Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 2, HOV Facilities (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 1-127
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
• "Underlying Traveler Response Factors" explores the parameters that make successful HOV facilities attractive, and the mode choice mechanisms and decisions involved. • "Related Information and Impacts" presents special related subtopics including an examination of conditions associated with the more substantial HOV facility volumes.
|
From page 2... ...
Busways or HOV Lanes in Separate Rights-of-Way. This approach to providing HOV priority uses roadways or lanes developed on alignments mostly separate from the highway 2-2
|
From page 3... ...
Concurrent Flow Freeway HOV Lanes. These most common of freeway HOV lanes operate in the same direction of travel as the GP traffic lanes and are separated only by normal paint striping or a 2 to 4 foot painted buffer.
|
From page 4... ...
or lower occupancy vehicles (LOVs) to use an HOV facility for a charge.
|
From page 5... ...
A limitation deserving special note is the scarcity of available analyses that examine HOV facility effects over the full lateral extent of travel corridors. Much available research is operationally oriented and focused on HOV lanes themselves.
|
From page 6... ...
Illustrative examples of AM peak-hour vehicle and person volumes on HOV projects include some 500 to 600 buses carrying 23,000 passengers on the NJ Route 495 bus-only contraflow lane approaching the Lincoln Tunnel to New York City; 1,200 vehicles including 22 buses, carrying 3,600 people including 1,100 bus passengers, on the exclusive Northwest HOV lane in Houston; 1,200 vehicles including 64 buses, and 5,600 people including 2,600 bus passengers, on the I-5 North concurrent flow HOV lanes in Seattle; and 1,300 carpools and vanpools with 3,000 occupants on the California Route 91 concurrent flow HOV lanes in Los Angeles County, California. As these figures suggest, HOV lanes may focus on serving buses only, or primarily carpools, or more commonly, a mix of buses, vanpools, and carpools.
|
From page 7... ...
These percentages, which are regional averages for freeways with HOV lanes, are above or well above the corresponding average proportions of freeway lanes allocated to HOV facilities. Thus the HOV lane productivity is higher than GP lane productivity overall in these examples.
|
From page 8... ...
Further summaries and calculations based on Table 2-2 data, such as AVO statistics, together with equivalent data for other types of freeway HOV lanes, are provided within Tables 2-22 and 2-23 in later sections of this chapter. Monitoring efforts have provided relatively good historical data for the Houston exclusive HOV facilities, the I-395 Shirley Highway HOV lanes in Washington, DC's Northern Virginia suburbs, the I-394 HOV lanes in Minneapolis, and the San Bernardino Transitway (El Monte Busway)
|
From page 9... ...
. Table 2-1 General Characteristics of Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes Circa 1998
|
From page 10... ...
. Table 2-2 Examples of Vehicle and Person Utilization Information for Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes
|
From page 11... ...
The highest average AM peak-hour travel time savings for Houston HOV lane users range, as measured over the past decade, from some 11 to 22 minutes for the Northwest Freeway HOV lane and 17 to 20 minutes on the Katy lane. Time savings in 1996 for the other three facilities then in place were 14 minutes on the North HOV lane and between 2 and 4 minutes on the Gulf and Southwest HOV lanes (Burris and Appiah, 2004; Stockton et al., 1997)
|
From page 12... ...
-- 3.7 -- Transit Data Bus Vehicle Trips Peak-Hour -- a 83 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Peak-Period -- a 111 Bus Passenger Trips Peak-Hour -- a 2,055 Peak-Period -- a 3,775 Bus Occupancy (persons/bus) Peak-Hour -- a 24.8 Peak-Period -- a 34.0 Vehicles Parked in Corridor Park-and-Ride Lots -- a 3,310 Combined Freeway Mainlane and HOV Lane Data Total Person Movement Peak-Hour 6,355 12,764 101% Peak-Period n/a 32,027 n/a Vehicle Volume Peak-Hour 4,950 9,027 82% Peak-Period n/a 24,137 n/a Vehicle-Occupancy Peak-Hour 1.28 1.41 10% Peak-Period 1.28 1.32 3% 2+Carpool Volumes Peak-Hour 700 1,383 98% Notes: n/a – information not available; -- - Information not applicable.
|
From page 13... ...
-- 2.6 -- Transit Data Bus Vehicle Trips Peak-Hour 7 19 171% Peak-Period 17 37 118% Bus Passenger Trips Peak-Hour 270 850 251% Peak-Period 605 1,545 155% Bus Occupancy (persons/bus) Peak-Hour 39 44.7 15% Peak-Period 36 41.8 16% Vehicles Parked in Corridor Park-and-Ride Lots 430 1,542 259% Combined Freeway Mainlane and HOV Lane Data Total Person Movement Peak-Hour 6,140 9,538 55% Peak-Period 17,450 23,962 37% Vehicle Volume Peak-Hour 5,370 6,989 30% Peak-Period 15,295 18,729 23% Vehicle-Occupancy Peak-Hour 1.14 1.36 19% Peak-Period 1.14 1.28 12% 2+ Carpool Volumes Peak-Hour 490 1,337 173% Peak-Period 1,365 2,961 117% Notes: n/a – information not available; -- - Information not applicable.
|
From page 14... ...
