CAT Coalition Planning Scenarios Working Group

1 CAT Coalition – Planning Scenarios WG November 6, 2019 Webinar – Notes and Summary

CAT Coalition Planning Scenarios Working Group

November 6, 2019 Webinar Notes and Summary of Discussions

Summary of Action Items

1. Staff to identify presenters for future webinars that can speak about how to create plans that are resilient against an array of potential futures, and how to conduct robust decision making that is needed.

2. Staff to work with Ray Derr to identify speakers on the recent NCHRP Projects related to CAV/CAT Planning for the upcoming webinar(s).

3. Staff to work to arrange a presentation from AMPO on an upcoming webinar

4. Staff to work to arrange a presentation on one or more Smart City/Smart Region deployments, with the emphasis on what is known about how the technology deployments will impact travel demand and travel behavior.

Welcome Matt Hardy welcomed members and noted this is the CAT Coalition working group on planning, and as we will discuss, will combine efforts with the CAV group within the AASHTO Committee on Planning (COP) as both efforts are looking to plan for the eventual deployment of CAV/CAT. Matt reviewed the agenda and introduced the co-chairs of this working group being Sondra Rosenberg (NVDOT) and Justine Sydello (CDM Smith).

• Sondra welcomed the group and thanked them for their involvement with both groups. She recognized that planning is very challenging in this arena and she is looking forward to learning from today’s speaker and other members of the group. In addition to serving as the co-chair of this group, Sondra chairs the CAV working group in the AASHTO COP;

• Justine echoed Sondra’s comments and noted that she is looking forward to this group having a regular meeting frequency and learning more about the activities of both the public and private sectors.


Update on the CAT Coalition Matt provided an overview of the AASHTO COP. Scott Bennett (Arkansas DOT) is the chair. Lynn Weiskopf (NYSDOT) is the vice-chair. The COP has formed several technical working groups addressing topic specific areas. One of these is the CAV Planning Working Group. The purpose is to serve as a forum for information sharing and dissemination. The working groups are not formed to create policy, but instead focus on information exchange and on identifying needs for additional resources. In the case of the CAV Working Group they are sharing information on how state DOTs or MPOs are planning for CAVs. Since goals and topic area are very similar, Matt and Sondra discussed combining efforts of these two groups. Tom Kern provided an update on the overall Cooperative Automated Transportation (CAT) Coalition. Tom noted that the two co-chairs of the coalition are Roger Millar (Secretary of Transportation for WSDOT) and Jennifer Cohen (Secretary of Transportation for Delaware DOT). Tom stepped members through the organization chart of the CAT Coalition, explaining how the working groups are organized into three focus areas. Tom noted that the coalition has over 500 members and the grouping into focus areas and working groups helps to ensure all members are able to interact. The Planning Scenarios WG is “paired” with the Technical Resources Working Group, which is chaired by Faisal Saleem, MCDOT. The Technical Resources WG is responsible for exploring resources, summarizing resources, and developing resources. Tom also noted the Policy, Legislative, and Regulatory (PLR) Working Group that recently looked at CAT Policy Frameworks around the country and internationally. Tom noted that a summary table is available on the CAT website, including approximately 30 CAT Policy Frameworks and plans. These and other resources can be found at the coalition website: http://transportationops.org/catcoalition. Finally, Matt relayed a message from the CAT Coalition Co-Chairs recommending that each working group consider the following:

- Identifying additional members for the working groups to broaden participation; and - Introducing and discussing MaaS and MOD in relation to CAT activities of the working groups.

Focus of this Working Group Sondra led a discussion on the focus of this working group. Sondra reviewed four candidate activities that were previously identified for this group, as follows:

- Use Case Framework; o Identified as a lower priority activity;

- CAT Survey of Practitioners

http://transportationops.org/catcoalition


o Note that as the chairs understood that the PLR Working Group was conducting a survey they decided to hold off until that survey was completed and assess any additional questions that may need to be asked.

- ATCMTD Synthesis o Identified as a lower priority activity;

- CAT International Scan o Idea was to outreach and understand planning activities in other countries.

