Prepared for Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County

Transcription

1 ESTMATED TRAVEL TME SAVNGS FOR THE OPERATONAL HOV FACLTES N THE YEARS2000 AND 2010 Technical Memorandum Work Order 5-C Prepared for Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County Texas Transportation nstitute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas June 1991

2 SUMMARY n order to develop travel time savings estimates for the years 2000 and 2010, this study examine.d average daily traffic per lane (ADT/lane) on the freeway mainlanes adjacent to high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) facilities in the Houston urban area and its impact on HOV lane travel time savings. This technical memorandum documents the specific procedures utilized in the analysis. t was found, as a result of this study, that a statistically significant relationship exists between HOV lane travel time savings and freeway ADT/lane conditions. Pre.dictive equations (Equations S-1 and S-2) were establishe.d that exhibit levels of significance greater than 99% (0.114) * (ADT!Lane) (Eq. S-1) whe.re: TSPH = Average HOV lane travel time savings in minutes per mile during the. peak hour ADT!Lane =Average ADT/lane for a freeway corridordivided by 1,000 TTSpp = ( ) * (ADT/Lane) (Eq. S-2) where: TTSpp = Average HOV lane travel time savings in minutes permile during the. peak period ADT!Lane = Average ADT/lane for a freeway corridor divided by Equations S-1 and S-2 were, in tum, utilized, in conjunction with ADT/lane estimates for the years 2000 and 2010, to estimate HOV lane travel time savings for these future years. These HOV lane time savings estimates were calculate.d for the peak hour and peak period, in both minutes per mile and total minutes save.d, and are displaye.d in Table S-1. ii

3 Table S-1. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Estimates for the Year 2000 Travel Time Savings Estimates, Year 2000 Length of Avg. Frwy HOV Lane Facility AOT/Lane Avg. Travel Time Avg. Travel Time Facility Year 2000 Year Savings (min/mi.) 3 Savings (min. > 4 (mi.) 1 Peak Hour Peak Period Peak Hour Peak Periocf East ex , (US 59N) Gulf , (1-45S) Katy , (1-101.r) North , (1-45N) Northwest , (US 290) Southwest , (US 59S) 1 Estimated length of facility in the year 2000, based on currently proposed inprovements and coopletion dates 2 Represents average AOT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor in the year Estimated average transitway travel time savings during the respective time periods in minutes per mile; estimates are for optimal (non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV lane 4 Estimated average transitway travel time savings during the respective time periods in minutes; estimates are for optimal (non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV lane 5 Estimated travel time savings shown for the peak period represent the average savings during the shoulders of the peak period, not inclusive of the peak hour 6 Eastex HOV lane proposed to operate as a two lane facility; travel time savings estimates shown are, consequently, for the peak direction of flow only; no savings in the off-peak direction are expected w

4 Table S-2. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Estimates for the Year 2010 Travel Time Savinn" F!OtimAtes Year 2010 length of Avg. Frwy Avg. Travel Time Avg. Travel Time HOV Lane Facility, AOT/lane, Savinn" lmintmi.l 3 Savina" tmin. ) 4 Facility Year 2010 (mi.) 1 Year Peak Hour Peak Perioc:f Peak Hour Peak Period' East ex , (US 59N) Gulf , C 45S) Katy , (l 10W) North , (J 45N) Northwest , (US 290) Southwest , (US 59S) 1 Estimated length of facility in the year 2010, based on currently proposed irovements and CO!f4>letion dates 2Represents average ADJ/lane conditions for the freeway corridor in the year estimated average transitway travel time savings during the respective time periods in minutes per mile; estimates are for optimal (non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV lane 4Estimated average transitway travel time savings during the respective time periods in minutes; estimates are for optimal <non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV lane 5 Estimated travel time savings shown for the peak period represent the average savings during the shoulders of the peak period, not inclusive of the peak hour 6eastex HOV lane proposed to operate as a two-lane facility; travel time savings estimates shown are, consequently, for the peak direction of flow only; no savings in the off-peak direction are expected The travel time savings estimates shown in Table S-1 are representative of non-incident type flow conditions on the freeways and HOV facilities and, as such, reflect the minimum amount of HOV lane travel time savings predicted to occur in the years 2000 and 2010 as a result of the heavy flow conditions (recurrent congestion) on the freeway mainlanes. Data from the Houston urban area indicate that increasing the HOV lane travel time savings by 100% to account for incidents would be reasonable (1). V

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMAR y Page iii N'1'RODUCTON PROBLEM STATEMENT... 2 OBJECTVES AND PROCEDURES... 3 STUDY DESGN... 4 HOV Lane Travel Corridor Characteristics Statistical Analysis HOV Lane and Freeway System in the Years 2000 and HOV Lane Travel Time Savings in the Years 2000 and RESULTS HOV Lane Travel Corridor Characteristics Statistical Analysis HOV Lane and Freeway System in the Years 2000 and HOV Lane Travel Time Savings in the Years 2000 and RECOMMENDATONS AND CONCLUSONS REFEREN'CES APPENDX A. Historical Travel Time and Ridership Data A-1 APPENDX B. Ridership Projections B-1 v

6 LST OF FGURES Page Figure 1. Operational Sections of Houston HOV Lane System, June Figure 2. Status of HOV Facility Development Program, June Figure 3. Speed-Flow Relationship Under deal Conditions Figure 4. Peak-Hour HOV Lane Travel Time Savings versus ADT/Lane Figure 5. Peak-Period HOV Lane Travel Time Savings versus ADT/Lane Figure 6. Plot of Predictive Equation for Peak-Hour HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Figure 7. Plot of Predictive Equation for Peak-Period HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Figure 8. Proposed Operational Sections of Houston HOV Lane System in the Year Figure 9. Proposed Operational Sections of Houston HOV Lane System in the Year vi

7 LST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Status of Operating HOV Lanes June Table 2. Measures of Traffic Flow for Basic Freeway Se.ctions... 8 Table 3. Summary of Historical Travel Time Savings Table 4. Freeway Mainlane ADT Data, Table 5. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings and ADT/Lane Data Utilized in Statistical Analysis Table 6. Statistical Summary Table 7. Status of Operating HOV Facilities, Year Table 8. Freeway Mainlane ADT Data, Year Table 9. Freeway Mainlane ADT Data, Year Table 10. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Estimates for the Year Table 11. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Estimates for the Year vii