Comparative data on opening of the facility to carpools is given below in the "San Bernardino Transitway" subsection and Table 2-5. Shirley Highway bus service has been modified with the opening of the Metrorail Yellow and Blue lines in the corridor, resulting in a decline in the number of buses using the full length of the HOV lanes (Metropolitan Washington COG, 1991; Arnold, 1987)
|
From page 15... ...
HOV Lanes" case study provides additional details. In considering how lessons from the Shirley Highway experience apply to HOV applications elsewhere, it is important to recognize major differences between this corridor and those served by most other HOV and express bus operations.
|
From page 16... ...
garages, which provide discount rate parking for carpools, and transit station areas. Eight miles of concurrent flow HOV lanes operate on I-394 to the west of Highway 100.
|
From page 17... ...
Additional summaries based on Table 2-8 utilization statistics and other information sources, along with similar data for other types of freeway HOV lanes, are found in later sections of this chapter within Tables 2-22 and 2-23. The 13 relatively new concurrent flow Los Angeles County HOV lane segments evaluated in 2000 carried an average of 2,400 persons in the AM peak hour peak direction, an average of 26 percent of all AM peak-hour peak-direction person movement on the freeways involved.
|
From page 18... ...
1 each direction 13 1971-76/1987-91 6:30-8:30 AM, 4:30 -7 PM 2+ HOVs Orange County, CA I-5 1-2 each direction 34 1996 24 hours 2+ HOVs SR 55 1 each direction 12.3 1985 24 hours 2+ HOVs I-405 1 each direction 24 1990 24 hours 2+ HOVs SR 57 1 each direction 12 1992 24 hours 2+ HOVs SR 91 1 each direction 2.6 1995 24 hours 2+ HOVs Riverside County, CA SR 91 1 each direction 17 n/a 24 hours 2+ HOVs
|
From page 19... ...
2.0 n/a 5-8:30 AM 2+ HOVs H-1 1 each direction 7 1987 6-8 AM, 3:30-6 PM 2+ HOVs H-2 1 each direction 8.2 n/a 6-8 AM, 3:30-6 PM 2+ HOVs Montgomery County, MD US 29 1 each direction 3 n/a Peak periods only Buses only I-270 (eastern connection) 1 each direction 2.5 n/a Peak periods only 2+ HOVs Boston, MA I-93 North 1 (SB only)
|
From page 20... ...
1 each direction 7 n/a 6-9 AM, 3:30-6 PM 2+ HOVs Seattle, WA I-5 North 1 each direction SB 7.7, NB 6.2 1983 24 hours 2+ HOVs I-5 South 1 each direction SB 8.4, NB 16.1 1991 24 hours 2+ HOVs I-90 1 each direction 7.3 1988 24 hours 2+ HOVs I-405 1 each direction SB 22.5, NB21.7 1986 24 hours 2+ HOVs SR 167 1 each direction 4.2 n/a 24 hours 2+ HOVs SR 520 1 WB only 2.3 n/a 24 hours 3+ HOVs Notes: First order alphabetization is by state/province, second order is by city/county metropolitan area. a The HOV lanes on I-80 and I-287 were terminated by the New Jersey Department of Transportation on November 30, 1998.
|
From page 21... ...
1 2 27 1,080 -- -- n/a n/a 45 1,800 -- -- n/a n/a 2 Alameda County, CA I-80 (Bay Bridge)
|
From page 22... ...
c The 1998 Dallas, Texas, counts were taken fairly close after the 1996 opening of the I-35E HOV lanes and the 1998 opening of the I-635 HOV lanes and thus reflect utilization levels for relatively new HOV facilities. Sources: Lisco (1999)
|
From page 23... ...
, with elaboration by Handbook authors. Table 2-9 Operating and Usage Data for Los Angeles County Concurrent Flow and Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes Circa 2000
|
From page 24... ...
. Los Angeles County Examples Concurrent flow HOV lanes were opened in 12 Los Angeles County corridors during the 1990s, mostly in the latter half of the decade.
|
From page 25... ...
Column 13 shows the corresponding numbers of HOV lanes calculated by direction as percentages of all lanes. Comparison shows that by these measures eight of the concurrent flow HOV facilities move people more effectively than the GP lanes while five, all opened in the 3 years preceding the data collection, carry fewer people per lane than the GP lanes.
|
From page 26... ...
. Impacts of lowering the occupancy requirement are examined further below under "Response to Changes in Occupancy Requirements and Operating Hours." Additional details on carpool usage over time and information on bus services using the HOV lanes are provided in the case study, "Seattle I-5 North HOV Lanes." The concurrent flow HOV lane on SR 520 through Seattle suburbs east of Lake Washington, being somewhat unusual, deserves special mention.
|
From page 27... ...
It also includes 6 miles northbound and 8 miles southbound of concurrent flow HOV lanes on I-35W. Both facilities operate during the AM and PM peak periods and have a 2 vehicle occupancy requirement for HOVs.
|
From page 28... ...
Two of the existing contraflow HOV lanes are restricted to buses only, one is open to buses and taxis, four are open to all HOVs, and one at the time of Table 2-10 preparation was in a state of flux because of highway reconstruction. The AM peak-hour peak-direction person movements on the three contraflow HOV facilities oriented to New York City ranged from 8,200 to 34,700 in 1989, carrying 56 to 82 percent of the total person movement on the two freeways for which general-purpose lane person volumes were available, the Gowanus Expressway and New Jersey Route 495.
|
From page 29... ...
