Envisioning the Ci ty wi th Automated Vehicles Lindsay Stevens, Jeremy Crute & Jordan Crandall Florida State University APA’s 2016 National Planning Conference Session Function Code#9001891

Co-Principal Invest igators ◎ Dr. Tim Chapin ◎ Dr. Mark Horner ◎ Florida Department of Transportation Staff

○ Ed Hutchinson ○ Tanner Martin ○ David Sherman

Today’s Big Takeaway Automated Vehicles will cause the next great transformation in our transportation systems and the built environment Mobility and safety will increase Ownership patterns will change AVs will impact roadway design, urban

form, site design, and parking

Agenda

1. Introduction to Automated Vehicles (AV) 2. AVs implications for the Transportation

System 3. Florida’s AV Initiative 4. Future of Florida Project 5. Envisioning the Future of the City 6. Moving Forward – Policy Implications

Automated Vehicles Autonomous Vehicles ◎ Standalone Operability ◎ Vehicle has Situational Awareness

Connected Vehicles ◎ Vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) ◎ Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) ◎ Vehicle-to-Bike/Ped/Other (V2X)

Technology Adoption Rates

Place your screenshot here

Shared AVs

Shared AVs (SAVs) The model of the future? ◎ The typical American vehicle is parked 95% of the time ◎ Fewer Millennials want to own cars ◎ On-demand car and ride-sharing models like Zipcar and Uber

are growing in popularity ◎ Auto manufacturers are investing in car-sharing companies

Multiple studies have found that one shared AV could replace between 9 and 11 traditional vehicles1 However, even a privately-owned AV could reduce vehicle ownership by 43% (from 2.1 to 1.2 per household)2

1 Fagnant, Kockelman, & Bansal, 2015; McDowell, 2015; Schoettle & Sivak, 2015 2 Schoettle & Sivak, 2015

Shared AVs (SAVs)

AVs’ Impl icat ions for the Transportat ion System

5,500,000 Automobile crashes every year

93% of crashes are caused by human error

30,000+ fatalities per year

$450,000,000,000 In damage per year due to crashes

Safety

42 hours Sitting in traffic each year

$121,000,000,000 Annual Financial cost of congestion

Eff iciency

How Wil l AVs Improve Safety + Eff iciency?

Reducing t raffic crashes 25% of congestion is attributed to accidents and breakdowns

Reducing t ime spent “ cruising for parking” 30% of downtown congestion has been contributed to searching for parking

Increasing throughput of exist ing infrast ructure Smaller vehicles Travel closer together

AV Legislat ion

Thirteen states introduced legislation related to autonomous vehicles in 2015, up from 12 states in 2014, nine states and D.C. in 2013, and six states in 2012.

States with Enacted AV Legislation

Florida’s Automated Vehicle Ini t iat ive

FDOT’s Automated Vehicle Init iat ive Steering Commit tee

◎AV/CV Strategic Plan ◎Prioritize Investment

Locations/Programs

1. Stakeholder Working Groups 2. University Research

Partnerships 3. Pilot Projects 4. Public Outreach and Education

Improving Safety and Mobility

Ongoing Pi lot Projects ◎ Assessing Advanced Driver Assistance Systems in District 7

(Safety) ◎ Assessing Connected Vehicle Technologies for Miami’s

Perishable Freight Industry (Freight Mobility) Improving Safety and Mobility ◎ USDOT Connected Vehicle Deployment in District 7 with the Tampa Hillsborough Expressway Authority • Focused on reducing the

frequency and severity of crashes (Safety)

Universi ty Research Partnerships

Universit ies in Florida have been conduct ing research on AV/CV/ITS technologies for >10 years

• Policy – Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Long Range Transportation Plans (UF)

• Connected Vehicle Messaging (UCF)

• Autonomous Technologies for Mobility Solutions for the Aging and Disabled Populations (FSU)

• Visioning Future Cit ies with AV Technologies (FSU)

• Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (FIT) and Unmanned Surface Vessels (FAU) for Bridge Inspections

• AVs for DOT Maintenance Vehicles (ERAU)

Florida State Universi ty’s Future of Florida Project

◎Envision the Future of Cities in an AV World

◎ Identify policies and infrastructure investments necessary to enable a smooth transition

◎Facilitate visioning sessions at the 2015 AV Summit

Visioning Session To engage participants at the 2015 Florida Automated Vehicles Summit in a collaborative small group exercise to: ◎ Envision the future of Florida in an AV world, ◎ Brainstorm AV’s impact upon Florida’s

communities ◎ Document a range of potential issues that

might hinder the smooth and efficient transition to a transportation system dominated by AVs

