A Yellow Cab van pulls into the unloading lane of a hotel in downtown Pittsburgh. Inside, the rider awaits an amount from the driver. “You owe me $48,” he says without turning his head. The drive from Pittsburgh Airport to downtown—17.8 miles if you take the most direct route—lasts no longer than 30 minutes and would have cost about $22 had the rider taken Uber or Lyft. The rider cringes and lifts himself from the seat to pull out his wallet from beneath the tail of his suit to begin the process of swiping his card until the machine works. Cabs in Pittsburgh (many in need of refurbishing and updating) are equipped with a credit card machine on the back of the front passenger seat headrest, acting as a screen to display the total owed. To pay, though, the driver will hand you an iPad (or similar tablet device), ask you to swipe your card, sign, review the receipt and wait for the driver’s device to connect to the onboard printer. This process can take up to 15 minutes.
I work as a bellman at a hotel and watch this scene unfold before gesturing toward the trunk—the universal sign for “is there any luggage back here?” The driver nods and the trunk door swings open. I begin removing the luggage and placing it on a cart, taking all six pieces before heading inside to wait for the guest to begin the check-in process. After a few minutes, the cab driver comes in with the rider. The driver turns and says, “That’s mine,” pointing to a suitcase on the cart. “Okay, sorry about that,” I say after handing it back. The rider, confused, turns toward the desk. Later that day, that same rider opted for Uber to commute to his worksite. Meanwhile, that cab driver sat in the same spot he pulled into hours before, first in the cab line, waiting for business.
After my shift that night, I walked with a coworker who offered me a ride home. He had parked in an alley a few blocks from the hotel. Three cabs were parked in front of my coworker’s car. Two unoccupied cabs preceded the third. The driver with the suitcase was asleep in the front seat. His car, turned off, rested peacefully in the sleeping city. It was as if he would become a part of it, trapped in it—never allowed to leave unless an airport trip dangled before him. His seat leaned back toward the cabin of the van, pressed outward beyond the outline of his body. The taupe, suppressed cushioning of the seat showed obvious signs of repeated wear well beyond daily seating—the reclined position was not new. His sleeping position had become engrained into the seat, but a sign of battled fatigue rested in the cup holder: A 7-11 coffee mug, the kind you buy once to reap the benefit of cheap, often refills. It was battered, old, and could use a replacement. A lot of people viewed him the same way.
My coworker and I get into the car behind him, and a conversation arose about the sleeping driver ahead of us.
“Do they always do that?”
“A few of them, yeah.”
“Some—others live out of their cab.”
I thought back to the cab driver’s suitcase. It contained his belongings, his possessions, what he lived out of. I thought back to how defensive he had gotten; he had almost lost everything. I had previously never thought of anyone’s cab as his or her home. His passenger’s seat was full of newspapers and Styrofoam food containers: signs of a life imprisoned in the cab; signs of an industry cornering its workers into a lifestyle of deception, disfranchisement, and desperation; signs of a demographic switch in a city where blue-collar workers fueled its growth into a technological, trendy hotspot. Where do cab drivers fit in now, with millennial workers coming to Pittsburgh to work for high-tech companies like Uber, Facebook, Google, and Carnegie Mellon, and forcing the city to adapt to their burgeoning lifestyle?
This lifestyle and professional switch has cab companies backed up against the wall by a larger, convenience-driven competitor: Uber. The company recently opened headquarters in Pittsburgh and began to employ self-driving cars in its fleet. This type of car picks riders up, takes them to their destination, and returns to the roads to retrieve the next customer, effectively eliminating the need for a driver. It is still too early to know whether riders are keen on the idea of driverless vehicles, in that it would be utopic to believe that no issues might arise. In a city like Pittsburgh, which has been molded into a center of the transportation industry, cab drivers seem unfazed: stuck in their ways of poor service, dirty vehicles, and the occasional trip to and from the Pittsburgh airport. Cab drivers are rapidly losing customers to their new competitors in what results as an unprecedented market shakeup. In September of 2016, there were just fewer than 240,000 taxi drivers in the United States, and according to December 2015 numbers, just about 327,000 drove for Uber.
Cabs in Pittsburgh return to two cabstands centrally located downtown. Their demand, however, for airport trips deters riders from hailing cabs to other locations. If the cabs are not stacked in the cab lane downtown, they are likely waiting in line at the airport. Drivers do not waste their fuel or time driving back downtown without a passenger. This creates a problem for riders who demand the use of the cab service for what it is: a mode of transportation. Drivers often omit destination details until the rider is inside so as to prevent this shady, airport-only tactic.
