happened since 2013? The arrival of ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft, which are now a competitive force on the city’s streets."
Assume NYC would have a similar systems for medical doctors. You have to buy a "medallion" before you are allowed to treat patients.
What do you think the quality and cost of medical services would be ?
The system of prepaying for the privilege of being allowed to fleece the customers later was widespread in the medieval age (French tax collectors, Roman Catholic Cardinals appointed by Borgia) but has no place in modern economy.
12
Taxi medallions should have been issued for safety reasons to individual drivers, NOT investors. Their value should have been about $100, not $1 million. Uber is providing a useful service but the city wants to force people onto subways for revenue reasons. This is a pure conflict of interest.
11
@George A large percentage of medallion owners are small business or individuals, trust me, I'm one of them.
I don't have an address in Manhattan, nor in Silicon Valley where Uber is HQ'd. I'm just a middle class guy living in Queens.
10
"Riders Wonder: With Uber as New York’s Plan B, Is There a Plan C?" by Winnie Hu and Mariana Alfaro talks about the restriction of new Uber drivers throughout New York. This article was of interest to me because of the popularity Uber has gotten. As an Uber user, I can understand Ms.James dismal feeling toward this restriction. Uber is an extremely simple way to get where to need to be at a fairly low cost. On the other hand, NYC transportation, like taxis, are more expensive than the convenient, cheaper Uber.
Although, it is understandable why this policy is being enacted. There is an increase of traffic in NYC stemming from Uber drivers. However, I feel as that the benefits that Uber provides is worth the increased traffic.
4
Uber and Via pools were the only affordable way I could get to work after having surgery that impacted my ability to walk. Oh I could have taken a cab but it would have cost me four times as much money.
22
@Lucky Poodle Nobody is taking that service out, as a matter of fact, the only vehicles allowed to be used for Uber are wheelchair accessible.
The name of the bill is a 'cap", not a "ban".
2
Plan C: Move away from NYC. FAR AWAY. All cities have issues and rarely deal well with them, but at least you can live for a lot less in most of them.
15
@Todd Johnson
All New Yorkers have thought about leaving, but I've priced living in several states - Salaries are much lower and the quality of life is too. Gun violence and a lack of urban parks is the rule in America, not in NYC. New York has the money to solve it's problems. New York is extremely wealthy compared to other cities. New York is smart too, 67% of Manhattan residents have a college degree or higher (national average around 20%) We'll figure it out and you'll all come round to marvel at it like you do our other attractions. Of course it will take time but the city is 400 years old. Rome wasn't built in a day.
7
In my view, this act by the City Council is a curtsey to established interests that have long spurned and disrespected the citizens of this great city.
The established interests -- the MTA and the yellow cab industry -- would never have been so susceptible to so-called "disruption" if they had, ever, for once, heeded the needs of their customer base.
Instead, they behaved, predictably, in the manner of true government protected monopolists by resisting, in an epically high-handed and arrogant fashion, any and all innovation and improvements in the interests of their customer base.
People, until the advent of Uber and its ilk, our mass transportation services were no more responsive to us than some Eastern-European, Stalinist, Iron Curtain analogue, precisely because the conditions were the same, a lack of competition.
So, now you have powerful vested interests, which do not have our interests at heart, trying to stifle innovation.
This can not stand.
I demand the impeachment of every city council member who cravenly sold out the true interests of their constituents on this day.
39
Drivers are literally committing suicide because of the unlivable conditions they are experiencing. Taxi and Uber drivers totally support the cap. It's not just about our convenience.
11
No surprise. Anti-competitive price fixing, wage fixing and exclusion are hallmarks of NYC's inefficient, subsidized transportation system. Archaic union rules and Democratic politics keep it that way. The big surprise in all this is that progressives actually want to save a buck, improve service and encourage competition.
11
It sounds like regulation was a great way to drive up the price of taxi medallions.
I've had the misfortune of taking taxis a dozen times in NYC, and it's invariably a horrible experience. They brought this on themselves. I don't condone any of Uber's business practices, but the very rise of these "ride sharing" (okay, "illegal taxi app") companies is testament to how horrible the taxi service is in New York.
Thankfully I haven't experienced the decline of the Metro, but perhaps the city should spend more time fixing its transit and less time banning workarounds. The Metro truly democratizes transportation, and would be faster and more convenient if it worked properly.
