Carpool Lane Congestion and RCTC's Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project

Southern California's carpool lanes may appear to be dated given noticeable peak hour congestion, but that is no reason to simply do away with the system. According to Caltrans, the goals of carpool lanes are to reduce congestion and improve air quality on the State Highway System.

The law states that the carpool lane is used "to stimulate and encourage the development of ways and means of relieving traffic congestion on California highways and, at the same time, to encourage individual citizens to pool their vehicular resources and thereby conserve fuel and lessen emission of air pollutants."

Dedicated lanes for high occupancy vehicles is a viable alternative, according to the state government. In many cases, such lanes are the only alternative, in meeting federal air quality conformity standards for capacity-increasing improvement projects in metropolitan areas in conjunction with improving options for alternative high occupancy vehicle travel such as expanded bus and train services and marketing campaigns to form carpools. Carpool lanes represent one approach being used in regions throughout the state to respond to growing traffic congestion, declining mobility level, air quality and environmental concerns.

Yes, there are some corridors where the carpool lane may be lightly used during some hours. We've brought our views into the court of public opinion earlier this week on this one.

Many commuters sold on ridesharing

Those principles and benefits of carpool lanes are all good, and many commuters were sold on that notion. Guess what? Combined with the Inland Empire population growth, the carpool lanes are now jammed too during the rush hour. Under the federal law, carpool lanes are officially congested when the high occupancy vehicles in these lanes fail to maintain a minimum average operating speed of 45 miles per hour 90 percent of the time over a 180-day period during the morning or afternoon peak hours.

There have been claims that solo hybrids and electric cars are contributing to the chaos. There are some who are demanding that the exemption be abolished. Caltrans believes the state's rising population–and not solo clean vehicle access–is the primary reason for congestion in the carpool lanes. “More people are driving more cars longer distances. Our research shows that vehicle miles traveled increased faster than population growth," according to Caltrans' Chief of Traffic Operations Robert Copp. "So, with population increases, we get more traffic, more congestion." That may be true, but placing solo hybrid restrictions could be one solution to explore given that they are not really high occupancy vehicles. Restricting such access in congested areas is not the cure-all solution, but it would certainly help. The reality is that it probably won't be much longer until the majority of cars would be considered clean as more hybrids and electrics are introduced in the marketplace and prices come down.

Speaking of solo's, the other exempted vehicles are motorcycles. Should they too be restricted? Positively not. Motorcycles are considered a high occupancy vehicle simply due to safety and their small size. If a motorcycle is stuck in the general purpose lanes, that makes the roadway more hazardous. One corridor does restrict motorcycle access to its high occupancy vehicle lanes, the 91 Express Lanes. They must have a FasTrak transponder and hop into the 3+ lane. Motorcycles should be exempted from needing to register for a FasTrak transponder and pay tolls during the PM rush hour, period. There is no excuse to motorcycle safety. Automated enforcement systems can certainly detect these high occupancy vehicles.

Combating Carpool Lane Congestion

Moving forward, Caltrans will explore several strategies to reduce carpool lane congestion, including:

• Adjusting hours of HOV operation
• Modifying vehicle entrance and exit points in HOV lanes
• Increasing enforcement by the California Highway Patrol, and
• Limiting hybrid access in congested areas.

Identifying bottlenecks and the modification of access points which could include the addition a transitional weave lane certainly should be looked at by traffic engineers. There may be cases where carpool congestion is caused by a bottleneck. That's why we're keeping a close watch on the 91 Express Lane extension and the bottleneck along the I-15 south at El Cerrito Road where the highway goes to three lanes with no high occupancy lane.

There have also been local discussions of changing the occupancy requirement for carpool from 2 to 3 during congested periods. That should be looked at on a corridor-by-corridor basis by traffic engineers. We understand that such a change will be a bit chaotic at first as 2-person carpools are displaced, but strong marketing campaigns to form 3+ carpools and plans implement all day transit service should be able to offset this issue. Long term plans may include doubling the capacity so that there are two carpool lanes in each direction. The I-15 Express Lane facility in San Diego County is a prime example.

Model high occupancy vehicle infrastructure: San Diego County I-15 Express Lanes

In San Diego County, the I-15 Express Lanes corridor between Escondido and San Diego has been nationally recognized for its innovative design. It is the first section of a regional system of interconnected Express Lanes. It fosters public transit with the presence of bus infrastructure. It encourages shared ridership with park & ride lots. There's no toll for 2+ carpools and vanpools, buses, and motorcycles. They do not have to preregister ahead of time or mount a transponder. They can get on for free and go! Intelligence-driven enforcement combined with heavy fines combats carpool and toll payment cheating. Starting in 2014, the corridor will offer an all day express bus rapid transit route. This multi-modal high occupancy toll lane facility features:

