Competition is getting fierce to demonstrate driverless vehicles manufacturers are welcome. Strategies differ by pilot program, big plans, and the absence of legal restrictions.
Transit in the Desert
Recent news shows Dubai continuing to make a strong commitment to driverless transportation, specifically transit shuttles. Lots of testing via pilots and consideration of expansion to "metro stations, malls and tourist attractions." Consideration is serious here on the first-mile/last mile piece as well. Dubai is also crafting regulations for the not-too-distant ordinary operation of autonomous transit.
Where the Underground is Polite - Mind the Gap
A pilot project to take place in South London in 2019 will show off the UK government's investment in a consortium pushing ahead with autonomous vehicle technology. The 2019 pilot will be Uber-esque ride hailing designed to replace automobile commuter trips. "FiveAI, a Cambridge-based artificial intelligence firm, is developing the trial with Direct Line, the University of Oxford, Transport for London and the Transport Research Laboratory."
American translation: Competition is serious with autonomous-related AI technology. Think the huge GM investment in Cruise Automation. Plus, smartly, the UK is making sure transit - see Transport for London - is a partner.
I love "mind the gap." We need that British voice on American subways and the level of service of London subways too, please.
Across the Potomac
Meanwhile, American states are practically in a mob fistfight to advance in the driverless race, except for California, which is confident that Silicon Valley firms and brains are not moving out anytime soon. This time it is the governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia who is laying out the red carpet. Terry McAuliffe, the governor and good friend of the Clinton family, declares that his state's motor vehicle laws and regulations currently allow for driverless vehicles to be tested and operated on Virginia's roads. No law is good law goes Virginia's thinking on attracting autonomous vehicle manufacturers and tech companies.
Monday, April 24, 2017
Friday, April 21, 2017
Smaller Cities Speeding Toward Autonomous Future
Beyond the driverless testing bubbles of San Francisco, Pittsburgh, and Austin where autonomous vehicles have found mostly enthusiastic homes, most cities have remained silent and let their state governments express enthusiasm or trepidation about the transportation revolution. Some, like Toronto, New York, Boston, and Atlanta, have made some noises.
Now we have a few smaller cities, technically medium size, that are begging or already laying out the red carpet for companies to come test.
Keeping it weird
Portland, Oregon, home of artisnal everything, lots of backyard chickens, and tons of tatooed people, has put the word out on its cute streets. The city is quickly drafting regulations to allow autonomous vehicle pilot programs and "specifically looking to attract programs that actively enhance Portland's current transit infrastructure or improve accessibility while also helping the city reduce its carbon emissions. The city will finalize its autonomous vehicle regulations after a two year test period." (Endgadget post, 4/19/17)
The mayor's vision is not the Pittsburgh approach of attracting one company. Rather Portland seeks to be corporate agnostic, if you will, and take all comers. All is not craft beer and homemade funky clothes, however, because not all of the Portland council city council is in agreement about setting out the autonomous car welcome mat. This remains a big question mark at the moment.
Hello Jerry!
Meanwhile, out in normally quiet and staid Sacramento, CA., the state capital, home to Governor Jerry Brown - and no, you did not wake up from a 1970s dream of the future - there is enthusiastic activity already going on to make the city a "test bed" for autonomous vehicle testing. The unspecified companies meeting with Sacramento officials probably already have permission to test on California roads. That's a complete guess, by the way.
Even the owner of the basketball team, the Sacramento Kings, is on board. The city seems to be united and ready.
Gateway to the Great Smoky Mountains
Knoxville, TN, is getting an Olli autonomous transit shuttle. Soon to be tested and taken out for spins during events, the shuttle is pencilled in for "full phase" - I assume that means actual operation - next year. Take that Manhattan - it may be Poughkeepsie gets driverless before you.