15
Cities like New York, London are choked with traffic and overcrowded with residents and tourists. More development, more residential buildings where previously there were only office buildings are all adding to the terrible congestion we are now facing. Uber was allowed to put an unlimited number of cars on the roads with not a thought of the impact that it would have on already overwhelmed cities and the existing taxi industry. These actions do provide cheaper transportation, more available transportation, more jobs but at what cost? Do we want livable cities or cities that are crippled by over development, inadequate infrastructure, and unrelenting traffic, etc, etc? What about climate change? Increased pollution, increased noise, storm damage...We cannot have mindless convenience without being very aware of what it means now and into the future.
17
As a lifelong NYC resident, I do not want to hear anything about a cap on ride sharing until or subways are fixed. Talk to me then.
68
I’m a bit confused by all the doom and gloom presented in this article. The city council has merely stopped accepting new licenses; the number of ubers currently on the road today will remain and therefore a drop off in service should not be expected in the short term, correct?
There is no mention in the article of the average rate of turnover for uber drivers, and thus no way to project how many less cars there might be in the space of
one year. Other reporting has suggested that as many as 9 out of 10 drivers drive uber as a full time job, so on that basis one would expect very little change in overall service in a 12 month period.
In any case, while ride sharing has many advantages and the inefficient, consumer indifferent yellow cab industry was due for a disruption, its basic common sense that this kind of actuon by the city council was inevitable at some point. drivers are getting slaughtered out there and traffic is getting completely out of control. what were they supposed to do, wait until there one million ubers on the streets and 14 hour a day daily gridlock traffic?
15
“They” were supposed to see the underlying problem years/decades in the making which led to the huge demand for Uber and similar services and resolve it. They opted for a simplistic reactionary response.
9
@Justin Uber typically has a 96% annual driver turnover rate. By this new law, Uber wont be able to add new drivers for another year. So they will be treating the drivers who are already registered extra nice. They are already contacting dormant drivers by email encouraging them to get their paperwork completed with the commission. Translation: Uber will no longer collude with you to treat your Uber driver like an 18th Century indentured servant. At least not in NYC over the next 12 months.
2
To me, capping or reducing Uber's influence is important, for our sovereignty, our health, and the welfare of others, namely drivers. Besides, it is not eliminating car services, just preventing it from growing even further. It's already gone too far.
That said, Why not seize the opportunity? is there an option for a smart, driven people to arrange something that can server extant communities? I don't mean to be flip, but if there is an unmet need, there is an opportunity, however small.
Fifteen years ago I lived in Inwood, and the dearth of cabs up there was terrible, but I was usually able to flag a black car heading down into Manhattan. Many drivers lived up that way, or in the Bronx. I'm guessing it's the same now, in that those drivers need to come from somewhere, nd I doubt that most are living in Manhattan. Find a way to organize those drivers, and they might appreciate making the extra money, instead of driving an empty car.
There are car services. I've used those for years when we wanted to guarantee a ride to the airport at a fixed cost. Now, the rates for them are even less than what they were before, and although they don't necessarily have apps, they are easy to arrange and to pay for. Also, the Arro app is good for paying for cabs, and I have used it to get a cab while in Queens.
You have options. Look around.
15
If you want to decrease congestion in NYC, make verrazano bridge cheaper to cross. Everyone takes Holland tunnel to avoid the crazy one way toll on Verrazano bridge.
8
@Realist Why not increase the toll on Holland tonnel? Wouldn't that be more effective?
1
Could it possibly be that the taxes not paid by Uber, Lyft et all and the lower wages affecting the taxes paid by drivers has something to do with the lack of funding for maintenance and improvement./expansion of public transportation?
These illegal taxi companies are a con game invented for the sole purpose of avoiding taxes and to steal wages. If you look at it its the same game played by the GOP since the 80's of transferring money from the economy to the 1% at the expense of the people whom it supported. There is no new value or product produced only the transferring of money from many places to very few places.
13
The ''sharing'' economy cannot be left to grow unencumbered as a lawless alternative to taxis and public transit. All it will do is further weaken the local economy as it takes away from the tax base that is required for any society to exist.
At every turn the Governor of New York as tried to keep his stranglehold on the finances of the city, and as an extension the popular mayor.
These are the moves as a result.