. 2 b Table 2-10 General Characteristics of Contraflow HOV Lanes Circa 1998
|
From page 30... ...
. Table 2-11 Examples of Vehicle and Person Utilization Levels for Contraflow Freeway HOV Lanes
|
From page 31... ...
. As if to prove the point that there is no inherent reason contraflow freeway HOV lanes should engender a different traveler response from other freeway HOV lanes, the person volumes on this one Texas contraflow lane are around the median value of all Texas HOV lane person volumes.
|
From page 32... ...
It appeared that the increase was at least partly explained by route shifting of existing carpools, in that the AVO declined overall at the six ramps without bypass lanes. No negative impact on the freeway main lanes was documented; however, the mainline auto occupancy rate decreased, and no measurable effect on bus ridership was noted.
|
From page 33... ...
. This experience was accrued prior to the opening of the previously described concurrent flow HOV lanes on I-35W.
|
From page 34... ...
The I-5 North HOV lanes were described under "Response to Concurrent Flow Freeway HOV Lanes," and are further detailed in the "Seattle I-5 North HOV Lanes" case study. From opening of the lanes in 1983 until July 1991, a 3 vehicle occupancy requirement was used.
|
From page 35... ...
62 -17 -27% 113 104 -9 -8% Total Non-SOV Automobiles 1,024 2,842 1,818 178% 2,589 6,036 3,447 133% Total Automobiles 1,997 3,320 1,323 66% 5,264 8,126 2,862 54% Total Vehicles 2,092 3,387 6,811 1,295 62% 5,474 8,282 2,808 51% Total Non-SOV Automobile Person Movement 3,441 3,370 98% 8,088 14,274 6,186 77% Total Automobile Person Movement 4,414 7,289 2,875 65% 10,763 16,364 5,601 52% Total Vehicle Person Movement 5,200 7,818 2,618 50% 13,007 17,612 4,605 35% Average Non-SOV Automobile Occupancy 3.36 2.40 -0.96 -29% 3.12 2.36 -0.76 -24% Average Automobile Occupancy 2.21 2.20 -0.01 -1% 2.04 2.01 -0.03 -2% Average All Vehicle Occupancy 2.49 2.30 -0.19 -8% 2.38 2.13 -0.25 -11% Percent Violation of HOV Restrictions 68% 14% -54% -79% 71% 25% -46% -65% Notes: a Data from I-66 Eastbound between Sycamore Street and Fairfax Drive. b November 1995, approximately 1 year after occupancy requirement change from 3+ to 2+.
|
From page 36... ...
HOV Facility. Northern Virginia's I-95/I-395 HOV facility, the outgrowth of the Shirley Highway HOV lanes, serves more carpoolers, vanpoolers, and bus riders than any other North American facility open to all those modes.
|
From page 37... ...
, determined that the carpool occupancy requirement should not be reduced. Information on actual I-95/I-395 HOV facility usage and mode shifts over the years, with additional cross-referencing, is found in the "Response to Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes" -- "Northern Virginia/Washington, DC" subsection above and -- with more details -- in the "Shirley Highway (I-95/ I-395)
|
From page 38... ...
. HOV lane travel times tripled in the AM peak hour, and GP lane travel times also worsened slightly.
|
From page 39... ...
The HOV lanes were first opened to buses and authorized vanpools only. The process of authorization included insurance requirements, driver training, and vehicle inspection.
|
From page 40... ...
At all other times, including the PM peak hour, the 2 occupancy requirement was maintained. The AM peak-hour HOV lane carpool volume dropped from approximately 1,450 to 510 vehicles immediately after the change, a 65 percent reduction.
|
From page 41... ...
Northwest Freeway QuickRide results are provided in the "Response to HOV Facility Exempt Vehicle and Value Pricing Programs" subsection. Hours of Operation Reductions in Greater Seattle Freeway HOV lanes in the Puget Sound area have historically operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
|
From page 42... ...
Travel behavior response mechanisms and relationships involving pricing are examined in the "Underlying Traveler Response Factors" section of Chapter 14. Those approaches applied up to the present time tend to focus either on using exempt vehicle programs or pricing as a basis for allowing some LOVs on HOV lanes, or on allowing HOVs free or discounted use of toll facilities, or on providing HOVs time savings when accessing or using toll facilities (Turnbull, Hall, and Ringrose, 1994; Turnbull, 2005)
|
From page 43... ...
The transportation act reauthorization of 2005, SAFETEA-LU, includes language that provides states with options for allowing low-emission and energy-efficient vehicles to use HOV facilities under certain conditions. Based on the provisions in TEA-21, at least 10 states -- Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Texas, Utah, and Virginia -- approved legislation allowing ILEVs to use HOV lanes without meeting minimum occupancy requirements.
|
From page 44... ...