Tyler Falk, a Cities Fellow, ranked “the 10 major U.S. airports that are the 10 farthest from the downtown cores of the cities they serve.” Pittsburgh ranked 9th, with 19.2 miles from the downtown center—a 28-30-minute trip with no traffic. Pittsburgh may not be the largest city, nor the most airport-dependent, but for a city that now headquarters a vast variety of international companies and prestigious universities, the influx of workers, visitors and tourists is at an all-time high and can no longer rely solely on the hard, blue-collar work of its residents.
An outsider company like Uber employs more people in the city of Pittsburgh than the city of Pittsburgh itself does.[i] On a national scale, Uber drivers outnumber cab drivers. With Pittsburgh’s recent adoption of the transportation giant, the number of Uber’s “partners” (as the company calls its employees) has risen exponentially. Despite having no set hourly wage or benefits, Uber appeals to potential employees because of the self-decided hours, use of one’s own vehicle, and the do-it-yourself incentive. The stark contrast between employees of both the cab companies and Uber becomes even more divisive when the income is viewed as a secondary source. There is no sense of desperation in most Uber drivers. They do not seem as tense or as reliant on longer, more lucrative trips. They are willing to take a rider from their house to a friend’s, back from the bar, or to the airport.
The demographics of Uber drivers also differs. It seems rare to find an Uber driver who works full-time or regular hours with the company. This does not mean that they do not work 40 or more hours a week: their schedules may be more like: 6 A.M. to 12 P.M.; off; 6 P.M. to 12 A.M. Uber drivers are frequently college students, full-time employees elsewhere, or stay-at-home mothers or fathers. The risks—infrequent, short, or unavailable rides—do not impact the Uber drivers too significantly. The income from Uber is usually a bonus. Uber drivers usually thank their riders rather than rushing them out the vehicle to quickly snatch the next ride. Uber cars are also better-kept, the drivers more personable, and the trips cheaper. To add to the personable element, Uber drivers offer riders the car stereo’s auxiliary cord, or let them seamlessly play music via Bluetooth on the Pandora Radio App. Riders may enter the vehicle, scroll their phone, and play their music. It feels like the driver is your personal chauffeur rather than an unwelcoming stranger.
Though cab-driving companies and Uber offer the same services, they recruit their employees in different ways. One immediate observation of both employee fields is the heavy reliance on ‘transplants,’ a term which refers to non-locals and recent immigrants to the city. This trend of recruiting transplants seems more typical of Uber. Billboards across Pittsburgh read: “A little drive goes a long way”. The slogan was taken from a thirty second YouTube clip that accompanied the release of the billboards. The billboard and video target the transplant audience by creating a narrative that calls on all “go-getters, early-risers, providers, self-motivated, self-earners, 9-5ers, and night-owls”. The video continues, and a chef in a kitchen says, “Technically, I’m a cook,” implying that he drives Uber once the kitchen closes. “That’s extra buy-you-stuff money, or buy-them-stuff money,” the narrator continues. “Start earning this week”. These suggestions—that those who can’t find work elsewhere want to work for themselves, want to make their own hours, or want to make extra money—make those who come to work for Uber feel like they made their own decision. Employment with Uber is an agreement. The company’s drivers are not beholden to strict hours, cabstands, or airport trips.
The owners of the two biggest cab companies agree that their services differ in quality and business. CEO of Star Transportation Group Bob DeLucia said, “Pittsburgh is not a cab town [because it is a small city]. If there are no conventions here, drivers can’t make a living. That’s why they like to do trips to the airport.” Rather than blame the city’s layout, Jerry Campolongo of Yellow Cab defended the cab service: “I know people think this is a huge problem here, but if you gauge us against other cities, we're actually better. We have more than one taxi per every thousand people in the population. You won't find near that in other cities our size.” Mr. Campolongo argues that what the cabs lack in service they make up for in availability. When there is an excess of supply and a shortage in demand, however, the company flounders. The solution nor the problem is clear. For a city spotlighted as a global innovator in the transportation industry, even a legislative agreement would be a step forward. Mayor Bill Peduto, vocally supportive of the introduction of Uber and Lyft into Pittsburgh, has not recommended the legal ban on the transportation.
