UPDATE: See below for an update added to this story on November 26.
There’s a battle brewing over drones — and jobs — in the Mission.
DoorDash, the on-demand delivery app, plans to launch a drone-testing site on Folsom Street, but the Teamsters Union Local 665, which represents over 70,000 workers in the Bay Area, is pushing back.
In August, DoorDash leased a warehouse at 1960 Folsom St. with the intention of developing “aerial delivery systems,” using drones that would fly up to 150 feet in the air and eventually deliver some of the orders that today are transported by the company’s drivers.
The same month — at the request of DoorDash Labs, a subsidiary of the delivery company— the city’s zoning administrator determined that the firm could operate drone testing at the Folsom Street site, which is located within a PDR district (“production, distribution and repair”).
The category encompasses a wide range of industrial uses, including sound engineering, food distribution and auto shops.
More specifically, the zoning administrator’s letter explained that drone testing falls under what the city’s planning code defines as a “laboratory use,” which is allowed at a PDR site.
The Teamsters appealed the zoning administrator’s decision, claiming that drone testing does not fall within the city’s defined “laboratory” uses.
PDR districts, which cover most areas in the Mission north of 19th Street and east of Shotwell Street, are part of a citywide effort to retain low and middle-income residents, and manufacturing activities. Twenty-three percent of employees in the Mission work in jobs for PDR businesses.
“This PDR property is meant for blue-collar jobs, but DoorDash is using it to develop technology designed to destroy jobs,” said Tony Delorio, the Teamsters’ principal officer.
“We filed this appeal because teamster members are proud to live and work in the neighborhood, and the Mission is not a laboratory. We refuse to be used as Doordash’s guinea pigs,” Delorio added.
The Board of Appeals will vote on the appeal on Wednesday at 5 p.m.
DoorDash, which is headquartered in San Francisco and employs some 1,600 people citywide, is contesting the Teamsters’ claims.
“DoorDash is excited to continue contributing to San Francisco’s economic recovery as the global capital of innovation with our new research and development site at 1960 Folsom,” a spokesperson for the company said.
“We are deeply invested in the city’s comeback, and eager to continue our testing of autonomous technologies more broadly, including drones, as we explore delivery systems.”
DoorDash anticipates 200 people to be employed at the site, according to materials submitted to the zoning administrator.
Several major business groups have expressed support for the development, including the Bay Area Council, the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce and the Mission Merchant’s Association.
Supervisor Fielder’s legislation
District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder, who represents the Mission District, said that the case of the DoorDash drone site is just one example of an increasing number of applications to convert space in the Mission to laboratory use.
She said it “should be reviewed in more detail to determine whether the proposed lab use is meeting the goals of this zoning district.”
She pointed to the role of PDR districts within the Mission Action Plan 2030, an updated anti-displacement plan that the Planning Commission approved last year.
“The community groups involved in MAP 2020 and MAP 2030 have repeatedly voiced concerns about the preservation of PDR space and the importance of maintaining dignified working class jobs in our communities,” Fielder said.
This month, Supervisor Fielder, along with District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton, put forward legislation that would require companies to obtain a conditional use authorization from the Planning Commission to change the designated use of a city property to “laboratory use.”
The legislation, subject to approval from the Board of Supervisors, would apply for 18 months.
Although the legislation enforces additional vetting for companies, Ana Herrera, Fielder’s legislative aide, said that it does not impose a barrier to the projects like the DoorDash drone testing site.
“If anything it’s an opportunity for any company to show how it’s further benefiting the district,” she said.
UPDATE: The Board of Appeals denied the Teamsters’ appeal on November 19. On November 26, the Teamsters appealed the decision on their appeal, which means the subject will be heard again at an upcoming meeting. The Teamsters filed a new appeal on the basis that only three out of five board members were present during the meeting on November 19. They also claim that it was not made clear whether the “laboratory use” classification applies to indoor or outdoor space.
Sounds good, I am on the third floor with a big window overlooking Mission st, if I get one of those poles with grabbers I can get free meals out my window now?
We have technology that can efficiently deliver burritos the last 150 feet of the way to an urban apartment building or house door. It’s called a bicycle.
So no, as a resident near this site, I don’t want to be a guinea pig for unnecessary drones that would be the next front in corporate surveillance alongside Waymos’ cameras. Venture capital is scraping the bottom of the barrel if this passes for innovation.
Not a word about privacy, which might be a concern for everyone at some point.
I believe several years ago, there was talk about how much leeway drones should have coming so close to homes. As I recall, it was established that we do not have privacy rights to the airspace directly outside our windows and doors?
It is one thing to use smart appliances and devices when a household makes that specific choice, it is quite another to have corporate drones flying close to our private spaces and gathering data without our expressed permission.
While yes, your burrito will come to your home, what about your neighbors and everyone else on the way? I assume the drones will not be flying at street level.
Waymo and Zoox collect data on roadways, Ring sells data to just about anyone willing to pay for it, but getting up close to homes?