8 NTRODUCTON n the past 15 to 20 years there has been growing concern over the congested conditions of urban highway facilities in Houston. n an effort to combat this congestion, the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) and the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (SDHPT) are jointly committed to developing a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane system consisting of 95.5 miles of barrierseparated HOV lanes (1). As of June 1991, 46.5 miles of this system were in operation m four separate freeway corridors. Research has shown that, of the factors affecting the utilization of HOV lanes, the three following factors appear to be significant: 1) the vehicle groups allowed to use the facility; 2) the travel time savings provided by the facility; and 3) the length of time an HOV facility has been in operation. Of these three factors, travel time savings is, possibly, the most important single factor influencing HOV facility use. n fact, unless an HOV lane provides at least seven to eight minutes of travel time savings relative to the general-purpose freeway mainlanes, data suggest that the facility will only be marginally utilized Q). 1

9 PROBLEM: STATEMENT The Metropolitan Transit Authority (METRO) is currently working on a "High Occupancy Vehicle Lane Briefing Paper." The completion of this paper requires the determination of the travel time savings for the operational HOV facilities in the years 2000 and These travel time savings have not yet been verified, however, and METRO has requested that the Texas Transportation nstitute (Tfl) perform an analysis to verify these travel time savings, as well as the status of the HOV facility development program for the years 2000 and

10 OBJECTVES AND PROCEDURES The primary objective of this study was to develop travel time savings estimates for the operational HOV lanes in the years 2000 and A secondary objective was to verify the status of the HOV facility development program for these same future years. follows. n order to accomplish the objectives of this research, the general procedures were as Procure historical travel time savings data for the Houston HOV lane system. Gather average daily traffic (ADT) data for the freeway mainlanes corresponding to HOV lane travel corridors, along with the geometric characteristics (basic number of lanes) for freeway mainlane ADT count locations, and calculate the ADT per lane (ADT/lane). Utilize the freeway ADT/lane data to estimate the relative congestion level on the freeway mainlanes of the HOV lane travel corridors. Determine any relationship(s) between existing freeway ADT/lane and HOV lane travel time savings data. Verify the status of the HOV facility development program for the years 2000 and Obtain projected ADT and basic number of lane data for freeway mainlanes in HOV lane travel corridors scheduled to be operational in the years 2000 and 2010, and calculate projected freeway ADT/lane conditions for these future years. Based on any relationship(s) determined from ADT/lane and HOV lane travel time savings data, estimate travel time savings for the HOV lane system in the years 2000 and

11 STUDY DESGN HOV Lane Travel Corridor Characteristics Travel Time Savings for HOV Lane System The initial phase of this study involved the procurement of historical travel time savings data for the Houston HOV lane system relative to the general-purpose freeway mainlanes. As of June 1991, the HOV lane system consisted of 46.5 miles of barrier-separated HOV lanes in the following four freeway corridors. Gulf Freeway corridor (-45S) Katy Freeway corridor (-low) North Freeway corridor (-45N) Northwest Freeway corridor (US 290) The current (June 1991) status of the operational HOV lane system is enumerated in Table 1 and depicted in Figure 1, while the current status of the HOV facility development program is illustrated in Figure 2. Travel time surveys of the operational HOV lane travel corridors are conducted by TT on a quarterly basis. These surveys allow for the analysis of travel time savings provided to users of the HOV lanes as compared to travelers of the freeway mainlanes. The travel time savings data were obtained via these quarterly surveys for the years of 1988 through These data represent the most recent and reliable historical travel time savings information available for the Houston HOV lane system. 4

12 Table 1. Status of Operating HOV Lanes, J111e 1991 HOV Lane Date First Ml les in Ope rational Vehicles Allowed Hours of Phase Opened Operation, Limits 1 to Use Weekday May 1991 Facility Operation Gulf May Broadway to Dowling 2+ vehicles 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. B Cl 45S) 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. 08 Katy October a2 SH 6 to E. Extension/ 3+ vehicles from 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. 18 Cl 10W) S.P.R.R. 6:45 to 8:15 a.m. 2 p.m. to 10 p.m during other operating hours North Noventler Aldine Bender to Authorized buses 5:45 to 8:45 a.m. S (l 45N) Downtown Terminus and vanpools 3:30 to 7:00 p.m. OB Northwest August FM 1960 to Old Katy 2+ vehicles 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. S (US 290) Road 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. 08 Total 46.5 Hours of Weekend Operation 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. 08 Saturday 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. B Sunday 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. 08 Saturday 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. B Sunday N/A N/A Note: B nbound, 08 OUtbound N/A: Not accessible on weekends at present time 1 0peratfonal limits shown are reflective of morning operations; evening operational limits are these in reverse 2Represents HOV lane corridor in final form 3 First phase of this HOV facility opened as a contraflow lane in August 1979

13 N Belt Scale..., Aldine Bender... 'nemont 1' N Shepherd '--t P&R \ \ \ \ \ 0 2 Miles 4 Addicks P&R b--- SH 8 ', Dacoma b Gessner <O = in D LEGEND Entrance and Exit Entrance or Exit Only ndicates HOV Facility Operational in the Year 1991 Reference Roadways O) O) Cll i;i Figure 1. Operational Sections of Houston HOV Lane System, June 1991

14 1-45 North us 290 Northwest N Belt * Scale Miles 1-10 Katy 1-10 LEGEND 0 HOV Lane Access Locations - Operational Under Construction CJ Design and/or Planning _- SH 225,..,._,. " l 0 Beltway 8 SH 288 l-45 Gulf Figure 2. Status of HOV Facility Development Program, June 1991

15 HOV Lane Travel Corridor ADT/Lane Conditions There are several characteristics of HOV lanes and the freeway corridors in which they are located that affect the success of these facilities as measured by ridership and travel time savings. One characteristic of an HOV lane travel corridor which is inherently necessary for significant travel time savings to be experienced by individuals utilizing the HOV lane is the presence of traffic congestion on the freeway mainlanes. The magnitude of ADT associated with the beginning of an undesirable level of congestion is generally accepted to be between 15,000 and 17,000 vehicles per day per lane. Measures of traffic flow for freeways and their relationships with general levels of service are shown in Table 2 (2). Table 2. Measures of Traffic Flow for Basic Freeway Sections Level of Service Density 1 speed2 MSF 3 VJC 4 A B , c ,550 o.n D , E , F7 ADT/Lane 5 N/A 13,000 15,000 17,000 18,500 DVMT/LM 8 N/A 11,500 13,000 15,000 17,000 Source: Reference 2 Note: N/A: All figures shown are for a design speed of 70 miles per hour Not available at this level of service 1 Traffic density in passenger cars per mile per lane per hour 2 Average travel speed in miles per hour 3Maxinun service flow rate in passenger cars per hour per lane 4 The ratio of traffic volune to theoretical facility capacity 5 Average daily traffic volune per lane 6Daily vehicle miles of travel per lane-mile 7 Highly variable, t.nstable conditions Acquisition of ADT Data n order to estimate the level of congestion in the HOV lane travel corridors, ADT/lane figures were estimated for the freeway mainlanes in the HOV lane corridors. The first step toward attaining these ADT/lane data was to gather ADT data for the freeway mainlanes. 8

