Driverless Cars: Changing How You Plan APA National Conference, New - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Driverless Cars: Changing How You Plan APA National Conference, New York -- May, 2017 Don Elliott, FAICP Clarion Associates, Denver CO Zabe Bent Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, New York NY Prof. Shannon Sanders McDonald Southern Illinois University, Carbondale IL

WHAT HAS CHANGED? TERMINOLOGY

SUBURBAN & URBAN FIRST MILE / LAST MILE

Press-Office City of Müenster, Germany/via

Image: Jon Orcutt

Induced and Latent Demand Congestion More People Widen Drive Roadway Faster Driving

The real City of the Future will focus on human health and human happiness

Minority Report

What’s actually happening?

Early Signs of Change USE O SE OF T F TNCS NCS (Drivers as a proxy for riders) USE O SE OF C F CARS ARSHARE Sources: Shaheen (2015) (http://www.ncsl.org/documents/summit/summit2015/onlineresources/Shaheen_NCSL_Keynote_SS.pdf) and Quettra Mobile Intelligence (2015) (https://www.quettra.com/research/rise-of-uber-in-the-usa/)

Early Signs of Change SCHALLER SCHALLER REPORT REPORT Ride-hailing the leading source of non- personal car travel in NYC 2014-2016 Most ride-hailing growth (not trips) in the outer boroughs, where transit is less convenient Sources:

What are governments doing?

Regulatory Response FEDERAL R ERAL REGULAT ULATIONS IONS 2016 USDOT Automated Vehicles Policy Federal focus on performance of • technology and vehicles (e.g. safety, fuel standards) Regulates products, not humans • Model state policy • 10 official “testing grounds” •

Regulatory Response STATE R TE REGULATIO ULATIONS NS State policy focus on human behavior (e.g. • licensing) and enforcement (e.g. vehicle registrations) 6 states explicitly allow AV testing, but • are not required to make this explicit under Federal policy CA: GoMentum Station (Concord) special • permit to test w/o human driver present MI: defines and allows testing of “on- • demand automated motor vehicle network”

Regulatory Response LOCAL R AL REGULATIO ULATIONS NS Cities p ies partners tners i in i implemen lementing A ting AV p pilo lots ts • Very l y limi mited r ted regulati ulation r on related t ated to A AVs’ s’ i impac pacts o ts on • parking d king demand and

Is this really happening?

Potential Adoption Timelines ROCKY M KY MOUNTAIN NTAIN INSTITUTE TITUTE ESTIMATE IMATE Right: Fast- • growth scenario Compares • reasonably with adoption rates for previous “disruptive” Source: Walker, Jonathan and Charlie Johnson. Peak Car Ownership: The Market Opportunity of Electric Automated Mobility Services. Rocky Mountain Institute, 2016. technologies http://www.rmi.org/peak_car_ownership

Potential Adoption Timelines Approximate Years to 90% AON B BENFI NFIELD ELD Penetration ESTIMATE IMATE Insurance Private Vehicles • broker, risk Air Travel management Predicts Mobile Phones • widespread Smart Phones adoption by Vehicle Safety Features 2050 McKinsey: Auto Autonomous Vehicles • (Prediction) insurance 0 20 40 60 80 100 industry may Years need a major Source: Insurance Journal (2016). “Driverless Cars to Slash US Auto Insurance Premiums.” shift in http:// www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2016/09/12/425980.htm business model

Potential Adoption Models “MOBILITY BILITY A AS A A SERVIC RVICE” E” TRADITION DITIONAL C AL CAR MODE ODEL OWNERSHIP ERSHIP M MODEL DEL

Mobility as a Service MOBILITY ILITY AS A A SERVICE VICE Predictions of • rapid growth in this sector by 2021 Many pilots • worldwide

Cost Models FACTORS T TORS THAT T MAY AY DETERMINE ERMINE ADOPTION PTION MODE ODEL  Cost per ride: $1 threshold vs. traditiona l autos  Cost of AVs: Too costly for vast majority of people? Source: Walker, Jonathan and Charlie Johnson. Peak Car Ownership: The Market Opportunity of Electric Automated Mobility Services. Rocky Mountain Institute, 2016. http://www.rmi.org/peak_car_ownership

What should cities be doing?