When you think of the infatuating, nostalgic buzz of hundreds of taxis swarming the streets of New York City, weaving among the crowds of tourists and the streamlined herds of businessmen and women, you do not think of Pittsburgh in the same light. It is smaller and less bustling. Even so, it is all starkly different from the dull, grey-poupon yellow cabs that inhabited Pittsburgh prior to October of 2016. Though the last of a dying fleet, Yellow Cabs in Pittsburgh still encircle hotels. The cabs’ interiors—as expected—are beaten and stained rather than nostalgic and vintage-chic. The seats are missing headrests, seatbelt buckles, and no longer hold the weight of their passengers; trunks are missing plastic panels; and doors no longer close properly or instead need brute, aggressive force to shut. Their drivers are often road-rage culprits, or cigarette smokers, or speakers of English as a second language, and are reputed as ignorant, unpunctual, unwelcoming, expensive, and directionally-inept. Their yellow and black brand and frequent strip club advertisement adhered atop the roof (reminiscent of New York taxis) could not be forgiven by Pittsburghers the same as New Yorkers. Everyone in New York expects to take an old, beat-up taxi. New York City traffic is notorious and getting anywhere within 30 minutes of your intended time is considered a success. Comparatively in Pittsburgh, a city whose traffic is relatively bad, it is still the norm to be on time. “I took a taxi” is not a valid excuse for being late. Over time, people grew increasingly unhappy with Yellow Cab’s service. The company’s business and ratings declined—their replacement was inevitable. Then, the rumors swirled: “Z-Trip is buying out Yellow-Cab,” I’d heard inside the manager’s office of the hotel I work at.
Sure enough, two months later, Yellow-Cab began their assimilation into the Z-Trip fleet. Z-Trip hosts a fleet of cabs that appear as Scion hatchbacks, Dodge minivans, and black cars. The company markets themselves as a convenient alternative to traditional taxis, eerily like those used by Uber in its preliminary stages. “Need a ride? Get the app,” Z-Trip’s website reads. They introduced a smartphone app that allows riders to pre-book rides, order a driver, and even track the driver to your pick-up location. Subtle jabs at competitors often appear: Z-Trip boasts “Up-Front Pricing” where you would “enter your drop off destination to get an accurate rate quote – no surprises and no surge pricing” as well as Customizable Pickup where you “select locations using our list of airports, nearby places, and your favorite and recent addresses.” These two features were initially unique—at least in Pittsburgh—to Z-Trip. Uber introduced similar features in September, offering prices upon ordering (a contrast from their original method of estimating within $4 in either direction price range, which frequently changed due to surges or other unknowing circumstances) and a “Schedule a Ride” button for users on the ordering homepage, allowing riders to schedule a ride for 15 minutes from now or 30 days later.
As the two brands grew increasingly similar, their differences become more glaring. Uber drivers feel more personal, that they are just somebody there to pick you up. They start up conversations. They may even live down the street from you. They are teachers and college students, or moms and dads who do this for some extra spending money or to buy their children something nice. Their cars are something you would drive if you were so inclined, or even something your best friend drove.
Though it may feel like your best friend or ex-boyfriend giving you a ride in their well-used clunker, it is not. Uber’s safety regulations restrict the use of cars that are too old or unfit for service. It also doesn’t feel like Mom or Dad driving you around—more like a personal chauffeur that happens to also go to the same coffee shop as you or like the same band as you. Upon ordering a ride, you are even given a profile of the driver that details the driver’s hobbies, favorite music, and favorite destination. The experience is meant to be natural, the rides conversational, and the drivers personable. You get the opportunity to plug your phone in to charge, play music or even grab a bottle of water and some candy out of the backseat. When you ask the driver how their day has been they could say they ran errands in between rides, if they have plans to go out to dinner, and then come back out later tonight. Their schedules are flexible, and you may even see them out one night. Uber drivers strive to impart a memorable riding experience. They offer the same services as Z-Trip, but theirs is wrapped in a pretty bow of personality, spritzed with conversation and sound-tracked by your favorite album.
Across their website, Z-Trip continues the subtle jabs at its opponents, referencing both directly, on its “Become a Driver” page. A chart delineates the pros of driving for Z-Trip and the cons of driving for Uber or Lyft. The categories “Keep 100% of Your Fares”, “24/7 Driver Support”, “Set Your Own Hours”, “All Vehicle Maintenance Covered”, “Commercial-Grade Insurance”, and “Develop Personals” form a column on the left-hand-side. To the right, Z-Trip, Uber, and Lyft line the top row. Beneath, green checks for yes and gray x’s for no fill the boxes for each category. Z-Trip is the only service to meet all criteria. Uber and Lyft each only meet one: “Set Your Own Hours”. What goes unmentioned, though, is the population’s perception of cabs and their preference toward newer, more functional options like Uber and Lyft. The extent to which these categories entice potential drivers differs depending on personal preference and demographic. It is unlikely for a single mother or single father to take up Z-Trip as a second source of income when Uber offers the ability to “work from home”. Drivers can use their own cars, drive home once they decide their shift is over, and maybe even stop for errands or grab something to eat. Simply by turning off their app and removing their Uber sticker, the drivers return to civilian life and autonomous driving.
