HOT Lanes-General Thoughts

[theroadwayone]

Given the small but fast-growing network of HOT (high occupancy/toll) lanes across the country, what are your thoughts on the idea? I think they're effective, although that might be due to being near the express lanes on the I-15 in San Diego.

What are your thoughts on the idea?

[jakeroot]

I like them. I do feel that they are the future of freeways, particularly in dense-ish metro areas (like Seattle) where there's not much room for continued freeway expansion.

Around the Seattle area, the HOV lanes are so popular (with buses, taxis, vanpools, etc) that they move damn near as slow as the GP lanes. A HOT/Express lane may end up displacing some of those who could have formerly used the lanes (they don't want to pay the toll for having less than three people, assuming the HOV lane formerly required two people), but it does help free up space by "pricing out" those who aren't in a particularly big rush.

The other big advantage is that if you have an HOV lane that is hardly being used, you can help free up GP lane demand by allowing single-occupancy to use the lane (for a fee of course).

[1995hoo]

When a new lane is built (such as widening an existing highway) and it opens with HO/T restrictions, I'm fine with it. We've been using the HO/T lanes on the Beltway in Virginia regularly on our commute home due to the various subway shutdowns and they're fast. We do a consistent 65 to 70 mph in there (speed limit is 65) while the parallel "free" lanes (speed limit is 55) are at a standstill, which says to me the variable tolling is working as it should. In the afternoon rush hour we typically pay $10 to $12 to go eight miles in there (max we've paid was $19.30 one day last month), but we make it home in less than half the time we would via the routes we used to use.

I'm not sure I like the idea of taking an existing road with rush-hour HOV restrictions and imposing 24/7 HO/T restrictions on it like Virginia did with the I-95 reversible roadway (and plans to do to I-395). Had they imposed the HO/T restrictions during the old HOV-only hours, I'd have no issue at all (that's what they plan to do on I-66 inside the Beltway later this year–HO/T in the peak direction only during rush hour). In my view the latter is basically capitalism in action on the road in that you sell the excess space in the HOV lanes to people who are willing to pay for it and you keep the road available as it was outside of those hours. But a 24/7 HO/T restriction on a road that was formerly open at no cost to everyone, or substantially everyone (I-95's HOV lanes didn't allow trucks in one area due to a weigh station), is a different situation and I'm not sure I like the precedent. On the other hand, I don't have a huge beef with expanding HOV hours somewhat if the traffic flow justifies it, but at least around here I don't know of anything that opened with limited HOV hours and then saw them expanded to 24/7. I know there's a 24/7 HOV lane on US-50 in Maryland, but I believe it was 24/7 HOV from the start, so that's different.

Of course I recognize one reason for imposing HO/T on I-95's reversible lanes was because it was needed to get Transurban to sign on to widen the reversible carriageway and extend it nine miles to the south.

[epzik8]

I have a decent opinion on the concept. Probably one of the most notable American HOT corridors is I-95 through Northern Virginia. It seems like before their extension into Stafford County, they were prone to backups like the regular lanes, but since then it seems like traffic flow has improved.