Driverless Cars: Changing How You Planmedia2.planning.org/media/npc2017/presentation/S535.pdf ·...

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

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

Widen Roadway

Faster Driving

More People Drive

The real City of the Future will focus on

human health and human happiness

Minority Report

What’s actually

happening?

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/)

USE OF CARSHARE

USE OF TNCS (Drivers as a proxy for

riders)

Early Signs of Change

http://www.ncsl.org/documents/summit/summit2015/onlineresources/Shaheen_NCSL_Keynote_SS.pdf

https://www.quettra.com/research/rise-of-uber-in-the-usa/

Sources:

SCHALLER 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

Early Signs of Change

What are governments

doing?

FEDERAL REGULATIONS

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 REGULATIONS

• 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 REGULATIONS

• Cities partners in implementing AV pilots

• Very limited regulation related to AVs’ impacts on parking demand

Regulatory Response

Is this really happening?

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

ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE ESTIMATE

• Right: Fast-growth scenario

• Compares reasonably with adoption rates for previous “disruptive” technologies

Potential Adoption Timelines

http://www.rmi.org/peak_car_ownership

0 20 40 60 80 100

Autonomous Vehicles(Prediction)

Vehicle Safety Features

Smart Phones

Mobile Phones

Air Travel

Private Vehicles

Years

Approximate Years to 90% Penetration

Source: Insurance Journal (2016). “Driverless Cars to Slash US Auto Insurance Premiums.” http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2016/09/12/425980.htm

AON BENFIELD ESTIMATE

• Insurance broker, risk management

• Predicts widespread adoption by 2050

• McKinsey: Auto insurance industry may need a major shift in business model

Potential Adoption Timelines

“MOBILITY AS A SERVICE” MODEL

TRADITIONAL CAR OWNERSHIP MODEL

Potential Adoption Models

MOBILITY AS A SERVICE

• Predictions of rapid growth in this sector by 2021

• Many pilots worldwide

Mobility as a Service

FACTORS THAT MAY DETERMINE ADOPTION MODEL

Cost per ride: $1 threshold vs. traditional 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

Cost Models

http://www.rmi.org/peak_car_ownership

What should cities be doing?

“MOBILITY AS A SERVICE” MODEL

TRADITIONAL CAR OWNERSHIP MODEL

Less dramatic decrease in parking demand, but

Relocation of parking demand?

Densification of vehicle storage

Massive decrease in parking demand

Curbside loading is critical

Far more efficient use of vehicle fleet

Effect on Cities

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

Public health decline

Image: Victor Dover. Atlanta parking

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

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

Alternative Model

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


Don Elliott, FAICP


Zabe Bent




Questions and Discussion


Don Elliott, FAICP


Zabe Bent





2

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.

http://www.automatedvehiclessymposium.org/why-attend

http://www.automatedvehiclessymposium.org/why-attend

3


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)

http://its.ucdavis.edu/news-and-events/conferences-2/automated-vehicle/

http://its.ucdavis.edu/news-and-events/conferences-2/automated-vehicle/

http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319190778

http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319190778

4


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.

5


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.

6


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050

• Scenario One: Investment and Re-Design of the Freeway System

• Scenario Two: Complete Streets • Scenario Three: Transit and Road User Fees • Scenario Four: Commuter Rail Traffic • Scenario Five: Parking • Scenario Six: Mitigating Poor Performance • Scenario Seven: Sustainable Mobility for All

7


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario One: Investment and Redesign of the Freeway System In this scenario, advanced vehicle technologies enabled a redesign of the freeway system that is carefully tailored to optimize the temporal and spatial demand for vehicle travel (including lanes that vary by direction and speed) and seamlessly connects to parking economic centers. These changes will require significant reclassification of freeways and changes in design standards. The following elements of the system were articulated:

8


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario One: Investment and Redesign of the Freeway System • Fast lanes or lanes with higher speeds could be provided for

automated vehicles, with dedicated off-ramps. These ramps could allow for vehicle speeds of 100 miles an hour. They could be steeply banked and shorter becoming mini ramps integrated with arterials.