This autonomous way of working—which entails switching back and forth from the Public Utility Commission (PUC) transporter to Mom-on-the-move—has not always appealed to everyone, nor been entirely legal. In May, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf and Mayor Bill Peduto, along with county executive Rich Fitzgerald, asked the PUC to reconsider its fine against ride-sharing apps Uber and Lyft for operating without proper licensing. In their letter, they stated that:
“We are writing today to address fairness in business regulation, and especially fairness toward one business -- Uber -- which is investing hundreds of millions of dollars in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is poised to invest millions more. However, all this could be lost if we send the message that Pennsylvania is not a welcoming place for 21st century businesses and other job-creators looking to make our state a home,” and reiterated that, “Decisions like this unprecedented fine against Uber will make it difficult for Pittsburgh and other cities to attract technology companies to our state and have a chilling effect on the new economy we are trying to build in Pennsylvania. We hope that the PUC would use its considerable powers to encourage the sharing economy in Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, this substantial fine sends the wrong message about the business climate for innovation in the Commonwealth”[ii]
Although Bill Peduto genuinely wants to help Pittsburgh grow economically, technologically, and socially, he also maintains a personal relationship with Uber CEO, Travis Kalanick. The outcry for Peduto’s support of the PUC and its desire to remain true to its original beneficiaries, of which cabs and other taxis comprise the silent majority. Cabs feel pressured when it comes to competing with Uber or Lyft. These ride-sharing services caused the need for cabs and their service ratings to plummet. Prior to Uber’s arrival in 2014, cabs were the only option, remaining a necessity only because they were benefitting from Pittsburgh’s lack of transportation options.
Since the war between PUC-regulated cabs and Uber or Lyft, the city became divided in trying to understand its significance. Over the years, Pittsburgh has quietly become a technology epicenter. Its older generations remember the days of the steel mills. The late 1970’s and early 80’s began the collapse of the steel industry, and by 1982, more than 150,000 workers had been laid off in the Pittsburgh area. The decline continued until 1991, when the Homestead Works Mills were demolished, thereby marking the end of an era. Eight years later, a shopping mall was built where mills once were, signifying a new decade and a new city. Pittsburgh’s current incarnation depends on its past foundation.
Considering this, Mayor Peduto rests somewhere between the old and the new. He benefits from “new Pittsburgh” and may have catalyzed its change. Peduto believes that technology and innovation can be Pittsburgh’s 21st-century commodity. As evidenced by e-mails released on October 14th, a close public-private relationship between Pittsburgh, the Pennsylvania government, and Uber mirrors that between Mayor Bill Peduto and Uber CEO Kalanick, which underscores the notion that Pittsburgh is “open for business.”
Pittsburgh, amidst change, has found its “change-promisor.” Uber is a company capable of and willing to offer “widespread benefit to the entire Commonwealth in the form of improved transportation and new job opportunities for thousands.” One can see how this would be appealing for a governor at the reigns of a city known as “Most Livable”, “Foodie Destination 2016,” and formerly as the “Steel City.” The desire to become something better, to attract more citizens, and to garner more national recognition is something any mayor would wish for. Though, in a city like Pittsburgh, it is possible that companies like Uber, Facebook and Google are taking advantage of a naïve Pittsburgh. The city’s readiness to advance became a readiness to rid themselves of past inconveniences. Cabs bear the brunt, because the transportation industry seems to have taken the brunt of focus, have been ousted and overpowered by the abundance of ride-sharers.
