Eleven things you should know about the carpool lanes in Los Angeles County.

Similar documents
Congestion Pricing The Latest Weapon the U.S. War on Traffic Congestion. Darren Henderson, AICP

HOV LANE PERFORMANCE MONITORING: 2000 REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Word Count: 3,565 Number of Tables: 4 Number of Figures: 6 Number of Photographs: 0. Word Limit: 7,500 Tables/Figures Word Count = 2,250

LOS ANGELES COUNTY CONGESTION REDUCTION DEMONSTRATION INITIATIVE

2006 WEEKDAY TRAFFIC PROFILE. June 15, 2007

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

A Tour Across America s Managed Lanes Mike Heiligenstein, Executive Director Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority

Assessment of Travel Trends

CALIFORNIA HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE DEGRADATION ACTION PLAN

Research Report Agreement T4118, Task 24 HOV Action Plan HOV ACTION PLAN

Appendix 4.1 J. May 17, 2010 Memorandum from CTPS to the Inter Agency Coordinating Group

Selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative for the Interstate 405 Improvement Project Between State Route 55 and Interstate 605.

APPENDIX B COMMUTER BUS FAREBOX POLICY PEER REVIEW

Arlington County Board Meeting Project Briefing. October 20, 2015

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL WASHINGTON, D.C. HOV SYSTEM NOTES

Interstate 90 and Mercer Island Mobility Study APRIL Commissioned by. Prepared by

DISTRICT EXPRESS LANES ANNUAL REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2017 JULY 1, 2016 JUNE 30, FloridaExpressLanes.com

A VISION FOR I-95. January 12, Delaware Department of Transportation

FIRST WEEK UPDATE: 66 EXPRESS LANES INSIDE THE BELTWAY Data from first four days shows faster, more reliable trips on I-66

AN ANALYSIS OF CASUAL CARPOOL PASSENGER BEHAVIOR IN HOUSTON, TEXAS. A Thesis JUSTIN R. WINN

High Occupancy Vehicle

FIRST WEEK UPDATE: 66 EXPRESS LANES INSIDE THE BELTWAY Data from first four days shows faster, more reliable trips on I-66

San Mateo County Transportation Authority Board Meeting November 2, 2017 Item #10 1

Memorandum. Fund Allocation Fund Programming Policy/Legislation Plan/Study Capital Project Oversight/Delivery Budget/Finance Contract/Agreement Other:

Project Deliverable 4.1.3d Individual City Report - City of La Verne

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

LA Metro Rapid - Considerations in Identifying BRT Corridors. Martha Butler LACMTA, Transportation Planning Manager Los Angeles, California

Transform66 Transportation Management Plan: Transit & TDM Strategies

Mount Pleasant (42, 43) and Connecticut Avenue (L1, L2) Lines Service Evaluation Study Open House Welcome! wmata.com/bus

TransAction Overview. Introduction. Vision. NVTA Jurisdictions

I-95/395 HOV/Bus/HOT Lanes Project Overview

McLean Citizens Association Transportation Committee Project Briefing

THE JANUARY 17, 1994 NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE IMPACTS ON THE INTERSTATE-5 AND THE STATE ROUTE-14 COMMUTE BEHAVIOR IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY

Metro ExpressLanes April 5, 2011 Community Meeting re: Adams Blvd Improvements

What We ve Learned About Highway Congestion

Business Growth (as of mid 2002)

Peer Performance Measurement February 2019 Prepared by the Division of Planning & Market Development

Director King County Department of Transportation. King County Department of Transportation

Fast Lanes Study Phase III Telephone Survey Results

6 HIGH-OCCUPANCY-VEHICLE (HOV) LANES AND TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) PROGRAMS

IMPACT OF NORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC

Att. A, AI 46, 11/9/17

Memorandum. Roger Millar, Secretary of Transportation. Date: April 5, Interstate 90 Operations and Mercer Island Mobility

Submission to Infrastructure Victoria s Draft 30-Year Infrastructure Strategy

KING STREET TRANSIT PILOT

Los Angeles County One Gateway Plaza 213 Metropolitan Transportation Authority Los Angeles, CA me