• Trucks could be separated by type and speed. Truck travel on highways could be restricted to night-time.

• Businesses could cluster around ramps and ramps could be connected to parking structures that are also destination centers.

9

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario One: Investment and Redesign of the Freeway System • All structured parking could be converted to local distribution facilities. • Medians could be replaced and used to accommodate other modes of travel or even turned into park space. • Ramps, not flyovers, may be built as HOV lanes are converted to dedicated lanes. • These dedicated lanes will assist with initial transition to

automated vehicles. http://www.barteverettphotography.com/images/CarpoolLane405A-0152.jpg

10


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario One: Investment and Redesign of the Freeway System This system may increase vehicle travel, but congestion will be shallower more distributed. Overtime, VMT pricing could limit vehicle travel (especially by empty vehicles) and households may own fewer cars. The system will be traveled by vehicles of many different vehicle types and sizes. The economics for these changes is challenging as the key question is can we build in advance of the market? The key to pay for infrastructure could be public private partnerships around freight connected to new distribution centers. Revenue may also be raised from VMT pricing and advertising included in different in-vehicle entertainment experiences.

11


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Five: Parking The group asked the basic question: Why do we now need parking? A vehicle needs to be somewhere when it is not moving; it needs to be convenient and close to drop-off and pick-up locations. Parking protects an asset, whether this asset is privately owned or part of a service company. Automated vehicles allow for the dislocation of convenience for the location of the parking facility. Instead of parking facilities consuming the downtown urban areas, drop-off and pick-up areas will now be the most important need and further street congestion may result.

12


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Five: Parking Financial incentives and disincentives would, just as in parking, emerge with drop-off and pick-up locations. This may create social equity issues. For parking, the positive aspect of level 5 vehicles is that less space would be required for parked vehicles especially if shared vehicles are the norm. Parking does have a great impact on land use and the public realm. This group identified key questions: Will the elimination of public parking make downtown more attractive? Will urban downtowns become too valuable for parking? Land values will dictate future use of vacated parking lot land (surface lots or parking structures). Ultimately, however parking WILL still be required for parking vehicles – both Level 5 and lower.

13


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Six- Mitigating Poor Performance The group addressed policies, programs and infrastructure challenges. They identified a number of potential negative consequences that could emerge as automated vehicles are integrated into the transportation system. • More automated vehicles may lead to more mobility and

access, which may lead to more sprawl. • Congestion could worsen and downtowns could therefore

suffer. • People may choose to live in their automated motorhomes,

constantly cruising around popular activity centers, but causing even more traffic.

14


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Six- Mitigating Poor Performance • Pedestrians could walk into the streets stopping automated

vehicles and causing gridlock. • People’s health may deteriorate as shot walking trips are

increasingly made by automated vehicles. • Many people’s livelihoods will be disrupted (e.g., professional

drivers and possibly mechanics).

15


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Six- Mitigating Poor Performance The group developed a number of initial thoughts about actions that could be taken to address these problems. Governments could be either be reactive by putting up fences on sidewalks so pedestrians don't disrupt traffic, or be proactive by charging automated vehicle passengers a VMT fee collected via a block by block EZ Pass system. Vehicle speeds in lively activity centers could be restricted to 5 mph to discourage vehicle use and increase safety while speeds of 125 mph would be allowed on dedicated infrastructure. In really high demand areas, there could be requirements to reserve slots in traffic flow (similar to approaches at high-capacity airports).

16


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Seven- Sustainable Mobility for All This group focused on the issues of sustainability and new mobility for all. Identifying what sustainability is and its goals was the primary focus. The three primary sustainability areas identified were environmental, social and economic. Goals were identified for these areas. • Primary environmental goals were to decrease energy and

resource use, reclaim space, and decrease pollution. • Social goals were to increase mobility, increase safety, reduce

social inequity, increase social contact, and decrease wasted personal time.