There is a lot of news coverage over at 404 Media about cross-referenced tracking data, for reference.
I would love to read a book about the cult of privacy. It is something we presume is extremely important. But is it? So what if someone knows my name? Or what burrito I like? How does that hurt me? I think we’ve glorified privacy without really assessing why it matters.
Totally, man. Now, please share your passwords and social security number with us, mm-kay? Oh, that’s not what you meant? Well then, who gets to decide what privacies you’re entitled to? You? Peter Thiel? Zuckerbezos?
All tyrannical governments require useful idiots.
Tech parasites once again aiming to put the working class out of business.
Imagine what they could accomplish if they put their minds to actually improving our society rather than profiting from its disruptive destruction for lazy consumerism?
Drones for deliveries in the Mission? what could go wrong ? many people are sensitive to unnecessary noise..get ready to some boots hitting them really hard in they land on the street. Do you think the residents will tolerate that crap in the Mission ? what planet are you from ? have you ever considered accidents occuring? lawsuits? just to deliver a cup of coffee for a lazy techie who can get his ass off the couch to go get it at the corner?
It’s bad enough having those guys on their scooters blasting down the sidewalks and veering through traffic with a death wish. If I have to deal with drones flying all over the damn place too, I’m going to lose my mind.
lemme guess, some bought-and-paid for state agency is in charge of whether our SIDEWALKS can be polluted with hundreds of drones??? where does it end? I can’t wait for the economy to crash.
I live a block away and I would MUCH rather have something occupy that space than have it stay forever empty. If DoorDash isn’t there, who will be? It’s a huge area, hard to find a tenant for
So you’d be fine with a slaughterhouse or massage parlor?
Id rather that– than homeless encampments and fentanyl junkies. That’s what happens with unused space in this neighborhood.
Interesting fallacy anyhow, thanks.
Hell to the No!!! The Mission is already noisey enough with: Car horns blaring, gun shots, and people screaming at each other-All we need is drones to add to this noise symphony.
We already have unnatural cars with no drivers steering them and now they want to drop commercial drones on people and kill them. This is what they call modern life???
“We are deeply invested in the city’s comeback…” Typical PR copy. And so, if no drone deliveries, the City’s economy will plummet?
1. Boycott Doordash, and for that matter go in person (are we still “persons”?) to get your food (and BTW, bring your own coffee mug/cup and not add to the planet’s detritus with more paper cups/sleeves).
2. “accidentally” step on the drone if it lands on the sidewalk. Oops, didn’t see you there. (donate the food). You can’t be cited, because like Waymos can’t be ticketed, that drone is not a delivery PERSON. At the same time, let’s prohibit food deliveries by car; only by electric scooter, bike or real bike. And prohibit them from riding on sidewalk (ha!–maybe they’ll run over the drone!)
3. Get Trump to outlaw the drones because to quote him: “They’re killing the birds!!”
4. Organize the red-tailed hawks and abundant crows to attack them. (“Oops, again–we thought they were after our street trash”).
5. Laid-off tech workers: develop a controller that will intercept the drone and force it back to its original address with food undelivered.
Here is why drone delivery will fail, especially for food delivery. During the pandemic customers were accustomed to having no contact delivery, than as we have gotten thru the pandemic customers want their deliveries at their door. As a former food delivery driver i can say drones will not be able to go to up to a 5th floor walkup and deliver someones food, and customers are not going to want to return to having to walk down flights of stairs to retrive their food.
> Laboratory shall mean space within any structure intended or primarily suitable for scientific research
> (b) Engineering laboratory;
Sounds like the Planning Code is pretty clear. Gig work delivering food for a few bucks per trip – seems hard to make the argument that’s a quality job meriting saving.
I’m sure they’ve baked a few Lurie cabinet bribes into their bottom line.
Would this set a precedent that any political powerful bloc could leverage zoning to prevent the production of technology that threatens them?
Glad to hear that Teamsters don’t want to be used as Doordash’s guinea pigs, but some of us in the Mission are happy to be.
Hope the Board of Appeals knows that since we know we can’t count on Fielder to have an open, unbiased mind to anything beyond who pays her bills.
You don’t speak for the entire Mission pal.
And neither do you
Do you read well or not so much?
Yes, I am fine with drone deliveries as well.
I suspect those who oppose it are the same people who opposed the sharing economy back when that was a new thing.
“the sharing economy”?! Good one, Ray!
Yeah, some poor schmucks provide their labor, insurance, registration, fuel, maintenance, repair, depreciation, and replacement costs to some billionaire welfare queen disruptors, and they get sub-minimum wage compensation in return for access to a fungible software program.
Sharing!
Nice economy you got there, Ray. It would be a shame if billionaire oligarchs had to pay their own way.
The people that oppose it, love to sleep! Drones are all we need to add to the;Gun shots, crazy people screaming at each other at all hours, and car horns blaring. Everything seems for sale in S.F even the sky.
That makes zero sense. I suspect you’re a nonsense person.