Session Detai ls When: 2015 AV Summit – Dec. 2015 Where: Jacksonville, FL Who: Planners, Engineers, Elected Officials, and Industry Representatives What: 14 Immersive Small Group Discussions

AV Scenario Assumptions

2040 ◎ 50% AV Penetration

○ 90% Privately Owned ○ 10 Shared Ownership

◎ 50% Human Operated Vehicles

2060 ◎ 100% AV Penetration

○ 70% Privately Owned ○ 30 Shared Ownership

◎ 0% Human Operated Vehicles

Downtown Orlando

Urban Sett ings Medical/Univ Campus

USF/Medical Complex

Urban Arterial US-19 in Pasco County

Transit Oriented Place Dadeland in Miami

Discussion Topics Participants were asked to think about AV’s impact on a range of areas, including: Parking Streetscapes Intersection Design Signage & Signalization Bicycle/Pedestrian Interface System Function

Changes to the Bui l t Environment

Road Design AVs may create narrower and more efficient ROWs

Signage & Signalizat ion Virtual infrastructure may replace physical signs and signals

Bikes & Pedestrians AVs could support or hinder the pedestrian experience

Parking AVs could affect the location, design and demand for parking

Drop-offs Drop-off areas may replace on-site parking

Redevelopment Reduced parking may open redevelopment opportunities

Road Design

The Present ◎ In 2013, there were

8,656,070 lane miles of roadway in the U.S. ○ 19,673 Sq miles of pavement

◎ All that roadway has not solved our congestion problem ○ Americans spent 6.9 billion

hours stuck in traffic in 2014

AV Right-of-Ways (ROW)

AVs could enable smaller & more efficient ROWs Why?

◎ Smaller vehicles ◎ More precise driving – AVs remove margin of error ◎ Increased throughput – AVs can travel closer together

Implications ◎ Creates more space for bike/ped facilities ◎ Reduces need to expand roadways ◎ Potential for road diets

A Common Auto-Centric Streetscape

Moving to Complete Streets

AVs’ Long-Term Streetscape Opportuni ty

Transi t ioning to AV ROWs Until the existing vehicle fleet turns over the transportation system will need to accommodate automated and human-operated vehicles

Separating automated and human-operated vehicle infrastructure

◎ Dedicated lanes ○ Starting on the highway system - Similar to today’s

HOV lanes ○ Provides AVs’ efficiency benefits without

compromising human-operated vehicles

Signs & Signals

The Present ◎ Traffic signs and signals keep the transportation

system running smoothly and efficiently ◎ Inform drivers when, where, and how they may go

The Future of Traff ic Signals

◎The Decline of Traffic Signs and Signals ○ V2I and V2V technology may replace all traffic signs and signals

○ Declutter Roadways ◎Reorient of Traffic

Signs to Pedestrians ◎Enable Free-flowing

Intersections

The Reorientat ion of Signs and Signals ◎ Traffic signals will only be

necessary to tell pedestrians when to cross

◎ Replace street signs with pedestrian way-finding

◎ Create more attractive urban spaces

Free-Flowing Intersect ions

Source: University of Texas

Bikes & Peds

How AVs Could Support Bikes & Peds ◎ AVs require less space within urban

settings ◎ Narrower lanes makes extra space to

retrofit ROWs to provide more pedestrian and bicycle facilities

◎ Opportunities to pursue complete streets with separate ROWs for AVs, bicyclists, and pedestrians

How AVs Could Hinder Bikes & Peds ◎ Free-flowing intersections could make

crossing intersections difficult or even dangerous

◎ Drop-off lanes could fragment bike/ped networks

Separat ing Bike/Peds from AVs

Park ing

The Present

~1 Bi l l ion Parking spaces in the U.S. (4,068 to 11,622 sq miles) 14% Of land area in LA County is dedicated to parking