17


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Seven- Sustainable Mobility for All • Economic goals identified were to induce economic activity,

reduce income inequity, create sustainable transportation infrastructure funding, lower mobility costs, and address demand management.

Specific ideas for the environmental goals were to use automated vehicle technology to reclaim use of space through reductions in on-street parking and parking requirements for new development and use of virtual street infrastructure and allocation (e.g. change lane directions at different times of day based and new building approach for vehicles, such as multi-tiered vertical approach and airport style multilane drop-off and pick-up space at first floor of buildings).

18


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Seven- Sustainable Mobility for All The group envisioned the use of automated vehicles and technology to address social goals by reducing the cost of mobility through more time efficient shared rides and establishing subsidized automated food deliveries, which could even include organic food to address food deserts and demand based/flash mob farmers markets. Safety is also a key social concern, which would require regulations, rules, and monitoring of in vehicle behavior to, for example, allow passengers to choose who they ride with and use social networks to rate passengers. Access for all would require incentivization of supply to needy areas, and address language and cultural barriers to access.

19


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Seven- Sustainable Mobility for All Economic goals could be achieved through dynamic system demand management. Real time dynamic road pricing could be implemented on all roads with credits for those who share rides. Dynamic road definitions and central system controls could alter road space based on historical and real time needs. Lane directions could be dynamically changed or reduced in size for platoons of smaller vehicles for integrated mode management, which would also include non-motorized vehicle modes. The results may be overall lower mobility costs.

20


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Eight – Revolutionaries This group defined themselves as wanting to explore the boundaries of automated visions. They created an entirely new “transit roadway” system that was solar powered, collected rainwater, and included multiple speed paths for varying purposes, space for bikes, and new automated mobility systems. This “mobility system” would be raised above the existing roadway, sheltering it and providing a new green roof surface for all manner of pedestrian activities. It would provide the groundwork for a gradual transition away from anything but ultralight vehicles in the cities. The group produced several drawn visions that were based on a concept that was first thought about in the 1970’s as personal rapid transit.

21


Transportation Research Board First Workshop 2014: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Scenario Eight – Revolutionaries The following key idea was identified by the group: ATN (automated transit networks) are only efficient with ultralight electric vehicle cabins, typically segregated from traffic for safety, however the cabins could descend to the street. In order for ATN to be accepted it needs to be reliable on demand, segregate people, bikes, ultra-light vehicles, autos, freight, and size the station grid to minimize last mile or allow cabins to drive on the street. It should reduce or mitigate modal shifts (transfers) and have carts for personal belonging. Social changes in transit attitudes are needed: rental, public, and car sharing need privacy and security alternatives.

22


Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 • The workshop focused on 8 different Built Environments in

and around Ann Arbor Michigan: 3 movement structures were discussed: Privately owned Automobiles, Transit and Taxi/Car Sharing and 2 specific Scenarios (Ownership and Shared) were defined for each location

• Workshop Events and documents can be found at: (http://its.ucdavis.edu/news-and-events/conferences-2/envisioning-automated-vehicles-within-the-built-environment-2020-2035-2050/)

http://its.ucdavis.edu/news-and-events/conferences-2/envisioning-automated-vehicles-within-the-built-environment-2020-2035-2050/



23


Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 This ancillary all-day workshop presented the opportunity to focus on built environment issues related to automated vehicle use. The workshop committee focused the event on the local Ann Arbor Built Environment. The workshop was financially supported by: UCDavis, National Center for Sustainable Transportation, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Mineta Transportation Institute, ITS Michigan, and NCIT, National Center for Intermodal Transportation.

24


Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 The workshop design drew on qualitative scenario planning methods and architectural visualization for eight different site contexts existing within the built environment of the Ann Arbor and Detroit, MI. These sites typified conditions that could be found in many locations in the United States including a downtown, midtown, University, first ring suburb, exclusive suburb, shopping mall, and two freight/shipping locations. To ensure a common baseline of knowledge on the likely progression of AVT for different transportation modes, workshop organizers conducted a review of the literature and expert interviews.

