Thursday, October 26, 2017

Local Governments Scream "What do I do now?"

All over the United States, cities and counties, even state governments, are waking up - suddenly, as if an alarm clock just went off, awakening them from a deep sleep - and they are screaming "What are we going to do when autonomous vehicles come? Ahhhhhh!!!!! Oh my g-d, what the f&*ck are AVs? CVs? V2Vs? And gas stations versus EVs?

They don't know what the future holds and how to plan; no one knows, partly because the private sector is calling the shots. Plus, federal legislation will come along to preempt state laws and state laws will preempt local laws.

[Aside: I do believe that in the next year, unless we get totally bogged down with impeachment proceedings or some nightmare major distraction, the US will see the passage of a true bipartisan law in the form of AV legislation. The regulation and on-the-street details will fall to the US Department of Transportation and state departments of transportation. Many states already have some kind of AV advisory council.]

Calling on the quiet kid in the back

Let's take Nashville as an example because its transit plans for bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail (LRT) are attracting criticism - as ambitious transit projects tend to do in car-oriented places - because of talk that shared AVs will make transit less important or not important at all. Shared AVs, some say, will absorb all of the extra congestion expected in the coming decades from Nashville's growth. So, two giant assumptions here: (1) Nashville's current population trajectory will continue, and (2) residents and workers in Nashville will be traveling in shared-AVs that are shuttle or taxi-like instead of alone in their own AVs.

So, one might say, plan for AVs. BUT no one knows when AVs will be coming, in what form, or what business models will co-exist in particular local and regional markets or which will dominate, or whether to go out now and buy all of the connected technology one can get one's hands on or whether to wait because vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) won't be necessary when every vehicle is connected to every other one.

A question answered - Where?

We do know where AVs are thanks to a cool map from the Initiative on Cities and Autonomous Vehicles (ICAV, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Aspen Institute). This screenshot is just of the US and Canada, but the Initiative map covers the globe and one can zoom in and click on a colored spot for information about the AV activity in that city AND a link to municipal information about the particular project. Very cool.

Go local

Local is in. Local is farmers markets and quirky restaurants, yarn stores, parks, and murals. But most places are full of strip malls, free parking, and street crossings and pedestrian infrastructure that are ugly and dangerous. AVs challenge the conventional transportation wisdom of free parking and  everyone needing a car. However, that challenge might only be in the minds of planners and others paid to ponder transportation networks. It is possible that we will have an AV in every parking spot and companies aiming to make that goal both affordable and profitable.

Now, cities and counties are wondering how to move forward and they are hosting meetings, writing reports, investing money, and sometimes being completely frank that they are not sure what to do. In no particular order, here are some examples.

Disclaimer: What appears below is not a complete list. In fact, actual city plans are mentioned later. Scroll down if at first you become irritated.

Columbus, Ohio - Winner of the much-hailed and competitive $40 million Smart Cities Challenge (with a matching bonus of another $10 million), Columbus is perceived as having an advantage. Here is a one-year update on the Columbus demos being funded, which include autonomous shuttles and new fare card technology. Do not believe Columbus is ahead, if only because this city is very troubled. Few complete streets, terrible transit, lots of highways, illegal drugs, and big, big problems with poverty. There is so much to fix; this is a city very much tied to the automobile and the Smart Cities plan tries to do too much. Big doubts. - 😬. Columbus' plan links via ICAV.

Lake County, Illinois - Just outside of Cook County, which is mostly Chicago, Lake County is suburban and exurban, with lots of strip malls and big box stores, and some local stuff thrown in. (I've had decent falafel there and lots of good walks.) Great parks and walking trails. This is a place built around the car. Lake County is just beginning to address AVs and the already changing transportation system as it ponders the new popularity of complete streets and cities. So, being smart, nearby experts from Chicago were invited to address the Lake County Transportation Alliance about ways to improve transportation that do not involve extra lanes and more cars - or huge investments of tax dollars.


Atlanta, Georgia - Not even on the ICAV map yet, but Atlanta is promising a hi-tech, connected corridor right by Georgia Tech, with an AV shuttle. Lots of promotion and news stories about the Ponce-City-Market-to-Midtown (home of Georgia Tech) CV corridor and future AV shuttle route. Here's a boring, but informative video that focuses on the CV aspects of the project. (As a mom of a GaTech grad student, not sure the cycling stuff alleviates any concern about my biking offspring on that exact route.)