A legislative agreement would be a step in the right direction. For Pittsburgh as a city on the cusp of an economic explosion, a governmental agreement between citizens and employers may be necessary. In e-mails acquired by Vice News, Uber and Peduto exchanged e-mails. In one chain, Peduto and his staff even offered Uber a spot in the city’s bicentennial parade:
“Hi Kevin, Nice seeing you Friday! As promised, I am sending you an official email to request that Uber participate in the parade via driver less [sic] cars on July 9th 11 a.m. Again, this parade will include community groups, cultural groups and famous Pittsburghers. We are hoping to celebrate both our past and future. We would love to have Uber participate”[iii]
Though Vice News admits, “Uber did not respond to the e-mail,” it is hard to believe there was no further communication on the subject. Pittsburgh’s government, it seems, has become intertwined in and infatuated with the idea of Uber’s promised advances. As a growing city, is it smart to trust Uber and effectively eliminate the previous cab industry? Uber recently pulled all operations out of Austin, Texas. Could or would the company do the same to Pittsburgh one day, possibly beginning a surge of “big-tech” departures? It is impossible to guess now, and the relationship between Pittsburgh’s government and the private company suggests Uber is in it for the long-haul.
It appears that Peduto has it all figured out on a grander scale, but the minute details remain unclear. Daily life for cab drivers has changed significantly since Uber first got wind that future legislation was near. Pittsburgh normally sees cabs come in and out, doing their business with little interference from anyone. Recently, Uber drivers have found a new sense of entitlement in downtown Pittsburgh. They have begun occupying cabstands, which are intended strictly for taxi drivers. Atop William Penn Place, however, two cab stands rest unoccupied throughout the day. Cabs rove the streets, idling in front of hotels, office buildings, and stadiums hoping someone will wave them down. When business slows down, cabs anchor into these spots and await passengers. They will put their cab in park, grab something to eat, take a nap, or gather around with fellow drivers. Sometimes, they make their way out front of hotels to chat with the bellmen and valets to let them know that they are awaiting business.
These stations, intended for use by taxi drivers and shuttles if need be, have been used improperly by Ubers awaiting the ping of a nearby rider-request. They appear anonymously at first. They pull their Uber signs from the dash or “look for directions” or let the valet lane monitor know “I’ll be out of here in a second.” More recently, Uber drivers have become more aggressive and more demanding of the spots in these cabstands. Uber drivers watch movies on their phones, listen to music, or grab coffees while occupying these spots.
One morning, two cab drivers noticed the Uber drivers in their spots and pulled in front of them to park them in, letting them know, “You’re not leaving until I get somebody,” clearly stating that the cab drivers would get the next business. A shouting match with the cabs on either side of the street ensued. After the shouting subsided, two older gentlemen waited outside of their vehicles parked tightly in the cab stand. The two drivers chatted closely and glanced occasionally at the cab drivers they were feuding with. I decided I would check in on both parties, attempting to remain neutral in the matter.
“He’s just an old shit. I drove that—I know I can park here.” He meant he drove taxis before Uber, so I played it off as banter between former colleagues and presumed “traitors.” The drivers all looked similar: they did not have the “coolness” Uber drivers are portrayed having. They had the same dull jeans, scuffed, square-toe dress shoes, and hoodies. They just had different cars, but they stuck out amongst the fleet of younger, cleaner drivers. Eventually, they all reentered their cars when riders hailed them. The cab left first, filling in the last spot at the hotel across the street. The Ubers left too, presumably because they each were pinged by awaiting riders. But when I turned around, another vehicle had spurred their sudden departures. Two Pittsburgh Police cars pulled into the spaces the Ubers and cab previously occupied.
Officer J. Nicholas of the Pittsburgh Police Department was the first to exit his vehicle. He approached the valet and I, as we asked, “Is this about the cabs?”
“Yeah, I got a call about two cabs yelling at some cars?”
“Two Ubers were parked in a cab stand and the cab parked them in.”
He laughed, pulled out his phone and began dialing. He told us he was calling back to the station to see if he could get an answer on the matter.
Can Ubers park in cabstands? We initially thought not. They share rides rather than provide transportation services. As the conversation continued and the officer seemingly becoming more puzzled, he concluded that: “We don’t really have any regulations on that.” During his phone call, he went back and forth, at one point asking, “Uber is considered a taxi? What is an Uber?” He told us he’d call his lieutenant, hoping for an answer. He, like the rest of us, did not. Officer Nicholas informed us he would talk with city legal and get back to us.
We now rested in a legal limbo. Unable to discern between Uber and taxi spaces, we tried to mitigate a vehicular warzone in our hotel’s valet lane. The traffic is bad enough during rush hour and peak check in time. With Ubers meticulously reversing into spots behind cabs, traffic bloats with idling cars and confused drivers.
As a zoomed-in version of Pittsburgh’s complex transportation transition, the hotel valet lane represents the possible problems of a mishandled future. Assimilated fleets of vehicles blend into normal traffic, allowing riders to travel anonymously. Their drivers are like chauffeurs who provide a seamless operation and a guaranteed ride at any moment of any day. These assimilated fleets then transform into autonomous vehicles without an operator. The rider enters the vehicle, avoids all meaningless small talk, and treats the ride like public transportation.