16 Annual average daily traffic (AADT) data are available from SDHPT District Traffic Maps. These AADT data, however, come from permanent counting stations that monitor the volume of traffic throughout the entire year and, thus, include weekend traffic counts as part of the AADT figures. Considering the weekday peaking characteristics of the HOV lanes, ADT data which take only weekday traffic into account would be more applicable. Average weekday and AADT traffic volumes on Houston freeways were, therefore, compared so that the relationship between these traffic volumes could be established. Another pertinent characteristic of the SDHPT traffic maps was that the AADT counts consisted of a combination of mainlane and frontage road volumes. Frontage road volumes in the Houston urban area are typically 10% of the combined (freeway plus frontage road) AADT volumes. t was, subsequently, determined that when considering the impacts of both the weekend and frontage road factors, the two factors effectively offset each other. The AADT data from the SDHPT traffic maps were, therefore, considered to be an acceptable representation of average daily weekday traffic on the freeway mainlanes. The ADT 1 data have recently been updated by SDHPT to include 1990 data. dentification of Cross-Sectional Data Once the ADT data had been established, cross-sectional data, in the form of the basic number of lanes, had to be acquired for each of the freeway ADT count locations within an HOV lane travel corridor. This was accomplished through the utilization of the SDHPT roadway inventory (R2-TLog) tables Q). The ADT data were divided by their corresponding basic number of lane data to produce ADT/lane figures. A weighted average of the ADT/lane data was, subsequently, calculated for each HOV lane travel corridor. This ADT/lane figure was used to represent the relative level of congestion prevailing on the freeway mainlanes of each HOV lanes travel corridor. 1 From this point forward, ADT will be synonymous with AADT data directly obtained from SDHPT. 9

17 Special Considerations HOV Lane Congestion While the presence of freeway mainlane congestion is necessary for HOV lane users to realize travel time savings, the absence of traffic congestion on the HOV facility is also important. The ability to change vehicle occupancy requirements on HOV facilities provides a method to constrain volumes and preserve free-flow conditions on the facility. This type of HOV lane volume control was applied to the Katy HOV lane in One-lane reversible HOV facilities, such as those presently operating in Houston, are known to exhibit a vehicular flow capacity of approximately 1,500vehicles per hour (vph). n early 1988, vehicular volumes on the Katy HOV lane began approaching the capacity level (1,500 vph) during the morning peak hour. The heavy morning flows persisted on the facility until October 17, 1988, when the vehicle occupancy requirement was raised from two or more persons (2 +) to three or more persons (3 +) per vehicle during the time period of 6:45 to 8: 15 a.m. The increase in the vehicle occupancy requirement resulted in a significant decrease in HOV lane vehicular volume during the peak-hour and restored free-flow conditions on the facility. t is assumed, for the purpose of this study, that while congestion on an HOV facility can negate any potential travel time savings, vehicle occupancy requirements will continue to be adjusted in this manner to ensure free-flow conditions on Houston HOV facilities. Peak Hour and Peak Period Freeway Operations n consideration of the peaking characteristics associated with the Houston HOV lane system, it would appear that peak hour and peak period volumes on the freeway mainlanes would be more closely related to HOV lane travel time savings than freeway ADT/lane conditions. While a peak hour/peak period approach was considered for this study, the following drawbacks were encountered with this type of methodology: 1) complications 10

18 associated with the relationship between speed and volume data for the freeway mainlanes; and 2) the general usefulness of a predictive equation consisting of peak hour/peak period variables. The theoretical relationship between speed and volume (Figure 3, illustrates that at a vehicular flow of 1,800passenger cars per hour per lane (pcphpl), could be present for two different conditions of flow; an uncongested flow with an average travel speed of approximately 48 mph or an unstable congested flow with an average travel speed of approximately 20 mph. Peak hour, and possibly peak period freeway volume data, would, thus, need to be supplemented with travel speed data, if the traffic operations on the freeway were to be correctly assessed. The available travel speed data, however, were variable and were not necessarily collected on the same days as traffic volume data. n order to successfully achieve the ultimate goal of this study, the development of a predictive equation for HOV lane travel time savings was required. deally, this predictive equation would lend itself to convenient use. While freeway ADT projections are common, projections of peak hour and/or peak period freeway traffic conditions are scarce. The general usefulness of a predictive equation would, thus, be adversely impacted by the inclusion of peak hour/peak period variables for which future estimates would have to be attained. n consideration of the complications associated with the acquisition of current and future peak hour/peak period data, the utilization of ADT data was deemed most appropriate. Statistical Analysis The presence of traffic congestion on the adjacent freeway mainlanes is mandatory for significant travel time savings to be experienced by HOV lane users. t was suspected that as congestion (ADT/lane) increased on the freeway mainlanes, HOV lanes travel time savings would likewise increase. Any formal relationship between the magnitude of freeway 11

19 - Ql N c: e 40 -.,, Ql - Ql - fl) i 30 O.. ' ti Q i """"_... i, r--- r--._ "' 1 \ ',.,,.,.,. \o "' \e --,.,,.,.,. ".\ :... :;;..-" Volume Per Lane ( 100 pcphpl) Source: Reference 5 Note: Diagram shown for 8-lane roadway with design speed of 70 mph Theoretical Capacity pcphpl Passenger cars per hoar per lane... / / / / / J Q..c: t.j g, = N * Figure 3. Speed-Flow Relationship Under deal Conditions

20 congestion (from the standpoint of ADT/lane) and HOV lane travel time savings, however, has yet to be established. n order to examine the relationship between freeway ADT/lane conditions and HOV lane travel time savings, statistical software from the SAS nstitute was utilized to perform a least squares regression analysis. By establishing a relationship between existing HOV lane travel time savings and freeway ADT/lane data, future (year 2000 and 2010) approximations of freeway ADT/lane conditions could be used to develop travel time savings estimates for the operational HOV facilities in the year 2000 and HOV Lane and Freeway System in the Years 2000 and 2010 Status of HOV Facility Development Program in the Years 2000 and 2010 The latest update (June 1991) of the proposed status for the Houston HOV lane system in the year 2000 was verified; this included the determination of the HOV facility operational limits in the year 2000 and facilitated the identification of the sections of freeway for which future ADT estimates and cross-sectional data had to be secured. Freeway System Characteristics in the Year 2000 Having verified the proposed HOV facility system in the years 2000 and 2010, ADT estimates and cross-sectional data for these future years needed to be identified for the adjacent freeway mainlanes corresponding to the proposed operational limits of the HOV facilities. The freeway mainlane ADT estimates, as well as the basic number of lane data, were obtained from the Houston-Galveston Regional Transportation Study (H-GRTS, ). 13