Effect on Cities “MOBILITY BILITY A AS A A SERVIC RVICE” E” TRADITION DITIONAL C AL CAR MODE ODEL OWNERSHIP ERSHIP M MODEL DEL  Less dramatic decrease  Massive decrease in parking in parking demand, but demand  Relocation of parking  Curbside loading is demand? critical  Densification of  Far more efficient use of vehicle storage vehicle fleet

Effect on Cities – Current Trajectory  Upside: Parking lots and garages repurposed  Downside: Stranded parking garages  Parking revenue collapses  Induced demand results in severe congestion  Sprawl Image: Victor Dover. Atlanta parking  Public health decline

Effect on Transit Agencies: Current Trajectory  AV fares cheaper than most transit fares for most trips  AVs faster except at peak where transit has dedicated right of way  Complete loss of off-peak and reverse peak revenue  Transit agencies will seek to preserve operator jobs until retiree healthcare requires agency bankruptcy  Huge increase in congestion and loss of person capacity  Cities respond by offering incentives to high-capacity Chariot

Alternative Model Streets are 25-35% of a city’s area They are its most valuable asset

Managed Streets  Streets are city’s most valuable asset  Manage them for the public good  Use lowest price that eliminates congestion  Price empty seats and empty cargo space  Replace on-street parking with protected bikeways  Price curb access and manage for pooled rides

Transit Must Lead  Best contexts for AVs: ‐ Long haul trucking ‐ Bus Rapid Transit  Cities can partner with transit operators: ‐ Dedicated right of way in exchange for AV BRT, 24/7 every 2 minutes  Begin process now to minimize any job loss

AVs work if:  Shared, not owned  Pay congestion fees to use public roadway  Empty seats taxed  Exterior ads restricted  Cruising restricted  Efficiency allows retrofit of cities for increased walking + cycling  Sprawl controlled

Questions and Discussion APA National Conference, New York -- May, 2017 Don Elliott, FAICP Clarion Associates, Denver CO Zabe Bent Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, New York NY Prof. Shannon Sanders McDonald Southern Illinois University, Carbondale IL

Driverless Cars: Changing How You Plan APA National Conference, New York -- May, 2017 Don Elliott, FAICP Clarion Associates, Denver CO Zabe Bent Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, New York NY Prof. Shannon Sanders McDonald Southern Illinois University, Carbondale IL

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board • First summer meeting on July, 2013 – a small group of 100 diverse professionals freely discussing how to focus on the opportunities and challenges with automated vehicle technology entering the built world • This summer, 2017, the Automated Vehicles Symposium as a joint TRB and AUVSI sponsored event will have over 1,200 diverse professional attendees. (http://www.automatedvehiclessymposium.org/why- attend) • Workshops in the years, 2014 and 2015 provided focused discussions for Metropolitan Planning Organizations and others specifically on the built environment with over 100 professionals attending each one. 2

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014 : Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 • The workshop focused on 3 specific planning challenges: Streets and Roadway Design, Neighborhood and District Design, Regional Design • 3 movement structures were discussed: Privately owned Automobiles, Transit, and Taxi/Car Sharing • Several scenario structures were provided • Workshop Events and documents can be found at (http://its.ucdavis.edu/news-and-events/conferences- 2/automated-vehicle/) and published paper with the summary published: (Road Vehicle Automation 2 | Gereon Meyer | Springer) 3

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014 : Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 This ancillary all-day workshop presented the opportunity to focus on the policy and built environment issues related to automated vehicle use. The workshop committee focused the event on assisting Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO’s) in their efforts to address these new technologies. The workshop was financially supported by: UCDavis, National Center for Sustainable Transportation, Southern California Association of Governments, ARUP, Kimley Horn, Fehr & Peers, and NCIT, National Center for Intermodal Transportation. 4

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014 : Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 The Scenario groups generated, through different interactive methods and writing/visualizing techniques, “after” scenarios in order to think through the challenges and benefits to our built environment that an autonomous mobility future can hold. Each team briefly presented their outputs at the end of the workshop for feedback and discussion with the wider set of participants. 5