I never should have used that term because you can't look past it.
No heliports. Designated landing/takeoff areas like the taxicab stands of old.
And Detroit? There will be people in Detroit using the service? I don't think a flying car service is going to take EBT...
Given the aircraft Uber is proposing, it's going to need 10m squares or more.
Given the 4x5m open rotor the Chinese are already putting into trials, that's going to need dedicated landing spaces with several m clearance beyond due to the open rotors.
Its not that it's your term; it's the appropriate term for the needed safety space for
any/every open-rotor design.
An open rotor necessitates a relatively secure access for safety reasons, as the rotors are a lethal risk to careless bystanders. That means marked off, and enforced vacancy of, landing areas. That means dedicated landing zones - helipads/heliports.
The ducted fan designs, at least the few I've seen on various documentaries, being more car sized and shaped, and presenting a much lower threat risk, won't need the dedicated stand; they're not the same level of risk, nor the same level of needed infrastructure to mitigate that risk.
Uber's shown design is comparable to a double-wide or triple-wide load - not going to be safe downtown, even if the landing stand is present. It's not a V-22, but it's still more than 8m wide - and that's assuming a 1.5m cockpit width - plus the rotor extension.
Ehang's is about 1.2 lanes wide - looks like about 4 x 5m (roughly 13' x 16') - still oversized - but reasonable for being able to land pretty much anywhere that traffic will yield, including most private driveways and many downtown plazas and parking lots - but the open rotor design is a safety hazard.
Take Ehang's, bring the rotors closer abeam, and put them in nacelles. Then you have a device which, while generating a good blast of wind, is reasonably safe to have in traffic for short periods.
Or, with a bit more of a mass-hit, have them swing-out for flight mode, in for landing amidst traffic in a parking spot.
Putting Uber's, even with the rotors ducted or in a nacelle, downtown is just going to be tight. It's going to need a dedicated pad, due to blocking 3-4 lanes worth. You're right to a point - in that the Uber design will require a pad, even with safety-increases from enclosing the props - simply because the form-factor is wrong for the environment
and the task. It won't be "Air travel at push button" - it will be "Make appointment for departure in an hour from pad X, and schedule me a driver to get to the pad."
Meanwhile, beasts more like the Ehang can, and will, be able to negotiate the downtown districts, and, once the rotors aren't exposed, can be reasonably allowed to land in extant parking places. In areas with major plant overhang, you'll need a little infrastructure to make use of the intersection to get under the trees... but you won't need the dedicated landing space.
Once you have the downtown connection to the wealthy burbs, you're in like Flynn. In Anchorage, that's 5-20 km. Geneva Woods and Roger's Park are about 5 km from downtown. Sand Lake and Jewel Lake both have some wealthy neighborhoods, and are 10-15km out from downtown. Bayshore (stupidly expensive) and the Hillside (insanely expensive - almost LA levels) are about 20 km out.
Corvallis lacks any visible "wealthy burbs" - but has some surprisingly well-heeled college students (thanks, OSU; can we get the *'s off the *ing roads?), and being able to hop around the Corvallis area is going to be a status symbol for the wealthier students.
Uber's design won't work well in either the Corvallis/Albany area nor in Anchorage. Nor in Portland - Portlanders love their tree shaded neighborhoods. Seattle/Tacoma also has many tree-lined neighborhoods - the wealthier, the more likely...
As for Detroit... note I said detroit-metro. dozens of cities across a six-county area in search of a common identity. Still a huge conurbation, even if City-of-Detroit (0.6 M people) is the land of urban homesteading. Still, the overall area is "thriving"... and 4.3 million people. And much of the metro area is rolling waves of suburb.
https://patch.com/michigan/rochester/detroit-population-continues-decline-metro-area-still-strong (webpage article)
For fairness, I have kinfolk and friends in the Detroit Metro area. And that's not counting Windsor, Ontario, south across the water.
I've seen LA, San Francisco, and San Diego - and yeah, lots of wires in some neighborhoods - but the wealthy ones don't tend to have a lot on street. Flying over LA rather than driving through it has been a stated dream of several wealthy (including some notably eccentric) celebrities. Not all of hollywood has a love affair with cars like Mr. Leno does.
Now, some urbanizations of low density will be perfect for the smaller "hail a drone" - teens in the outlying areas of, oh, say, Wasilla, Kenai/Soldotna (Alaska), Alsea, Adair, and Lebanon (Oregon), many places on the Hawaiian Islands (except Oahu... NAS/NSY Pearl Harbor and MCAS Kaneohe will create blockout zones for national security... but drone tours of Oahu are likely going to be all the rage - Helo-tours already are a common touristy thing.)