At two locations on I-95 outside the Capital Beltway, in October of 2004, special fuel vehicles constituted 11 to 19 percent of all vehicles in the HOV facilities, averaging 13 to 17 percent. Virginia's HOV Enforcement Task Force, established in 2003, has concluded based on the fall of 2004 monitoring that the I-95/I-395 HOV lanes have become overly congested and that it is the rapid growth of hybrid vehicle use of the facilities that has pushed peak volumes beyond the recommended HOV facility capacity of 1,800 vehicles per lane per hour (HOV Enforcement Task Force, 2003 and 2005)
|
From page 45... ...
Providing free or lower fees to HOVs has been most common with toll facilities in California, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York. Priority treatments in use have included toll booths reserved exclusively for HOVs and also HOV lanes such as the previously described concurrent flow HOV lanes on the east approach to the San Francisco -- Oakland Bay Bridge.
|
From page 46... ...
vehicle occupancy requirement, which has been retained for HOV vehicles. The two phase value pricing project allowed SOVs to use the I-15 HOV lanes for a fee.
|
From page 47... ...
Both the with-flow and the barrier-separated reversible HOV lanes on I-394 in Minneapolis have recently been modified to accommodate a dynamically priced HOT lane operation, dubbed MnPASS. Phase I, which maintains the pre-existing physical layout, was opened in May 2005 (Federal Highway Administration, 2005b)
|
From page 48... ...
. Response to Arterial Street HOV Facilities Arterial street HOV lanes are, as categorized here, open to all forms of HOVs -- buses, vanpools, and carpools.
|
From page 49... ...
Table 2-17 General Characteristics of Selected Active U.S. Arterial Street HOV Facilities
|
From page 50... ...
3 7.2 mi 1982 6 – 9 AM 3 – 7 PM 2+ 448 30% 15% 3,729 2,940 Peak Hour Seattle, WA Airport Road 2 3.4 mi 1993 5:30 – 8:30 AM 2:30 – 5:30 PM 2+ 272 c n/a 1,102 d PM Peak Hour Vancouver, BC Hastings Street 2 11.2 m i 1996 6:30 – 9 AM 3:30 – 6 PM 2+ 13% 1,706 AM Peak Hour Toronto, ON Eglinton Avenue 2 7.0 mi 1993 7 – 10 AM 3 – 7 PM 3+ 32% 4,551 3-hour AM Peak Period Notes: a Includes all users of the HOV lane including violators. b Includes all users of the general-purpose lanes including any HOVs.
|
From page 51... ...
The specific thresholds used for evaluating whether HOV lanes were performing satisfactorily were traffic flow of more than 400 total vehicles per peak hour, person flow of more than 880 total persons per peak hour, productivity ratio of more than 0.80 (ratio of people in HOV lane to people in the GP lanes) , violation rates of no higher than 15 percent, and travel time savings over GP lanes.
|
From page 52... ...
, roughly the norm for Toronto's arterial HOV lanes. It has been noted that these violation rates may be overstated by as much as 40 percent as a result of permitted use of the lane by general traffic turning at the next intersection.
|
From page 53... ...
. Table 2-19 Examples of Bus-Only Arterial Streets and Lanes–General Characteristics and Approximate Bus Volumes
|
From page 54... ...
Average express bus travel times along the 17-block segment were reduced during the peak hour by 42 percent with the implementation of the reserved lanes, from 15 to 9 minutes in round numbers, a 6 minute savings. Travel times for local buses declined by 35 percent, from 16 to 11 minutes, a 5 minute savings.
|
From page 55... ...
. Surveys of bus riders on the Shirley Highway HOV lanes completed in 1971 and 1974 identified shorter bus travel times and reduced levels of congestion in the HOV lanes as important factors in
|
From page 56... ...
As time savings increase there are operating cost savings for transit operators and impacts on mode choice favoring transit and ridesharing. HOV Facilities Individual examples of travel time savings that HOV lanes provide to buses, vanpools, and carpools relative to travel on the general-purpose (GP)
|
From page 57... ...
Travel time savings, as outlined in the preceding section, have been reported by HOV facility users as an important factor in their decision to change from driving alone. For example, time savings provided by Houston's Katy and Northwest HOV lanes were rated an important factor by 72 percent of the carpoolers using both facilities in a 1995 survey (Turnbull, Turner and Lindquist, 1995)
|
From page 58... ...
27 1997 28 1.0 Concurrent Flow Freeway HOV Lanes California SR 55, Orange County 11 1986 18 1.6 SR 91, Los Angeles 8 1992 10 1.2 SR 101, San Francisco Bay Area 11 1989 5 0.5 SR 237, San Francisco Bay Area 4 1989 4 1.0 Bay Bridge, San Francisco Bay Area c 2 1998 20 10.0 Massachusetts I-93(N) Boston d 2.5 1999 10 (max)
|
From page 59... ...
Minutes per Mile Contraflow Freeway HOV Lanes East R
|
From page 60... ...
The benefits shown are greater than those experienced with conventional concurrent flow bus lanes where violations and right-turn conflicts are common. Trip Time Reliability It is not only the higher operating speeds and shorter travel times of HOV lanes that are important to users.
|
From page 61... ...
Documented improvements in bus on-time performance include the results of opening the Shirley Highway HOV lanes in 1969. In that case, the percentage of affected bus trips arriving early or on time in downtown Washington, DC, improved from 33 percent to 92 percent (McQueen et al., 1975)
|
From page 62... ...