Public Information Meetings. October 5, 6, 7, and 15, 2015

Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas

FNORTHWEST ARKANSAS WESTERN BELTWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY

JATA Market Research Study Passenger Survey Results

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments 2002 COMMUTE PROFILE

An Orientation to Today s Webinar

Treasure Island Supplemental Information Report Addendum

Revolutionary Mobility

5 Rail demand in Western Sydney

Score. Category. Access Aesthetics Community Resources

METHODS TO IMPROVE HOUSTON CARPOOL INFORMATION

Tolling in Washington State. Craig J. Stone, P.E. Assistant Secretary, Toll Division

95 Express Monthly Operations Report May 2017

ROUTE EBA EAST BUSWAY ALL STOPS ROUTE EBS EAST BUSWAY SHORT

Role of High-Occupancy-Vehicle Lanes Highway Construction Management

Mr. Leslie Rogers Administrator, FTA Region IX 201 Mission Street, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA by

Transit / Accessibility

95 Express Monthly Operations Report July 2017

Managing Mobility: Engineering an Express Lane Network

APPENDIX B. Arlington Transit Peer Review Technical Memorandum

HDR itrans Consulting Inc. 100 York Blvd., Suite 300 Richmond Hill, ON L4B 1J8 Tel: (905) Fax: (905)

Impact of Carpool Tolls on Bay Bridge Casual Carpooling A Case Study

RACINE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSIT PLAN:

NORTH FRASER PERIMETER ROAD WEST CORRIDOR DEFINITION STUDY

SANTA CLARA COUNTY I-280 CORRIDOR STUDY

SAMTRANS TITLE VI STANDARDS AND POLICIES

AN EXAMINATION OF OPERATIONAL ALTERNATIVES FOR EXISTING AND PROPOSED HOV FACILITIES

IDGH-OCCUPANCY VEIDCLE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES

SRTA Year End Fixed Route Ridership Analysis: FY 2018

Date: 11/6/15. Total Passengers

2018 Service Implementation Plan Executive Summary

Slugging in Houston Casual Carpool Passenger Characteristics

POTENTIAL SHIFT FROM TRANSIT TO SINGLE OCCUPANCY VEHICLE DUE TO ADAPTATION OF A HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE TO A HIGH OCCUPANCY TOLL LANE.

2015 Independence Day Travel Overview U.S. Intercity Bus Industry

Central Coast Origin-Destination Survey

A B C s. The Texas Experience. The. Wm. R. Stockton, P.E. Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute

Update on the I-680 Transit Corridor Improvement Project HOV on/off Ramps Environmental Impact Report Community Engagement Plan

VCTC Transit Ridership and Performance Measures Quarterly Report

APPENDIX J MODIFICATIONS PERFORMED TO THE TOR

PREFACE. Service frequency; Hours of service; Service coverage; Passenger loading; Reliability, and Transit vs. auto travel time.

MEMORANDUM. for HOV Monitoring on I-93 North and the Southeast Expressway, Boston Region MPO, November, 2011.

MEMORANDUM. Open Section Background. I-66 Open Section Study Area. VDOT Northern Virginia District. I-66 Project Team. Date: November 5, 2015

Like many transit service providers, the Port Authority of Allegheny County (Port Authority) uses a set of service level guidelines to determine

Improving Houston METRO HOV/HOT Lane Safety Fall TexITE: Fort Worth August 31 st, 2012 Dustin Qualls, PE, PTOE Nader Mirjamali, PE

About This Report GAUGE INDICATOR. Red. Orange. Green. Gold

95 Express Managed Lanes Consolidated Analysis Technical Report

Commuter Park and Ride Steering Committee Meeting Notes August 7, :00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Attendees Name Organization Phone

HOT Lanes on Interstate 15 in San Diego: Technology, Impacts and Equity Issues

I-405 Express Toll Lanes Coming in 2015

2017 TBARTA Future Regional Priority Projects Adopted by TBARTA Board, December 9, 2016

San Mateo 101 Corridor Strategies:

