Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
2021 T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 220 Research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation Subject Areas Public Transportation â¢ Passenger Transportation â¢ Planning and Forecasting Low-Speed Automated Vehicles (LSAVs) in Public Transportation Kelley Coyner Shane Blackmer John Good Mobilitye3, llC Arlington, VA Paul Lewis Alice Grossman eno Center for transportation Washington, DC
TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 220 Project J-11/Task 27 ISSN 2572-3782 ISBN 978-0-309-67370-9 Â© 2021 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The research report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. This material has not been edited by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the information contained in this document may not be reflective of NHTSA policy or procedures, or those of the Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nationâs growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Cur- rent systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating prob- lems, adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Coopera- tive Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213âResearch for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administrationânow the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the successful National Coop- erative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of transit ser- vice providers. The scope of TCRP includes various transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Proposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was authorized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooperating organi- zations: FTA; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Development Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research organization established by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Commission. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Commission to formulate the research program by identi- fying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Commission defines funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. The panels prepare project statements (requests for propos- als), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Because research cannot have the desired effect if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on disseminat- ing TCRP results to the intended users of the research: transit agen- cies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other supporting material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, train- ing aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are imple- mented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. Published research reports of the TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to https://www.nationalacademies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was written by Shane Blackmer and John Good, both of Mobilitye3, LLC, and Alice Grossman, Ph.D., and Paul Lewis of the Eno Center for Transportation, under the oversight of the Principal Investigator, Kelley Coyner, Mobilitye3. Lisa Nisenson of WGI and Alisyn Malek, Executive Director of the Commission on the Future of Mobility, an initiative of Securing Americaâs Future Energy (SAFE), provided additional technical consultation. The researchers especially wish to thank the more than 200 individuals, agencies, and companies that took the time to contribute their knowledge and insights during the interviews and site visits that are at the heart of this research. CRP STAFF FOR TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 220 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Gwen Chisholm Smith, Manager, Transit Cooperative Research Program Dianne S. Schwager, Senior Program Officer Jarrel McAfee, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications TCRP PROJECT J-11/TASK 27 PANEL Field of Special Projects A. Jeff Becker, Regional Transportation District, Denver, CO (Chair) Rashidi J. Barnes, First Group PLC, Cincinnati, OH Robert Lawrence Bertini, USF Center for Urban Transportation Research, Tampa, FL Yuche Chen, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC Brian Hoeft, Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas, NV Lyndsay Mitchell, City of Arlington, TX, Arlington, TX Gregory Rogers, Securing Americaâs Future Energy, Washington, D.C. Kevin J. Salzer, Jacksonville, FL Jarrett William Stoltzfus, Proterra, Walnut, CA Danyell Diggs, FTA Liaison Darnell Chadwick Grisby, APTA Liaison Elizabeth Machek, OST-R/Volpe Center Liaison Tim Weisenberger, SAE International Liaison
Interest in driverless vehicles, including low-speed automated vehicles (LSAVs), continues to expand globally and in the United States. TCRP Research Report 220: Low-Speed Auto- mated Vehicles (LSAVs) in Public Transportation presents current use cases for LSAVs and provides a Practitioner Guide for planning and implementing LSAV services as a new public transpor tation service. The audience for this research includes public transit agencies, communities, and private mobility providers seeking to understand how to best incorporate automated vehiclesâand specifically LSAVsâinto public transportation service. Research under TCRP Project J-11/Task 27, âLow-Speed Automated Vehicles (LSAV) in Public Transportation,â was conducted by Mobilitye3, LLC, and the Eno Center for Trans- portation. The team was asked to (1) conduct scenario analyses of possible use cases for LSAVs that foster integrated urban mobility; (2) delineate vehicle, technology, and infrastructure attributes required for various LSAV use cases; (3) consider important issues relevant to the introduction of automated transportation regarding goals, safety, mobility of diverse populations (including people with disabilities), and benefit measurement; and (4) develop guidance, such as a checklist, that presents a decision-making process and rationale for the effective planning and deploying of LSAV services. The focus of this research was LSAVs, also called automated shuttles. At present, LSAVs are typically low-floor and high-ceiling vehicles that carry four to 10 seated passengers and some standing passengers at relatively low speeds (i.e., about 15 mph). While the vehicles do not require a driver and have SAE Level 4 automation, they typically have an attendant to help passengers and oversee the safe operations of service. Generally (but not always), LSAVs currently operate in controlled environments such as office parks, campuses, and theme parks and on simple circulator routes. To date, LSAVs do not operate in complex mixed traffic or on demand. The future of LSAVs is unknown, but many of the above characteristics may change as vehicles, technology, and use cases evolve. The research included a literature review; three detailed case studies on the lessons learned in pilots conducted in Texas, Nevada, and North Carolina; and 14 mini case studies on other LSAV projects in the United States. The research team interviewed numerous project spon- sors, public agency representatives, researchers, and technology vendors. The Practitioner Guide presents seven key stages for planning and implementing LSAV services with checklists and resources (available through hyperlinks) that address (1) program foundations, (2) feasibility, (3) procurement, (4) implementation, (5) operations, (6) monitor- ing and evaluation, and (7) sustainability. F O R E W O R D By Dianne S. Schwager Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
1 Summary 5 Chapter 1 Introduction 5 1.1 Study Background 6 1.2 Research Objectives 7 1.3 Methodology: Lessons-Learned Approach 8 Chapter 2 Use Cases and Operational Design Domains for LSAVs 8 2.1 LSAV Use Cases 11 2.2 Operational Design Domains 13 Chapter 3 LSAV Projects 19 Chapter 4 Findings 19 4.1 Current Interest in LSAVs Globally and in the United States 20 4.2 Objectives for Planning and Implementing LSAV Services 21 4.3 Governance and Funding for LSAV Services 21 4.4 Evolution of LSAVs and Services 22 4.5 Accessibility Concerns with LSAVs 24 Chapter 5 Practitioner Guide 24 5.1 LSAV Program Foundations Checklist 25 5.2 Feasibility Study Checklist 27 5.3 Procurement Checklist 27 5.4 Implementation Checklist 28 5.5 Operations Checklist 29 5.6 Monitoring and Evaluation Checklist 29 5.7 Sustainability Checklist 32 Chapter 6 Areas for Further Research 32 6.1 Baseline Survey of LSAV Planning and Implementation 32 6.2 Performance Requirements for LSAVs 32 6.3 Accessibility, ADA Standards, Equity, and Universal Design 33 6.4 Resource Centers for Best Practices and Research 33 6.5 Measurement and Assessment of LSAV Services 33 6.6 Infrastructure Improvements for More Effective LSAV Applications 35 Acronyms and Glossary C O N T E N T S
38 Appendix A Literature Review and Survey 52 Appendix B Interviews and Roundtable Discussions 56 Appendix C Interview Outline 57 Appendix D LSAV Case Studies 83 Appendix E LSAV Mini Case Studies 112 Appendix F Canadian Projects