DC mayor Adrian Fenty already won my heart and revolutionized District governance by reorienting the taxi cab zone maps so that north would be up. Like on, you know, maps. And now via Garance I see that he's gone one further and our taxi fares will now be charged by meter rather than by zone. Good for him. GFR calls the old policy "incomprehensible" but it's perfectly comprehensible it was just designed with the interests of out-of-town movers and shakers in mind (basically a trip from one point in the central business district to another point in the central business district is cheap no matter how far you drive) rather than those of actual DC residents.
« Features and Bugs | Main | Dog Bites Man »
Home Rule Rules
17 Oct 2007 10:36 am
Comments (10)
Those who live, work and socialize within the downtown core might end up with a net savings due to this change. Anyone taking a cab between the "outskirts" of the city and the downtown core, or vice versa, is probably going to end up with a net increase in taxi costs. And anyone trying to travel during rush hour is going to learn really quickly about the "time" component of those time-and-distance meters . . .
This will make fares easier for tourists to understand, but I seriously question how much it will benefit DC residents across the board.
Pre-Metro, cabs were a basic part of the transportation system for people who lived in and near DC. Now, with Metro (and, particularly, with Metro running after midnight), less so. Consequently, I'd assume that the proportion of tourists-to-natives in DC cabs has increased over recent years- so, it makes sense for the system to become more transparent and, yes, more expensive for natives since it's more of a luxury.
I had a hard time trying to figure out why taxicab operators favored the zone system as a means of "preserving their independence" until I thought about it for a while. It's not that the cab drivers are inherently fraudulent, it's that the zone system makes it difficult, if not impossible, for a large cab company to audit its employees without a comparatively larger investment in equipment than meters do.
Meters make it much easier to audit employees of cab companies, which makes it easier to start a large cab company and undercut the independent operators.
Incidently, the same phenomenon is at work in keeping laundromats independently owned-- it's difficult to trust employees to handle such a large number of quarters unsupervised and thus more efficient for the owner to do it himself. And an owner can be in only so many places at once.
Incidently, I was against meters for the simple reason that I wanted to spite Carl Levin who didn't have any business waging a personal crusade over an issue where he is not a member of the voting public. He should have hired a lobbyist, like any other pressure group would have.
Why does Home Rule "rule" in this case? If there was no home rule, Levin would have simply drawn up legislation to force the adoption of meters a long time ago.
finally. couldn't stand fighting with the cab drivers trying to shake you down on long rides (depending on where you got in and out, you could get some pretty long rides for low fares, drivers would always quote something far above what it costs to go one or two zones).
If the zones are being consigned to the ash heap, what difference does it make if the zone maps are properly oriented towards north? Just asking.
There's no reason why meters must be cheaper or more expensive than the current system for certain types of trips -- it all depends on how the prices are set within each system. That being said, the WaPo article contradicts MY's suggestion that the zone map subsidizes short downtrip trips, suggesting that a switch to meters will make longer trips more expensive and shorter trips cheaper.
If the time component of time-and-distance means that end users bear more of the costs of congestion, that's a good thing, right?
Tyro's observation about the ability of cab companies to audit is an excellent one, except that it's undercut a bit by the new meters, described in the story, which calculate the number of zones by using GPS.
Traven - I assume they are going to phase the system in over time.
I hate taking cabs in DC. Too confusing for local, imagine the difficulty for visitors who never understood why the systems was established in the first place, why it continued, and most importantly, why the map looked like it did.
It's not quite the victory for tourists that it seems if there is a time component involved. There are quick ways to get places using side streets and slow ways using major streets. Anyone who constantly drives through the city knows which streets are always congested, which streets don't have lights which are synchronized, which streets have constuction bottlenecks, etc.
With the zone system, the incentive was for the driver to find the quickest way because he/she will get paid the same from point A to point B regardless, and so to maximize revenue, needed to maximize the number of fares. By adding a time component and making the rider pay, the driver now has the incentive to take the longest way timewise from point A to point B and poor said tourist will be none the wiser, especially when it innocously involves major (but congested) streets.
Comments closed October 31, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
The single most revelatory thing about DC cabs is taking one in New York. I think the first time I did that also marked the last time I took one in DC unless I absolutely had to. Saving twenty minutes of waiting for a late night train is not worth feeling like a sucker.
Posted by jhupp | October 17, 2007 10:56 AM