25


Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 The results were summarized for auto, transit, carsharing, and freight modes in handouts for each mode that described the level of technology achievement and integration in 2014, 2020, 2035, and 2050. Also provided were the NHSTA and SAE levels of automation for automobile. A transit level of automation was also created. The workshop participants were instructed to proceed assuming that all of the challenges to full automation were achieved, ie. not to discuss technology or institutional barriers, but to focus on the impact to the physical built environment.

26

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Ownership Scenario • Higher levels of auto travel and congestion. • Higher quality vehicle travel comes at a price. • New low-density land development in outlying areas of the

region. • Less proximate commercial parking and on-street parking. • New off-street non-residential parking in areas that minimize

land costs and relocation travel.

27

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Shared Scenario • Lower levels of auto travel and congestion. • Reduced cost of travel for all income groups. • Travelers pay more for greater travel distances, solo use, and

larger vehicles. • New higher density development in central areas but some

sprawl for very high income. • Huge reductions in the need for parking space, no on-street

parking, no residential parking and proximate commercial parking.

• New off-street parking development in areas that minimize land cost and relocation travel.

28

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Geographic Locations • Downtown Ann Arbor, MI • Mid-town Detroit, MI • Burns Park, Ann Arbor, MI • Arborland, Ann Arbor, MI • CPG, Detroit, MI • Ambassador Bridge Area, Detroit, MI

29

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Downtown Ann Arbor Current Conditions Downtown Ann Arbor is the central business district (CBD) of Ann Arbor and is located (as shown in Figure 1) southwest of the University of Michigan North Campus and North West of Burns Park. The landscape is similar to that of other American mid-size city CBDs with city blocks, stoplights and signs at most corners, and the majority of the land being covered by impervious surfaces (roads, sidewalks, buildings) as shown in Figure 2. The land use is made up of luxurious apartments and other living environments, high-tech offices, high-end boutiques, restaurants, medical services, and other retail and personal services.

30

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Downtown Ann Arbor Current Conditions The neighborhood can be described as a “social hub” with many pedestrians enjoying cultural experiences such as art and dining. The area is also a desirable place to live for young UM professors. Currently, 21% of people in the area work in the field of education, 18% in health related industries, 7.6% in art and food, and 8.1% in retail.

31

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Life In 2040 By 2040 the demographics are expected to slightly change in the downtown area of Ann Arbor. Population is expected to grow by 8.6% with a 20.2% growth in employment and 11.1%. in households. There will be four main types of people that will need to be accommodated in 2040. Those who work and live in the downtown area, those who work and live outside the downtown area but visit the area for pleasure, those who live inside the downtown area but work outside of it, and those who live outside of the downtown area but work inside of it. Those who live and work in the downtown area will either walk or bike to work, or travel using a form of automated transit.

32

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Life In 2040 People who are just in the downtown area for pleasure will use car-sharing and automated transit to get to a downtown drop-off zone. People living in downtown, but working elsewhere can use automated transit to get to jobs in places like Detroit. People coming to the downtown area for work will use car-sharing and automated transit to get to a downtown drop-off zone, and from there they will use automated transit to get to a workplace.

33

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Life In 2040 Restricted Vehicle Zones In the year 2040 there will be restricted vehicle zones. There will be a multi-modal last mile solution. This will be the areas on the outskirts of the downtown area where people switch from single-occupancy vehicles to shared vehicles outside of the downtown zone. They would likely be placed near bike-share locations. This will help limit and discourage door-to-door single-occupancy vehicles downtown. There will also be a parking swap in the northern downtown area where there is already an existing parking lot.

34

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Transportation Research Board Second Workshop 2015: Envisioning Automated Vehicles Within the Built Environment; 2020, 2035, 2050 Life In 2040 Restricted Vehicle Zones In the downtown zone there will be a shared vehicle environment where no single-occupancy vehicles are allowed. There will be a bus system that will transport people throughout the downtown area. Handicap services for the disabled and emergency vehicles will be permitted. There will also be a pedestrian zone where the only forms of transportation will be walking, biking, and automated public transit (tram). In this zone there will also be one lane streets to allow for emergency vehicles to patrol the area and for delivery vehicles. The pedestrian zone can be seen highlighted in Figure 3.