A COMPARISON OF THE MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN AREA TO ITS PEERS

Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas

Technical Report Documentation Page. 1. Report No. FHWA/TX-09/ Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

Transcription:

Eleven things you should know about the carpool lanes in Los Angeles County. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA 912 COMPANY NAME Street Address City, State Executive Summary The MTA is online at www.mta.net July 22

Page 9 of 1 Page 2 of 1 GRAMS PER PASSENGER-MILE 5. 4. 3. 2. 1.. 1) Carpool lanes can help air quality. Carpool lanes generate about half the emissions per person-mile than the other adjacent lanes on a freeway. Furthermore, survey findings for Los Angeles County reflect a widely held belief among residents and commuters that carpool lanes do help the region s air quality. VEHICLE EMISSIONS (AVERAGE OF AM & PM PEAK HOUR - ALL STUDY ROUTES) CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) REACTIVE ORGANIC GASES (ROG) NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx) PARTICULATE MATTER (PM1) Air quality is important to residents of Southern California, and carpool lanes are only one of a number of measures enacted to help slow the growth of vehicle emissions. Carpool lanes encourage ridesharing and transit use, thereby cutting down on the number of vehicles that would otherwise use the region s roadway system. Carpool Lanes Other Lanes The HOV Performance Program examined the current air quality impacts of carpool lanes in Los Angeles County. Further testing and monitoring will be needed over a number of years to ascertain the true long-term benefits of carpool lanes with regard to air quality. 11) Just because traffic is backed up in other lanes doesn t mean the carpool lanes aren t working. Carpool lanes are part of an overall strategy to address corridor and regional congestion problems on Los Angeles County freeways. With increases in population, employment and automobile ownership generating more traffic, carpool lanes provide options for those who are able to take the bus, carpool or vanpool. Carpool lanes provide a travel alternative that many people find attractive. In recent surveys, 64% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that carpool lanes reduce congestion in all freeway lanes, while 82% of the people using carpool lanes said that the main reason they did so was to save time. Eleven things you should know about the carpool lanes in Los Angeles County. The following is a summary of key findings from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) HOV Performance Program. The study findings represent the culmination of an extensive effort to collect and analyze traffic and user data to evaluate the effectiveness of the carpool lane system in Los Angeles County. The was conducted in cooperation and coordination with other state, regional, and local agencies and organizations. The measured the impact of carpool lane use against a set of program goals and objectives. Regional HOV goals were consolidated into five guiding objectives that were defined in a preliminary Evaluation Plan. The objectives included: 1. Manage travel demand by increasing person movement capacity in congested freeway corridors. 2. Encourage carpooling, vanpooling, and bus use by providing travel and mobility options. 3. Provide travel time savings and trip reliability to travelers using the HOV facilities. 4. Provide air quality benefits. 5. Promote a cost-effective transportation system. Various travel data including vehicle volumes, travel time, vehicle occupancy, transit utilization, and accident statistics were compiled and analyzed to evaluate the operational characteristics of HOV facilities in Los Angeles County. This performance data evaluation was supplemented by extensive market research to determine the level of support for the HOV system, to understand traveler needs and desires, and to expand ways to communicate the benefits of HOV facilities. Detailed findings from the HOV Performance Program are presented in a series of Technical Memoranda and a final Evaluation Report. Electronic copies of these documents are available from the MTA website at www.mta.net. The program findings help address some of the common questions and misconceptions regarding carpool lanes and the overall performance of the carpool lane system in Los Angeles County. Eleven things you should know about the Los Angeles County carpool lane system performance are presented in this executive summary. This important information is of benefit in planning future carpool lane investments and contemplating changes in operational policies. WHAT IS THE MAIN REASON YOU USE THE CARPOOL LANES? 1,222 RESPONDENTS 5% 82% 4% 3% 2% 1% 6% 2% 9% % SAVE TIME ITS SAFER DON'T KNOW OTHER

