Autonomous Vehicles: The Future of Parking

Transcription

1 Autonomous Vehicles: The Future of Parking June 2018 Copyright All rights reserved.

2 A convergence of disruptive technologies and demographics is happening. Increased community mobility achieved through electrified, selfdriving, shared vehicle fleets How.and when. will it impact parking? 2

3 AND EVERYONE IS TALKING ABOUT ADAPTIVE REUSE Images: Arrowstreet 3

4 A GLOSSARY OF TERMS Autonomous Vehicle (AV): capable of performing all dynamic driving tasks without human intervention. Personally owned or subscription service Driverless Vehicle: A vehicle operating with no human driver present. Individual: may or may not have controls and may sometimes be driven by humans Subscription: may not have controls Sources: primarily SAE and Wikipedia Photo by Associated Press Mercedes AV concept car first shown at Consumer Electronics Show, 1/2015 (NOT an auto show!) 4

5 WE HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE! 5

6 CONNECTED CARS: V2X Source: Qualcomm, 5g paving road tomorrows autonomous vehicles AVs today: operate independently of V2x Operate now on urban roads Operate forever on most rural roads But...operate best and with greatest efficiency and safety as connected cars. And. Likely: fees for subscription to V2I network that will pay for infrastructure. Change in federal and state gas taxes to fees based on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 6

7 L0 L2 AVS ARE ALREADY ON THE MARKET; L4 IS IN TESTING; L5 MAY BE 2025 TO 2027 OR MUCH LATER! > Regulatory change required? Vehicle > < Driver Driver in complete and sole control at all times No Automation Driver can regain control or stop faster than if driving without the special function 1 or more specific control functions (eg. Stability control, precharged brakes) Driver is temporarily relieved of these driving functions Automation of at least 2 primary control functions working in unison (eg. Adaptive cruise control in combination with lane changing) Driver must be available to take over controls All safety critical functions automated (incl. steering, throttle, brake). Vehicle monitors any changes in conditions that require a transition back to driver control Driver not expected to take control at any time Vehicle can perform all safety critical driving functions and monitor road conditions for an entire trip (incl. driverless), but can only be operated in particular conditions or in certain areas that are predetermined No driver needed Vehicle is designed to perform all safety critical driving functions and monitor road conditions for an entire trip under all conditions that a human could traditionally drive Level 0: No Automation Level 1: Function specific Automation Level 2: Combined Function Automation Level 3: Limited S D Automation Level 4: Full Self Driving Automation Now Now Now ? Level 5: Full Self Driving Automation ? Source: SAE, NHTSA 7

8 JUST TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR L4 vehicles Driverless In an area that is mapped Until there is smart infrastructure for V2I Operating under certain conditions, ie, NOT snow or rain until solved L5 vehicles will be able to go anywhere in US driverless, even rural roads. 8

9 TYPES OF RIDE HAILING: IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS Private rides: Shared or Pooled Micro Transit: UberX, Lyft Uber Pool, Lyft Line Chariot, Lyft Shuttle ANNA CARL ANNA CARL ANNA BEN BEN CARL CARL BEN BEN ANNA Eventually, these will be SAV rides 9 ANNA ANNA

10 KEY DRIVERS FOR PROPONENTS 1. Safety 2. Safety 3. Safety A strong and clear consensus of government, regulators, and academics say we MUST move to AVs for public safety. Source: Morgan Stanley Investor Report 3/1/2016 And then the throwaway line comes: Oh and it will reduce parking To some, the root of all urban planning evils 10

11 POTENTIAL USERS OF AUTONOMOUS CARS Young (all?) urban dwellers Commuters Aging baby boomers and disabled able to retain independence and mobility Teenagers (and even younger) taken to school, practices. Conclusion: Significant enhancement of quality of life for many. Image courtesy KPMG 11

12 IN OUR OPINION, THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE AND UNKNOWN: CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE 1. AV Technology 2. Shared Rides 12

13 CONSUMER TRUST IN AVS Are you comfortable with the idea of riding in a self driving car? AAA , % % Millennials 27% 49% Baby Boomers 15% 32% Watch Point: How the survey question is worded matters! Studies L2 cars now impact future use of L5 vehicles 51% 1 want L2 in their next vehicle

14 AND DATA ON ACCEPTANCE OF SHARED RIDES Ride hailing: 2017 surveys McKinsey survey: 1 67% prefer driving over ride hailing apps 63% aren t interested in trading their vehicles for shared mobility rides even if they re free. Walker: TNC riders at airport 75% chose for convenience 25% chose for price Same for both residents and visitors to city UC Davis 2 and other studies TNCs are impacting transit, proportionately more than parking TNCS are taking users from car sharing services Watch Point: So why do so many people expect shared AV rides to become 90% of VMT in future? 1 Grosse Ophoff, Hausler, Heineke and Moller, How shared mobility will change the automotive industry,mckinsey and Company April Clelow & Mishra, Disruptive Transportation: The Adoption, Utilization and Impacts of Ride Hailing in US, UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies 14