The Future of Park ing

Design Human design elements can be removed from parking areas

Locat ion Parking is no longer tied to a site

Demand The demand for parking may decreased dramatically

Source: Cornell.edu

Park ing Design

Parking spots can be smaller ◎ Smaller Vehicles ◎ No need to open the door

Remove human design elements ◎ Lighting ◎ Elevators ◎ Climate Control

Park ing Locat ion

◎ Parking is no longer tied to the site

◎ Parking can be moved out of the urban core

◎ Parking can be consolidated into facilities on the urban periphery

Park ing Demand AVs are expected to reduce the demand for parking spaces ◎ AVs can return home ◎ More efficient use of

existing parking infrastructure

◎ On-Demand Avs (Uber style AV taxis) may rise to prominence

○ Smaller Vehicle Fleet – 1 shared vehicle could 9 private vehicles

Impl icat ions of Park ing Impacts

AVs impact on the form and location of parking will have two major implications for the rest of the built environment: ◎ A growing demand for drop-off areas ◎ Opens space for redevelopment

opportunities

Drop-offs

Drop-offs: The Park ing Replacement ◎ AVs will shift priority from parking to drop-

off areas ◎ Drop-off areas are expected to become a

staple in urban site design

◎ Drop-off Area Design: ○ Protected ○ Easy ingress/egress ○ Passenger waiting areas – safe/comfortable spaces to

wait

Retrof i t t ing Exist ing Infrastructure Examples of existing infrastructure that could be retrofitted into drop-offs ◎ Surface Parking ◎ On-street parking ◎ Turn lanes ◎ Frontage roads ◎ Service roads

Redeveloping Suburban Strip Mal ls

Optional On-site Parking Garage

On-Street Drop-off

Area

Additional Greenspace

Freight and Employee

Drop-off

Complete Street w/ Drop-offs

Additional Greenspace

Redevelopment Opportuni t ies

Redevelopment Opportuni t ies ◎ Reduction and relocation of parking will open space for

significant urban redevelopment ◎ Opportunity to rethink, revitalize, and redevelop urban centers

○ Densification of urban core ○ Placemaking and beautification efforts

◎ Site Design Implications ○ Replace parking with drop-off areas ○ Pull buildings closer to frontage roads

Source: Savannah College of Art & Design, 2014

Redevelopment Opportuni t ies

Putt ing i t Al l Together: Today’s Bui l t Environment

Putt ing i t Al l Together: The Transi t ion to an AV World

Putt ing i t al l Together: A Ful ly Autonomous Ci ty

Moving Forward

Considerations for Policymaking and Infrastructure Investments

Possible Negative Impacts of AVs

◎ Increased sprawl ◎ More VMT

○ Vehicles going to pick up their owner ○ Delivery vehicles

◎ Fragmenting Bike and Pedestrian Infrastructure

◎ Chaotic Drop-off Zones

Streetscape & Road Networks ◎ Incorporate AV considerations into the

design of streetscapes and road networks ◎ Revisit roadway design manuals and long-

range transportation plans ○ Modeling and pilot projects testing the throughput

efficiencies and travel demand impacts of AVs

Land Use Considerat ions

Designate periphery areas for consolidated waiting and parking of AVs

Separate Lanes and Infrastructure

◎ Begin identifying ways to establish separated AV infrastructure ○ Dedicated AV-lanes, to ensure the efficiencies of AVs

can be capitalized on during the early stages of AV adoption

Park ing Locat ion and Form ◎ Identifying appropriate areas to locate AV

parking ○ Designated in the comp plan, zoning codes, etc ○ Provide these areas with sufficient roadway capacity

◎ Removing human-centered facilities from parking facility building codes ○ i.e., climate control, walkways, turning radius, elevators, and

lighting ○ May also need to fortify structural composition of AV parking

facilities

Preparing for a Drop-off Revolut ion

◎ Review and Update Land Development Regulations to Accommodate AVs ○ Reduce required parking requirements ○ Reduce setbacks ○ Replace parking standards with drop-off area

specifications ◉ Design Standards for the frequency, design, and

size of drop-off areas based on expected demand

Support ing Bike/Ped Travel ◎ Consider bicyclists and pedestrians from the

beginning of any AV-system related planning initiatives and infrastructure designs ○ Policy: Roadway Design Standards: Build upon

Complete Street best practices ○ Systems Design: developing innovative, yet

affordable ways to enable pedestrians to safely cross free-flowing AV intersections

○ Infrastructure: Reusing extra ROW: Dedicated bike lanes and expanded, more attractive sidewalks

Conclusion

◎ AV is a transformative technology that if implemented properly could support attractive, people-friendly, safe urban environments.

◎ The technology is rapidly advancing. It is vital for planners and policy makers to integrate AVs as a transportation mode in our plans.

Thanks! Any quest ions?

For more information please contact: Lindsay Stevens lstevens@fsu.edu Jeremy Crute jpc12c@my.fsu.edu