Page 7 of 1 Page 4 of 1 DAILY BUS RIDERSHIP 25, 2, 15, 1, 5, 1 El Monte Busway (Alameda to Baldwin) 14 (San Fernando to Escondido Cyn) 57 (Orange County to 6) 6 (Brea Canyon to SBD County) 91 (11 to Orange County) 15 (45 to 65) 8) Carpool lanes are important to bus transit. CARPOOL LANE BUS RIDERSHIP DAILY - SUM OF BOTH DIRECTIONS Not Available 11 Harbor Transitway (91 to 15) 11 Harbor Transitway (15 to Adams) Not Available Not Available 11 (45 to 27) 118 (Ventura County to 5) 134 (11/17 to 21) 17 (11/134 to 5) 21 (134 to Sunflower) 45 (Orange County to 11) 45 (11 to Century) 45 (11 to 5) 65 (South to 1) CONTROL ROUTES 5 (65 to 71) HOW IMPORTANT IS THE AVAILABILITY OF CARPOOL LANES IN YOUR DECISION TO RIDE THIS BUS? SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 11% NOT IMPORTANT 6% VERY IMPORTANT 83% 1,52 Respondents A few carpool lanes in Los Angeles County, particularly the El Monte Busway on the I-1 (San Bernardino) Freeway and the Harbor Transitway on the I-11 (Harbor) Freeway (pictured right), carry a significant number of transit passengers. The El Monte Busway carpool lanes carry over 24,5 transit passengers daily, and the Harbor Transitway carpool lanes carry almost 5, transit passengers daily. Almost all the carpool lane transit riders surveyed say that the carpool lanes are important in their decision to use transit services. Over onethird of these surveyed transit riders (34%) say they would most likely discontinue riding the bus if the buses were no longer able to travel in the carpool lanes. While the two carpool lane corridors that have the highest current transit ridership link directly to downtown Los Angeles, there are other carpool corridors in Los Angeles County that connect major residential and employment centers that could probably benefit from increased bus service. Comparisons to other cities with similar characteristics (like Houston and Seattle) show the potential exists to move more transit passengers in carpool lanes. 3) Carpool lanes don t have to look full to be effective. A commonly voiced concern is that the carpool lanes sometimes look empty and therefore they must not be working. In Los Angeles County, approximately half of the residents feel that carpool lanes are sufficiently utilized, while slightly fewer than half feel they are underutilized. Despite inherent capacity constraints and fewer vehicles, a carpool lane on Los Angeles County s busiest freeways carries from 1 to 3 times more people than an adjacent freeway lane. To look at this from a different perspective, one bus can carry as many as 5 commuters, and about half the number of carpools can carry as many people as a full general-purpose freeway lane. This means that carpool lanes (and particularly those with transit services) can carry more people in fewer vehicles. Caltrans HOV Guidelines for Planning, Design and Operations (July 1991) established a peak minimum lane threshold of 8 vehicles per hour for carpool lanes more than one year old. In Los Angeles County, all but one of the existing freeway carpool routes exceed this threshold. In most cases, carpool lanes in Los Angeles County exceed this threshold by more than 5% (or 1,2 vehicles per hour). Perhaps the most serious challenge Los Angeles County carpool lanes face is that they are now so popular that they are getting too crowded. Right now, several carpool lanes in Los Angeles County are close to reaching a maximum desirable operating capacity. These findings suggest that carpool lanes are indeed very effective, and that future effort is required to ensure they continue to be effective. VEHICLES-PER-HOUR-PER-LANE (VPHPL) PERSON-TRIPS-PER-LANE (PTPL) 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 1,6 1,4 1,2 1, 8 6 4 2 1 WB (Alameda to Baldwin) 1 EB (Alameda to Baldwin) 57 NB (Orange County to 6) 14 NB (San Fernando to Escondido Cyn) 14 SB (San Fernando to Escondido Cyn) 91 EB (11 to Orange County) 6 EB (Brea Canyon to SBD County) 57 SB (Orange County to 6) 6 WB (Brea Canyon to SBD County) PERSON-TRIPS (PM PEAK HOUR - PM PEAK DIRECTION) CARPOOL LANE PEAK VOLUME (PEAK HOUR - PEAK DIRECTION) 91 WB (11 to Orange County) 11 SB (91 to 15) 15 EB (45 to 65) 11 SB (15 to Adams) 118 EB (Ventura County to 5) 15 WB (45 to 65) 11 NB (91 to 15) 17 NB (11/134 to 5) 134 EB (11/17 to 21) 11 NB (15 to Adams) 21 EB (134 to Sunflower) 45 SB (Orange County to 11) Minimum Threshold (8VPHPL) 118 EB (Ventura County to 5) 45 SB (11 to Century) Carpool lanes are mass transit lanes, and their usefulness and effectiveness are compromised when they operate even a little over capacity. Once the operating capacity of a carpool lane is exceeded, congestion begins to occur more frequently, increasing travel times and reducing time savings. Increasing carpool lane transit services is one option that can be used to increase the person moving capacity of carpool lanes to make them more effective. 134 WB (11/17 to 21) 17 SB (11/134 to 5) 45 NB (11 to 5) 65 NB (South to 1) 21 NB (134 to Sunflower) 45 NB (Orange County to 11) CONTROL ROUTES 45 NB (11 to Century) 5 SB (65 to 71) 11 NB (45 to 27) Carpool Lanes Other Lanes 45 SB (11 to 5) 65 SB (South to 1)