15 REPORTS OF TNC IMPACT ON PARKING DEMAND..NOW.. HOTEL RESTURANTS & BARS SPORTS & EVENTS AIRPORTS Business Valet Parkers TNC Business 30 70% 80% 3 6% 200% 5 20% 15

16 TNCS AREN T JUST COMPETING WITH TAXIS 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% GROUND TRANSPORTATION CHARGES ON EXPENSE REPORTS Taxi curve has leveled a little. Reaching max saturation? Rental car still on same path down. 30% 20% 10% 0% Q Q Q Q Q Ride Hailing Rental Cars Taxis ify SpendSmart Report Story Infographic Q aspx 16

17 KEY CONCLUSIONS: Currently, and continuing into early years of AV TNCs: ~50% impact on transit/walking/biking. 25% of commuting, transit is 5% of commuting. ~50% on private ownership. 75% of commuting Once maximum pirating of transit/walking/biking occurs, most growth and impact will private vehicle trips. Growth of TNC slow? AV TNC accelerate? Convenience important issue. Cost alone may not drive 90% to SAV as many assume. Density and price of parking (which typically are linked) will also be key factors for impact on parking. 17

18 AMERICANS LOVE THEIR CARS LIKE THEY LOVED THEIR HORSES???? (Comparison reportedly first used by Morgan Stanley 2011) Easter morning, New York City, 1900 Easter Morning, New York City, horse photos new york city/ Photo: Bain Collection 18

19 90% REDUCTION IN PARKING IS A GREAT DREAM, BUT A FALLACY! Based on studies of potential widespread adoption of SAVs using trip data from National Household Transportation Survey. Note: this data source is widely accepted as reliable for such studies. Conclusions taken out of context: Study is usually for limited area (10 m x 10m) Considers trips within area, not all trips in City Studies assume everyone who could will use shared (pooled) service, aka SAVs 90% is reduction in trips or car ownership, not parking, by those whose trips stayed inside the area and choose to use SAVs, not all those who park today. SAV not used by rural residents 19% of US population Source: US Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Table

20 SO WHY ARE THE ACADEMICS AND MANY OTHERS PUSHING SAV? trifecta of electric shared AVs has potential for huge environmental savings How the U.S. Transportation System Can Save $1 Trillion, 2 Billion Barrels of Oil, and 1 Gigaton of Carbon Emissions Annually, (2015 article by Rocky Mountain Institute) Opposite: If AVs are not shared and electric, more gridlock, more pollution and more emissions. To avoid the latter, public policy and regulations will have to force EVs, limited miles driven empty and incent SAV rides. Source: self driving cars usher in a transportation utopia or dystopia Watchpoints: Subsidies for EVs haven t worked..<200,000 plug ins /260 million cars on road today, New York has been trying for 15 years to do a congestion tax in Manhattan, and We can t raise the gas tax to pay for crumbling bridges and roads.. 20

21 THE MORE LIKELY SCENARIO THAN 90% SAV TRIPS: LOTS of choices, and behaviors: SAV for commuting and/or all rides Private TNC rides for some trips for car free life One owned AV (long commute), TNC (short trips), Reverse Long commute One owned AV for all trips, returning home between Commute by AVs and gain productivity time Park on the perimeter not at workplace. Move farther out but use personal AV to make longer commute acceptable Many transportation officials/academics worry about this. Impact on parking demand 90% 0% 21

22 WALKER CONCLUSIONS: A MORE REALISTIC PROJECTION MAXIMUM parking demand reduction nationally is 40% per unit land use (per residence, per sq ft floor area office or retail.) Significant variation based on residential density: City by city Neighborhood by neighborhood Variations also based on: Land use (e.g. office versus entertainment) Geographic areas (e.g. Massachusetts vs Montana) too 22

23 TIMING PROJECTIONS: WIDE RANGE ( ) OF MARKET SHARE OF L4/5 AVS (SALES) Article does predict: 15% new cars sold in 2030 Avs 2/3 or 10% to TNCs Sales not all vehicles on road HI tech/our insights/disruptive trends that willtransform the auto industry LO

24 A MUCH SLOWER GLOBAL TIMELINE Global not US Production not sales Green line is L2 L4/L5: 5% in 2030, 60% in 2050 Source: The Growing and Transformative Impact of Technology on the Auto Industry, Brian Doherty Chief Technology Officer, Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association, Automotive News webinar April 26,