Conversations were initiated at World Congress. May or may not be applicable Sondra then opened the floor for input from members:

• One request from Oregon DOT was for increased sharing of information and approaches for how to create plans that are resilient against an array of potential futures, and how to conduct robust decision making that is needed. Stronger input and direction at that national level was requested.

• It was noted by Mark Norman that there are several NCHRP reports that would be applicable to this group, and possibly would address the issue described above. Mark noted about five activities under development right now and several recently completed activities.

o Matt suggested these could be presentations for the next webinar and suggested to work with Ray Derr to request the Principal Investigators to present on the topics.

• There was a suggestion for a topic on how the Smart Cities and Smart Regions all tie together and the likely role of 5G in supporting these efforts. Sondra noted that it might be most appropriate for this group to hear how the technologies deployed in Smart Cities and Regions will impact travel behavior and how they will impact how people travel. The topics related to the technology solutions and approaches are more appropriate in other working groups. Sondra noted she would appreciate a presentation on how AMPO working group is addressing these topics.

Guest Presentation: MnDOT’s CAV Scenario Planning Matt introduced Phillip Schaffner from MnDOT as the guest speaker for today. Phillip introduced the CAV Scenario Planning that MnDOT recently conducted. The motivation for this was that MnDOT recently completed a CAV Strategic Plan. As part of that planning effort, there was interest in conducting outreach throughout the state. Similarly, MnDOT is currently preparing for the next round of planning updates to their ‘suite of plans’. For these and other reasons, MnDOT completed scenario planning for CAV. Phillip noted that traditional forecasting works well when there is high certainty about the future and past trends are likely to continue. Scenario planning is an effective tool when there is uncertainty about the future travel patterns and especially when there are unreliable predictors or when agencies are preparing for multiple potential future scenarios. Phillip presented a detailed summary of the CAV planning activities that MnDOT completed. A copy of Phillip’s slides is included with the webinar summary.


Future Webinar Topics and Speakers General discussion among webinar attendees helped identify several topics and speakers for future conversations. They include:

• TRB studies pertinent to planning – three recently completed reports could be the topics for the next webinar

• Recent MPO planning initiatives/AMPO studies (Bob Hazlett, Bill Keyrouze) • Ohio DOT Scenario Planning and travel demand models (Rebecca as a possible speaker) • Emerging Learnings in Maas/MoD Governance • Oregon DOT Planning Efforts (Adam Argo) could present a similar study to the MnDOT

presentation • Washington State DOT Planning Efforts (Daniella Bremer/Ted Bailey/other) and the activities of

the CAT Coalition Policy, Legislative, Regulatory (PLR) Working Group.

Next Webinar / Close The next webinar is scheduled for Wednesday, January 8, 2020 from 12:00-1:30 ET.

CAT Planning Working Group – November 6, 2019 Webinar Participants

• Sondra Rosenberg (Chair)

• Justine Sydello (Chair) • Phillip Schaffner • Matt Hardy (AASHTO

liaison) • Gummada Murthy • Adam Argo • Alex Bettinardi • Angel Gonzalez • Bob Hazlett

• Charles Wade • Christos Xenophontos • Cindy Mueller • Craig Wacker • Curtis Nosal • Daniela Bremmer • Dave Miller • Ed Seymour • Hari Sripathi • Jeff Lindley • Kyle Miller

• Linda Sitz • Lynn Weiskopf • Marc Williams • Mark Norman • Shane McKenzie • Tom Houck • Tonya Norman • Tom Kern • Dean Deeter

2/21/2020

1

AASHTO Committee on Planning:CAV Planning Working Group &

CAT Coalition: Planning Scenarios Working Group

WebinarNovember 6, 2019

2

Welcome and Agenda Review1. Updates

AASHTO Committee on Planning Update CAT Coalition Update

2. Focus of this Working Group Group discussion about the focus of this working group

3. Guest Presentation: MnDOT’s CAV Scenario Planning Philip Schaffner, MnDOT

4. Future Webinar Topics and Speakers Discussion of topics of interest and/or candidate speakers for future webinars

5. Logistics of this Working Group Discussion on the meeting frequency of this group – Establishing future dates

6. Next Webinar / Close

1

2

2/21/2020

2

Agenda Item #1:Updates

Matt Hardy (AASHTO)

Tom Kern (CAT Coalition)

