Will Automated Vehicle Technologies Reduce Urban Congestion?

1. Will Automated Vehicle Technologies Reduce Urban Congestion? Stanley Young, PhD, PE University of Maryland Center for Advanced Transportation Technology

2. Varying Visions of Adoption • Estimates of when penetration will be great enough to impact performance • Source: FP Think – Effects of Next-Generation Vehicles on Travel Demand and Highway Capacity, Jan 2914

3. Factors impacting Adoption Rate and Impact • Driver Experience: Stress relief, safety, comfort, and ability to use travel time for other purposes (texting) • Portion of the network over which the AV’s operate • Quality of service by other modes of transport • Vehicle costs / new models of sharing ownership • Legality of use by those otherwise not qualified to drive. • Enablement of remote parking/ vehicle storage

4. Near Term Benefits of AVs • Less congestion due to less accidents, but not significant capacity increases • Penetration rate not high enough to increase capacity • Benefits in safety: • Better vehicle following • Less crashes • Safety benefits to reduce non-reoccurring congestion • Magnitude up to debate, but measurable

5. Long Term Benefits (Increased Capacity) With a larger penetration rate literature/research indicates: • Lanes could be narrower or support wider high capacity trucks • Much of the width is needed to accommodate driver behavior • Each lane could support more traffic • Safe driving requires about 9 car length gap resulting in a capacity of about 2200 vehicles per hour per lane • Automated platoon could enable lane capacity of 6000-8000 vehicles per hour per lane Shladover, 2011

6. Long Term Unknowns for Increased Capacity Freeways Arterials – (getting to urban) • Capacity fundamentally limited by vehicle control • Must manual driving be eliminated • Will merge/diverge and ramps provide practical limits • Can AVL lanes be introduced to capture majority of benefit • Capacity not fundamentally limited by vehicle control / rather signal control • AV provides incremental benefits, though not transformational • Q? How must urban mobility be approached to leverage AV technology

7. Long Term (Laws of Parking) • Auto-valet parking may do more to change the urban form • Great accessibility • More flexible placement of parking • Less space

8. Long Term (Laws of Parking) • Auto-valet parking may do more to change the urban form • Great accessibility • More flexible placement of parking • Smaller parking areas Parking Grayfield Development

9. Long Term Problem • People could theoretically live in their vehicles and have in constantly move • If we follow the same vehicle ownership rates, congestion could get worse • How can we prevent this from happening? Source: NY Times Source: NY Post

10. Long Term Vehicle Sharing • Why do you need a car? • Shared system (Zip Car) • Taxi like system • Solves parking problem • People still need to get places • ‘Mobility by the Drink’

11. Conclusions – AV and Urban Mobility • AV will bring a host of new abilities that will impact mobility, and the urban form • Major impacts are debatable • Increased safety, reduction in non-recurrent congestion • Minimal increased capacity on non-freeway facilities • AV networks potential for service enhancements • Latent demand & empty vehicle circulation may overrun increased capacity • Parking and parking management may be significant • AV sharing concepts needed for transformational change • It’s the ‘wild west’ currently, so stay tuned