The information in Table 2-22 supports the finding presented earlier that travel time savings are a crucially important determinant of HOV facility usage. Of the 17 facilities for which travel time savings information is listed, five have an estimated saving of 20 minutes or more.
|
From page 63... ...
28 1,000 0 1,000 n/a Concurrent Flow 1,770 4 Radial 1.12 Santa Clara Co., CA US 101 3 105 803 908 n/a Concurrent Flow 1,595 25 Radial/Circ. 1.11 New Jersey I-287 2 45 711 756 n/a Concurrent Flow 4,522 20 Circumferential 1.18 Table 2-22 Consolidated Freeway HOV Lane Utilization Data with Urban Area and Facility Descriptors
|
From page 64... ...
Source: Developed from AM peak-hour peak-direction bus vehicle volumes and total HOV facility person volumes data for 35 HOV facilities as consolidated in Table 2-22 from Tables 2-2, 2-8 (see footnote "a")
|
From page 65... ...
(See "Traveler Response by Type of HOV Application" -- "Response to Concurrent Flow Freeway HOV Lanes" -- "Los Angeles County Examples," noting that the bus counts in Table 2-9 are not peak hour peak direction, but daily in both directions)
|
From page 66... ...
Peak volumes on all purely circumferential HOV facilities are generally in the 750 to 2,400 persons range.4 Eligibility Requirements. Either allowing carpools to use a bus-only lane or reducing HOV carpool occupancy requirements will result in an increase in HOV lane usage, measured either in terms of vehicle or person volumes, so long as the vehicular capacity of the priority lane is not exceeded (Christiansen and Morris, 1990 and 1991)
|
From page 67... ...
The results, representing carpools prepared to pay $2.00 for entry onto the HOV lanes during periods of 3 occupancy requirement, are outside the range previously identified for Houston HOV lane users. Family members composed 49 percent of reported members, less than for regular HOV lane carpoolers.
|
From page 68... ...
Many HOV lanes by their very nature emphasize service to persons going to and from work. Clearly this work trip orientation applies to any facility whose operation is restricted to peak hours or the peak direction of workday travel flow.
|
From page 69... ...
This estimate, thought to be understated given that smaller pickup locations were not surveyed, indicates that almost 11 percent of 28,000 carpoolers and bus riders on the HOV facility between 6:00 AM and 9:00 AM were slugs. Casual carpool occupancy was observed to be 1.25 before slug pickup and 3.07 after slug pickup, with a filledcarpool makeup of 32.6 percent drivers, 8.2 percent non-slug passengers, and 59.2 percent slugs (Spielberg and Shapiro, 2000)
|
From page 70... ...
In the 2 years prior to the 1998 survey, the mode had been enhanced by a doubling of Bay Bridge tolls to $2.00, BART fare increases, and opening of I-80 HOV lanes through the northerly East Bay communities. Spurred by the I-80 HOV lanes and Environmental Defense Fund publicity, almost 10 percent of inbound casual carpoolers were returning home as casual carpoolers by 1998.
|
From page 71... ...
Travel time savings indicated in Table 2-21 for the I-10W and US 290 HOV lanes are 17 and 22 minutes, respectively. The measurements made in 2003 were used to estimate casual carpool net savings over SOV driving of 6 to 13 minutes at 7:30 AM, the time of maximum savings, at the three Houston parkand-ride sites identified above.
|
From page 72... ...
Beach, SR 44 1989 0 0% 800 100% 800 0 0% 1,520 100% 1,520 -- 1.90 1.90 Pittsburgh, I-279/579 1989 23 3% 845 97% 868 1,050 41% 1,527 59% 2,577 46 1.81 2.97 Santa Clara Co., CA SR 237 1989 18 2% 754 98% 772 630 27% 1,720 73% 2,350 35 2.28 3.04 Santa Clara Co., CA US 101 1989 3 1% 376 99% 379 105 12% 803 88% 908 35 2.14 2.40 Seattle, I-5 North 1992 64 5% 1,169 95% 1,233 2,605 46% 3,039 54% 5,644 41 2.60 4.58 Seattle, I-5 South 1992 28 7% 400 93% 428 1,176 47% 1,320 53% 2,496 42 3.30 5.83 Seattle, I-90 1992 34 15% 200 85% 234 1,250 65% 660 35% 1,910 37 3.30 8.16 Seattle, SR 520 1992 56 21% 210 79% 266 3,140 86% 498 14% 3,638 56 2.37 14 Vancouver, BC H-99 1989 27 100% 0 0% 27 1,080 100% 0 0% 1,080 40 -- 40 Table 2-23 Examples of Vehicle and Passenger Mix and AVOs on HOV Facilities in the AM Peak Hour
|
From page 73... ...
Augmented screenline survey results for the corridor are provided, broken out by both origin area and destination area, in the "Shirley Highway (I-95/I-395) HOV Lanes" case study under "More...." Within the case study, data in its Table 2-35 are employed to demonstrate major differences between local person-movements in the corridor and longer trips headed for the Northern Virginia and District of Columbia regional core.
|
From page 74... ...