4

AASHTO Committee on Planning

• Leadership Chair: Scott Bennett, Arkansas DOT

Vice Chair: Lynn Weiskopf, New York State DOT

CAV Planning Working Group: Sondra Rosenberg, Nevada DOT

• Committee has formed a number of technical working groups Address specific topics, like CAV

Serve as a forum for information sharing and dissemination

Identify needs related to the topic (e.g., research, conferences, workshops)

• Decided best to combine forces with CAT Coalition

3

4

2/21/2020

3

5

CAT Coalition Status

• Coalition Co-Chairs Roger Millar, WSDOT

Jennifer Cohan, DelDOT

• Coalition is wrapping up Year 2

• Year 3 begins November 13th

• Current Organization Chart on the Next Slide

6

Current Organization Chart

5

6

2/21/2020

4

7


• 3 Focus Areas

• Orientate the coalition into “pairs” of working groups

• Promote collaboration

• Peer Exchange & Outreach supports all Focus Areas

8


Technical Resources WG

• Reviewed and commented on about 15 CAT resources

• Developed a white paper summarizing CAT resources

• Currently developing a CV Deployment Environment resource

• Next meeting November 13th

• Chairs:• Faisal Saleem, MCDOT• Navin Katta, Savari

7

8

2/21/2020

5

9

PLR Working Group Activity

• Clearinghouse of CAT Policy Frameworks

• Many are CAT/CAV Plans Summary table of the CAT Policy Frameworks

Emerging and Noteworthy practices based on 30 frameworks reviewed

• Excerpt from the summary table on the next slide!• https://transportationops.org/CATCoalition/policy_legislative_regulatory_WG

9

10

CAT Policy Framework / CAV Planning Document Clearinghouse - Excerpt

10

9

10

2/21/2020

6

11

Coalition Chairs Input to the CAT Coalition - 2019

• Consider Expanding Membership Are there other associations, agencies, companies, individuals that would

benefit from this group (e.g. transit, emergency responders)?

Brief open discussion today, also email any suggestions

• Introduce and discuss MaaS & MOD. How do mobility services relate to CAT

Any activities this working group can take to explore integration with mobility services?

Agenda Item #2:Focus of this Working Group

Sondra Rosenberg, NVDOT

11

12

2/21/2020

7

13

Focus of the Planning Scenarios WG

• Open discussion with members

• Goal is to identify 1-2 key activities members will focus on for the next 12 months

Candidate Focus #1: General information sharing between CAT Coalition and state/local planners

Candidate Focus #2: Survey/Scan/Report CAT Planning Activities: Domestically and Internationally

14

Focus of the Planning Scenarios WG

• Notes on the discussion:

13

14

2/21/2020

8

Agenda Item #3: Presentation on MnDOT’s CAV Scenario Planning

Philip Schaffner, MnDOT

Scenario PlanningConnected and Automated Vehicles (CAV)

Philip SchaffnerOffice of Transportation System Management

October 2019

15

16

2/21/2020

9

Motivation

17

Minnesota GO Vision

Minnesota’s multimodal transportation system maximizes the health of people, the environment and our economy.

…flexible and nimble enough to adapt to changes in society, technology, the environment and the economy

18

17

18

2/21/2020

10

Traditional Planning & Forecasting

Traditional forecasting is good when:

• There is a high certainty about the future

• Past data and trends are likely to continue

• Periods of stability

19

Change Happens Fast

First Model T – 1908Cars dominate in U.S. cities – 1920 (+12 years)Cars dominate in U.S. rural areas – 1939 (+31 years)

19

20

2/21/2020

11

But Not Always

“Scientists have been working on [fusion] since the 50s and, at the time, they suspected the final breakthrough wasn’t too far off. But then, as now, the running joke is that fusion is still a staggering 50 years away.”

‐ Daniel Starkey, Science & Technology Writer

Therefore …. Scenario Planning!

Scenario planning is good when:

• There is high uncertainty about the future

• Past data and trends are unreliable predictors

• Periods of change

22

Shift in philosophy from prediction to preparation

21

22

2/21/2020

12

CAV Scenarios

CAV Elements

Connectivity Automation Electrification Sharing

Less Change

More Change

24

23

24

2/21/2020

13

4 Minnesota‐Specific Scenarios

Advancing Technology

Connected Infrastructure

Private Automation

Integrated Mobility

These are 4 possible futures by year 2040. Any of these could happen. Or none.

