Road HOV, HOT and Express Lanes

[#Metro]

General Information about HOV, HOT and Express Lanes.

In the grand scheme of things, this sits in between a general traffic lane and an exclusive bus lane.

A high-occupancy toll lane (or HOT lane) is a type of traffic lane or roadway that is available to high-occupancy vehicles and other exempt vehicles without charge; other vehicles are required to pay a variable fee that is adjusted in response to demand. Unlike toll roads, drivers have an option to use general purpose lanes, on which a fee is not charged.

If the frequency of the bus doesn't justify a full bus lane, letting some cars in for a fee converts it into a HOT/Express Lane.

The HOT concept developed from high-occupancy vehicle lane (HOV) systems in order to increase use of the available capacity, as it was found that HOV lanes were underutilized compared to general purpose lanes.

High-occupancy toll lane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occupancy_toll_lane

Some examples in Washington DC
https://www.transurban.com/roads-and-projects/north-america

Note - buses travel for free. 
Toll adjusted to maintain high speed, similar to a bus lane.



Some examples in Colorado, USA:
https://www.codot.gov/programs/expresslanes/using-the-lanes

[Gazza]

HOT lanes are still road widening though.
I mean yeah they are paid for by tolls, but it still has a flow on effect to the rest of the transport system, since more capacity on the freeway means more traffic on the feeder roads, and less active/PT mode share.

[Andrew]

I think in certain cases on more urban roads, it would be a good compromise to have a bus lane become a T3 transit lane in peak direction to soften the blow of losing a lane (e.g. if you made the left lane of Kelvin Grove Road/Enoggera Rd a bus lane (say 5am - 7pm as a minimum)). This ideally wouldn't be a lane created by widening but a lane reclaimed for an existing road. I definitely think there is a place for Transit/HOV/HOT lanes as a compromise between public transport priority and road capacity constraints. As much as I would like to be pro-PT and put bus lanes in a lot of places, the reality is unless you can justify that by an excellent PT network, it would be very hard to convince the public that creating longer car journey times for those who do not have a viable PT option is a good thing. I mean, Lord Mayor Campbell Newman got rid of some bus lanes as part of an election promise...

[#Metro]

Agreed Andrew, good observation. RBOT is an influencer not a decision maker. We're not elected to public office, so we can't strike out added lanes if that's what the minister decided to do.

That said, if we compromise the other side might too and we get a better outcome overall than just a pure added general mixed traffic lane.

[Gazza]

Can you do HOT lanes on urban roads?

I have driven on said HOT lanes on the I-95 in a hire car when I drove from Richmond to Washington in 2017. It was separated by a concrete barrier with only limited merge points.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6916063,-77.2268434,3a,29y,184.72h,92.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1Ls6XtCUbZUhkG6bh2Btpw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Just wondering how it would work if it was on a urban road where a concrete barrier is impractical, eg preventing people from just swerving out of it to avoid the toll. Would you need to have toll points every few meters?

[#Metro]

I definitely think there is a place for Transit/HOV/HOT lanes as a compromise between public transport priority and road capacity constraints. As much as I would like to be pro-PT and put bus lanes in a lot of places, the reality is unless you can justify that by an excellent PT network, it would be very hard to convince the public that creating longer car journey times for those who do not have a viable PT option is a good thing

With a HOT lane, buses would get the express speeds, along with a few cars in the gap-space ($).

Here are some more recent examples from California:

Translating Ideals into Practicalities

While this is a compromise from a purely idealistic outcome:
- it does keep the bus moving much faster than general traffic
- it offers protection from 'empty lane syndrome' which often acts to remove bus lanes after installation

[Jonno]

I definitely think there is a place for Transit/HOV/HOT lanes as a compromise between public transport priority and road capacity constraints. As much as I would like to be pro-PT and put bus lanes in a lot of places, the reality is unless you can justify that by an excellent PT network, it would be very hard to convince the public that creating longer car journey times for those who do not have a viable PT option is a good thing

With a HOT lane, buses would get the express speeds, along with a few cars in the gap-space ($).

Here are some more recent examples from California:

Translating Ideals into Practicalities

While this is a compromise from a purely idealistic outcome:
- it does keep the bus moving much faster than general traffic
- it offers protection from 'empty lane syndrome' which often acts to remove bus lanes after installation

Again show me a city with sustainable levels of public and active transport that has HOT/HOV lanes! Dedicated bus lanes yes but shared lanes?? 

If we need to "compromise" then our Governments haven't educated the public correctly! Trying to increase public transport usage without explaining the benefits and cost savings is futile as SEQ has shown.