2
I have noticed a van service (with a name I can't remember & specially painted vehicles) operating between my east midtown neighborhood and Williamsburg. I knew people were planning to do this when the L line was down, but was surprised to see this one operating already. People in Brooklyn must really be fed up with public transit options.
6
There is no doubt that New York probably faces some of the worst traffic congestion issues in the country. However, I question whether a moratorium on the issuing of licenses is truly the solution. It is likely that this cap will transform Uber from being a cost effective alternative for many New Yorkers into an unaffordable option as demand continues to rise and supply stays constant.
People blame Uber for congestion, but the same city officials that approved this legislation are also responsible for allowing public transportation to deteriorate to a point where Uber was seen as a “reasonable” alternative. If De Blasio and Co we’re serious about solving these congestion issues they would implement policies such as a congestion tax (which he already refused to implement), and funnel the subsequent revenues into improving and modernizing the city’s failing public transit. It is exactly these types of non-market based policies that got us into this problem in the first place.
8
If the city improved is transportation system, there wouldn’t be the demand for Uber. The yellow cabs don’t do the job anymore; get rid of them. The city is also discriminating against all boroughs that are not Manhattan. It’s a form of racism.
8
Taxis are like when the music industry took us for a ride charging $15 for a CD all those years. All hail Uber, Lyft, and Cabify.
18
I’m sure people in Manhattan won’t mind the limits on uber/lyft. But what about the rest of us in the outer boroughs?
6
It’s a cap on the current fleet not a limit on the current fleet. If you want to be a uber driver from bow to the next year your car has to be wheel chair accessible. It’s a year and it’s not permanent
if you wanna cut congestion in NYC, get pedestrians out of intersections....build pedestrian over or underpasses.
5
@sy123am Was thinking about this while I was walking downtown today. Why not have something like the highline all over the place? I believe singapore has something similar where pedestrians move above the traffic and amongst the buildings.
2
@sy123am. Ha Ha Ha! Well, let's see...
Manhattan ONLY rough estimate...
220 streets
X
5 avenues (average)
X
4 (crossings per street/avenue)
=
4400 pedestrian bridges
Let's figure $750,000 per bridge
$3,300,000,000 (yes, billions)
Not including the countless intersections in downtown, and all of the additional Broadway intersections.
1
@sy123am Also prevent drivers from blocking the box at every intersection preventing traffic from flowing naturally.
1
I for one am happy, exalted, and ecstatic - Less Cars and TLCs on the road!! Less congestion and less people running red lights, cutting cars off on the highway and speeding to red lights. If TlC drivers were decent and respectful this would not be a problem, but to speed to red lights, wait for last possible second to turn on highways, speed through red lights and idle when waiting for fares I say down with them all!! I hate the current mayor - but this needed!!
4
It’s always the working poor and minorities who pay the price for Mayor de Blasio’s grandstanding attempts to become a national progressive leader.
8
.....and of course, while things are being “studied,” the geniuses on the Council, in Gracie Mansion & the TLC will do absolutely nothing to address the legitimate concerns of the outer boroughs regarding availability of cabs and discrimination.
17
Yeah, well wait until their subway and bus rides become unbearably long and uncomfortable....Um, never mind.
Someone please explain to me how someone who’s supposedly “poor in the outer boroughs” who the article makes sound like are only black and brown people can afford to take Uber and Lyft as “Plan B.” I live in the heart of Manhattan and I can’t afford to eschew public transit for private car service. Also, if the City is gridlocked, who cares how many TC&L cars are available, you’re not going anywhere anyway.
25
@Jeff Me too. I also don't understand how poor outer borough people can afford those big SUVs they insist on driving over the free East River bridges into Manhattan.
7
People taking Uber etc everywhere is mind-blowing to me. I'm a software engineer making 6 figures and living in Manhattan, and I spend almost $1500 a year on subway fares. It's serious money and I'm not in a rush to spend more.
It'd be many times that if I was doing as Mr. Jeff Gutierrez was doing and taking Uber to and from work every day. It'd be, what, $5000 or more a year? You're not gonna get a ride for $2.75. I guess you have to do what you have to do to get to work, but maybe I don't make as much as Mr. Gutierrez because I'd be investigating other alternatives or sweating it out on the bus. Or move closer to work - I'd rather spend the extra $400 a month on rent than Ubers.
8
I don’t understand some people that can only take uber/lyft everywhere. It’s not good for your budget unless your upper middle class. I understand service can be horrendous, but your only paying 2.75 or even less with a unlimited
why the hysteria? There will be just as many Uber/Lyft cars out next week as there were last week.
