Mobility as a Service – In Las Vegas
It seems like you can’t turn a corner without encountering a tech company tackling a mobility challenge these days.
The CEO of Zappos Tony Hsieh moved their corporate headquarters from the suburbs to downtown Las Vegas and, in a reversal from the Silicon Valley tech firms who shuttle people from the city to suburban office campuses, they are now shuttling people from the suburbs to the city. Project 100, as it is called, aims to create a seamless network of 100 on-demand chauffeured Tesla sedans, 100 shared vehicles, 100 shared bikes, and 100 shared shuttle bus stops that a phone app would optimally assign to each subscriber who inputs a destination. This mixed mode “concierge” service (as covered in this excellent Atlantic Cities article by Greg Lindsay) could be the ultimate proving ground for the concept of mobility as a service.
Hsieh’s $350 million Las Vegas downtown redevelopment is a larger initiative which includes real estate investment, startup incubators, support for schools & local businesses, as well as Project 100. It’s clear that, if successful, Hsieh would be looking to replicate this in other cities. Other software providers have attempted this goal of providing full commute mode optimization and recommendation. Upshift is a San Francisco startup looking to pair shared car leasing service along with hourly rentals supported by full valet service. Various regional transit agencies have online “trip planning” tools that calculate best routes using schedules from multiple transit modes. Google Maps offers driving, transit, and bicycling directions – but only each in isolation. Project 100 may be trying to crack a much bigger nut of mixing these modes, weaving in actual real time data (as opposed to static bus schedules), and testing it on cutting edge vehicles loaded with sensors and communication capabilities.
This could be a stepping stone to the vision of shared autonomous vehicles (SAV) that create a network of on-call transport, as Eric Jaffe writes – like elevators did for vertical transport (originally operated by humans, of course). Self-driving, publicly accessible transport could lead to an “internet of cars” that, in addition to improving traffic flow and mitigating long commutes, can also prevent crashes and track data. Think of the vast improvement over the current communication tools that cars are equipped with: horns, lights, and bumpers. These improvements in inter-car communication and safety can also result in significant improvements to traffic flow in cities. But city policies will need to stay flexible in order to keep up with so many changes. One example of this is a new price on curb space for tech company shuttle buses to share bus stops with the existing San Francisco municipal bus system.
Are tech companies providing benefits to the city as a whole?
Project 100 is starting small and it remains to be seen whether this ambitious endeavor can be achieved. Technical details aside, the prospect of a corporate-run transportation network has parallels to the Silicon Valley-San Francisco shuttle bus phenomenon. As Silicon Valley tech companies have run more and more charter buses to pick up employee recruits in San Francisco and around the Bay Area, there has been backlash from some San Francisco residents, ranging from complaints of the buses unwieldy sizes to outright protests against a larger sense of gentrification and class division between the tech haves and have-nots.
In Las Vegas, one third of the downtown population lives below the poverty line, so Project 100 will need to carefully consider how they want to approach the social equity aspect in order to truly achieve the community benefits that they tout. Their premium $500 monthly unlimited mobility subscription would still be cheaper than the all-in costs of owning a car, though the public might need a lot of convincing to accept that. Mobility as a service was once called public transit. Public personal transit is a new frontier.
As tech companies increase their forays into the public domain of the physical world – as opposed to the internet world – and wield their considerable resources, they may increasingly face challenges from a wide spectrum of the vocal public. Ultimately, is Zappo’s move downtown another indicator that tech companies and their knowledge workers are the new upper class in future cities? Or will some tech companies located in the suburbs simply build the cities around themselves? To house their employees, 50-story apartment towers would need to be built on Google and Facebook campuses, as visualized in these depictions by 3D designer Alfred Twu.
The efforts in Las Vegas reflect a new class of smart city influencers: innovator-financiers who can self-fund projects that push the boundaries of what is possible. Maybe it takes a place like Las Vegas for big risks to be taken in changing the paradigm. It is already making some strides to mitigate its reputation as a city of excess, such as improving operational sustainability in many convention and casino chains, including the nation’s second-largest rooftop PV solar array at 6.2 megawatts of power. Now if only those slot machines could be harnessed for good…
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
The best nature-based solutions on urban industrial lands are those that are part of a corporate citizenship or conservation strategy like DTE’s or Phillips66. By integrating efforts such as tree plantings, restorations, or pollinator gardens into a larger strategy, companies begin to mainstream biodiversity into their operations. When they crosswalk the effort to other CSR goals like employee engagement, community relations, and/or workforce development, like the CommuniTree initiative, the projects become more resilient.
Air quality in urban residential communities near industrial facilities will not be improved by nature alone. But nature can contribute to the solution, and while doing so, bring benefits including recreation, education, and an increased sense of community pride. As one tool to combat disparate societal outcomes, nature is accessible, affordable and has few, if any, downsides.
I spoke last week to Adrian Benepe, former commissioner for the NYC Parks Department and currently the Senior Vice President and Director of National Programs at The Trust for Public Land.
We discussed a lot of things – the increased use of parks in the era of COVID-19, the role parks have historically played – and currently play – in citizens’ first amendment right to free speech and protests, access & equity for underserved communities, the coming budget shortfalls and how they might play out in park systems.
I wanted to pull out the discussion we had about funding for parks and share Adrian’s thoughts with all of you, as I think it will be most timely and valuable as we move forward with new budgets and new realities.
There is a risk of further widening the gap between so-called ‘knowledge workers’ able to do their jobs remotely and afford to move, and those with place-based employment who cannot. Beyond that, retreating residents might take the very identity and uniqueness of the places they abandon with them.
Nurturing the community-resident bond could be an antidote to these dismaying departures, and new research sheds light on how. A recent report by the Urban Institute and commissioned by the Knight Foundation surveyed 11,000 residents of 26 U.S. metro areas to uncover what amenities created a “sense of attachment and connection to their city or community.” Three key recommendations emerged in Smart Cities Dive’s synopsis of the results.