|
|
Effects of Changing HOV Lane Occupancy Requirements:
El Monte Busway Case Study
 |
 |
|
Notice This document is disseminated under the
sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of
information exchange. The United
States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. |
|
1. Report No. FHWA-OP-03-002 |
2. Government Accession No. |
3. Recipient's Catalog No. |
||
|
4. Title and Subtitle Affects of Changing HOV Lane Occupancy
Requirements: El Monte Busway Case
Study |
5. Report Date June 2002 |
|||
|
6. Performing Organization Code |
||||
|
7. Author(s) Katherine F. Turnbull |
8. Performing Organization Report No. Report |
|||
|
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 |
10. Work Unit
No. (TRAIS) |
|||
|
11. Contract
or Grant No |
||||
|
12.
Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Operations Office of Travel Management Federal Highway Administration Room 3404, HOTM, 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C.
20590 |
13. Type of
Report and Period Covered Research: |
|||
|
14.
Sponsoring Agency Code |
||||
|
15.
Supplementary Notes Jon Obenberger, FHWA Operations Office of Traffic
Management, Contracting Officers Technical Representative (COTR) |
||||
|
16. Abstract In 1999,
the California Legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 63, which lowered the
vehicle-occupancy requirement on the El Monte Busway on the San Bernardino
(I-10) Freeway from three persons per vehicle (3+) to two persons per vehicle
(2+) full time. The California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) was directed to implement this change
on January 1, 2000 and to monitor and evaluate the effects of the 2+
requirement on the operation of the Busway and the freeway. Based on the operational effects that
resulted from this change, new legislation was approved increasing the
vehicle-occupancy requirement back to 3+ during the morning and afternoon peak-periods
effective July 24, 2000. This
report represents information on the effect the change in the
vehicle-occupancy requirement had on the operation of the Busway and freeway,
public transit services, violation rates, accidents, local and feeder
roadways, and public response. The
assessment is based on available information from Caltrans, Foothill Transit,
the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the California
Highway Patrol, and other local agencies. Lowering
the vehicle-occupancy requirement from 3+ to 2+ full time had a detrimental
effect on the Busway. At the same
time, significant improvements were not realized in the general-purpose
freeway lanes. Morning peak-period
travel speeds in the Busway were reduced from 65 mph to 20 mph, while travel
speeds in the general-purpose lanes decreased from 25 mph to 23 mph for most
of the demonstration. Hourly Busway
vehicle volumes during the morning peak-period increased from 1,100 to 1,600
with the 2+ designation, but the number of persons carried declined from
5,900 to 5,200. The freeway lane
vehicle volumes and passengers per lane per hour remained relatively
similar. Peak-period travel times on
the Busway increased by 20- to 30-minutes.
Bus schedule adherence and on-time performance declined significantly
and passengers reported delays. |
||||
|
17. Key Words High-Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, HOV Lanes, Concurrent
Flow Lanes |
18.
Distribution Statement No restrictions.
This document is available to the public through NTIS: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 |
|||
|
19. Security
Classif.(of this report) Unclassified |
20. Security
Classif.(of this page) Unclassified |
21. No. of
Pages 64 |
22. Price |
|
Effects of Changing HOV Lane Occupancy Requirements:
El Monte Busway Case Study
Katherine F. Turnbull
Texas Transportation Institute
The Texas A&M University System
College Station, Texas
June 2002
This study was conducted in cooperation with
staff from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the California Department
of Transportation (Caltrans), and other agencies.
Jon Obenberger, FHWA Office of Traffic Management and ITS Applications,
served as the project director. Robert
Cady, FHWA B California Division, and Antonette Clark and Dawn Helou,
Caltrans, provided guidance and information throughout the study. In addition, Bonnie Duke, TTI, was responsible
for word processing on the report and Gary Lobaugh provided editorial review.
The assistance of these individuals is both recognized and appreciated.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................
1
Case
Study Objectives............................................................................................................1
Background..............................................................................................................................1
Activities
Conducted...............................................................................................................
2
Organization
of Report...........................................................................................................
2
CHAPTER TWO
OVERVIEW OF EL MONTE BUSWAY............................................................
3
Physical
Description of the Busway........................................................................................3
Operation
of the Busway........................................................................................................
4
Utilization
of the Busway.......................................................................................................10
CHAPTER THREE
EFFECTS OF VEHICLE-OCCUPANCY CHANGE.....................................13
Operation
of Busway and Freeway........................................................................................14
Public
Transit Services...........................................................................................................21
Enforcement
and Vehicle-Occupancy Violations..................................................................24
Accidents.................................................................................................................................25
Local
and Feeder Roadways..................................................................................................31
Public
Response......................................................................................................................31
CHAPTER FOUR
ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH OPERATIONAL CHANGES........................33
Management
and Operation of HOV Facilities...................................................................
33
Examples
of Operational Changes.......................................................................................
38
Process
and Stakeholder Involvement.................................................................................
39
Issues
to be Considered........................................................................................................
43
Experience
in Other Areas...................................................................................................
44
Federal
Interest in Operational Changes............................................................................
49
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................
51
REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................
55
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1.
Morning Peak
Hour Utilization of the El Monte Busway................................................
10
2.
Vehicle-Occupancy Level Violation
Rates.......................................................................
24
4.
Accident Rate Summary B Six Months Before 2+ Requirement Implemented
(3+ Requirement in Effect)................................................................................................
28
5.
Accident Rate Summary B Six Months When 2+ Requirement was in Effect ............... 29
6.
Accident Rate Summary B Twelve Months When 3+ Peak/2+ Off-Peak
Requirement
was in Effect..................................................................................................
30
LIST OF FIGURES
1.
Location of
El Monte Busway in Los Angeles County..............................................................
5
2.
Major Elements of El Monte Busway........................................................................................
6
3.
El Monte Busway Buffer Separated
Section.............................................................................
7
4.
El Monte Busway Separated Section.........................................................................................
7
5.
Major Milestones in Operation
of the El Monte Busway.........................................................
8
6.
Congestion in El Monte Busway
with 2+ Requirement............................................................
16
7.
Changes in Morning Peak Hour
Travel Speeds.......................................................................
17
8.
Changes in Afternoon Peak Hour
Travel Speeds.....................................................................
17
9.
Changes in Hourly Vehicle Volumes
During the Morning Peak-Period..................................
18
10.
Changes in Hourly Vehicle Volumes During the Afternoon
Peak-Period................................
18
11.
Changes in Morning Peak Hour Persons Per Hour Per Lane..................................................
19