7
Taxis should be regulated for safety and driver honesty and competence, but limiting the number of taxis was a protectionist tarball which made this fiasco all but inevitable. The city should end the medallion system, and maybe buy them back from their luckless owners before the latter commit suicide.
4
The subway is great if you live in Manhattan and you’re a 9 to 5. But if you have to go to work (even in Manhattan) and suffer the hardship of living ANYwhere else you know that there is simply no way of knowing how long it will take or if you will get to work at all. Making Uber and Lyft more expensive and less accessible (the MTA business model) will not relieve gridlock; it will hammer the City’s economy. Perhaps there’s a young entrepreneur out there who could start-up a profitable company that can get people where they need to be and even make a profit what with 5.5 million riders a day at $2.75 a pop. Without reliable affordable public transportation New York will wither and die. Until then....?
8
Why would anybody think that a cap "threatens" Uber and Lyft? It's obvious that there are lots of drivers out there, even in the outer boroughs.
(I also find it amusing that the first quote in the story comes from someone who is too young to remember using car services as the alternative to trains and buses.)
10
I see no mention in this article of a viable alternative to cars, subways and buses: bicycle. It’s the fastest way to get around NYC and the cheapest. Perhaps the 20 year old from Brooklyn should save her money and use a Citi bike instead if her long experience with subways is so bad. Despite all of the problems with the signals and subways today, it’s still the best way to get around the city and for a cheap price. Uber is polluting this city and clogging all of the roads. Here’s a test: next time you are walking around Manhattan, count the number of for hire cars parked at a light vs commercia vehicles, taxis and private cars. Their growth is staggering, like a disease.
12
The only part of what the City did that I agree with is the requirement that livery drivers earn at least the minimum wage. Why have livery drivers been exempt from this thus far?
In order for the drivers in NYC to earn the minimum wage fares will have to go up. If fares go up more people will opt for the subways and buses. If that happens the number of livery cars on the street will necessarily decline and traffic will improve. Problem solved.
What the City did today by instituting a cap on livery vehicles was hysterical over-reaching.
3
Uber should do a study on the positive economic impact of their services! More employees at work on time and new neighborhoods not on public transit now available for development! I know it changed my life for the positive. I am sure the $$ impact to NYC is in the hundreds of millions.
3
These drivers need, and deserve, our sympathies. Forget people like Michael Cohen, who owns several medallions and is standing on perilous ethical ground. What about the families who invested in a single medallion, which might be their most significant asset, only to watch their life savings go down the toilet?
I live in Brooklyn, so I take local car services all the time. Mostly, the drivers are immigrants working to support their families. This has been a huge hit for them. Yes, public transportation, especially in the boroughs, can be terrible. But what is the true cost of a cheap car ride if that cheap ride is on the backs of exploited workers? I would gladly pay a few dollars more. And if by chance I take an Uber, I always tip.
11
@Jane
Thank you, Jane. I feel a lot of people think that families like mine, medallion owners, are some kind of royalty living in Silicon Valley when in fact we are local, hard working people, in my case living in Queens paying local taxes.
5
@Jane I don't use Uber. When I have been in an outer borough and couldn't take public transit I have used car services in whatever neighborhood I was in, and that has generally worked okay for me. In hearing tales of woe from people in the outer boroughs who like Uber I was surprised they didn't use their local car services. But if Uber has been undercutting them, then I guess I can see why they are unhappy to lose that.
I am already seeing specialized car (van) services transporting people from Brooklyn (Williamsburg) to midtown Manhattan). I wonder if something like that would work for people in other underserved outerborough neighborhoods
1
@Jane
Uhm, no they don't. They made an investment which did not work out as planned. , plain and simple. That's life. Happens every day. They are not owed a bailout. Or, I would like to get in line also - I had a losing position in my IRA last year. Don't I deserve everybody's sympathy and to be made whole? Yeah, didn't think so.
1
The quality of life is better here with the ability to get an Uber or Lyft to take you anywhere else- for less money. Taxis are more expensive. Period.
The market needs to determine the price- and service and price must evolve. This is the era of fast everything- business models included. That being said, let Uber and Lyft grow, let the Taxis make adjustments that all businesses must make when technology disrupts their models.
