Uber ads on Prop 1 for May 7

[AustinN4]

The one thing I definitely did not like was the proposal giving them permission to stop in lanes of active traffic to drop-off/pick up. Thats just horse shit.

Agreed and surprised more people weren't talking about that.

 

[RstyShcklfrd]

I thought just the opposite, that the hipsters would want to keep their Uber. Looks like I was wrong from that map.

I don't see how Uber is a "hipster" thing. Since when did making the choice to not drink and drive become a hipster concept? Uber is a great idea and is/was a very useful tool, especially in a city with relatively shitty public transportation. I guess innovative ideas that force companies(taxis) to become more competitive just aren't your thing though because you don't use it.

 

[zincwarrior]

You'll realize its a hipster thing if you ask anyone over 50 about when they last used Uber.

 

[RstyShcklfrd]

It would appear that while many of you see a "California company bullying Texas cities", I see politicians lining their pockets by introducing frivolous regulation on a company that made a market more competitive. But alas, I guess no one really cares about these things until it directly affects themselves.

 

[RstyShcklfrd]

You'll realize its a hipster thing if you ask anyone over 50 about when they last used Uber.

I think you mistake the word "hipster" for anyone who's younger than 50.

 

[zincwarrior]

It would appear that while many of you see a "California company bullying Texas cities", I see politicians lining their pockets by introducing frivolous regulation on a company that made a market more competitive. But alas, I guess no one really cares about these things until it directly affects themselves.

Both are right.

I think you mistake the word "hipster" for anyone who's younger than 50.

In my case thats anyone under 90.

 

[Mreed911]

The one thing I definitely did not like was the proposal giving them permission to stop in lanes of active traffic to drop-off/pick up. Thats just horse shit.

The Austin City Council can't give them permission to violate state law:

Sec. 545.302. STOPPING, STANDING, OR PARKING PROHIBITED IN CERTAIN PLACES. (a) An operator may not stop, stand, or park a vehicle:
(1) on the roadway side of a vehicle stopped or parked at the edge or curb of a street;

 

[zincwarrior]

Good point MREED. Regardless of anything else, thats over-reaching, and dangerous to boot.

 

[AustinN4]

The Austin City Council can't give them permission to violate state law:

They didn't want to. Uber & Lyft wanted it, and reportedly operated that way in violation of the law.

 

[AustinN4]

I think you mistake the word "hipster" for anyone who's younger than 50.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hipster

 

[Mreed911]

They didn't want to. Uber & Lyft wanted it, and reportedly operated that way in violation of the law.

That's what tickets are for.

 

[AustinN4]

That's what tickets are for.

Hopefully they got lots of 'em.

 

[RstyShcklfrd]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hipster

I don't really need a Urban Dictionary definition of what hipster means. I'm a 20-something college boy who lives in these areas, I'm well aware of these people.

Here's a much more important definition I think we should all be reminded of though:

Free market- an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

 

[Skip]

It's great! I've earned half of what I normally would have today , because the kicked out Austin drivers are now down here in SA.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Mreed911]

It's great! I've earned half of what I normally would have, because the kicked out Austin drivers are now down here in SA.

It's not just ride-sharing the City is after with new regulations. Those against public schools, take note!

At the heart of the issue is that city code is written to exempt “public schools” from the process. However, due to interlocal agreements between the city and its various ISDs, the exemption doesn’t really apply to any schools other than charter schools — the code was written before the Legislature established charter schools, which, because they aren’t taxing entities, do not have interlocal agreements with the city.

Charter schools are, however, considered public schools and therefore do qualify for the site plan exemption, which means they do not have to go through the site plan process. And without interlocal agreements with the city, they are not subject to regulations such as development restrictions.

Linseisen said that this is “very challenging” for the city.

“We’ve been doing the best we can to at least protect public health and safety, but they aren’t subject to all of our codes and ordinances,” said Linseisen, who explained that the current ordinance is an attempt to mirror the restrictions in those existing interlocal agreements and create a “level playing field.”

But the charter schools that are opposed to the change say that the ordinance would not create a level field and would, instead, raise their costs significantly.

How much? Peter M. Hayes, owner of Project Management Services, Inc., estimated that, for example, compliance with Transportation Impact Analysis standards could mean that inner-city schools would be “off the table,” i.e. not viable as sites for new charter schools, and could increase the needed acreage and internal roads for other schools at a cost of $500,000. Water quality ponds could run additional expenses of $150,000 to $200,000, and the addition of six- to nine-month review times could mean charter schools would have to identify and fund sites two years prior to opening.

Revamping the code is supported by the Austin Neighborhoods Council, which passed a resolution in July 2015. That resolution asked the city to “require and enforce that any ‘public’ charter school comply with City development codes and ordinances; require and enforce that any ‘public’ charter school facility not exceed an established student-per-acre ratio (to be determined in compliance with AISD standards); and enforce state laws that apply to the illegal location of ‘public’ charter schools within the boundary limits of existing businesses that provide the sale of liquor or that provide housing for sex offenders.”

 

[AustinN4]

Ride sharing fans have other choices. All is not lost.

********************************
5 alternative apps Austinites can use instead of Uber or Lyft:
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/new...rnallink_referralbox_free-to-premium-referral

 

[Mreed911]

Ride sharing fans have other choices. All is not lost.

********************************
5 alternative apps Austinites can use instead of Uber or Lyft:http://www.mystatesman.com/news/new...rnallink_referralbox_free-to-premium-referral

That depends on if you're on a corporate account or not.

 

[AustinN4]

Uber Drivers Owed $730 Million More If Employees, According To Court Documents

Seems some of the natives are restless:

"Uber and smaller rival Lyft are attempting to settle legal actions by drivers who contend they should be classified as employees. 05/09/2016 05:22 pm ET"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...o-court-documents_us_5730fe0fe4b016f37896bc1b

 

[lsadfjlakjdfwalk]

The Austin City Council can't give them permission to violate state law:

That happens all the time with taxis, pedicab, moped. It has never been an issue until now since Uber/Lyft that competes with them...

 

[zincwarrior]

That happens all the time with taxis, pedicab, moped. It has never been an issue until now since Uber/Lyft that competes with them...

Then they didn't need to make it a law, thus giving them the protection of said law.