This assumption is supported by 2001 HOV lane user survey responses from Los Angeles County, where the HOV lane system actually has the least orientation toward the traditional central core of any in North America. Work was reported as the primary trip purpose for 90 percent of trips on the HOV lanes identified during peak periods.
|
From page 75... ...
An example of the difference in prior modes for drivers and passengers can be seen in Table 2-34 of the case study, "Shirley Highway (I-95/I-395) HOV Lanes." As Tables 2-26 and 2-27 demonstrate, bus riders and carpoolers who have not shifted modes, and thus apparently made only a route or lane change, compose an important constituency for many projects.
|
From page 76... ...
Characteristic Traditional HOV Slugs Transit Riders GP Lane Trips Sample Size 331 290 1,032 Trips per Week 9.9 9.2 9.8 Trip Purpose Commute 80% 89% Work (non-commute) 6% 7% School 7% 2% Other 7% 1% Occupation Professional/managerial 58% 57% Technical 10% 11% 18% 12% Sales 3% 2% Administrative/clerical 20% 1% 0% 11% 68% 0% 0% 4% 96% 9.7 149 41.5 49.3% 3.01 2.22 24% 8% 1% 7% 4% 2% 9% Manufacturing 0% 1% Other 1% 5% 11% 10% 63% 85% Average Age 44.3 43.6 43.3 Percent Female 50.3% 54.2% 39.1% Household Size 3.32 3.06 3.02 Number of Vehicles 2.39 2.19 2.42 Income Less than $25,000 1% 1% 4% 2% $25,000 to $34,999 1% 1% 8% 5% $35,000 to $49,999 14% 14% 12% 10% $50,000 to $74,999 28% 28% 24% 20% $75,000 to $99,999 25% 25% 20% 22% $100,000 to $199,999 30% 30% 28% 32% $200,000 or more 2% 2% 3% 9% Notes: The traditional HOV sample was limited to users of the HOV lanes.
|
From page 77... ...
HOV Lanes" case study for more detailed prior mode data.) Surveys taken on the San Bernardino Transitway of Los Angeles in 1974, and then in 1977 after carpools were allowed, indicate the facility played a major role in new bus rider attraction and new carpool formation.
|
From page 78... ...
Carpool volumes increased from approximately 332 in 1985 -- prior to the opening of Route 55 HOV lanes -- to 653 in 1987, after 18 months of HOV lanes operation. The 1987 survey results indicate that 56 percent of the carpoolers previously drove alone, while 28 percent were from existing carpools, and 11 percent were new trips in the corridor (Wesemann, Duve and Roach, 1988)
|
From page 79... ...
Results show the lanes to be attracting both new carpoolers and new bus riders. Between 36 and 46 percent of current carpool drivers on four of the Houston HOV lanes indicated they previously drove alone, while 38 to 46 percent of current bus riders formerly drove alone (Bullard, 1991; Turnbull, Turner and Lindquist, 1995)
|
From page 80... ...
On the other hand, 54 percent reported no change in their travel patterns in response to the HOV lane (Urbitran and Hayden-Wegman, 1997)
|
From page 81... ...
Nevertheless, there is certainly a propensity for carpoolers to shift routes to gain HOV lane advantages. Time to Establish Ridership and Use Available data on operating HOV lanes indicates that use and ridership levels can be expected to grow over the first months and years of operation.
|
From page 82... ...
Initial growth in person travel on the Shirley Highway HOV lanes of Northern Virginia and Washington, DC, as measured in the AM peak 3.5-hour period, was on the order of 4,000 persons per year over the first 8 years. Growth in person travel on the San Bernardino Transitway on the east side of Los Angeles, measured in the AM peak 4-hour period, was 1,500 to 2,000 persons per year in the initial 7 years (Christiansen and Morris, 1990)
|
From page 83... ...
. For a tabular presentation of AM peak-hour El Monte Busway utilization over time, see Table 2-6 in the "Traveler Response by Type of HOV Application" section under "Response to Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes" -- "San Bernardino Transitway (El Monte Busway)
|
From page 84... ...
There have also been a limited number of arterial street HOV project terminations for reasons ranging from underperformance to substitution of a freeway facility. Take-A-Lane Situations The late 1970s HOV project terminations in Los Angeles and Boston, both well documented, occurred when concurrent flow freeway HOV lanes were in their infancy.
|
From page 85... ...
. The freeway HOV lanes involved -- primarily concurrent flow -- represented new capacity, but with part of the I-287 northbound HOV lane opened to GP traffic during construction, as happened with the initial Dulles Toll Road HOV lanes.
|
From page 86... ...
The HOV operating hours served two different markets. HOV lanes operated for the full 20 miles northbound in the AM peak period and southbound in the PM peak period.
|
From page 87... ...
The May 2005 implementation of I-394 HOT lanes in Minneapolis raised the old take-a-lane bugaboo again, however, in a limited way. A point of conflict on the Citizen Advisory Committee engaged throughout planning and design was charging a toll, generally 25¢, in the off-peak hours/off-peak direction on concurrent-flow HOV lanes that had previously been open to all vehicles except in the peak hours/direction.
|
From page 88... ...