This idea has come to fruition because of Uber. More specifically in Pittsburgh, Uber takes a glimpse into modern cities and their debacle with controlling the way their citizens travel around town. On November 4th, Governor Tom Wolf signed Senate Bill 984 into law, which allows Uber and Lyft to operate permanently in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Wolf stated this in a press conference after the official signing:
“We want these companies welcome here in the Commonwealth, allowing them to become full partners with the cities and communities where they operate and invest, including Pittsburgh where Uber has headquartered its advanced robotics research”[iv]
Wolf reiterates Peduto’s message: we want Uber here for the long run. Uber now operates legally with few restrictions, though, their time here might outlast the brief stint in Austin, Texas. Austin began restricting Uber’s operations, which did not harmonize with their vision of “innovation.” Austin, which vied for the “Smart City Initiative” grant alongside Pittsburgh, seemingly terminated their chances because of their feud with Uber. Neither city’s proposal detailing their part in the initiative specifically mentioned ride-sharing, company or autonomous vehicles, and focused more on public and traditional transit. Both cities mention buses, trains, cars, and training employees. The Austin proposal specifically featured a plug for the car-rental service: ZipCar. The company does not rival Uber or Lyft in customer use or size, but offers fuller service closer to car ownership. This strategy may appeal to older or more established users who need to transport more than just themselves. Was this a jab to Uber? Probably—but after Uber and Lyft left Austin, the community still showed a need and preference for them:
“Combine the city’s affinity for drinking with a largely despised transportation system, cabs that refuse to take people on short trips and severely limited ridesharing options and you’re asking for midnight mayhem. ‘The first Friday and Saturday after Uber was gone, we were joking that it was like the zombie apocalypse of drunk people,’ Cooper said. People were so desperate for rides, she said, that she’d pull up to a corner and pedestrians would offer to hop in her car as soon as they spotted her old Uber and Lyft emblems in the windshield. ‘They don’t even know who I am,’ she chuckled in amazement,” Driver Sarah Cooper said in an interview with Vocativ[v]
Neither city won the grant, but Uber seems to have chosen the city that appeals to their needs most: a city with a thirst for innovation, remodeling, and restarting. Since Uber has established a hub in Pittsburgh, the city’s glaring preference for Uber has come to light. Whether citizens still depend on taxis remains a question. Peduto tries diligently to handle this question as Pittsburgh and its citizens take sweeping action on this global issue. Uber can legally operate—but not without local discomfiture. On a smaller scale, legal issues remain among police departments. Then come the issues with the indigenous competitors.
Cab drivers see less business. Uber and its ‘partners’ bully their way around downtown. Trust in Uber causes cab-company owners to feel unwanted, overlooked in a city whose turf they once securely owned. Now, Pittsburgh grows because of the technological giants it invites into its economy. Those who once ruled the roads of the city are paved over by innovation and forgotten as a dull, off-yellow memento of Pittsburgh’s origins.
Beckler, Ryan. "When Uber Leaves."Vocativ. Vocativ, 25 June 2016. Web. 24 Mar. 2017.
Florida, Richard, and Tyler Falk. "What Cities Gain When Their Airports Are Close to Downtown."CityLab. CityLab, 11 Apr. 2012. Web.
Koebler, Jason. "Uber CEO and Pittsburgh Mayor Discussed Reducing State Fines, Emails Reveal." Motherboard. Vice, 14 Oct. 2016. Web.
Post-Gazette, Daniel Moore / Pittsburgh. "Uber aims to build Pittsburgh workforce to test driverless technology." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 24 Mar. 2017.
Wolf, Tom, Rich Fitzgerald, and William Peduto. Letter. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission, 3 May 2016. PDF.
[i] Daniel Moore. "Uber aims to build Pittsburgh workforce to test
driverless technology." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 15 Sept. 2016. Web. 24 Mar. 2017.
[ii] Wolf, Tom, Rich Fitzgerald, and William Peduto. Letter. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission, 3 May 2016. PDF.
[iii] Koebler, Jason. "Uber CEO and Pittsburgh Mayor Discussed Reducing State Fines,
Emails Reveal." Mo therboard. Vice, 14 Oct. 2016. Web.
[iv] Wolf, Tom, Rich Fitzgerald, and William Peduto. Letter. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission, 3 May 2016. PDF.