Issues outlined a/k/a questions to think about
Meanwhile, two recent reports have come out that are relevant for city planners. The first, from the National League of Cities, outlines the issues that cities should ponder and begin planning for in relation to autonomous and connected vehicle technologies. Autonomous Vehicles: A Policy Preparation Guide briefly discusses transportation and the mixture of partially and completely autonomous vehicles for an audience mostly unaware of the differences, but the report also points out privacy, cybersecurity, and other issues that will shape the autonomous experience.
The second report is A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles, an in-depth examination of the myriad legal issues - federal, state, and judicial - that will affect the adoption and regulation of the coming transportation transformation. Produced by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) legal publication division, this publication is an excellent exploration of product liability, privacy, cybersecurity, insurance, crimes, criminal procedure, and other issues, with wonderful information about statutes, regulatory regimes, and caselaw. The report falls down a bit in the prediction department, but where it sticks to legal analysis it is a fantastic read.
This is a web not only of different areas of the law and different responsibilities, from administrative agencies to the courts, but also of different levels of government - local, state, and federal - having their fingers in the pie. The report lays out this complex matrix quite nicely. It's a great read for transportation law nerds. Guilty here on both.
Now we have a few smaller cities, technically medium size, that are begging or already laying out the red carpet for companies to come test.
Keeping it weird
Portland, Oregon, home of artisnal everything, lots of backyard chickens, and tons of tatooed people, has put the word out on its cute streets. The city is quickly drafting regulations to allow autonomous vehicle pilot programs and "specifically looking to attract programs that actively enhance Portland's current transit infrastructure or improve accessibility while also helping the city reduce its carbon emissions. The city will finalize its autonomous vehicle regulations after a two year test period." (Endgadget post, 4/19/17)
The mayor's vision is not the Pittsburgh approach of attracting one company. Rather Portland seeks to be corporate agnostic, if you will, and take all comers. All is not craft beer and homemade funky clothes, however, because not all of the Portland council city council is in agreement about setting out the autonomous car welcome mat. This remains a big question mark at the moment.
Hello Jerry!
Meanwhile, out in normally quiet and staid Sacramento, CA., the state capital, home to Governor Jerry Brown - and no, you did not wake up from a 1970s dream of the future - there is enthusiastic activity already going on to make the city a "test bed" for autonomous vehicle testing. The unspecified companies meeting with Sacramento officials probably already have permission to test on California roads. That's a complete guess, by the way.
Even the owner of the basketball team, the Sacramento Kings, is on board. The city seems to be united and ready.
Gateway to the Great Smoky Mountains
Knoxville, TN, is getting an Olli autonomous transit shuttle. Soon to be tested and taken out for spins during events, the shuttle is pencilled in for "full phase" - I assume that means actual operation - next year. Take that Manhattan - it may be Poughkeepsie gets driverless before you.
Issues outlined a/k/a questions to think about
Meanwhile, two recent reports have come out that are relevant for city planners. The first, from the National League of Cities, outlines the issues that cities should ponder and begin planning for in relation to autonomous and connected vehicle technologies. Autonomous Vehicles: A Policy Preparation Guide briefly discusses transportation and the mixture of partially and completely autonomous vehicles for an audience mostly unaware of the differences, but the report also points out privacy, cybersecurity, and other issues that will shape the autonomous experience.
The second report is A Look at the Legal Environment for Driverless Vehicles, an in-depth examination of the myriad legal issues - federal, state, and judicial - that will affect the adoption and regulation of the coming transportation transformation. Produced by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) legal publication division, this publication is an excellent exploration of product liability, privacy, cybersecurity, insurance, crimes, criminal procedure, and other issues, with wonderful information about statutes, regulatory regimes, and caselaw. The report falls down a bit in the prediction department, but where it sticks to legal analysis it is a fantastic read.
This is a web not only of different areas of the law and different responsibilities, from administrative agencies to the courts, but also of different levels of government - local, state, and federal - having their fingers in the pie. The report lays out this complex matrix quite nicely. It's a great read for transportation law nerds. Guilty here on both.