It must also be recognized that both these and the Table 2-31 results are for the freeway or bridge involved, and except for two water crossings in the 1970s data set, there may have been some diversion of carpoolers from parallel facilities, inflating the AVO increases. The two known analyses made corridor-wide, thereby addressing this concern, were presented in connection with Table 2-5 under "Traveler Response by Type of HOV Application" -- "Response to Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes." A comprehensive assessment of the VMT impacts of HOV projects, as well as impacts associated with air quality and environmental factors, should consider not only the facility itself, and the corridor it is located in, but also other elements of the trip.
|
From page 89... ...
d After data are for freeway and HOV facility combined. e For Los Angeles County facilities opened in the 1990s, the "Before Date" is assumed to be 2 years prior to the reported first full year of operation, and the "Before AVO" is calculated from the reported percent change and "After AVO." Sources: Minnesota DOT (1998a)
|
From page 90... ...
. In the discussion that follows, available analyses indicating positive impacts of HOV lanes on air quality, energy, and the environment are described first, followed by studies questioning the environmental benefits of HOV facilities.
|
From page 91... ...
The analysis indicated that, in 1974, the Shirley Highway HOV lanes had achieved a reduction of approximately 21 percent in carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, and nitrogen oxide emissions, and saved approximately 17,200 gallons of gasoline daily, or about a 23 percent reduction in the level of consumption without the facility (McQueen et al., 1975)
|
From page 92... ...
In most cases, HOV lane emission rates were roughly half the rates for parallel GP lanes, despite the typically higher person volumes carried by the HOV lanes. In only 3 of 50 sub-segments and AM or PM peak hours analyzed were HOV lane emission rates higher than GP lane rates.
|
From page 93... ...
Comparable information on busways is found in Chapter 4, "Busways, BRT and Express Bus." The Minneapolis modeling effort described above provides additional perspective, and both it and the contemporary Los Angeles County HOV lanes evaluations address overall benefits or disbenefits to all parties of HOV lanes. The before-and-after evaluation of the Shirley Highway Express-Bus-on-Freeway Demonstration Project, conducted in the early 1970s, attempted to examine effects of opening the HOV lanes on bus on-time performance, bus service productivity, and the financial status of the operator.
|
From page 94... ...
Whatever the cost savings or revenue loss to transit operators, casual carpooling is obviously a negligible-cost benefit to those who do it. Overall Effects on Benefits Despite the estimated negative impact on transit costs noted above for changing the Minneapolis HOV lanes back to GP lanes, the MnDOT study in question obtained a positive cost-benefit ratio overall for such reversion.
|
From page 95... ...
. Subsequently, using before and after accident record analysis in a different region, a Texas Transportation Institute study found injury accident rates to have been increased by installation of concurrent flow HOV lanes having both their inside shoulder and painted buffer in the 2-to-3-foot-wide range.
|
From page 96... ...
• Outreach to key policy stakeholders and the media to explain the purpose and benefits of the HOV lanes and facilities, along with vehicle occupancy requirements -- before the project opens, during the initial phases, and on an ongoing basis. • Public information campaigns -- accompanying the opening of an HOV facility and ongoing -- to promote transit, carpooling, and vanpooling and discourage use violations.
|
From page 97... ...
As illustrated in Tables 2-2 and 2-8 among others, a significant majority of HOV facilities have operated well below their vehicle carrying capacities. To many GP lane users, who typically constitute a significant majority of total corridor travel, these lanes appear "underutilized" and "inefficient." Such negative perceptions of HOV lanes have only grown as congestion in the GP lanes has progressively worsened (Bhatt, 2003)
|
From page 98... ...
, home of the TRB HOV Systems Committee's "Worldwide Arterial HOV Lane Database" covering North America, Australia, Europe, and other parts of the world. Each of these inventories includes physical and operating characteristics and rules.
|
From page 99... ...
. TCRP Report 95 covers BRT and other transit service uses of HOV lanes in Chapter 4, "Busways, BRT and Express Bus." NCHRP Project 8-36B Task 52, "Changes in Travel Behavior/Demand Associated with ManagedLanes Facility System Expansion" promises to serve, upon completion, as a source of updated and expanded subject matter for both Chapter 14, "Road Value Pricing," and this "HOV Facilities" chapter.
|
From page 100... ...
Vehicle volumes, person volume levels, AVOs and other information on the five HOV lanes and adjacent freeway lanes operating as of 1998 are displayed in Table 2-32. Other tables in the body of this chapter, Tables 2-3, 2-4, 2-15, 2-20, 2-21, 2-24, 2-25, 2-26, 2-27 and 2-31 in particular, provide additional Houston HOV system data, much of which is not repeated here.
|
From page 101... ...
. Table 2-32 1998 Houston HOV Lane Parameters and Weekday Utilization Data The HOV lanes accounted for 40 percent of the AM peak-hour total person movement on three of the freeways involved in 1998, and a quarter of it on the other two.
|
From page 102... ...
. The Houston QuickRide HOT program, in operation on the I-10W Katy Freeway and the US 290 Northwest Freeway HOV lanes, has been decidedly low-key.
|
From page 103... ...
The Shirley Highway (I-395) HOV lanes have been in operation for over 30 years and served as the first major freeway HOV facility in the United States.
|
From page 104... ...
