Advertisement

Building Automation into Urban and Metropolitan Mobility Planning

  • Bart van AremEmail author
  • Aernout Aki Ackerman
  • Tilly Chang
  • William Riggs
  • Augustin Wegscheider
  • Scott Smith
  • Siegfried Rupprecht
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)

Abstract

Transport authorities and mobility planning stakeholders have started discussing approaches to planning for road automation in cities and metropolitan areas. We present guiding principles for developing AV ready mobility plans, and show how scenario development, travel demand and transport modelling and participatory street redesign can be part of a planning approach at different temporal and spatial scales. We show best practices from the Rotterdam-The Hague, Boston and San Francisco Bay areas. We recommend a multi-stakeholder approach, integrating AV based travel with other options such as transit, TNC, walking and cycling and embedding transport with other fields such as energy, land use and equity.

Keywords

Urban and Metropolitan Mobility Planning Scenario development Transport modelling Automation readiness 

References

  1. 1.
    FHWA: Factsheet National Dialogue on Highway Automation (2018). https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/automationdialogue
  2. 2.
    Rupprecht Consult – Forschung und Beratung: Guidelines. Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (2014). http://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/sump_guidelines_en.pdf
  3. 3.
    European Commission: COM (2013) 913 Final. Annex 1: A Concept for Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans to the Communication From The Commission ‘Together towards competitive and resource-efficient urban mobility’ (2013). https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/themes/urban/doc/ump/com(2013)913-annex_en.pdf
  4. 4.
    Heinrichs, D., Rupprecht, S., Smith, S.: Making automation work for cities: impacts and policy responses. In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds.) Road Vehicle Automation 5. Cham (2018)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gyergyay, B., Gomari, S., Friedrich, M., Olstam, J., Rupprecht, S.: Automation-ready framework for urban transport and infrastructure planning. 25th ITS World Congress, Copenhagen (2018)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rupprecht, S., Backhaus, W., Gyergyay, B., Gomari, S.: CoEXist Deliverable D1.1 Automation Ready Framework (2018). https://www.h2020-coexist.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/D1.1-Automation-Ready-Framework-Preliminary-version-1.pdf
  7. 7.
    Milakis, D., van Arem, B., van Wee, B.: Policy and society related implications of automated driving: A review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intell. Transp. Syst. Technol. Plann. Oper. 21(4), 324–348 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2017.1291351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Babes, V.: A Method to Assess the Impact of Automated Vehicles on Urban Liveability in the Rotterdam The Hague Metropolitan Region. European Post-Master in Urbanism (EMU), P5 report (2017). repository.tudelft.nl
  9. 9.
    Milakis, D., Snelder, M., Van Arem, B., Van Wee, B., De Almeida Correia, G.H.: Development and transport implications of automated vehicles in the Netherlands: Scenarios for 2030 and 2050. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 17(1), 63–85 (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nieuwenhuijsen, J., Correia, G.H.D.A., Milakis, D., van Arem, B., van Daalen, E.: Towards a quantitative method to analyze the long-term innovation diffusion of automated vehicles technology using system dynamics. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 86, 300–327 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.11.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Puylaert, S., Snelder, M., van Nes, R., van Arem, B.: Mobility impacts of early forms of automated driving – a system dynamic approach. Transp. Policy 72, 171–179 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.02.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Correia, G.H.D.A., Looff, E., van Cranenburgh, S., Snelder, M., van Arem, B.: On the impact of vehicle automation on the value of travel time while performing work and leisure activities in a car: Theoretical insights and results from a stated preference survey. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 119, 359–382 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.11.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoogendoorn, R., Van Arem, B., Hoogendoorn, S.: Automated driving, traffic flow efficiency, and human factors. Transp. Res. Rec. 2422, 113–120 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.3141/2422-13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Madadi, B., van Nes, R., Snelder, M., van Arem, B.: Assessing the travel impacts of subnetworks for automated driving: An exploratory study. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 7(1), 48–56 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2018.11.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smit, R., van Mourik, H., Verroen, E., Pieters, M., Bakker, D., Snelder, M.: Will self-driving cars impact the long term investment strategy for the Dutch national trunk road system? In: Proceedings European Transport Conference (2017). https://aetransport.org/en-gb/past-etc-papers/conference-papers-2017
