<\/p>\n
The Portland Bureau of Transportation wants to be ready for Waymo and the potential onslaught of autonomous vehicles. After the Google-owned company approached city officials last fall to share their desire to operate on our streets<\/a>, PBOT realized it was time to update their administrative rules that govern the new form of transportation.<\/p>\n PBOT last dug into AVs in 2017 with the passage of their Smart Autonomous Vehicle Initiative<\/a>, but a lot has changed in the industry since then. And with Waymo\u2019s aggressive expansion plans \u2014 they recently raised $16 billion in venture capital and want to launch in 20 more cities this year \u2014 PBOT officials want strong local regulations that balance innovation with public safety. And simmering under all these conversations are Portlanders with strong feelings about AVs and city council members who are skeptical<\/a> to say the least.<\/p>\n PBOT Mobility Innovations Section Manager Jacob Sherman (formerly the city\u2019s e-scooter program manager) stopped by the Bicycle Advisory Committee last night to share the city\u2019s stance on Waymo and hear from members what they think of AVs in general. He was joined by PBOT Transportation Planner Hannah Morrison.<\/p>\n \u201cWe see automated vehicles as just the next evolution of this broader industry [of rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft], and we think that we need to get ready for it and have a conversation about what it could mean for Portland,\u201d Sherman shared at the BAC meeting last night. Sherman said he was relieved a state bill that would have preempted local control of AVs died<\/a> in the state legislature last month.<\/p>\n \u201cWe think these [AVs] should be regulated as for-hire vehicles \u2014 just like taxis and just like Uber and Lyft. And we need to maintain our local control to be able to do that,\u201d Sherman said.<\/p>\n Like students getting ready for a big test, PBOT has been studying-up on AVs. In the past few months, PBOT officials have talked to over a dozen other cities to better understand the pros and cons that come with robotaxi services like Waymo. \u201cWe took pieces from other cities and tried to do this in a Portland way,\u201d said Morrison, when explaining PBOT\u2019s new draft rules.<\/p>\n Sherman describe the \u201cPortland way\u201d as, \u201cTrying to propose a thoughtful, collaborative approach that could let companies come to market, but also do so in a way that kind of protects the broader public good.\u201d<\/p>\n To be clear, PBOT isn\u2019t anti-AVs. The benefits they see include: safety, more efficient traffic flow, a good option for folks who can\u2019t drive themselves, and the fact that AVs give riders more time to themselves. But the perils loom large as well. PBOT is concerned about: how robotaxis will interact with other road users, the impacts on the job market, increased congestion (in California, about 40% of AV miles are without a passenger), who has access to the videos and photos the cars take, how AVs could induce sprawl, and so on.<\/p>\n To stay in the driver\u2019s seat when it comes to regulating AVs, Portland\u2019s plan is to set a strong set of ground rules before any testing or operations begin. Here\u2019s a general outline of the draft rule PBOT is seeking comment on (taken from a PBOT presentation<\/a> to the BAC last night).<\/p>\n To understand companies\u2019 intended operations, they must provide a description of the conditions they will operate under, including: time of day; environmental conditions (e.g. weather); and a description of restrictions on operations, including: speed of travel, roadway type, and a map of their intended operating area.<\/p>\n To ensure that the City permits safe companies and not possible bad actors, companies must: provide a statement of testing or deployment experience, comply with robust insurance and liability requirements, comply with all state and local laws (including traffic laws and parking regulations).<\/p>\n To ensure widespread access, AV companies must: provide reasonable accommodations to passengers with disabilities and host at least two public outreach events annually.<\/p>\n To ensure companies are supporting the City\u2019s Vision Zero goal, they must: provide a Passenger Safety Plan; provide a First Responder Interaction and Disengagement Plan and host at least one in-person training annually; provide PBOT with copies of NHTSA collision reports; comply with all federal, state and local laws (including traffic laws and parking regulations); do not pick-up or drop-off passengers in a vehicle or bicycle lane; comply with federal AV requirements; submit documentation on annual vehicle inspections.<\/p>\n To ensure that companies are committed to data privacy and data sharing, they must: share trip level data with the City (like taxis, Uber and Lyft, BIKETOWN, e-scooters, and car-share); comply with the Oregon Consumer Privacy Act; submit a privacy policy showing how they will safeguard passengers\u2019 information. AV companies should also work with the city to integrate our data about street closures, school zones, work zones, and first responder conflicts.<\/p>\n To ensure that AVs contribute to the City\u2019s decarbonization goals: all AVs must be fully battery electric vehicles.<\/p>\n Standard private for-hire permit and per-trip fees will apply to for-hire AVs, just like taxis, Uber and Lyft. These fees support administration and maintenance and operations of transportation system.<\/p>\n Addition of a for-hire AV permit. To receive a permit for commercial operations, AV companies must either:<\/p>\n Permits can limit fleet size. Permits can be suspended or revoked for noncompliance.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The response from BAC members was mixed. One member, Alon Raab expressed serious concerns \u2014 both about basic things like safety (he doesn\u2019t like that you can\u2019t look robotaxi drivers in the eye when negotiating an intersection) and deeper societal issues the vehicles represent. \u201cI find this technology alarming,\u201d Raab said. \u201cSix companies own the market. I don\u2019t feel comfortable in a world where six companies own a market. It\u2019s a philosophical issue.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis is a big question of what kind of world we want,\u201d Raab continued. \u201cAnd I don\u2019t feel comfortable with this world where machines drive and don\u2019t have any responsibility and where a few people make all the decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n BAC member Sabrina Freewynn had a much different take. \u201cI am a total supporter of autonomous vehicles. Absolutely love them,\u201d she said. Freewynn, who\u2019s ridden in a Waymo in Phoenix, said people need to get more familiar with them, \u201cSo I like that idea of having them tested in Portland.\u201d<\/p>\n The issue of traffic law enforcement came up several times during the meeting. If a police officer wanted to issue a citation to an AV, how would that even work since there\u2019s no driver to cite? Sherman with PBOT said, \u201cOregon law doesn\u2019t answer that question right now. That\u2019s a piece of law that needs to be clarified at some point.\u201d<\/p>\n There remain many questions surrounding the future of AVs in Portland. That\u2019s why you should pay attention and consider sharing your comments with PBOT. The comment period will be open through April 4th and there\u2019s a public hearing today (Weds, March 11th) from 6:00 to 7:30 pm at the Portland Building downtown (Zoom also available). Learn more about the draft rule change and opportunities for feedback on PBOT\u2019s website<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n\n
\n