1. Stanley Young, PhD, PE University of Maryland Center for Advanced Transportation Technology

2.  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.  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. 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. 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. 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.  Auto-valet parking may do more to change the urban form  Great accessibility  More flexible placement of parking  Less space

8.  Auto-valet parking may do more to change the urban form  Great accessibility  More flexible placement of parking  Smaller parking areas Grayfield Development Parking

9.  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.  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.  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