Austin has increasingly become a testing ground for autonomous vehicles (AVs), with sightings now as familiar as the city’s sweltering July temperatures and grackles flocking to local spots at dusk.
However, while seeing autonomous vehicles navigating the streets of Austin has become a common sight, actual ridership experiences have begun to vary significantly.
In March, Waymo’s service became accessible via the Uber app, marking a pivotal moment as more Austinites were able to take a ride in a robot-powered vehicle.
As major companies like Tesla and Volkswagen also test their AV technologies in the city, the experiences of local users will likely provide insights that could influence the future of AVs in Austin and beyond.
**The Mixed Bag of Experiences**
Initial data indicates that many Austinites are actually willing to try Waymo’s service.
A YipitData study indicated that during the last week of March, approximately 20% of Uber rides in Austin were provided by Waymo.
Moreover, an Uber spokesperson revealed that Waymo rides received an impressive average rating of 4.9 stars from customers in Austin.
Yet, not every ride has been a positive experience.
Becky Levin Navarro shared a particularly distressing incident that occurred during a ride with friends.
While attempting to travel from Matt’s El Rancho to Deep Eddy Cabaret, the Waymo unexpectedly diverted its route, leaving the group feeling unsafe as it moved into unexpected areas.
Despite their attempts to end the trip, the vehicle continued to drive away from their intended destination, ultimately bringing them to a location beneath the highway—what they described as “not a safe spot”.
After several minutes and struggles with the door locks, they managed to exit the vehicle.
Levin Navarro rated the ride a single star and expressed her hesitance about taking another ride in a Waymo vehicle in the future.
City data also revealed that 26 out of 108 reported AV incidents occurred between March and May 2025, indicating a rising concern regarding these vehicles.
In one event, a Waymo was noted for passing a funeral procession despite the emergency lights being activated.
Another report described a scenario where a Waymo was inconveniently blocking a resident’s driveway for an hour, significantly inconveniencing the homeowner.
**Diverse Academic Perspectives**
In the academic community studying transportation, opinions regarding AVs diverge significantly.
While many agree on fundamental principles such as induced demand—where increasing highway lanes eventually leads to more traffic—opinions on AVs differ regarding their broader impact.
Some academics support the notion that AVs will improve road safety, while others view them as unnecessarily complicated solutions when safer alternatives exist, like public transit, biking, and walking.
Peter Norton, a professor at the University of Virginia and author of “Autonorama: The Illusory Promise of High-Tech Driving,” is skeptical about the societal implications of AVs despite acknowledging the impressive technology behind them.
He argues that the service remains prohibitively expensive, noting that companies like Waymo may be reporting optimistic passenger costs only because they incur significant losses on each ride.
Norton suggests that rather than investing in costly AVs, cities should prioritize enhancing public transport and infrastructure to accommodate biking and walking, thereby reducing reliance on robotic taxis.
Conversely, Junfeng Jiao, who directs the Urban Information Lab at UT-Austin, takes a more optimistic view of the safety implications of AV technology.
Jiao believes vehicles equipped with advanced lidar sensors and cameras show superior driving abilities compared to humans who primarily rely on their own senses.
He praises Waymo for their cautious testing approach, contrasting it with Tesla’s alleged recklessness, particularly given the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s inquiry into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving technology.
Despite the challenges, Jiao anticipates that AV technology will ultimately enhance safety through innovation, pointing to evolving national safety standards as a contributing factor.
Concerns surrounding AVs often include their potential to foster urban sprawl, as individuals may feel emboldened to live farther from their workplaces, knowing they can work during commutes.
With this in mind, Jiao asserts the significance of designing “15-minute cities,” where essential services are easily accessible by a 15-minute walk or bike ride.
Looking to the cost factor, Jiao argues that overall expenses will decrease over time, enhancing accessibility for those unable to drive due to age or disability.
**A Future of Innovation and Responsibility**
While academic opinions remain mixed, one consensus is that Austin is a key location for AV testing efforts.
Elon Musk shared on X that Tesla’s Y model was spotted operating without a driver in the seat around Austin, a move that aligns with the company’s ambitious plans.
Tesla appears to be racing ahead of schedule, preparing to launch a robotaxi service soon with an initial fleet of about 10 vehicles and a plan to expand within months.
However, the legislative environment in Texas limits how cities can regulate AVs.
Austin’s Transportation and Public Works spokesperson noted that the city remains engaged with Tesla to facilitate smooth operational integration, offering information relevant to safety measures.
Contrastingly, Tesla has blocked the release of records related to its trial runs in Austin, raising some eyebrows regarding transparency.
Dan O’Dowd, founder of the Dawn Project—which critiques Tesla’s AV technology—has been vocal about safety concerns.
After witnessing problematic behaviors exhibited by Teslas in Full Self-Driving Mode on YouTube, he described Tesla’s approach as one that recklessly prioritizes speed over-safety, echoing a sentiment of caution.
In an advertisement aired during the 2023 Super Bowl, the Dawn Project depicted a critical narrative surrounding Tesla’s technology, emphasizing the necessity for thorough testing before public road operation.
Despite his concerns about Tesla, O’Dowd expressed more confidence in competitors like Waymo, citing their comprehensive testing protocols.
With a current fleet of about 100 vehicles in Austin, Waymo plans to increase its number significantly, following the right path toward refining AVs for public safety.
The AV landscape in Austin is not solely dominated by Waymo and Tesla; Amazon’s Zoox is also contributing with autonomous vehicles that feature a driver present as a safety backup, following a recent voluntary recall after an incident.
Volkswagen has likewise been conducting tests with its bay-like vehicles in Austin, alongside operations in other cities like Hamburg and Munich.
Even smaller startups are aiming to take advantage of the burgeoning AV market in Austin.
Ben Seidl, who initiated his company Autolane after an eye-opening experience with Tesla’s Full Self-Driving, is currently trials an innovative system called OpenCurb OS.
Seidl’s vision includes developing smart logistics that allow vehicles to navigate to appointments and autonomously park or pick up products at designated spots across Austin’s key commercial areas.
He sees great potential in Austin as an emerging hub for testing and launching autonomous technology, aligned with several industry players looking to redefine transportation.
With a dynamic mix of perspectives, technological experimentation, and public eagerness, Austin is well-positioned to be a focal point for discussions and developments within the evolving landscape of autonomous vehicles.
image source from：austinchronicle