35

EXPLORING THE OPPORTUNITIES AHEAD Personal Thoughts • Everyone will want to be dropped off right at the “front door” of

their destination – this will create tremendous challenges for our streets

• Parking will not disappear, the parking garage will still be useful, but in new ways so that streets are still passable

• Or potentially, existing streets find a new use as all mobility other than walking or biking will be on another level

Key Questions • How will automated vehicles change the suburban – urban –

rural dynamic? • What will be our personal expectations toward mobility? • Since, automated vehicles will allow for mobility for all, how do

we prepare for the new culture/society to emerge?


Don Elliott, FAICP


Zabe Bent





2

THE PANEL

Don Elliott, FAICP Clarion Associates, Denver CO Introduction

Prof. Shannon Sanders McDonald Southern Illinois University, Carbondale IL The Big Trends from Mobility Leaders

Zabe Bent Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates, New York NY Questions that You Should be Asking Yourself

Don Elliott, FAICP How Will Zoning Need to Change?

3

THE BASICS

A. It’s Not One “Thing”

0. Human Drivers by themselves 1. Driver Assistance

• System helps steer / accel / decel 2. Partial Automation

• System can steer / accel/ decel ________________________________________ 3. Conditional Automation

• System also monitors surrounding – but can ask for help

4. High Automation • System also monitors without human

help in some driving conditions _________________________________________ 5. Full Automation

• System can do everything in all driving conditions

Who Monitors? Driver

_________ System

Driver Prepared to Drive or Take Over? YES _________ NO

4

THE BASICS

5

THE BASICS

B. How Many Will Owned by Private Individuals Rather than Rideshare Systems?

The Dream – Most of them are owned by rideshare systems • Lower car ownership • More cars moving more of the time – so fewer of them

need to be parked • Less parking cost = more compact neighborhoods

The Nightmare – Most of them are owned by individuals • Not much reduction in auto ownership • Not much • The car is your mobile office, so you can live farther from

your office -- so sprawl increases

6

THE BASICS

C. It’s Coming Fast – But Not All At Once

The Fast Part • Many makers say they will introduce AVs by 2018-2021 • By 2030 = Maybe 15% of the market is AVs • By 2040 = Maybe 50% of cars on road are AVs. You need to start planning TODAY (actually, Yesterday)

The Not All At Once Part • Now = 263 million non-AV cars, 2 billion parking spaces • It will take a long time for those to all be replaced or

repurposed • AND we will have to plan for a “mixed AV / non-AV system”

for a long, long time The answers are within our 20-30 year planning horizons

7

TRENDS FROM MOBILITY LEADERS


8

QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF

Zabe Bent

9

HOW WILL ZONING NEED TO CHANGE?

Five Key Areas of Zoning Regulation 1. Permitted (or Required) Land Use

2. Building Type / Form / Size

3. Parking

4. Redevelopment and Reuse

5. Street Edges and the

10


1. Permitted (or Required) Land Uses

Recent Trends

• 58% want to live – but only 30 % now live – in mixed use neighborhoods

• Lower car ownership may simplify

the economics of mixed use development

Allow more mixed use

11



Recent Trends • As individual ownership of AVs

rises, the ability to work or play while being driven will decrease the “loss” of commuting time

Want to Live Currently Live

Suburbs 52% 44%

Small Town 23% 13%

Prepare for more sprawl pressure

12



Other • More accurate driving and

parking = Fewer crashes and repairs

Need for fewer auto repair sites Probably NOT fewer gas stations

• More shared / automated ridesharing may mean that gas stations can be further from high-value locations and commuting routes

Relocation (and more fleet?) fueling stations in secondary locations

13



• Parking can occupy: • 75-80% of suburban commercial lot area

• 20-30% of urban building envelopes

• As much floor area as a micro unit • Shared AVs will be moving more of the

time, parked less of the time • Lower auto ownership means more of

available land and building can be occupied by non-parking uses

Lower – or remove – on-site / in-building parking location requirements

14



Staging Areas / Structures

• Even if shared AVs are moving more of the time, there will be “downtimes” between rides.