Table 2-33 highlights general information on the use of the Shirley Highway HOV lanes over time. Table 2-5 and the accompanying discussion earlier in this chapter under "Traveler Response by Type of HOV Application" -- "Response to Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes" compared auto occupancy impacts across the full corridor with those on the freeway itself.
|
From page 105... ...
In 1998, travelers making use of the full 27 miles of HOV lanes on I-95 and I-395 saved from 34 to 39 minutes during the AM peak hour. The time savings measured in the 2005 AM peak period was 37 minutes.
|
From page 106... ...
In 1988, approximately 150 buses carrying 5,320 passengers were using the HOV lanes during the AM peak hour, along with 1,890 carpools and vanpools carrying 8,880 people, for a total of 14,200 inbound persons. There were slight increases in 1989, even as the 4 carpool occupancy requirement was relaxed to allow 3 carpools.
|
From page 107... ...
Table 2-35 Northern Virginia I-95/I-395 AM Peak One Hour Person Movements Inbound toward Washington, DC
|
From page 108... ...
The HOV lanes operate in the peak periods, in the peak direction of travel, with a 2 vehicle occupancy requirement. I-394 was built on the existing TH 12 right-of-way.
|
From page 109... ...
Survey findings indicated that carpoolers perceived a travel time savings of 10 minutes and bus riders a savings of 15 minutes. In 1992, with I-394 completion, HOVs using the full 11 miles of HOV lanes in the AM peak hour saved approximately 5 minutes over travelers in the GP lanes.
|
From page 110... ...
Volumes are from Turners Crossroads, a lower volume location further from downtown than the 1992-2005 observations. b The final HOV lanes (2-lane reversible section and concurrent flow lanes)
|
From page 111... ...
On May 16, 2005, "MnPASS" tolled vehicles were allowed onto the I-394 HOV lanes, creating the first HOT lanes facility outside of California and Texas. Teething problems on the unique concurrent flow HOT lanes segment, and their resolution, are described in the "Terminations of HOV Projects" -- "HOT Lane Situations" subsection in the "Related Information and Impacts" section.
|
From page 112... ...
As implemented in 1983, the northbound HOV lane was 6.2 miles in length, and the southbound lane was 7.7 miles long. At their south ends, these concurrent flow HOV lanes tie into reversible express GP freeway lanes (that is, express lanes open to mixed traffic)
|
From page 113... ...
Approximately 280 vehicles used the HOV lanes during the AM peak hour in the first weeks of operation in 1983. Because there was very little bus service in the corridor at this time, most of these vehicles were 3 person carpools, with a few vanpools.
|
From page 114... ...
With the exception of the El Monte Busway (see "Traveler Response by Type of HOV Application" -- "Response to Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes" -- "San Bernardino Transitway [El Monte Busway]
|
From page 115... ...
Percent of Carpools/Vanpools and HOV Lane Vehicles E Buses and Bus Riders 2.
|
From page 116... ...
higher with HOV lane than for controls 59% 25% All-lanes PTPL growth higher with HOV lane than PTPL trend for controls 95% 86% HOV lane PTPL greater than PTPL of the GP lanes 67% 72% Grand total daily person trips in HOV lanes (both directions summed) 737,700 1C Current HOV lane AVO higher than GP lanes AVO 100% 100% Percent of person trips on HOV lane higher than pct.
|
From page 117... ...
Among highway users, 91 percent of those using HOV lanes and 73 percent of those not using HOV lanes believed that HOV facilities "are a good transportation improvement." Sources. Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc., Kaku Associates, Inc., Texas Transportation Institute, Strategic Consulting & Research, and HS Public Affairs, "HOV Performance Program Evaluation Report." Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (November 22, 2002a)
|
From page 118... ...
L., An Assessment of Carpool Utilization of the Katy High-Occupancy Vehicle Lane and Characteristics of Houston's HOV Lane Users and Non-Users. Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, TX (1991)
|
From page 119... ...
M., and Kopf, J M., Evaluation of Puget Sound HOV Lane Hours of Operation: One-Year Results.
|
From page 120... ...
. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, "1997 Performance of Regional HighOccupancy Vehicle Facilities on Interstate Highways in the Washington Region -- An Analysis of Person and Vehicle Volumes and Vehicle Travel Times." Washington, DC (1998)
|
From page 121... ...
. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, "MetroCore Cordon Count, Total Person Travel on HOV Shirley Highway." Washington, DC (1991)
|
From page 122... ...
. Schijns, S., Signalized Arterial Road HOV Lane Database.
|
From page 123... ...
. Texas Transportation Institute, "Dallas HOV Lane Quarterly Data -- Second Quarter." College Station, TX (1998a)
|
From page 124... ...
F., Potential Impact of Exempt Vehicles on HOV Lanes. Prepared by the Texas Transportation Institute for Battelle and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
|
From page 125... ...
M., "Implementation of HOV Lanes on I-270: Lessons Learned." 7th National Conference on High-Occupancy Vehicle Systems. Transportation Research Circular No.
|
From page 126... ...
. Wesemann, L., Duve, P., and Roach, N., "Comparison of Travel Behavior Before and After the Opening of HOV Lanes in a Suburban Travel Corridor." Transportation Research Record 1212 (1988)
|
From page 127... ...
Multimodal/Intermodal Facilities Ch. 2 – HOV Facilities (2006)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.