Tuesday, April 11, 2017
Legislative Bonanza: New York Dipping a Toe In the Ocean
A good portion of New York State is on the ocean, but in terns of driverless, no one is running in to catch the waves. No, the analogy is more to people who stand at the edge of the water, toes in the wet sand, getting toes and maybe ankles wet.
Get ready, set, go ... for one year
The first thing to know about the New York legislation, which was tucked into a budget bill, S02005C, which has now become law, is that the law will only be in force for one year. The second important point is that the law only regulates testing. New York apparently is not ready to deal with actual operation of driverless vehicles.
Please be aware that no one who writes legislation in Albany, the state capital, went to school on the day that paragraphs and their role in readability were explained. This quote is only part of a super-long paragraph.
Oh, and the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles is required to prepare a report to the governor and the legislature by June 2018, in consultation with the state police, given the agency's knowledge of autonomous vehicle technology - time to chuckle - and, presumably, its presence during those many tests.
Lest not we judge too hastily
This is not necessarily a bad approach. New York City, for example, has never been a place of innovation, but more a place of capitalizing on what has already been created. This mindset allows New York to sit out the driverless race and to learn lessons from the many states that are rushing in to catch the waves. Many of those states have no chance to be in the lead and could be wasting time, money and effort.
Legislative hoagie
We won't even mention, oh yes I will, that the budget provision is sandwiched between a property tax provision relating to Spring Valley, a nice enough suburb of New York City, and something relating to penalties and forfeited security about motor vehicle fines, the latter of which is stated in the most dense, unreadable prose that Charles Dickens should come back to life and quote it in a new novel.
Get ready, set, go ... for one year
The first thing to know about the New York legislation, which was tucked into a budget bill, S02005C, which has now become law, is that the law will only be in force for one year. The second important point is that the law only regulates testing. New York apparently is not ready to deal with actual operation of driverless vehicles.
Please be aware that no one who writes legislation in Albany, the state capital, went to school on the day that paragraphs and their role in readability were explained. This quote is only part of a super-long paragraph.
[T]he New York state commissioner of motor vehicles may approve demonstrations and tests consisting of the operation of a motor vehicle equipped with autonomous vehicle technology while such motor vehicle is engaged in the use of such technology on public highways within this state for the purposes of demonstrating and assessing the current development of autonomous vehicle technology and to begin identifying potential impacts of such technology on safety, traffic control, traffic enforcement, emergency services, and such other areas as may be identified by such commissioner. Provided, however, that such demonstrations and tests shall only take place under the direct supervision of the New York state police. Such demonstrations and tests shall take place in a manner and form prescribed by the commissioner of motor vehicles including, but not limited to: a requirement that a natural person holding a valid license for the operation of the motor vehicle's class be present within such vehicle for the duration of the time it is operated on public highways; ...So as long as all paperwork is complete AND there is a human licensed driver AND a police officer nearby, you're good to test in the Expire State. Or a company can just go to one of a number of other states and forget dealing with a police officer and even a licensed human.
Oh, and the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles is required to prepare a report to the governor and the legislature by June 2018, in consultation with the state police, given the agency's knowledge of autonomous vehicle technology - time to chuckle - and, presumably, its presence during those many tests.
Lest not we judge too hastily
This is not necessarily a bad approach. New York City, for example, has never been a place of innovation, but more a place of capitalizing on what has already been created. This mindset allows New York to sit out the driverless race and to learn lessons from the many states that are rushing in to catch the waves. Many of those states have no chance to be in the lead and could be wasting time, money and effort.
Legislative hoagie
We won't even mention, oh yes I will, that the budget provision is sandwiched between a property tax provision relating to Spring Valley, a nice enough suburb of New York City, and something relating to penalties and forfeited security about motor vehicle fines, the latter of which is stated in the most dense, unreadable prose that Charles Dickens should come back to life and quote it in a new novel.
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
Legislation Bonanza: Out to Colorado
SB 17-213, as amended, is the Colorado bill. Even in beautiful Colorado, where everyone is fit and either biking in spandex or skiing, there is a state legislature. Okay, some people are hiking there. (I actually like Moxie Bread Company, a nice little whole grain bakery with great coffee in Louisville, outside of Boulder.)