25 WALKER SALES PROJECTION, US Passenger Vehicle Sales 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2, Private AV TNC AV Non AV Cars sold between now and 2035 L4/5 AV sales: 15% AV by 2030, 12% TNC* 90% AV by 2040, 33% TNC practical limit based on multiplier of TNC miles/vehicle Based on: 5 year life of TNC AVs, then scrapped & replaced. High Disruption Scenario per McKinsey including 2.3 personal car sold per TNC AV sold Population growth per US Census Bureau * 10% TNC didn t make sense with curve shape and assumption that L5 AVs aren t available until Vehicles on Road (Millions) Passenger Vehicles on Road Private AV TNC AV Non AV Scrappage for private vehicles = 4.5% 1 per year million more non AVs sold through 2030 = AVs on the road will lag..a lot At full adoption: Vehicles on Road: 2/3 private, 1/3 TNC VMT: 72% TNC, 28% private 1 release/automotive/vehicles getting older average agelight cars and trucks us rises again

26 IMPACT ON PARKING DEMAND: NATIONALLY NOT 90% REDUCTION.SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 10% AND 40% Percent of Demand withuot AVs 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Parking Demand (Without Population Growth) High Disruption Low Disruption Property with fixed quantity of land use, i.e., office building, apartment complex. 26 Percent of Demand withuot AVs 180% 160% 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Parking Demand (WIth Population Growth) No Disruption (Background Growth) High Disruption Low Disruption Uses/areas where activity and parking demand grow with population growth

27 WHAT HAPPENS IF TIME LINE IS SLOWER? THE CURVE STRETCHES OUT! Parking Demand (Without Population Growth) 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Percent of Demand withuot AVs High Disruption Low Disruption 27

28 WE CAN AND SHOULD THINK/PLAN/DO NOW Avoid over supply of parking Provide just enough for commerce to thrive Shared parking & mixed uses. not chicken pox development! Provide flexibility in planning and design to increase or decrease supply Image per Google Earth 28

29 COMING SOONER: AUTONOMOUS PARKING This will happen faster than driverless private AVs on streets. Reduction in area required for parking those cars that do park Tighter spacing Vehicles may get smaller Perhaps 4 cars in 3 of today s stalls By 2025 or 2030, dedicate areas for AV parking w/flexibility Initially, autonomous parking by car (sensors and programming.) Over time, cars parking will be increasingly connected to IT system. Plan for this in new facilities, although technology could change. WATCH POINT: Capacity of existing parking goes up as demand goes down 29

30 LONGER TERM: MULTI PARKING FACILITY SYSTEMS Decreased importance on parking close to destination More parking on perimeter of downtown, campus and remote airport facilities, less needed in core Campuses, hospitals, downtowns, large mixed use Surface lots will be redeveloped first Oldest and/or deteriorated stand alone garages may be removed and replaced by new buildings with little or no parking. Downtown Indianapolis Parking In other words, parking market will likely absorb most of the changes in demand over time. 30

31 INNOVATIVE ADAPTIVE REUSE TODAY US Ski team training in Slovenia u s olympic team practices in a refrigerated parking garage in slovenia ?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1 31

32 ANOTHER HOT TOPIC.DESIGN FOR FUTURE CONVERSION Clients and cities are asking about conversion to other uses when less parking is needed ULI article Jan 2015 and a number of others since argue for designing whole garage for conversion. Concept has appeared in lots of other planning forums. In our opinion, underplayed costs, and issues. Minimum cost now = much higher conversion cost in future. Walker Task Force has completed position paper and cost analysis Walker has prepared several studies for design for significant conversion No client has elected to design for 100% conversion. 32

33 Relative Adaptive Reuse Design Premiums Above New Structure Cost Repurposed parking area 33

34 CONVERSION EXAMPLE 34

35 CASE STUDY: DESIGN ½ STRUCTURE FOR CONVERSION Initial Construction Costs: Additional floor to floor height: <1% Express ramps in lieu of parking ramps: 10 to 15% For conversion in future: More drains to reduce cost of leveling floor Heavier structure Removeable parking bay for future courtyard Removable/adaptable exterior façade Initial Cost for Future Conversion +32% Future cost of conversion to cold dark shell: Demolition New façade Added stairs and elevators Remove and replace grade slab Roof treatment Future cost to convert: $36.15/sf. Total cost of conversion (net of normal parking $) +$ 49.32/sf of initial area designed for conversion. Total cost of cold dark shell $92.30/sf (including initial cost for parking area.) 35

36 CASE STUDY: DOESN T THIS MAKE MORE SENSE? Provide expansion joint for ease of future demolition Construct ideal building to suit the market and add demand for parking, in 20 or 30 years. 36

37 IN SUM, 100% CONVERSION MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR MOST PARKING STRUCTURES Any site/area with multiple parking structures: Tear down oldest, poor parking than convert newer, state of the art parking. If consider conversion of logical areas in any new facility: Future retail at grade 15 min fl to fl height, express ramp to P2 Future additional occupied floors Cost of foundation and column increases Alternate uses on roof Cost of foundation, column and top floor framing increases Future residential wrap Underutilized site opening day, careful planning of openness to keep natural ventilation Horizontal un expansion Double column expansion joint 37

38 38