Page 5 of 1 Page 6 of 1 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% % HOURLY LANE VOLUME 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 52% DROVE ALONE IN OTHER LANES OF : 1: 2: 4) Carpool lanes are used all day, everyday. CARPOOL LANE VOLUMES (AVERAGE OF ALL STUDY ROUTES - BOTH DIRECTIONS) 19% 16% 3: 4: 5: 6: 7: 8: 9: 1: 11: 12: 13: 14: TIME OF DAY 15: 16: 17: 18: 19: 2: 21: 22: 23: 24: While use of carpool lanes is highest during the mornings and evenings, many people use carpool lanes throughout the day. In fact, almost 4% of Los Angeles County s daily carpool users are not traveling the lanes during the morning and evening peak commute periods. On many routes, off-peak use in the middle of the day represents 3 to 5 % of peak hour demand. The same is also true for weekend use. These trends indicate that a very large number of carpool lane travelers rely on the lanes throughout the day, and without the availability of these lanes, they would not have a reliable option to avoid periodic congestion. These volume levels support the current 24-hour operation of carpool lanes in the County. 5) Carpool lanes encourage people to switch from driving alone. The purpose of carpools lanes is to provide an alternative to congestion so that freeway users have a travel option that can help them save time. By providing the incentive of time savings, carpool lanes encourage people to form carpools or ride transit, thus helping to reduce the overall number of vehicles on the road. Surveys of Los Angeles County carpool lane users found that over 5% of current carpoolers previously drove alone in the other lanes on the same freeway. In addition, another 9% of carpool lane users said they previously drove alone on a PRIOR TO USING CARPOOL LANES, HOW DID YOU MAKE THIS TRIP? TRAVELED IN A DIFFERENT AREA CARPOOL OR VANPOOL IN OTHER LANES ON 9% DROVE ALONE ON PARALLEL STREET OR CARPOOL OR VANPOOL IN DIFFERENT CARPOOL LANE 6% 5% CARPOOL OR VANPOOL ON DIFFERENT WITHOUT CARPOOL LANE 1,356 RESPONDENTS OTHER 1% TOTAL MAY EXCEED 1% DUE TO MULTIPLE RESPONSES parallel street or other freeway prior to using the carpool lanes. These findings indicate that Los Angeles County commuters are willing to change their driving behavior to share their trip when carpool lanes are provided. And these findings are not surprising. A University of California Irvine survey completed more than 15 years ago found a similar percentage of drive alone commuters started to carpool when Orange County s first carpool lanes opened. Implementing carpool lanes has been an effective way of getting people to start carpooling. The positive impact of carpool lanes on carpool formation has been evidenced in every corridor in Los Angeles County where carpool lanes have been provided. A comparison with other routes in Los Angeles County that do not have carpool lanes, like Interstate 5 and U.S. Route 11, shows that carpool routes have an overall higher average number of persons in each vehicle. In fact, average vehicle occupancies have been declining for a number of years on the non-carpool routes (which is consistent with national trends), but occupancies have increased on those routes with carpool lanes. Providing carpool lanes has made it possible to move more people around Los Angeles County in fewer vehicles. 6) Carpool lanes are a good public investment. Considering only the benefit of time savings, almost half of the County s carpool lanes have already proven their economic benefit. When comparing benefits to costs, a ratio of at least 1 to 1 is considered a worthwhile investment. For Los Angeles County carpool lanes, the benefit to cost ratio is about 1 to 1 over the estimated 2-year life of the facilities, while the average amount of time for benefits to payback costs is about nine years. In nearly every instance, the user and non-user benefits of Los Angeles County carpool lanes exceed the taxpayer costs. Considering the cost effectiveness of carpool lanes, it is not surprising that 82% of Los Angeles County residents 7) Many carpool lanes are full and have no capacity to sell. In some areas, excess capacity in the carpool lanes is sold to single occupant vehicle drivers who are willing to pay a toll. These facilities are often referred to as High- Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. The I-15 carpool lanes in San Diego County are an example of HOT lanes. At different times HOT lanes have also been considered as an option for some freeways in Los Angeles County. In Los Angeles County, many (1 of 16) of the carpool lanes are carrying between 1,2 and 1,6 vehicles-per-hour during the peak commute periods, which are the same periods when people are most likely to be willing to pay a price to avoid congestion. National guidelines suggest that time savings benefits are lost above a maximum threshold of 1,2 to 1,5 vehicles per lane. When these levels are exceeded, speeds in the carpool lanes can slow down as congestion builds. Without any capacity to sell in these already busy carpool lanes, there is little opportunity to add more potential users that pay a toll or fee without endangering travel benefits. On the routes where capacity does exist in the carpool lanes, there is also capacity available in the other lanes, so all lanes move at about the same speed. Under these conditions, the carpool lanes are not support the use of a portion of their County sales tax revenues for more transit-related highway improvements like carpool lanes. SHOULD THE POLICY THAT APPROVED THE USE OF A PORTION OF SALES TAX REVENUES FOR TRANSIT-RELATED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS BE CONTINUED? YES 82% likely to offer any time savings benefit and, therefore, it is unlikely that single occupant vehicles would be willing to pay a toll or fee to use the carpool lanes. In two separate surveys, a majority of the Los Angeles County respondents believe that carpool lanes should be reserved for carpool and transit use only. Almost two-thirds (64%) of Los Angeles County residents disagreed with the idea of opening up carpool lanes to single occupant vehicles that pay a toll. Similarly, over one-half (52%) of residents did not agree with the current policy that allows ultra low emission vehicles to use the carpool lanes when they carry the driver only. NO 13% DON'T KNOW OR REFUSED 5% 3,273 RESPONDENTS SINGLE OCCUPANT VEHICLES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE THE CARPOOL LANES IF THEY PAY A TOLL DISAGREE 5% STRONGLY DISAGREE 14% STRONGLY AGREE 6% AGREE 23% NEUTRAL 8% 3,273 Respondents

