by Joseph Jazwinski | Jan 24, 2023 | Commentary |
In 2015, the University of Michigan excitedly announced MCity, a state-of-the-art test track for “connected and automated” vehicle technology and an exciting development for the prospect of a driverless transportation system. The expansive fake city, unique at the time, received funding from the Department of Transportation (DOT) and private companies alike. Quickly, MCity extended beyond the testing grounds to the streets of Ann Arbor. By 2017, Michigan students could expect “driverless shuttle buses” around the engineering campus, and researchers were monitoring “1,500 [local] cars… to develop connected-car” technology. Ann Arbor recently welcomed A2GO, an “autonomous shuttle service” by May Mobility— a local startup that works closely with MCity. Ann Arbor should not be unique or exceptional in its pursuit of automated vehicle technology. Unfortunately, federal guidance on autonomous (used interchangeably with automated) vehicles is inconsistent and slow. I will first cover DOT’s struggle to keep up with rapid innovation, despite an open mind. Then, I will review progressive state and local government action and its success and even administrative efficiency. Although DOT oversight is perhaps necessary in the long-term rollout of autonomous vehicles, right now manufacturers need support at the local and state level for research and development. As previously mentioned, federal administration lags behind the demands of private innovation driven at increasing motor vehicle safety. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), “the agency responsible for motor vehicle safety” within DOT, “takes about five years to complete a rulemaking on an issue of medium complexity.” Autonomous vehicle implementation is substantially more complicated than “medium complexity” — it requires a complete rethinking on how humans travel on our nation’s...
