SF Chronicle – Driverless robotaxis are causing less mayhem on S.F. streets. City officials explain why
Full original article by Ricardo Cano from SF Chronicle
Robotaxi disruptions on San Francisco streets were nearly a daily fact of life last August for firefighters responding to emergencies across the city.
That was the month firefighters reported at least 25 incidents, by far the highest monthly tally of disruptions by Cruise or Waymo driverless vehicles. The robotaxis intruded active response areas, delayed firefighters’ responses after stalling on streets, ran over fire hoses and displayed errant driving that led to collisions.
Ten of those incidents, for example, happened less than a week after the California Public Utilities Commission approved the companies’ unlimited commercial expansion in San Francisco. For city officials vying to curb the proliferation of robotaxis, the cadence of incidents appeared to validate their concerns that the technology’s expansion would lead to more disruptions for emergency responders.
Nearly six months later, city firefighters report that autonomous vehicle interferences are happening much less frequently. Two potential reasons why: The robotaxis that fueled much of the disruption have been sidelined, while city officials and AV companies have unearthed new ways to keep self-driving cars away from emergency response scenes.
Since January 2023, the San Francisco Fire Department reported at least 85 incidents in which autonomous vehicles have interfered with emergency responses or negatively impacted firefighters’ operations.
Most of these incidents happened before September, according to incident reports compiled by the Chronicle via public-records request and a city legal filing.
In spring 2022, fire officials began instructing firefighters to report when “they have an interaction with an AV that changed what they would have normally done in the field, or which they perceived as dangerous.”
The Fire Department’s self-reported data is probably an undercount of robotaxi interference because it hinges on firefighters following through with documenting the events. However, the data seems to track with the rapidly evolving history of self-driving cars in San Francisco.
The incidents increased in frequency last spring as Cruise and Waymo accelerated their operations and peaked, so far, in the summer as they further multiplied their driverless ride-hailing activity in San Francisco. While other companies, such as Amazon’s Zoox, are testing self-driving cars in the city, Cruise and Waymo have been the only ones with permission to charge for driverless rides.
The noticeable drop in disruptions appears to have coincided with a decline in activity by Cruise, which has accounted for about two-thirds of all documented incidents.
The General Motors-owned company, in late August, cut its San Francisco fleet in half at the state Department of Motor Vehicles’ request. The DMV banned Cruise indefinitely in late October for its alleged handling of a severe crash in San Francisco in which a company robotaxi dragged a jaywalking pedestrian about 20 feet.
Since Cruise cars were pulled from the road, city firefighters reported three interferences by Waymo robotaxis since November, with none in January.
The Fire Department’s deputy chief of operations, Darius Luttropp, acknowledged the recent decline in reported incidents, though he said it’s too early to say whether it indicates a long-term pattern. The Chronicle received three new incident reports from the Fire Department after publication of this story involving Waymo robotaxis failing to yield to emergency vehicles.
City officials, who sued the CPUC to halt Cruise and Waymo’s expansion, say state regulators don’t require AV companies to report data — such as how often robotaxis unexpectedly stall on streets — that would shed light on how they’re performing in San Francisco.
But, “Broadly, I do feel like there’s been fewer incidents of interference,” Luttropp said. “Some of that could be ascribed to the work we’ve done with the companies with both Cruise, before they lost their licensure, and with Waymo as they continue progressing in their deployment.”
Amid concerns of escalating interferences, Cruise and Waymo agreed to allow emergency responders to take over stalled robotaxis if they need to be moved, as opposed to waiting for a company technician to arrive at the scene. A Waymo spokesperson said first responders can now take control of stalled vehicles “in a matter of seconds.”
The Fire Department also asked the companies to program their vehicles to avoid stopping in front of fire houses — a recurring interference that, in at least one instance, prevented a fire truck from responding to a call. Firefighters haven’t reported such blockages since August.
One effort that may be most impactful in lowering AV interferences is what Luttropp calls “an ‘avoid the area’ plan,” in which city agencies notify AV companies in real time when there’s an emergency, such as a fire.
In Waymo’s case, the company said it creates an “exclusion zone” for its robotaxis after it gets a city alert. That geofenced perimeter then tells its robotaxis to reroute trips, pickups and drop-offs away from that emergency area.
David Margines, Waymo’s director of product management, said “consistent dialogue with SFFD and SFPD and their feedback helped us gain a deeper understanding of their needs and refine our system accordingly.”
The Alphabet-owned company said its internal data show its rate of interference with San Francisco’s emergency responders has dropped, even as Waymo has doubled its ride-hailing mileage since September.
Still, Luttropp said some challenges with robotaxis remain “persistent.”
In December, firefighters working to clear a drain on a flooded off ramp on San Jose Avenue reported that a Waymo ran over “carefully placed flares,” intended to deter car traffic. A firefighter yelled at the car to stop, which it eventually did after its hood was hit with a small plastic flare cover, according to an incident report.
“It’s an identified problem that we’re asking them to address in their technology,” Luttropp said.
Another “high-tier ask” from the Fire Department: improving robotaxis’ ability to detect and respond to human traffic control officers.
Waymo said its vehicles can already detect and obey human traffic control commands, citing an example in Los Angeles where one of its robotaxis advanced through an intersection only after a police officer directing traffic waved it forward. San Francisco’s density, topography and chaotic streets, though, add challenges robotaxis are unlikely to encounter elsewhere, the company acknowledges.
How Waymo robotaxis perform during emergency responses in San Francisco could determine how the company expands its operations in the state. Officials on the Peninsula and in Los Angeles, where the company wants to introduce its driverless ride-hailing, oppose Waymo’s expansion, citing San Francisco first responders’ experiences with the technology.
Elsewhere, fire officials in cities including Houston and Atlanta have called San Francisco’s fire officials in recent months, inquiring what to expect when, and if, robotaxis come to their cities.
“We’ve made improvements to our software including better emergency scene understanding, more rapid and effective clearing the way for active emergency vehicles, and improved predictability of our behavior for first responders,” Margines said. “As a result, we were able to bring the number of (robotaxi interferences) down while gradually scaling our operations to now serve tens of thousands of rider-only trips in San Francisco each week.”