Page 3 of 1 Page 8 of 1 TIME SAVINGS IN MINUTES 35 3 25 2 15 1 5 1 (Alameda to Baldwin) 57 (Orange County to 6) 14 (San Fernando to Escondido Cyn) 91 (11 to Orange County) 6 (Brea Canyon to SBD County) 1) Nearly everyone supports carpool lanes. OVERALL, WOULD YOU SAY YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE HAVING CARPOOL LANES ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY S? NEUTRAL/ DON T KNOW 4% OPPOSED 8% 2) All carpool lanes save time, and the time The findings show that all carpool routes in Los Angeles County provide time savings, although the travel time savings for each carpool route AVERAGE TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS 15 (45 to 65) savings can add up. 11 (91 to 15) 11 (15 to Adams) 134 (11/17 to 21) 118 (Ventura County to 5) 17 (11/134 to 5) 21 (134 to Sunflower) SUPPORT 88% 65 (South to 1) 45 (Orange County to 11) 45 (11 to Century) 45 (11 to 5) 3,273 Respondents varies. Combining the time savings for multiple carpool routes, carpool lane interchange ramps and carpool bypass ramps at freeway entrance ramp meters really adds up. PM Peak AM Peak In Los Angeles County, there is very high public support for carpool lanes. An overwhelming majority (88%) of Los Angeles County residents support having carpool lanes on Los Angeles County freeways, including 7% of freeway motorists who do not choose to use the carpool lanes. This overwhelming support of carpool lanes is evidenced in every geographic part of the county, by users on every freeway route, and by all ethnic and income groups. Carpool lanes that provide the greatest time savings are typically located along very congested freeway corridors. In cases where carpool lane time savings are less, it appears to be due to the following reasons: Too much demand causing congestion in the carpool lanes. Merging difficulties causing congestion at the end of the carpool lanes. A lack of congestion in the other lanes resulting in no incentive to use the carpool lanes. The SR-14 (Antelope Valley) Freeway, for example, connects the primarily residential communities of the Antelope Valley and the major employment centers of the San Fernando Valley and greater Los Angeles. Not surprisingly, there are already over 1,1 daily transit riders using the carpool lanes in this corridor (in addition to those transit riders that use the parallel Metrolink commuter rail service). As the communities in the Antelope Valley grow, and traffic conditions on the SR-14 Freeway deteriorate, transit in this corridor will become an increasingly attractive commute choice. 9) There are not a lot of cheaters in the carpool lanes. Carpool lane requirements appear to be respected by most Los Angeles County freeway users. Violation rates for vehicles with fewer than the minimum required number of persons represent an average of no more than 3% of all carpool lane users. Thanks to efforts of the California Highway Patrol, a hefty $271 minimum fine for a first time offense, and a vast majority of motorists who respect the reason for having carpool lanes, this violation rate is one of the lowest in the nation. HOV Routes % Violators NB or EB SB or WB SR-14 % % SR-57 1% % SR-6 % % SR-91 1% % I-15 1% 1% I-11 1% 1% SR-118 % 1% SR-134 3% 1% SR-17 1% % I-21 2% 1% I-45 % 2% I-65 2% 1%