The Mayor and City Counsel are taking their eyes off the future in an attempt to appease the past. Cynical me wonders if there just ain't more donation $$$ coming from the Taxi owners than from Uber and Lyft...
5
Someone actually thinks that traffic in New York City can be managed in the future without an up-to-date public transportation system? That Uber and Lyft were going to solve the problem? You can't be serious. Better get busy finding the money to rebuild the subway system and upgrade the bus system.
28
@Cornflower Rhys And bring those improvements to the outer boroughs and not just Manhattan
The NYC Council is not diminishing the number of Uber and Lyft cars, they are putting a cap on them. The outer boroughs will still have the same number of cars that are on the road today.
Uber, through its recent ads, is falsely intimating that the "outer boroughs" (average working people) are losing out while richer Manhattanites are crying over too much traffic in their part of the city. Uber uses psychological games to entice many drivers to areas of "high demand" which encourages many idle drivers. The drivers lose, the city loses, Uber wins. The NYC Council is right to take a year to study the effects of Uber on the city. Maybe, like London, Uber will agree not only to stricter regulations but also to sharing traffic data with the city.
23
@Mary-Kay McHugh -- You sound like someone with experience driving for Uber (someone like me!), and you are absolutely correct.
Uber could back up its political messaging by offering drivers incentives to spend more time in the outer boroughs, where most of them live. Instead, the paltry incentives that are offered are all designed to get them to drive in Lower and Mid-town Manhattan, and of course, Williamsburg!
4
The NYC Council has caved in to the taxi interests and removed a major improvement in NYC residents' transportation (ride-hail services)--without first fixing the subway and bus system.
New York City-dwellers have the best government money can buy, and must content with some of the worst urban transportation in any major US city.
I notice the Mayor and other City officials have cars and drivers to take them around; let's see them use public transportation day after day and then see what they have to say.
62
@Mon Ray
I doubt there is a more powerful lobbying group than Uber and Lyft, combined they are almost valued at a $100bn.
Look at what happened the last time the mayor proposed a cap.
4
"You can’t have Uber and Lyft growing forever in Manhattan..."
Yes, but WHY is it growing?
I am from San Francisco, a town not at all as developed in its taxi access as New York, and Uber and Lyft have finally provided some relief to us. Muni buses would never come, BART can have a system-wide breakdown, and taxis downtown are already occupied, and if you call a dispatcher, they are extra rude and make you wait an hour, if the taxi comes at all. And if you are anywhere but an airport or downtown hotel, no other part of the whole city has taxis within wave shot.
So if cities and their residents want Uber and Lyft to go away, give those companies competition by providing superior transit service to the public. Its not cheap at all to get a private ride somewhere, so a well-funded and thoughtful public transit system could win.
56
I live in SF too, and long for the days when entire neighborhoods lacked cab service - outside of commute hours streets were quiet - nowadays crossing any public street means elbowing endless circling ubers/lyfts out of the way. By the way, give MUNI and BART another chance, both are hugely improved from the 80s/90s/2000s.
It’s not just Uber and Lyft that choke the city’s streets—it’s rampant, out of control construction! (And pedestrian zones rather than protection for pedestrians who actually want to walk somewhere.) Of course there are traffic jams when lanes are blocked off all over town for building projects that benefit the super-rich developers who keep the Mayor and the City Council afloat. Just yesterday the City Council approved the construction of a downtown tech hub, with no neighborhood protections in place. This is on top of the traffic nightmare that will likely entangle the same neighborhoods when the L train shuts down next year. It does not take a rocket scientist to deduce that this, not only Uber, is part of the problem. Just talk to a taxi driver sometime. But NYC, NY State and the governor don’t really want to solve the problem—otherwise they wouldn’t keep passing the buck and putting bandaids on the huge gaping wound of transportation in New York.
29
I understand the concerns of residents the outer boroughs however even with an Uber cap their transportation options are still better than they were 10 years ago.
Manhattan is the economic engine that drives the city. When it no longer "works" because of gridlock all the residents of NYC will suffer.
10
Typical comment from someone who has benefitted from a lifetime of white privilege. Manhattan's interests should supersede the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens or Staten island. "Who do these bridge and tunnel people think they are? Us Manhattanites were ordained to be first!" It's a shame to see so much disdain for those unfortunate enough to live outside of it.
