Article Directory
DoorDash's Drone Ambitions: A Flight of Fancy or Future Reality?
Alright, let's talk about DoorDash and their drone delivery dreams in the Mission District. A lot of companies chase shiny objects, but does this one actually compute?
The Mission's Drone Dilemma
DoorDash wants to set up a drone testing site at 1960 Folsom Street. The city's zoning administrator gave them the green light, classifying it as "laboratory use" within a PDR (Production, Distribution, and Repair) district. But the Teamsters are pushing back, arguing that drone testing isn't really a "laboratory" activity. They see it as a threat to blue-collar jobs, which, let's be honest, is a fair concern. DoorDash wants to test drones in the Mission. Some are pushing back.
DoorDash claims the site will employ 200 people. That's the key data point we need to unpack. Two hundred jobs... versus how many delivery driver jobs potentially displaced down the line? That's the calculation nobody seems to be making explicitly.
The company line is that they're "deeply invested in the city’s comeback," which is PR speak for, "we're trying to look good while automating your livelihood." Supervisor Jackie Fielder has introduced legislation requiring companies to get conditional use authorization for converting properties to "laboratory use." It's not a ban, but it adds a layer of scrutiny.
Here's where it gets interesting. Fielder's aide says the legislation isn't a barrier to projects like DoorDash's. "If anything it’s an opportunity for any company to show how it’s further benefiting the district," she said. That sounds like a challenge to DoorDash to actually prove the economic benefits, not just promise them.
The Numbers Game: Jobs and Automation
Let's break down the job numbers. DoorDash employs about 1,600 people citywide. Adding 200 jobs at the drone site would be a significant bump, about a 12.5% increase—to be exact, 12.5%. But what kind of jobs are we talking about? Are these high-paying engineering roles, or lower-wage drone maintenance and piloting positions? The details matter.
And here's the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling: If the goal is to replace drivers with drones, how many driver jobs are potentially at risk in the Mission, and citywide? DoorDash isn't exactly broadcasting that number.
The union's argument is simple: "This PDR property is meant for blue-collar jobs, but DoorDash is using it to develop technology designed to destroy jobs." It's a zero-sum game in their eyes. But is it? Could drone delivery create new types of blue-collar jobs that we haven't even considered yet? (Like drone mechanics, airspace traffic controllers, or even specialized drone delivery packaging designers?)
The counterargument is that drones could increase efficiency, allowing DoorDash to expand its services and hire more people overall. But that's a big "could." It depends on consumer adoption, regulatory hurdles, and the actual cost-effectiveness of drone delivery.
The Sentiment Analysis
Anecdotally, online sentiment seems split. You've got the tech enthusiasts who think drones are the future, and then you've got the skeptics who worry about privacy, noise pollution, and, of course, job displacement. It's hard to quantify that sentiment precisely, but a quick scan of social media suggests negative sentiment is running at least 2:1 against the project.
That said, online sentiment isn't always representative of the broader population. It tends to skew towards the more vocal and tech-savvy. But it's still a data point.
The Board of Appeals will vote on the appeal on Wednesday at 5 p.m. That's the next key event. If the appeal is rejected, DoorDash can proceed with its plans. If it's approved, the project could be delayed or even scrapped.
This Isn't Innovation; It's a Cost-Benefit Analysis
Ultimately, DoorDash's drone ambitions aren't about "innovation" or "the future." It's about cold, hard economics. They're betting that drones will eventually be cheaper and more efficient than human drivers. The question is, at what cost? And who bears that cost? The Mission District, and San Francisco as a whole, needs to have a serious conversation about that before we let the drones take off.