Eleven things you should know about the carpool lanes in Los Angeles County. When these same carpool lane users were asked how much time they thought they saved by using the carpool lanes, they reported that they saved, on average, more than 19 minutes in the morning and 24 minutes in the afternoon. That adds up to nearly 45 minutes per day each person believed they saved. Because saving time is the main reason people use carpool lanes, it is important that carpool lanes continue to provide time savings. On some routes where carpool lanes are becoming congested, it will be necessary to explore ways to continue to protect this benefit. Expanding transit services and increasing minimum occupancy requirements are two possible approaches to enhance the people moving capacity of the carpool lanes without Page 1 of 1 increasing the number of vehicles. These approaches ultimately allow more people to share in the time savings benefit carpool lanes provide, without increasing congestion in the carpool lanes. Other measures to make carpool lanes work better include encouraging commuting outside the peak h ours, the provision of new carpool lanes in other corridors, and building additional carpool lanes in existing corridors. Adding carpool lane interchanges and eliminating the gaps in the carpool lane system reduce the need for vehicles to move in and out of the carpool lanes unnecessarily. By keeping vehicles in the carpool lanes, traffic in the other lanes benefit by reducing the amount of weaving and merging at congested freeway interchanges. Do you want to know more about the carpool lanes in Los Angeles County? Findings from the HOV Performance Program have helped provide a better understanding of what carpool lanes can do, and have done, for Los Angeles County. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Caltrans are committed to continue to monitor the performance of Los Angeles County s carpool lane investments. http://www.mta.net Executive Summary Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Prepared by: Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. In association with Kaku Associates, Inc. Texas Transportation Institute Strategic Consulting & Research HS Public Affairs July 22 For more information about the HOV Performance Program findings contact the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, California, 912, or visit the MTA website at www.mta.net. Mo rni ni ng Co omm ut e A fte er no on Co m m ut e