[#Metro]

Again show me a city with sustainable levels of public and active transport that has HOT/HOV lanes! Dedicated bus lanes yes but shared lanes??

If we need to "compromise" then our Governments haven't educated the public correctly! Trying to increase public transport usage without explaining the benefits and cost savings is futile as SEQ has shown.

There is a role for idealists to set the vision and direction, and realists to translate that into local workable solutions. We need both. As I indicated earlier RBOT is an influencer and we cannot strike out the addition of lanes if adding lanes was what the minister decided to do.

I also think it is difficult to defend leaving the up to ~ 88 slots empty between two buses running three minutes apart. What is the public benefit to leaving those spaces empty? Filling them isn't going to impact the speed of the bus.

Again show me a city with sustainable levels of public and active transport that has HOT/HOV lanes! Dedicated bus lanes yes but shared lanes??

It is essentially a form of Class B ROW. We already have T2 and T3 lanes in Queensland. Do you disapprove of T2 and T3 lanes on the same principles?

I note BCC buses routinely using AirportLink or Legacy way during peak hour, no-one here seems to be objecting to that.

[Gazza]

So where are you thinking these would be implemented?

[Jonno]

The emptiness comes from efficiency

https://twitter.com/_dmoser/status/1611991846447730689?

No I don't support T2 or T3 lanes! Bus lane or give up! This is not radical thinking by the way!

[#Metro]

No I don't support T2 or T3 lanes! Bus lane or give up! This is not radical thinking by the way!

I understand that sentiment, but in many cases the lane would be removed entirely in favour of general traffic. This is the issue TMR DG Neil Scales has mentioned. They don't have political stickiness to be around and effective.

Also - that tweet image shows the bus in mixed traffic.

[Gazza]

Politically how do you prevent a future government from scrapping the hot toll, or doing toll rebates.

Again, I made a post about this and I don't think it adequately addressed

The hot lane projects in the US are on freeways, with long uninterrupted runs for several miles.

Where are we doing this in Brisbane?

The Pacific motorway already has a busway.

The other orbital motorway is probably aren't really candidates for a bus lane due to low demand on orbital routes.

Potentially the centenary highway, but the ship has sailed on that one and I don't see the government doing something risky like putting a toll on the extra lane when it's already been promised as free

So what corridors in Brisbane are for hot lanes or is this mostly and academic discussion?

[aldonius]

Combining the moderate political unpopularity of toll roads with the strong political unpopularity of tolling an existing road and the potential unpopularity of empty bus lane syndrome... sign me up!

More seriously, I remind people that the most important thing is to ensure the bus is not stuck in traffic and to ensure that the restricted lane has a higher capacity than a general traffic lane. Often a peak hour T2 lane is perfectly sufficient for this task.

Remember, private vehicle occupancy is very low - less than 1.5 people per car! This means at most one in every two cars is allowed to use a T2 lane. And to extrapolate, if the occupancy ratio is below 1.2, then at most one in every four cars could be in the T2 lane. If needed, bump up to a T3 lane and exclude even more cars. Then a full bus lane after that.

[#Metro]

Combining the moderate political unpopularity of toll roads with the strong political unpopularity of tolling an existing road and the potential unpopularity of empty bus lane syndrome

Well, let's look at the analogous situation with PT fares.

Nobody is advocating for free public transport or off-peak fares during peak hour because the existing bus or existing busway is already 'paid for' with tax dollars. PT users understand that when capacity during peak is constrained, they pay a premium to travel during peak hour as a peak fare.

Coming to think of it, in many cases the bus or train might be crowded, plus you are standing too.

Should peak fares for PT be dropped to be consistent with the pricing approach for motorists?

[Gazza]

What corridors in Brisbane would have hot lanes?

[Jonno]

No I don't support T2 or T3 lanes! Bus lane or give up! This is not radical thinking by the way!

I understand that sentiment, but in many cases the lane would be removed entirely in favour of general traffic. This is the issue TMR DG Neil Scales has mentioned. They don't have political stickiness to be around and effective.

Also - that tweet image shows the bus in mixed traffic.

Neil Scales has been at the helm during the abandonment of active and public transport as anything more than a poor safety net for those who can't drive. Anything he says is BS.  He, his Department and the Minister are stuck in 1970's still listening to OPEC for transport advice.

[#Metro]

Neil Scales has been at the helm during the abandonment of active and public transport as anything more than a poor safety net for those who can't drive. Anything he says is BS.  He, his Department and the Minister are stuck in 1970's still listening to OPEC for transport advice.

I understand where you are coming from with this.