21 HOV Lane Travel Time Savin&S in the Years 2000 and 2010 The ADT estimates and basic number of lane data for the years 2000 and 2010 were used to formulate ADT/lane projections for the freeway mainlanes corresponding to the HOV facilities scheduled to be operational at these future points in time. The relationship established between historical HOV lane travel time savings and freeway mainlane ADT/lane conditions was then utilized, in conjunction with the ADT/lane projections, to produce estimates of HOV lane travel time savings for the years 2000 and These estimates were expressed in minutes per mile and total minutes saved per trip for the peak hour, peak period, and off-peak. 14

22 RESULTS HOV Lane Travel Corridor Characteristics Historical Travel Time Savings for HOV Lane System Historical travel time savings data for the Houston HOV lane system are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. St ry of Historical Travel Time Savings Average Travel Time Average Travel Time Savings (minutes) 1 Length of Savings Cmin/mi) 3 HOV Lane Year Data HOV Corridor were Collected Peak Hour Peak Period Facility (mi> 2 Peak Hour Peak Period Gulf Gulf Gulf Katy Katy o.s Katy Katy North North North Northwest o.o Northwest Northwest Notes: Peak hours defined as the hour in which HOV lane travel savings is the greatest. As a result, they are not always the same hours, but are normally 7 8 a.m. and 5 6 p.m. Peak periods designated as 6-9 a.m. and 3:30 6:30 p.m. for all HOV facilities except the North HOV lane, whose peak periods are designated as 6 8:30 a.m. and 3:30-6:30 p.m. 1 Yearly average of travel time savings in minutes for HOV lane users during morning and evening peak hours and peak periods 2 The lengths used to calculate the travel time savings in minutes per mile correspond to the exact operational limits of the HOV lane. The "official" HOV lane project lengths shown elsewhere in the text may, therefore, be different. 3vearly average of travel time savings in minutes per mile for HOV lane users during morning and evening peak hours and peak periods 15

23 The peak hour and peak period HOV lane travel time savings shown in Table 3 represent, not only yearly averages, but also represent the average of the morning and evening peak hour and peak period HOV lane travel time savings. Due to the variance in HOV lane and freeway traffic flows, there was no statistical difference in morning and evening HOV lane travel time savings for the HOV lane system as a whole. The travel time savings data were, therefore, reduced and presented in this manner. The implications of the statistical analysis performed as a part of this study will be thoroughly discussed later in this section of the report. Very few samples of HOV lane travel time savings data have been collected during the off-peak periods of HOV facility operations (i.e. outside of the peak periods relative to freeway operations). t can be concluded from the limited data available, however, that Houston HOV lane users are not experiencing any off-peak travel time savings relative to the general-purpose freeway mainlanes. All of the detailed historical travel time data utilized in this study, along with HOV lane ridership and person-minutes of savings data, are included in Appendix A. These data indicate that, on a typical, non-incident day during 1989, the Houston HOV lane system provided a savings of approximately 2, 750 person-hours. Assuming a value of $9/hr for a persons' time and 250 working days per year, this translates into approximately $6.2 million of savings for those individuals utilizing HOV lanes during These values are expected to increase substantially in the near future, as major improvements/extensions to the HOV facility system come to completion and traffic congestion on the freeway mainlanes continues to increase. t is important to note that all data utilized for this study are representative of nonincident, mid-week (Tuesday through Thursday) days. The data are, therefore, reflective of optimal weekday freeway and HOV lane operations under non-incident conditions. f an accident/incident were to occur on the freeway mainlanes adjacent to an HOV facility, the users of the HOV facility would experience a considerable increase in travel time savings. 16

24 ncidents are generally much more prevalent on the freeway mainlanes in comparison to HOV facilities. The HOV lane travel time savings data are, consequently, conservative estimates of the travel time benefits provided to individuals utilizing the HOV lane system. n fact, data from Houston suggest that increasing the travel time savings value by 100% to account for incidents would be reasonable (.D. HOV Lane Travel Corridor ADT/Lane Conditions The 1987 through 1990 ADT and basic number of lane data, obtained from the SDHPT District 12 traffic maps and R2-TLog respectively, have been summarized in Table 4. The average freeway ADT/lane value computed for each HOV lane corridor (Table 4) is a weighted average based on the basic number of freeway lanes. These average ADT/lane values represent the relative level of congestion on the freeways within which the various HOV facilities operate. 17

25 Table 4. Freeway Mainlane AOT Data, ' 00 1 Freeway ADT,2 Basic Freeway ADT/Lane Freeway Count No. Corridor Location of Lanes Gulf Griggs N/A 156, , ,000 6,8 3 N/A 26,000 20, ,375 Broadway 184, , , ,000 23,380 24,250 Corridor Avg 5 24,290 22,060 23,300 Katy Silber 195, , , , ,380 26,750 26,130 23,750 Bunker Hill 173, , , , ,830 32,500 33,000 30,830 Kirkwood 145, , , , , ,500 27,830 26,670 Corridor Avg 5 25,650 28, ,700 26,750 North W. Cavalcade N/A 152, , ,000 8 N/A 19,000 19,500 21,500 Crosstinb!rs 201, , ,000 6,8 4 33,500 24,880 26,375 Tidwell 183, , ,000 6,8 4 30,500 31,000 25,000 Little York 172, , ,000 6,8 4 28,670 30,170 23, 750 Corridor Avgs 27,230 25,790 24, 160 Northwest Watonga N/A 180, , ,000 8 N/A 22,500 23, ,875 Antoine 136, , , ,000 17,380 19,000 Pinemont 112, , , ,670 19,830 21,830 Corridor Avg 5 19,450 20,140 21,900 N/A Not Applicable 1 ADT data obtained form SDHPT District Traffic Maps, District 12 2 The Gulf and Northwest HOV facilities were not operational in 1987, and reliable travel time data were not available for the North HOV lane in 1987; these data were, therefore, deemed not applicable 3 The basic number of lanes for this section of freeway changed from six to eight during The basic nunb!r of lanes for this section of freeway changed from six to eight during Weighted average based on basic number of lanes; represents average AOT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor

26 Statistical Analysis The HOV lane travel time savings and ADT/lane data utilized in the statistical analysis are presented in Table 5. These HOV lane travel time savings data are the yearly average travel time savings in minutes per mile of HOV lane referred to earlier in Table 3; the corresponding ADT/lane data are those previously identified in Table 4. The data shown in Table 5 are also represented graphically in Figures 4 and 5. HOV Lane Corridor Gulf Gulf Gulf Katy Katy Katy Katy North North North Northwest Northwest Northwest Table 5. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings and ADT/Lane Data Utilized in Statistical Analysis Average Travel Time Year Data Savings (min/mi) 1 Were Collected Peak Hour Peak Period Avg. ADT/Lane for Corridor 2 24,290 22,060 23,300 25,650 28, ,700 26,750 27,230 25,790 24, ,450 20,140 21,900 1 Yearly average of travel time savings in minutes per mile for HOV lane users during morning and evening peak hours and peak periods; rounded to the nearest 0.1 minutes per mile 2weighted average based on basic number of lanes; represents average ADT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor The results of the least squares regression analysis performed on the data shown in Table 5 indicated that there is a significant relationship between HOV lane travel time savings and freeway ADT/lane conditions. The empirical equations developed to predict HOV lane travel time savings during the peak hour and peak period are indicated in Equations 1 and 2, respectively. TTSPH = (0.114) * (ADT!Lane) (Eq. 1) where: 1TSPH - Average HOV lane travel time savings in minutes per mile during the peak hour 19

27 s i::: s -7Jl tld i::: 1.0 LEGEND 1.2 xx Gulf HOV Lane... > Katy HOV Lane ] Cd r:n e Q) 0.8 ] North HOV Lane... E-t Cl) > Cd M E-t 0.4 M A NW HOV Lane 0 ] l Cd Q) ll.; 0.0 & < > ] <&< > ADT /Lane (thousands) Figure 4. Peak-Hour HOV Lane Travel Time Savings versus ADT /Lane

28 -... E d LEGEND... s 0.6 xx Year b.() <&... d <@> Gulf HOV Lane Cl. Katy HOV Lane (,) a... E-t NW 0.4 North HOV Lane HOV Lane - N... (!) aj '"' E-t "'d Q) Q.. Cd Q) Q A ADT /Lane (thousands) A ] <B> <B> Figure 5. Peak-Period HOV Lane Travel Time Savings versus ADT/Lane

29 ADT/Lane =Average ADT/lane for a freeway corridor divided by l,cxxj TSpp = ( ) * (ADT/Lane) (Eq. 2) where: TS PP - ADT/Lane Average HOV lane travel time savings in minutes per mile during the peak period =Average ADT/lane for a freeway corridordivided by l,cxxj The descriptive statistics associated with Equations 1 and 2 are summarized in Table 6. The more important statistics are the multiple correlation coefficient (R 2 ), which indicates the percent of variability in the predictive equation that is accounted for by the independent variable (ADT/lane), and the confidence level, which, when expressed as a percentage, indicates the relative statistical significance of the equations. The percent of variability in Equations 1 and 2 accounted for by the ADT/lane variable was 83% and 63% respectively, while the statistical significance of both equations was greater than 99%. Table 6. Statistical SUllll8ry Predictive Correlation Multiple Correlation Level of Confidence Equation Coefficient(r) Coefficient (R 2 ) 1 Significance Cp-value> Level ( 1-p), X 2 Equation Equation Explains the percent of variability in the predictive equation accot.nted for by the independent variable (ADT/Lane) 2 ndicates the relative statistical significance level as a percentage t is important to recognize that, when analyzing the data, no statistically significant difference was found between morning and evening HOV lane travel time savings for the HOV facility system as a whole. The peak hour and peak period HOV lane travel time savings estimates, as predicted by Equations 1 and 2, are, therefore, applicable to either morning or evening HOV lane corridor operational conditions. Plots of Equations 1 and 2 illustrating predicted HOV lane travel time savings versus freeway ADT/lane are shown in Figures 6 and 7. 22

30 N CJ.,) s... i:::: LEGEND xx Year Gult Transitway i::: > Katy Transibray cd 00 Q.) 0.8 North Transitway -'ll b.o... 8 A e_; NW Transitway Q) > cd e_;... '"",,.. ;::! ::t: 0.2.!14 cd Q) Poe ADT/Lane ] Figure 6. Plot of Predictive Equation for Peak-Hour HOV Lane Travel Time Savings

31 - N.J:a s... LEGEND - e 0.6 xx Year en Gulf Transitway... 1:::1 0.5 > Katy Transitway Cll 'CfJ. < > Ql 0.4 North Transitway... E-o 0.3 Q.) > Cll s.. E-o 0.2 "O 0...,.. NW Transitway Q.) 0.1 C'd Q.) r:i ADT/Lane (thousands) ] Figure 7. Plot of Predictive Equation for Peak-Period HOV Lane Travel Time Savings

32 BOVLane and Freeway System in the Years 2000 and 2010 Status of HOV Lane Development Program in the Years 2000 and 2010 The proposed status of the Houston HOV lane system in the years 2000 and 2010 is enumerated in Table 7 and illustrated in Figures 8 and 9. All of the individual HOV facilities slated as constituents of the eventual 95.5 mile HOV facility system, with the exception of the Eastex HOV facility, are scheduled to be complete by the year The HOV facility system is, thus, currently proposed to have 81.5 miles of HOV lanes operational by the year The :Eastex HOV facility is scheduled to be operational from the Downtown terminus to Tidwell (Figure 8) in the year 2000, but will ultimately extend to Will Clayton Boulevard (just north of Houston ntercontinental Airport). The extension of the :Eastex HOV facility to Will Clayton Boulevard will mark the completion of the entire HOV facility system. Freeway System Characteristics in the Years 2000 and 2010 The ADT estimates for the year 2000, along with corresponding basic number of freeway mainlane data, are displayed in Table 8 (.. The ADT estimates and basic number of lane data for the year 2010 were also obtained directly from H-GRTS and are displayed in Table 9. t should be noted that the basic number of lanes in the year 2010 for the Katy Freeway (fable 9) do not correspond with the current long-range plan for this corridor (according to SDHPT Project Development Plan), which calls for 16 freeway lanes without an HOV facility from to SH6. n light of funding limitations and the implementation of air quality standards for the Houston urban area, this future scenario for the Katy Freeway corridor seemed unrealistic. A more likely scenario for this corridor is that which is shown in Table 9. This scenario calls for the freeway mainlanes to be widened to the maximum amount allowable within the right-of-way (ROW) considered to be readily 25