4
@Aaron F. Kopman, M.D.When we socialize medicine and we regulate your salary let's have this discussion again, because I could say you are over paid and contribute to the exceedingly high cost of healthcare. If you actually read this article you will see that many people in outer boroughs are now given less options. Way to pay attention.
2
@Aaron F. Kopman, M.D. and one more thing. Taking the subway away from 200,000 people for a year was not something that happened 10 years ago.
2
Scooters, skateboards, bikes, ebikes, skates ... so frequently branded as nuisances that are in the way and somehow too dangerous. Once I was threatened with a fine by a NYC subway officer for wearing skates during my commute. I wore an expensive suit every day on those skates and never once fell, never once hurt anyone, never once so much as brushed that suit. And now Uber, another solution, is branded "a problem." I am sympathetic to the medallion holders, though this action sure has been a long time coming for them. But it's not just about them here; among too many, and certainly not only in NY, there is a reflexive "pooh pooh" and "not near me" and "I won't accommodate that" whenever anything new is introduced to the transportation sector. And that reaction is generally nonsense from people who just don't like to be inconvenienced by change in any way. In an era that is and will increasingly be hot, flat, and crowded, that reaction is going to have to take a back seat to the fact that we all need to get around, efficiently and economically at a time when the existing modes are insufficient.
6
There's an important error in this story. The city hasn't "capped" the number of Uber and Lyft drivers. The city has stopped issuing licenses.
That's a significant difference. As drivers leave for other jobs in the normal course of business, they won't be replaced. Thus the number of available drivers will decline over time. New Yorkers will gradually find it harder and harder to get a ride when they want one.
43
@Son of liberty Sounds like a cap to me. Currently there are 100k Uber and Lyfts, since there won't be any additional licenses issued it is effectively capping the current number of Uber and Lyfts at 100k.
6
@John It would be cap only if drivers who quit are replaced by new drivers.
@Son of liberty -- Sorry, but the error is yours. The authors correctly state that the cap is "on issuing new vehicle licenses for Uber, Lyft, etc." (They don't mention the exception for wheelchair-accessible vehicles, however.)
The one-year limit applies to cars, not drivers, so new FHV driver licenses will continue to be issued, and Uber will now focus on getting more utilization from its already-licensed vehicles by adding more drivers. Message to all you Uber-App-loving Riders: No worries!
2
I dont have much sympathy for taxis. they had their time, and now, due to their complete lack of interest in improving their service and competing on rates...they are justifiably suffering for it.
112
Congestion pricing and infusion of tax money into renovating mass transit (with concurrent labor cost discipline) are the only workable answers. But they’re impossible given the political clout of medallion owners, transit workers, and outer-borough auto commuters.
35
@SJE
Don't need more "tax money". What you need is for the people that ride the public transportation to pay the full cost of that transportation like those of us who don't live where there is any public transportation do.
Maybe if they paid the full cost, they wouldn't vandalize the cars/buses and other infrastructure making the system fail.
2
Even as a subway rider I agree with this. $2.75 a ride just isn’t enough to support a quality subway system
2
@Blank Ballot -- Sounds like you are claiming to be more virtuous than those free-loading public transit riders who benefit from "tax money". What about all the money that's poured into the construction and maintenance of your streets, highways and bridges -- where do think that comes from? From "tax money", of course -- taxes that are collected not only from drivers, but from non-drivers and public transit riders, too! And how about airports -- do you think only frequent flyers pay for them?
3
Once again, the NYC Council has ignored the needs of lowly taxpayers and enacted legislation that hurts us. Outside the congested areas of Manhattan, taxpayers have come to rely upon a reasonably priced alternative to a very unreliable public transit system, Lyft or Uber. In most areas of the outer boroughs traffic congestion is not an issue, and an affordable, reliable, convenient and quick response car service is a blessing.
68
@SARAH
"In most areas of the outer boroughs traffic congestion is not an issue"
I've been covering the 5 boroughs by van for close to 20 years and the traffic today has never been worse. The traffic in the Bronx and Brooklyn is so bad now I will only take a call there in the morning. The 138th street and Fordham Road exits on the Deegan and the Gun Hill Road exit on the Bronx River are horrendous in the afternoon and don't get me started about the Belt Parkway.
6
@SARAH
Once again, tell me when?
NYC is heavily congested, the city is not allowed to pass congestion taxes to minimize traffic due to state legislation, what do you want NYC to do? Choke in traffic? Become like Bangkok or Manila?