  16. 16.
    Transportation Research Board: 7th Innovations in Travel Modeling Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, USA (2018). http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/conferences/2018/ITM/Program.pdf
  17. 17.
    Sun, S., Stabler, B., Milkovits, M.: Risk analysis workshop. Presented at the 7th Innovations in Travel Modeling Conference, Atlanta (2018). http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/Conferences/2018/ITM/workshop2a.pdf
  18. 18.
    Lavieri, P.S., Bhat, C.R.: Modeling individuals’ willingness-to-share trips with strangers in an autonomous vehicle future. Presented at the 7th Innovations in Travel Modeling Conference, Atlanta (2018). http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/Conferences/2018/ITM/PLavieri.pdf
  19. 19.
    Li, X.: CAV Trajectory optimization & capacity analysis - modeling methods and field experiments. Presented at the 7th Innovations in travel Modeling Conference, Atlanta (2018). http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/Conferences/2018/ITM/XLi.pdf
  20. 20.
    Slotterback, C.S.: Planners’ perspectives on using technology in participatory processes. Environ. Plan. 38(3), 468–485 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Evans-Cowley, J., Griffin, G.: Microparticipation with social media for community engagement in transportation planning. Transp. Res. Rec. 2307, 90–98 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Riggs, W., Gordon, K.: How is mobile technology changing city planning? Developing a taxonomy for the future. Environ. Plann. B 44(1), 100–119 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813515610337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Riggs, W.: Modeling Future Street Options in an AV Future Using Restreet (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Riggs, W.: Technology, civic engagement and street science: hacking the future of participatory street design in the era of self-driving cars. In: Proceedings 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age, pp. 4:1–4:6. Delft, Netherlands (2018)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Riggs, W., Boswell, M.R., Ross, R.: Streetplan: hacking Streetmix for community-based outreach on the future of streets. Focus J. Plann. Pract. Educ. J. City Reg. 13(1), 14 (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schlossberg, M., Riggs, W.W., Millard-Ball, A., Shay, E.: Rethinking the street in an era of driverless cars. UrbanismNext (2018)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Appleyard, B., Riggs, W.: ‘Doing the right things’ before “doing things right”: a conceptual transportation/land use framework for livability, sustainability, and equity in the era of autonomous vehicles. Presented at the Transportation Research Board 97th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC (2018)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Riggs, W., Appleyard, B., Johnson, M.: A design framework for livable streets in the era of autonomous vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 98th Annual Meeting Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC (2019)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ackerman, A.A.: Haalbaarheidsstudie AVLM Gemeente Leidschendam-Voorburg (in Dutch, Feasibility Study ATLM City Leidschendam-Voorburg). MABS Consultancy (2018)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    World Economic Forum: Reshaping Urban Mobility with Autonomous Vehicles - Lessons from the City of Boston. REF 140518 (2018). http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Reshaping_Urban_Mobility_with_Autonomous_Vehicles_2018.pdf. Accessed Jan 2019
  31. 31.
    Metropolitan Transportation Commission: Autonomous vehicles perspective paper, June 2018. https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06-25_Autonomous_Vehicles_Perspective_Paper.pdf. Accessed 29 Jan 2019
  32. 32.
    San Francisco Transit County Authority: Emerging Mobility Factsheet, November 2017. https://www.sfcta.org/emerging-mobility. Accessed 29 Jan 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bart van Arem
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aernout Aki Ackerman
    • 2
  • Tilly Chang
    • 3
  • William Riggs
    • 4
  • Augustin Wegscheider
    • 5
  • Scott Smith
    • 6
  • Siegfried Rupprecht
    • 7
  1. 1.Faculty of Civil Engineering and GeosciencesDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.MABS ConsultancyLeidschendamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.San Francisco County Transportation AuthoritySan FranciscoUSA
  4. 4.University of San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  5. 5.Boston Consulting GroupChicagoUSA
  6. 6.U.S. Department of Transportation Volpe National Transportation Systems CenterCambridgeUSA
  7. 7.Rupprecht Consult – Forschung & Beratung GmbHKöln (Cologne)Germany

Personalised recommendations