33 Table 7. Status of Operating HOV lanes, Year 2000 Transitway Date First Miles in Operational Vehicles Allowed Hours of Hours of Phase Opened/ Operation, limfts 1 to Use "eek day "eek end Will Open Year 2000 Transitwav2 Operation 3 Operatfon 3 East ex (US 59N)' Tidwell to Downtown Terminus 2+ vehicles 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. Gulf May Choate to Downtown Terminus 2+ vehicles 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. B 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. OB Saturday (J 45S) 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. OB 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. B Sunday Katy Oct SH 6 to E. Extension/SP R.R. 3+ vehicles from 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. B 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. OB Saturday ( 10M) 6:45 to 8:15 a.m. 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. OB 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. B Sunday and 4:45 to 6:15 p.m. 2+ during other operating hours North Nov 'fl FM 1960 to Downtown Terminus 3+ vehicles from 4 a.m. to 1 p.m. B 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. OB Saturday (1 45N) 6:45 to 8:15 a.m. 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. OB 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. B Sunday and 4:45 to 6: 15 p.m. 2+ during other operating hours Northwest Aug FM 1960 to Old Katy Road 2+ vehicles 4 a.m. to 1 p.m a.m. to 10 p.m. OB Saturday (US 290) 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. OB 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. 18 Sunday Southwest " 8ellfort to Downtown Terminus 2+ vehicles 4 a.m. to 1 p.m a.m. to 10 p.m. OB Saturday (US 59S) 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. OB 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. B Sunday Total 81.5 Note: 18 nbound, OB outbound 1 0perational limits shown are reflective of morning operations; evening operational limits are the same simply in reverse 2 Estimated vehicle occupancy requirements based on projected year 2000 freeway congestion levels and current operational characteristics 3 Future hours of operation assumed to be similar to existing hours of operation eastex transitway will operate as two lanes in two directions 5 ndlcates transitway in completed form

34 Scale Miles Addicks P&R SH 8 Aldine Bender N Belt " N Shepherd PA:R \ \ \ \ \, ' LEGEND D Entrance and Exit /;:, Entrance or Exit Only to f/l = - ndicates HOV Facility Operational in the Year 2000 Reference Roadways Greenway Plaza SH 22:> l-610 \ \ ' ' Hobbyq ' ' ' Fuqua Figure 8. Proposed Operational Sections of Houston HOV Lane System in the Year 2000

35 i t N Belt n W'Ul Clayton ri P&R N 00 Scale Miles -to- SH 8 Addiek -o---- P&R Aldine Bender "- N Shepherd '-{ PlcR \ \ \ \ \ Tidwell Greenway Plaza SH 221'> D l::. LEGEND Entrance and Exit Entrance or Exit Only - ndicates HOV Facility Operational in the Year 2010 Reference Roadways \ \ \ \ Hobby4 ' '' Fuqua ' Choate,,..,. Figure 9. Proposed Operational Sections of Houston HOV Lane System in the Year 2010

36 Table 8. Freeway Mainlane ADT Estimates, Year 2000 Freeway Count Freeway Basic No. ADT/ Corridor Location ADT of Lanes 1 Lane East ex cavalcade 146, ,600 Little York 169, ,950 Corridor Avg. 2 15,800 Gulf Griggs 196, ,550 Broadway 217, ,200 Edgebrook 157, ,700 Corridor Avg. 2 23,800 Katy Silber 252, ,500 Kirkwood 235, ,250 SH 6 212, ,400 Corridor Avg. 2 35,000 North W. Cavalcade 207, ,900 Crosstimbers 243, ,400 Little York 198, ,800 Aldine Bender 197, ,700 Corridor Avg.2 26,450 Northwest Watonga 206, ,750 Antoine 185, , 130 Pinemont 163, ,250 Corridor Avg. 2 25,200 Southwest s. Shepherd 247, ,650 Weslayan 259, ,650 Hill croft 238, ,850 s. Gessner 196, ,600 Corridor Avg. 2 21,400 1 Basic number of freeway mainlanes in the year weighted average based on basic rullber of lanes; represents average ADT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor in the year 2000 available (that ROW which can be acquired at no or minimal costs). n addition, the existing Katy HOV Lane would remain in operation. HOV Lane Travel Time Savinp Estimates for the Years 2000 and 2010 The application of Equations 1 and 2, in conjunction with the freeway ADT/lane estimates for the years 2000 and 2010 developed in Tables 8 and 9, produced approximations of HOV facility travel time savings for the HOV lane system in the years 29

37 2000 and These travel time savings estimates were computed for the peak hour and peak period, in both minutes per mile and total minutes saved, and are displayed in Tables loandll. Table 9. Freeway Mainlane ADT Projections, Year 2010 Freeway Corridor Count Location Freeway ADT 1 East ex cavalcade 182,000 Little York 219,000 Aldine Mail 177,000 Will Clayton 178,000 Corridor Avg 3 Gulf Scott 256,000 Griggs 214,000 Broadway 241,000 Edgebrook. 175,000 Corridor Avg 3 Katy Silber 314,000 Bl.l'lk.er Hit l 286,000 Beltway 8 297,000 Eldridge 265,000 Corridor Avg 3 North w. Cavalcade 242,000 Crosstilrbers 275,000 N. Shepherd 212,000 Aldine Bender 228,000 Kuyk.endahl 182,000 Corridor Avg 3 Northwest DacOlll8 213,000 PineMOnt 196,000 N. Gessner 158,000 Jones 159,000 Southwest Corridor Avg 3 s. Shepherd Wesleyan Hillcroft s. Gessner w. Bellfort Corridor Avg 3 294, , , , ,000 Basic No. of Lanes ADT/Lane 18,200 21,900 17,700 22,300 19,900 32,000 26,800 24, ,900 26,060 31,400 28,600 29,700 26,500 30,600 24,200 27,500 26,500 28,500 22,800 25,900 21,300 24,500 19,800 19,900 21,400 24,500 25,200 19,300 22,900 23,300 22,900 1 Freeway ADT projections for the year 2010 obtained from H-GRTS 2 Basic nunber of freeway mainlanes in the year Weighted average based on the basic nunber of lanes; represents average ADT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor in the year