The Colorado legislation opens with (1) a summary of the carnage on the nation's roads - and Colorado roads, specifically - due to deaths and injuries caused by vehicular crashes; and (2) the usefulness of driverless vehicles for first-mile/last-mile connections to transit and the mobility of people with disabilities and older adults. Amazing is that this introduction also mentions pedestrians and people who are poor. Go Colorado! Thinking multi-modal and socioeconomically.
Short bill, broad coverage
In a few pages, and those pages have a large font, the bill places its trust in a driverless future. Forget a focus on testing, the Colorado legislation would:
* Preempt local governments from regulating driverless vehicles.
* Authorize operation of driverless vehicles as long as vehicles comply with state and federal laws.
* Allow for testing of vehicles that are not in compliance with state and federal laws, with permission from the Colorado State Patrol and the DOT (Department of Transportation).
* And for the we-must-make paperwork department: The state DOT is required to submit a report each September about driverless testing in Colorado.
Colorado wisely leaves questions of liability, in the case of malfunction or crash, with existing judicial precedent, laws, and regulations. A new legal judicial structure for a new technology is not being established. Those physically fit (I'm assuming) state legislators read my mind.
AV eye candy from London
A glimpse into the future Colorado sees is already beginning to materialize in a very different landscape. See what the public transport agency in London will be trying out.
Click here for the video source.
The Colorado legislation opens with (1) a summary of the carnage on the nation's roads - and Colorado roads, specifically - due to deaths and injuries caused by vehicular crashes; and (2) the usefulness of driverless vehicles for first-mile/last-mile connections to transit and the mobility of people with disabilities and older adults. Amazing is that this introduction also mentions pedestrians and people who are poor. Go Colorado! Thinking multi-modal and socioeconomically.Short bill, broad coverage
In a few pages, and those pages have a large font, the bill places its trust in a driverless future. Forget a focus on testing, the Colorado legislation would:
* Preempt local governments from regulating driverless vehicles.
* Authorize operation of driverless vehicles as long as vehicles comply with state and federal laws.
* Allow for testing of vehicles that are not in compliance with state and federal laws, with permission from the Colorado State Patrol and the DOT (Department of Transportation).
* And for the we-must-make paperwork department: The state DOT is required to submit a report each September about driverless testing in Colorado.
Colorado wisely leaves questions of liability, in the case of malfunction or crash, with existing judicial precedent, laws, and regulations. A new legal judicial structure for a new technology is not being established. Those physically fit (I'm assuming) state legislators read my mind.
AV eye candy from London
A glimpse into the future Colorado sees is already beginning to materialize in a very different landscape. See what the public transport agency in London will be trying out.
Click here for the video source.
Monday, April 3, 2017
Legislation Bonanza - Illinois
The Illinois legislation, HB 2747, House Amendment 001, is pretty simple.
The bill explicitly states that no human operator of a vehicle need be present in the vehicle.
This equation explains the legislation: automated driving system = driver.
Human must report if a crash occurs.
Laws of cities and towns within the state are preempted regarding driverless vehicles.
The legislation as amended has passed the Illinois House. The press keeps reporting the line about how this is Illinois' chance to be in the lead. I seriously hope that some of the smart people in Chicagoland and elsewhere know that the state is already starting behind, though in many ways the driverless race is not near the finish line.
The bill explicitly states that no human operator of a vehicle need be present in the vehicle.
This equation explains the legislation: automated driving system = driver.
Human must report if a crash occurs.
Laws of cities and towns within the state are preempted regarding driverless vehicles.
The legislation as amended has passed the Illinois House. The press keeps reporting the line about how this is Illinois' chance to be in the lead. I seriously hope that some of the smart people in Chicagoland and elsewhere know that the state is already starting behind, though in many ways the driverless race is not near the finish line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)