• Shared ride operators will compete on convenience / response time

Expect more requests for “staging areas” distributed for convenient response And expect operators to try to make them “proprietary” – not open to competitors

15


3. Parking

The most talked-about aspect of AVs and planning • More accurate parking means parking

garages, and parking lots can accommodate more cars – a de facto capacity increase that reduces the need for more spaces

• Shared AVs will be moving more of the time – meaning parked less of the time – which further reduced parking needs

• Shared ride AVs, and some individually owned AVs, will be smaller vehicles than the current vehicle fleet

Lower – or remove – minimum parking ratios as AV use increases

16


3. Parking

The changes in parking will come slowly – as the use of AVs increases. • There will still be need for parking garages for

the foreseeable future

• Existing parking garages and lots will be able to accommodate more vehicles than currently – so fewer new ones will be needed

• Some parts of parking garages will be converted and used as staging areas for AVs

• Parking garages with level floors, 12 ft. ceiling heights, and central ramps will be easier to repurpose

Revise parking garage design standards and allow a wider range of uses

17


4. Redevelopment and Reuse Review permitted uses and broaden the range of allowed uses for:

1. Parking lots and garages

2. Car dealerships

3. Gas stations (125,000) and repair shops (175,000) in high value locations 125,000

4. Auto repair / auto body shops / wrecking yards

Broaden the range of permitted use or reuses for each of these structures and areas

18


5. The Public Realm and Street Edges

Drop-of Areas v. Parking Areas • Reduced need for parking areas (mostly on

private property) will be offset by increased need for pick-up/drop-off areas

• Pick-up/drop-off areas will be needed close to almost all destinations

• Some pick-up/drop-off areas will need to be on public r-o-w, but where that will interfere with traffic flow they will need to be on private property

Repurpose parking lanes and create on-site pick-up/drop-off area standards

19


5. The Public Realm and Street Edges

Redesign of Rights-of-Way

• Cars can travel closer together so roads and streets get a de facto capacity increase

• Streets can be narrower – with some of the gained right-of-way used for drop-offs and some for pedestrians & bikes

• “Complete Streets” and “Road diets” become easier

Revisit street design based on narrower travel lane widths over time.

20


Three Take-Aways on Zoning

1. Focus on the reduced needs for parking spaces and increased needs for pick-up/drop-off spaces

2. Broaden the number of permitted uses of auto sales / rental / storage / and body repair structures and land uses

3. Remember that all these changes will happen gradually over time – there will be a lot of non-AV vehicles on the road for a long time

21


A Few Disturbing Thoughts

• Jobs will probably disappear • 4 million professional drivers in US today

• Walking to and from parking will drop • Decline in a routine form of exercise

• Need to ensure service equity to low income neighborhoods

• Watch out for “Mobile AV Billboard Spam” • AV trends will have synergy with increasing drone

deliveries • Fewer wheeled delivery vehicles

• Existing transit system ridership may fall unless AV programs coordinated to support them

22


Resources http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2015/12/why-arent-urban-planners-ready-for-driverless-cars/419346/

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jul/16/google-fbi-driverless-cars-leathal-weapons-autonomous

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-07-16/automated-cars-may-boost-fuel-use-toyota-scientist-says

http://www.curbed.com/2016/8/8/12404658/autonomous-car-future-parking-lot-driverless-urban-planning

http://www.scenariomagazine.com/urban-planning-in-an-age-of-driverless-cars/

http://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf

http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2015/12/why-arent-urban-planners-ready-for-driverless-cars/419346/


















































































Don Elliott, FAICP


Zabe Bent





Driverless Cars: Changing How You Planmedia2.planning.org/media/npc2017/presentation/S535.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Driverless Cars: Changing How You Planmedia2.planning.org/media/npc2017/presentation/S535.pdf ·...