38 Table 10. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Estimates for the Year 2000 Travel Time savinas Estimates Year 2000 Length of Avg. Frwy Avg. Travel Time Avg. Travel Time HOV Facility, ADT/Lane, Savinas 'min/mi. ) 3 Savings Cmin. > 4 Facility Year 2000 (mi.) 1 Year Peak Hour Peak Period" Peak Hour Peak Period" Eastex , o.o 0.0 CUS 59N) Gulf , (l-45s) Katy , ( 1-10\l) North , C-45N) Northwest , (US 290) southwest , (US 59S) 1 Estimated length of facility in the year 2000, based on currently proposed improvements and completion dates 2Represents average ADT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor in the year Estimated average HOV lane travel time savings during the respective time periods in minutes per mile; estimates are for optimal (non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV facility 4 Estimated average HOV lane travel time saving during the respective time periods in minutes; estimates are for optimal (non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV facility 5 Estimated travel time savings shown for the peak period represent the average savings during the shoulders of the peak period, not inclusive of the peak hour 8 Eastex HOV facility proposed to operate as a two lane facility; travel time savings estimates shown are, consequently, for the peak. direction of flow only; no savings in the off-peak. direction are expected either Table 11. HOV Lane Travel Time Savings Estimates for the Year 2010 Travel Time Savinas Estimates Year 2010 Length of Avg. Frwy Avg. Travel Time Avg. Travel Time HOV Facility, ADT/Lane, Savinas <min/mi. > 3 Savincs <min. l 4 Facility Year 2010 (mi.) 1 Year Peak. Hour Peak. Period" Peak Hour Peak Period" Eastex , (US 59N) Gulf , (1 45S) Katy , (l-10\l) North , (l 45N) Northwest , (US 290) Southwest , (US 59S) 1 Estimated length of facility in the year 2010, based on currently proposed improvements and completion dates 2 Represents average ADT/lane conditions for the freeway corridor in the year estimated average HOV lane travel time savings during the respective time periods in minutes per mile; estimates are for optimal (non-incident) flow conditions on the freeway and HOV facility 4 Estfmated average HOV lane travel time saving during the respective time periods in minutes; estimates are for optimal (non incident> flow conditions on the freeway and HOV facility 5 Estimated travel time savings shown for the peak period represent the average savings during the shoulder of the peak period, not inclusive of the peak hour 8eastex HOV facility proposed to operate as a two lane facility; travel time savings estimates shown are, consequently, for the peak direction of flow only; no savings in the off peak direction are expected either 31

39 As was alluded to previously, the peak hour and peak period estimates are "generic" and, as such, are applicable to either morning or evening HOV lane corridor operations. t is also important to note that the peak period HOV lane travel time estimates represent the average travel time savings to be experienced by HOV facility users during the shoulder hours of the peak period; these peak period estimates are, thus, not inclusive of the peak hour. The estimates were developed in this fashion so that peak hour and peak period HOV lane ridership figures could be multiplied by their corresponding travel time savings estimates to produce accurate estimates of person-hours of savings for HOV facilities in the years 2000 and The HOV facility predicted to provide the greatest amount of travel time savings in the years 2000 and 2010 is the Katy HOV lane. n the year 2000, the North, Northwest, and Gulf HOV lanes are also expected to provide significant peak-hour time savings. By the year 2010, the North and Gulf HOV lanes are expected to provide time savings similar to the Katy HOV lane, while the Southwest HOV facility is also predicted to provide a significant time savings (greater than five minutes). All of the travel time savings estimates shown in Tables 10 and 11 are representative of non-incident type flow conditions on the freeway and HOV facility and, thus, reflect the HOV lane travel time savings predicted to occur as a result of the heavy flow conditions (recurrent congestion) on the freeway mainlanes. n addition to the travel time savings estimates shown in Tables 10 and 11, HOV lane ridership projections have also been developed as a result of this study. The data and procedure used to develop these ridership projections are included in Appendix B. t is anticipated that these projections, in addition to the time savings estimates presented previously, might be of use to METRO personnel. 32

40 RECOMMENDATONS AND CONCLUSONS The data base utilized to produce HOV lane travel time savings estimates for the years 2000 and 2010 was relatively small. t can be concluded, however, that the equations developed as a result of this research exhibit high levels of statistical significance and produce reasonable estimates of HOV facility travel time savings when applied within the limits of the analyzed data. The estimates of HOV lane travel time savings computed for the years 2000 and 2010 are, therefore, considered to be acceptable. t must be recognized, however, that the predictive equations developed in this study are based on macroscopic data and should, therefore, be applied in a similar context. The use of ADT/lane data offers a convenient and relatively accurate means for predicting HOV facility travel time savings. The available data at present, however, are limited and do not cover a wide range of ADT/lane conditions, especially at the upper and lower ranges of ADT/lane conditions (> 30,000and < 20,000ADT/lane). t is, therefore, recommended that Equations 1 and 2 be used with caution for ADT/lane conditions falling outside the limits of the analyzed data. Traffic flows in the Houston area are experiencing significant growth. t is anticipated that the vehicular volumes on Houston freeways will increase substantially within the near future, and some of the planned freeway improvements will not be completed in HOV lane corridors for at least two to three years. This should provide an excellent opportunity to gather HOV lane travel time savings data under higher ADT/lane conditions. t is, thus, recommended that the type of data analyzed in this study should be continuously monitored, so that the methodology and equations developed in this research might be further refined and updated. 33

41 REFERENCES 1. Christiansen, D.L., and Morris, D.E. The Status and Effectiveness of the Houston Transitway System, Texas Transportation nstitute, nterim Report, March United State General Accounting Office. Traffic Congestion: Trends, Measures, and Effects. November, Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Planning and Research Division, Roadway nventory (R2-T Log) Tables. 4. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, SAS nstitute nc. SAS/STAT User's Guide, Release 6.03 Edition, Houston-Galveston Regional Transportation Study, ADT and Basic Number of Freeway Lane Projections,

42 APPENDX A HSTORCAL TRAVEL TME AND RDERSHP DATA

43 Appendix A cont.a.ins the detailed historical travel time data for each of the existing corridors which constitute the Houston HOV facility system. Also included in Appendix A are ridership and person-minutes of savings data for the existing HOV facilities. All of the aforementioned data have been summarized in tabular form for convenient review. Since the extension of the Katy HOV Lane to SH 6 in June of 1987, the freeway and HOV lane travel time and ridership data for the Katy HOV Lane have been collected and categorized into two separate sections (SH 6 to the Gessner interchange, and the Gessner interchange to Washington Ave.). For the purposes of this study, the HOV facility travel time savings and ridership characteristics of the entire Katy HOV Lane were needed (i.e. one total travel time savings value and one ridership value for the entire facility). f the Katy HOV Lane is examined as two separate sections, the HOV lane travel time savings, as well as the person-minutes of savings, can be added together to produce a true representation of travel time and person-minutes of savings for the entire facility. The ridership characteristics of each section, however, cannot be added together, as a major overlap of ridership occurs from one section to another. For instance, the eastbound (inbound) ridership for the section of SH 6 to the Gessner interchange may be characterized by a ridership level of 800 persons, while the section from the Gessner interchange to Washington A venue may be utilized by 1,500 persons. Since no vehicles can exit between the endpoints of these two sections, 800 of the 1,500 persons counted in the section from the Gessner interchange to Washington Avenue were also using the HOV lane from SH 6 to the Gessner interchange. The ridership level for the entire facility would, therefore, be inaccurately represented if the two ridership values were simply added together. An average ridership value was desired that would reflect the actual amount of personminutes saved on the Katy HOV Lane. The person-minutes of savings data were, therefore, divided by their corresponding travel time savings data (in minutes) to produce a total person volume for each 30-minute time period during which data were collected. These total person volumes represent a weighted average for the two sections of the HOV facility A-1