Today’s technology gets incrementally better and

becomes more common

Connected vehicles and

devices improve safety and efficiency

Automated vehicles are here – for better and

for worse

Connected & automated

transportation is integrated & serves everyone

25

Scenario 1: Advancing Technology

SummaryToday’s technology gets incrementally better and becomes more common

Key Assumptions• Continued progress and innovation in CAV, but connected and

Level 4 highly automated vehicles are not common• Highly automated shuttles can operate in limited approved areas


26

25

26

2/21/2020

14

Scenario 2: Connected Infrastructure

SummaryConnected vehicles and devices improve safety and efficiency

Key Assumptions• Level 2 and 3 AV technology is common but requires supportive connected infrastructure to achieve benefits

• Public agencies invest in connected technologies to make AVs more functional


27

Scenario 3: Private Automation

SummaryAutomated vehicles are here – for better and for worse

Key Assumptions• Level 4 AV technology available at commercially affordable prices

• Outdated pricing, policy and lack of cooperation results in most trips being single occupant vehicle


28

27

28

2/21/2020

15

Scenario 4: Integrated Mobility

SummaryConnected and automated transportation is integrated and serves everyone

Key Assumptions• Level 4 highly automated vehicles are available at prices

affordable to average income households • Integrated, coordinated mobility‐as‐a‐service is common• Car ownership rates drop, especially in cities


29

Key Traffic/ITS Assumptions

30

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

CV 15% vehicles 75% of vehicles 50% of vehicles 75% of vehicles

AV 15% Level 3 50% Level 3 75% Level 4+ 75% Level 4+

MaaS 5‐10% of travel (up to 20% in cities)

5‐10% of travel (up to 20% in cities)

50% of travel 75% of travel

Truck platooning common in all. Freight services highly automated in all but Scenario 1

29

30

2/21/2020

16

Workshops and Select Findings

Workshop Details

• 12 workshops throughout Minnesota

• Primary audience

• Local agency staff

• MPO/RDO staff

• Elected officials

• Business

• Advocates

• Freight & logistics companies

• Public

32

31

32

2/21/2020

17

Potential Impacts & Responses

Impacts

• People Movement

• Goods Movement

• Land Use

• Environmental

• Social

• Political

• Economic

• Equity

Graphic idea?

Responses

• Type

Incentives

Restrictions

Investments

• Timing

Short/medium/long

Responsibility

Public, Private, Other

33

Select Findings

• Opportunities

• Safety

• Equity

• Challenges

• Equity

• Implementation

• Comments similar across geographies

• Generally support continuing existing policies and strategies

34

33

34

2/21/2020

18

Questions & Confusion

• How much ITS/support infrastructure is required? How much will it cost? Who’s responsible for the costs? How will we maintain?

• Does CAV increase or decrease the need for separation between motor vehicles and people walking, rolling and bicycling?

35

MnDOT’s CAV Approach

36

35

36

2/21/2020

19

Questions?

Philip Schaffner

[email protected]

651‐366‐3743

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/automated

37

Agenda Item #4:Future Webinar Topics and Speakers

Justine Sydello, CDM Smith

37

38

2/21/2020

20

39

Future Webinar Topics

• What are key topic areas members would like to learn about?

• Do any members have an activity they would like to share on a future webinar?

Agenda Item #5:Logistics of this Working Group

Justine Sydello, CDM Smith

39

40

2/21/2020

21

41

Future Webinars

• CAV Planning Working Group First Wednesday of odd months

12:00pm to 1:30pm Eastern

Matt to send out recurring calendar appoint for CY2020

• Most follow 1.5-hour webinar duration

• Agendas are typically: Updates on activities of the working group

Invited speakers

Updates from other CAT Coalition Working Groups

• What should be on the agenda for future webinars?

Other Member Updates(If time allows)

41

42

2/21/2020

22

Any Other Business / Adjourn

43

CAT Coalition Planning Scenarios Working Group

Documents

Transcript of CAT Coalition Planning Scenarios Working Group