Portland, Oregon - Home of Portlandia, food trucks, and all things artisnal - way west of Brooklyn, still independent as its own city, and without the snarkiness. Have to include a clip from Portlandia. This is from a classic early episode about whether the organic chicken on the menu had a full life.

Portland's draft policy smartly considers AVs in the context of the city's transportation goals, such as Vision Zero for pedestrian and biking safety, pollution reduction, and reduction in low-occupancy vehicle trips, among others. View the Portland AV policy page for draft policy documents, timeline, and a new acronym - SAVI for Smart Autonomous Vehicles Initiative. Basically, the draft policy is four single-spaced pages stating that AVs should serve the very new urban goals that the city has already identified. That's good, BUT (you knew there would be a but) there is no explanation of who, when, or how these linkages will be made and goals accomplished. Still, this is a saner-than-Brooklyn-almost-paradise (which has had its own problems, such as the recent ethnic-reactionary murder on the streetcar). The policy identifies a rational order of priorities.
Implement a prioritization of modes for people movement by making transportation system decisions according the following ordered list:
1. Walking
2. Bicycling
3. Transit
4. Fleets of electric, fully automated, multiple passenger vehicles
5. Other shared vehicles
6. No or low occupancy vehicles, fossil-fueled non-transit vehicles

Boston, Massachusetts - The Boston Plan incorporates the laudable non-tech goals of “Zero deaths. Zero injuries. Zero disparities. Zero emissions. Zero stress.” Good way to think of technology - as a means to an end, rather than as the end. Boston has articulated definite goals, a brave move because results can be compared against actual performance. One goal even aims for improved transportation for people with disabilities: "Greater Access for Nondrivers. AVs increase the mobility of people who are unable or unwilling to drive, such as the disabled and the elderly."

While the Boston planning document makes major assumptions, it does examine a range of scenarios in terms of ownership, modes, and use of AVs. I like that. BUT this document only looks at a dense, urban area of the city instead of playing with variables for different types of neighborhoods throughout the city. Allston is not Jamaica Plain is not Beacon Hill. The document also foresees improved mobility for older adults and people with disabilities without analyzing at all the pieces that must be in place for those results to occur.

One more like: The Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) type of "digital mobility platform." Here is the image from the document. Interesting that the city is set up as the central governor of the system. Boston rightly envisions itself as part of a public/private ecosystem with which coordination must happen with other city and state bodies.

Toronto, Ontario - This Canadian city has long been on top of AV developments. Thus far, Toronto staff have acknowledged that there are too many unknowns to make firm predictions. A March 2017 document, Implications of Automated Vehicles for TTC, spends most of its pages defining variables and what exists. About two-thirds of the way in, the Toronto document lists the ways in which AVs will likely bring change to traffic, transit fleet management, workforce needs, roadway safety, and the mobility of people with disabilities (without offering any details on that one). It identifies these questions as ones that remain unanswered:
  • What will be the cost of the vehicles, the services needed to support them, the training to work with them, etc.? 
  • Will the software running the system be proprietary, or something independent of the vehicle that can be changed? 
  • How is liability determined between Operators, maintenance, ITS, and the manufacturer? 
  • What would the overall net change in costs be after considering vehicle and software procurement, new infrastructure, and changes in roles and staffing? 
  • How will AVs operate in inclement weather?


Seattle, Washington - Seattle does not so much have a plan as a working let's-look-into-these factors document, which also serves as a teaching document that defines what the heck is actually being discussed. This document nicely summarizes the federal/state/local/judicial division of responsibilities and powers.

Arizona - Just read the other day about Waymo's expansion to the four Arizona cities of Phoenix, Mesa, Tempe and Gilbert. Well, a native New Yorker would not characterize these as cities because walking and transit are not major transportation modes, but Waymo is there and those "cities" are happy. Actually, to be fair, Tempe is a real city, small, but a city.

I have now managed to write a too-long post and insult most cities in the US. At least the dog is sleeping next to me.

No comments:

Post a Comment