44 based on travel time savings. The total person volumes were, subsequently, multiplied by modal (carpool, vanpool, and bus) percentages, reflective of the raw ridership data, to produce person volumes by mode. The data for the Katy HOV Lane which follows hereafter is reflective of this procedure, which can best be illustrated by the following example: Given: Find: Sol'n: Travel time savings of minutes at 7:00 a.m. for the Katy HOV Lane in 1987; a corresponding person-minute savings of 15,047; a modal split percentage of 49.75% carpools, 4.62% vanpools, and 45.63% buses. Total ridership and ridership by mode person-min min. = 1,214 persons (total ridership) 1,214 x = 604 persons in carpools 1,214 x = 56 persons in vanpools 1,214 x =persons in buses Total 1,214 persons Since the extension of the Northwest HOV Lane in February of 1990, the quarterly travel time data corresponding to the facility are also collected in two separate sections. The methodology illustrated above was, therefore, applied to the March 1990 data for the Northwest HOV Lane as well. A-2

45 Eastbound Travel Time Savings for Katy HOV lane (Average of 1987 Data) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Vol1.111es Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Carpools ,825 3,275 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person min) ,366 6,077 1,214 15, , , , ,890 5,322 46,434 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time Westbound Travel Time Savings for Katy HOV lane (Average of 1987 Data) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day <minutes) (minutes) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m Peak Period Totals HOV lane Person Volunes Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Carpools , , ,369 5,419 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person min) ,049 1,867 1,473 5,906 1,873 10,976 1,809 16,321 1,093 7, ,450 8, ,826 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

46 Northbound Travel Time Savings for Gulf HOV Lane (Average of 1988 Data) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes> (minutes> 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Volunes Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Carpools 1.n , Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min} , ,704 3,495 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time Southbound Travel Time Savings for Gulf HOV Lane <Average of 1988 Data) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m n 4:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Vol1.111es Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Carpools 1.n , Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) , , , , ,738 15,450 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

47 Eastbound Travel Time Savings for Katy HOV Lane (Average of 1988 Data) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Time Saved Day (minutes) (minutes) (minutes) 1 VaMDOOls 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m Peak Period Totals 194 Note: Data not available for evening operations of the Katy HOV Lane in 1988 HOV Lane Person Voll.lles Buses Caroools ,908 2,737 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person min) ,261 7,150 1, , , , , ,839 40,597 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

48 Southbound Travel Time Savings for North HOV Lane (Average of 1988 Data) Average Travel Time HOV Lane Person Voll.llleS Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m N/A , , , N/A 120 N/A N/A N/A 832 1,567 1, 760 1, N/A N/A 998 1,436 5,691 15,826 5, 751 N/A N/A Peak Period Totals 1,304 5,411 6,595 29,702 Note: Data for northbound (evening) operations on North HOV Lane were not available for 1988 N/A Data not available; peak hour and peak period travel time savings figured from available data shown 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

49 Northbound Travel Time Savings for Gulf HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes> (minutes) 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.rn :00 a.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Voll.lles Time saved (minutes) 1 Vanoools Buses Caroools , 705 1, 785 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) , ,659 1,961 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time Southbound Travel Time savings for Gulf HOV lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m Peak Period Totals HOV lane Person VollJ'lles Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses CarPOols , 750 1,403 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) , ,223 1,054 3, , ,347 12,963 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

50 Eastbound Travel Time Savings for Katy HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day <minutes) (minutes) 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m n Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person VoltMnes Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Caroools t791 3, 108 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) ,243 3,740 1t176 16, , ,583 3n 1t ,670 5, ,333 1 Freeway malnlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time > 00 Westbound Travel Time Savings for Katy HOV lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) <minutes) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person VoltMnes Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Caroools , , ,427 5,258 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) ,040 2,684 1,413 6,656 1,865 12,999 1,805 20,434 1,005 8, r718 8,041 53,751 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

51 Southbound Travel Time Savings for Norht HOV Lane <Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time HOV Lane Person Volumes Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) <minutes) Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanoools Buses Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m ,093 4.n 303 1, , s ,469 2,982 1,629 7,689 1,529 13, ,0SS 178 SS Peak Period Totals 982 5, 171 6, ,984 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time Northbound Travel Time savings for North HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time HOV Lane Person Volumes Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) <minutes) Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanoools Buses Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m n 5:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 D.m S , , ,1n ,294 1,113 1, 737 5,993 1,271 S, , Peak Period Totals 905 5,227 6,132 13,506 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV Lane travel time

52 Southbound Travel Time Savings for Northwest HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Tfme Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Volumes Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanoools Buses Carcools ,071 2,638 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) , 141 3,606 1, 118 2, ,792 5,998 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time -0 Northbound Travel Time Savings for Northwest HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1989) Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Volumes Time Saved <minutes) 1 Vanoools Buses Carpools ,054 1,698 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) , , ,858 1,566 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

53 Southbound Travel Time savings for Northwest HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time surveys, 1990> Average Travel Time Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) 6:00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m :30 a.m :00 a.m Peak Period Totals HOV Lane Person Voll.lles Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Caroools , , ,057 Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) ,306 1, ,204 1,747 23, , , ,832 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time - Average Travel Time Northbound Travel Time Savings for Northwest HOV Lane (Average of Quarterly Travel Time Surveys, 1990) HOV Lane Person Voll.lles Time of Freeway HOV Lane Day (minutes) (minutes) Time Saved (minutes) 1 Vanpools Buses Caroools Total Persons Travel Time Saved (person-min) 3:30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m :00 p.m :30 p.m , , ,021 1, Peak Period Totals 76 1, 104 2,414 3,594-1,259 1 Freeway mainlne travel time minus HOV lane travel time

54 APPENDX B RDERSHP PROJECTONS