Tag: high occupancy vehicle

no HOV lanes

Dan Allison2 Comments

HOV lanes are a failure. They save time for the drivers using them, but always less time than was asserted when the project was designed, funded, and built. And they do not save average drivers any time at all. But when added to existing freeways, they certainly cost a lot of money. And they certainly induce a lot more travel, exacerbating climate change, motor vehicle pollution, and damage to the communities through which they pass.

Hwy 50 in Sacramento

Despite this fact, the Hwy 50 project in Sacramento is adding HOV lanes in order to widen the freeway, which will induce more travel, and return traffic to previous or greater levels within a few years, or less. That means accelerated climate change, motor vehicle pollution and noise in the areas through which they travel, and for this particular project, strong discouragement to walkers and bicyclist passing under the freeway, since the undercrossings are very dark and very scary.

Hwy 50 HOV lanes (Fix50) project includes: “Adding Carpool [High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)] lanes in each direction on U.S. Highway 50 from east of Watt Avenue to Interstate 5”. HOV lanes would also be added on two on-ramps at 65th Street. I haven’t been able to locate any operational information. Will HOV be weekdays daytime, as in the Bay Area, or full time, as in Southern California?

HOV lane enforcement

Part of the reason HOV lanes have no benefit is that they are violated by many drivers. Though the target violation level is 10% (see below), data from the bay area indicates that violation is often 25%. If you stand on an overpass looking down at a HOV lanes, as I have done, you may conclude that 25% is an underestimate. (Study finds large number of drivers abusing Bay Area carpool lanes)

How Are HOV Lanes Enforced? (Caltrans): “The California Highway Patrol (CHP) is responsible for HOV lane enforcement. The goal is to keep HOV violation rates to less than 10%. Once monitor counts detect violation rates above 10%, District personnel will notify local area CHP of the need for heightened enforcement in a particular HOV corridor. An HOV lane violation ticket is a minimum $490 fine. Fine may be higher for repeat offenders. In addition, at the discretion of the county’s Board of Supervisors, local counties can assess additional administrative fees.”

CHP recently did a maximum enforcement period on Santa Rosa area HOV lanes. These actions are almost always funded by grants from OTS, and are commonly an indication the vehicle code in question is NOT being enforced at other times. CHP officers get paid overtime for these enforcement actions, but they don’t consider these violations are part of their routine activities. (Carpool lane crackdown: CHP writes 72 tickets in a single day, even the boss gets in on the action)

The upshot

HOV lanes are not a solution to anything. They allow Caltrans and other transportation agencies to increase freeway capacity while claiming benefits, while what they do is induce more travel, undoing any possible benefits. There should be no more HOV lanes constructed, anywhere. All existing HOV lanes should be converted to HOT (High Occupancy Toll) or Express tolled lanes.

This includes the new HOV lanes that will open on Hwy 50. They must be converted to toll lanes. The creation of a regional tolling authority would make this easier, though it would certainly be politically unpopular, or at least unpopular with drivers who think everything should be free, and politicians who kowtow to the entitlement of drivers. The legislation which authorizes tollling (AB 194 of 2015) provides that HOV lanes may be converted to toll lanes. The benefits of conversion must be documented, and it appears likely but not certain that it must be approved by California Transportation Commission (CTC).

References

If you search for ‘induced travel hov lanes’, you will find a large number of resource. Many transportation agencies claim a benefit, but no research backs up that claim. Caltrans does not claim a benefit, but does continually build projects despite that.

HOV lanes solution

Dan Allison1 Comment

So, given that new HOV lanes do not reduce congestion, and in fact induce demand and increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT), what is the solution? I suggest the following policy:

HOV lanes will not be added to any freeway by the construction of new lanes. If, in the judgement of Caltrans or other agencies, a HOV lane is desirable, an existing general travel lane(s) may be converted to some sort of HOV or tolled status. This only applies to freeways with three or more lanes existing. Existing general purpose lanes may also be converted to transit-only lanes or dedicated to rail use. It is well known that additional lanes of any sort will induce additional traffic, which is directly contrary to state goals to reduce carbon emissions and vehicle miles traveled (VMT).

This could be implemented as a 10-year moritorium rather than a permanent policy, as I think that within 10 years the folly of adding lanes to freeways will be clear to everyone, even Caltrans. 

#NoNewLanes

Note: when I wrote the preceding post and this one, I was aware that ECOS (Environmental Council of Sacramento) was working on a lawsuit against Caltrans over the project to add carpool lanes, as additional newly constructed lanes, to Highway 50. That suit has now been been filed.

HOV lanes

Dan AllisonLeave a comment

HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lanes have been in the news over the last few years, and will be so more and more often. They are the preferred option by Caltrans and other transportation agencies (which often have to fund these largely on their own dime) for increasing highway capacity. Notice that I said increasing capacity rather than reducing congestion. Caltrans claims that they reduce congestion (see Caltrans HOV page), but there is no evidence to support that, and much to controvert it. Though Caltrans officially acknowledges the concept of induced demand, it is not used in their highway planning. The mid-level engineers in Caltrans, who largely determine the actual projects selected and the design of those projects, don’t believe in induced demand. They say so regularly. But induced demand is a proven effect, and any project planned without that in mind is going to be mis-designed. 

Communities have grown increasingly resistant to the expansion of freeways, which largely or entirely benefit long distance commuters and provide almost no benefit, and often strong negatives, to the neighborhood, and little benefit to productive freight traffic. The era of the freeway is over, and many exiting freeways will be torn down eventually, but Caltrans is still on a building jag. Knowing the resistance, however, Caltrans rarely proposes new general purpose lanes (lanes which any one can drive in, without restriction), instead proposing HOV lanes. Somehow, these seem to get a pass from communities and environmentalists, figuring that a HOV lane expansion is better than a general purpose lane expansion. Well, yes, but the question is, should there be any expansion at all?

If some high capacity vehicles are diverted out of general purpose lanes, that provides a more open lane, and that more open lane will be filled with additional traffic. The HOV lane itself, being more open than adjacent lanes, will create additional traffic. Drivers respond to their perception of crowding and delay. If they see more space, they will drive more. Induced demand, simple as that. So a HOV lane increases overall traffic. Cost is an issue, as most of our transportation dollars at the state and regional level go to these projects, instead of projects that would actually reduce private vehicle use and vehicle miles traveled. Environmental and social impacts increase. And the lanes fill up, creating a demand for yet more lanes in a never-ending cycle. 

A $133M project called 80 Across the Top has been completed, which added HOV lanes to Interstate 80 from the river to Watt Ave. Note that cost does not include loss of productivity during construction, which if the news media is to be believed, was considerable, nor the elevated crash rate during the project. Now Caltrans is well underway with a $187M project to add HOV lanes to Hwy 50, and is out selling the idea of adding HOV lanes to Business 80 (Capital City Freeway). Meanwhile, a number of people have proposed tearing down the Capital City Freeway, including this blog. The river bridge would not be torn down, but the transportation facility north and south of the bridge would be a surface roadway rather than elevated freeway, and capacity on the bridge could be made available for other modes. Or maybe the bridge should be torn down and replaced with an appropriately scaled neighborhood bridge (similar to what is being talked about for the Broadway extension bridge over the Sacramento River). 

Next up: the solution for HOV