However, just making it about 1 person's approach and framing it as a bad actor scenario I feel really isn't dealing with the fact that there is going to be (legitimate) criticism from motorists if the HOT/T3/T2/bus lane has empty slots that aren't being used between bus services.

Currently, we don't have a good explanation for why the ~ 88 slots between two buses at 3 min frequency must be empty, presuming that bus speeds are not impacted by filling some or all of those empty slots. And it is this lack of defence that gives rise to Empty Lane Syndrome. That criticism would be made whether or not Mr Scales held that position or not, or if were someone else in the job. Just saying.

Empty lane syndrome is the reason why T2/T3/bus lanes were removed from the M1 and converted to a general traffic lane. Likewise the Coronation Drive bus lane was removed by BCC for the same reason, as was the bus lane through Fortitude Valley.

Motorists exist and they vote. That is true whether you like them or loathe them. And politicians have to consider feedback from all constituent groups, because they are all paying tax. Certain roads like Coronation Drive can be defended on the numbers - the bus frequency is so high that that the lane should be exclusive. Elsewhere, IMO the case is weaker and harder to defend.

[Gazza]

Empty lane syndrome is the reason why T2/T3/bus lanes were removed from the M1 and converted to a general traffic lane. Likewise the Coronation Drive bus lane was removed by BCC for the same reason, as was the bus lane through Fortitude Valley.

Motorists exist and they vote. That is true whether you like them or loathe them. And politicians have to consider feedback from all constituent groups, because they are all paying tax.

Which corridors would you do HOT lanes on though?

(Point of order, the T3 lanes were on the M3 not the M1)

The M3 lanes I think were lost for three reasons:

-You could fit two lanes in the space of the the single T2 lane without needing  to widen the road itself, so brute capacity would make up for the lower average occupancy.



-The M3 already had a busway, so the lanes didn't have the benefit of speeding up buses to justify their existance.

-Campbell Newman.

[Jonno]

Neil Scales has been at the helm during the abandonment of active and public transport as anything more than a poor safety net for those who can't drive. Anything he says is BS.  He, his Department and the Minister are stuck in 1970's still listening to OPEC for transport advice.

I understand where you are coming from with this.

However, just making it about 1 person's approach and framing it as a bad actor scenario I feel really isn't dealing with the fact that there is going to be (legitimate) criticism from motorists if the HOT/T3/T2/bus lane has empty slots that aren't being used between bus services.

Currently, we don't have a good explanation for why the ~ 88 slots between two buses at 3 min frequency must be empty, presuming that bus speeds are not impacted by filling some or all of those empty slots. And it is this lack of defence that gives rise to Empty Lane Syndrome. That criticism would be made whether or not Mr Scales held that position or not, or if were someone else in the job. Just saying.

Empty lane syndrome is the reason why T2/T3/bus lanes were removed from the M1 and converted to a general traffic lane. Likewise the Coronation Drive bus lane was removed by BCC for the same reason, as was the bus lane through Fortitude Valley.

Motorists exist and they vote. That is true whether you like them or loathe them. And politicians have to consider feedback from all constituent groups, because they are all paying tax. Certain roads like Coronation Drive can be defended on the numbers - the bus frequency is so high that that the lane should be exclusive. Elsewhere, IMO the case is weaker and harder to defend.

Empty lane syndrome exists purely because our Govts and their Department don't believe that active and public transport can or needs to cater for 60% of trips. They think there is a "human limit" to the number of trips by active/public transport so they prioritise road transport primarily for passenger cars.

Thus they won't (or don't understand the need to) educate the public on the costs, emission, health, etc, etc. etc. benefits of having bus lanes and that whilst they look physically empty they are actually moving far greater people for far less cost to the tax-payer.  They haven't even tried to have the conversation mainly because they don't believe it is true.   

[#Metro]

Well the ~ 88 slots between 2 buses 180 seconds apart are there. The slots exist because there isn't a need to run buses at 2 second frequencies.

You can see in the case where M1 Pacific Motorway T2 lanes were removed that this case wasn't even about PT because no buses used that T2 lane.

The PT vs Car narrative didn't apply in that case.

T2 lanes removed from Pacific Motorway

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/t2-lanes-removed-from-pacific-motorway-20130701-2p7gh.html

[Gazza]

So @#metro are you even going to address where you are thinking of using HOT lanes in Brisbane?
Have asked politely a few times now....You've responded to Jonnos comments but keep missing mine.

[HappyTrainGuy]

So @#metro are you even going to address where you are thinking of using HOT lanes in Brisbane?
Have asked politely a few times now....You've responded to Jonnos comments but keep missing mine.

You'll get use to it