Most Cities Aren’t Ready for Autonomous Vehicles. Here’s Why That’s a Problem and How They Can Be.

10 years ago, cities were excited about AVs.

Today, AVs are real—and cities are silent.

In 2015, the buzz was loud.
Autonomous vehicles were coming.
Cities ran pilots, held workshops, published white papers.

But the tech wasn’t ready and cities grew disillusioned.

Now?
The tech has arrived.
The cities are not ready.

In 2019, we surveyed 120 U.S. municipalities with over 100,000 population and reviewed 25 major city plans to find out how local governments were approaching AVs.

Here’s what we discovered.

🟡 Most cities had no AV policy. 64% of the 25 largest U.S. cities didn’t even mention AVs in their comprehensive or transportation plans.

🟡Most didn’t know who was in charge. 81% of transportation and planning officials reported that "there had been little or no staff time yet committed to AVs,"

🟡 The default attitude? “Let’s wait and see what the feds or states decid

AVs won’t ask for permission.

They are arriving, scaling, and reshaping mobility, land use, labor, and data governance—whether cities are ready or not.

"Waiting-and-see" is no longer neutral.
It’s a choice with consequences.

Here’s what cities need to do:
👉🏻Claim leadership – Engage actively in planning for AVs.
👉🏻Define public interest – What defines success?
👉🏻Engage industry early—Set expectations
👉🏻Prepare the public – Communicate what AVs mean, and why it matters.

If cities are not prepared, how should they?

1. What is the goal?

2. Who holds the regulatory power?

3. What are the policy instruments?

1. What is the goal?

While the 25 largest U.S. cities articulate common values in their transportation plans, they differ in emphasis:

• Livability: 100% of the studied cities

• Efficiency: 92%

• Environment: 88%

• Equity: 52%

Cities frame AVs more as tools for “innovation” through technology than city building through transportation, signaling a missed opportunity to align AV with holistic urban objectives.

2. Who holds the regulatory power?

Many assume that cities lack authority over AV management. This is only partially true. While federal and state governments set standards for vehicle safety and emissions, cities retain significant powers over how AVs operate in their jurisdictions:

• Street design and curb management

• Zoning authority

• Police enforcement

• Public transit integration

• Pricing and access control for street use

• Data standards and local compliance

Municipalities have more leverage than often perceived—they need to use it strategically.

3. What are the policy instruments?

We identify four themes and eight instruments that cities can use—within their existing regulatory frameworks:

1. Reconfigure cityscape: Reduce parking mandates; redesign street layout.

2. Ensure service quality: Mandate data-sharing, minimum service levels, and AV–transit integration.

3. Harness pricing mechanisms: Curb wasteful AV circulation (e.g., ghost vehicles) and advance equity.

4. Enforce environmental responsibility: Require low- or zero-emission AV fleets.

Cities can connect the goal (planning principles), the power (regulatory mechanisms), and the tools (policy instruments).

Reference: Yonah Freemark and Jinhua Zhao, An Urban Agenda for Autonomous Vehicles: Embedding Planning Principles into Technological Deployment 📄 (PDF)

Interested to receive practical insights, actionable frameworks on autonomous vehicles and city policies backed by research?