• Dual 2+ carpool lanes in each direction with the option of solo drivers to buy their way in with a FasTrak under real-time marketplace tolls. Much of the corridor also features a movable barrier where the number of carpool lanes in each direction can be adjusted easily. Under special circumstances, the barrier could be moved where one direction of the corridor would have 3 carpool lanes, the other would have 1.
• More than 20 access points that give travelers a wide range of options of where to enter or exit the lanes. 
• Direct access ramps that allow travelers to enter the Express Lanes from surface streets. New and improved transit stations are located less than a few blocks from these ramps, thus providing the bus transit infrastructure for high speed express bus services both from public agencies and the private sector.
• Robust bus transit stations less than a few blocks from the corridor: Unlike LA's I-110 Harbor Transitway where the transit stations were placed in the freeway median, the stations are placed on either side of the freeway, thus making non vehicular access more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. Speaking of the notion of placing transit stations within the median of the freeway, such proposals generally must be discouraged. Getting to stops is hard enough. Patrons are often required to bridge over or under several lanes of rushing traffic. Once they are finally on the platform, the environment is chaotic. Cars may be whizzing by at high speeds in both directions, producing noise and unhealthful air around the station. That's why it's better to place the transit hubs on either side of the freeway.

Concept: What a direct access ramp with supporting bus infrastructure from San Diego's I-15 Express Lanes may look like if replicated in Temecula. An extension of Bedford Court serves as the direct access ramp. Numerous casino buses, private carpools and future public express buses would utilize it. A transit station on the opposite side of the freeway would cater to connecting RTA buses and potential local high speed rail toward Los Angeles to the north and San Diego to the south. A gateway into the Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve would also support the transit station and serve as a tourist stop. View map.

Could the Inland Empire use robust transit infrastructure like this? Let's see what our folks at the Riverside County Transportation Commission have planned.

Riverside County: Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project

The Riverside County Transportation Commission's Interstate 15 Corridor Improvement Project was recently reevaluated, right-sized, and re-prioritized as it emerges from its original plan of a 43.5 mile corridor improvement, to a more focused 14.6 mile stretch of tolled express lanes running North from Cajalco Road in Corona to State Route 60 (SR-60). The original proposal was to run the HOT lanes between SR-60 and SR-74 in Lake Elsinore and to build carpool lanes between SR-74 and the I-215 in Murrieta. Because of predicted growth in Temecula, we've advocated for the carpool lanes to be dual and to run through to San Diego County where it would seamlessly link with the I-15 Express Lanes. Under the current political and economic climate, that will not happen anytime soon; so prepare for more bottleneck shifting.

According to RCTC, the project has undergone the reevaluation of its project limits in order to deliver a project that could be constructed in this economic recovery period. The project originally was relying, in part, on local Measure A funding, the half-cent sales tax dedicated to County Transportation, for a large portion of its funding source.

Concept: Dual high occupancy express lanes along the I-15 freeway just north of Cajalco Road which supports free non-transponder carpooling complete with infrastructure to support future rapid express buses and private sector intercity coaches like Greyhound. The access point pictured is actually officially proposed by the Riverside County Transportation Commission as part of a scaled-down version of the I-15 tolled express lane project. Also pictured to the right is infill marketplace job growth at the Corona Crossings area.

When the Measure A funding endured multiple years of unanticipated downturn, the I-15 CIP was evaluated for what could feasibly be built that would bring maximum benefit to the public. RCTC was therefore forced to downsize the I-15 Project which is now focused on the highest traffic impact areas within the corridor.

No more excuse making

We will continue to hold the state accountable for supporting policies that would entice the local marketplace to grow and for getting our transportation infrastructure to a point of where it needs to be and county officials should think likewise and pass resolutions to demand the state to stop misspending our money. Wasteful government spending of our transportation money positively should not be tolerated. With carpool demands high and growth on the way for the corridor, the I-15 needs robust infrastructure to support the high occupancy vehicle traffic so it does not become the next 91 Freeway Corona Crawl. The corridor needs to mimic San Diego County's I-15 Express Lane system with bus transit infrastructure and usage policies that support free non-transponder carpooling. Charging mandatory tolls and transponder preregistration on carpoolers which drives non-registered HOV's out of the express lanes should not be a substitute. The state simply has no excuse for this downsizing.

Getting around the "Braided" Blockade at the Riverside Downtown Metrolink station outside of the car

Back in 2006, the City of Riverside, the Western Riverside Council of Governments and Compass Blueprint teamed up to plan urban development and multi-modal transportation options around the Downtown Riverside Metrolink Station. The project will help facilitate the development of a Transit Village around the station and connect trains to other regional transportation. As many are aware, the area could certainly use this type of infrastructure and the additional marketplace jobs that go with it.

The Transit Coalition's original future vision of this area can be seen here. Our ideas were not mere concepts. Government officials had the area professionally studied, and we used information from the study into the future vision. Here were a few of the 2006 findings which still apply today. The following issues and opportunities were developed during the one-day design charrette a little more than seven years ago:

Issue #1 - The 91 freeway acts as a barrier preventing pedestrian and vehicular access from the Metrolink station to Downtown. The suggested opportunity was to construct a pedestrian and bus access bridge over the freeway linking the Metrolink station to Downtown. We envisioned a non motor vehicular multi-use pathway connecting the station to Riverside's 11th Street pedestrian corridor which seamlessly links to the Main Street pedestrian plaza and numerous government buildings and courthouses. The second opportunity suggested was to provide a bus shuttle with frequent service connecting the Metrolink station to Downtown. It turned out that existing through bus routes would fare better in terms of productivity under the current demographics with combined frequent service, but a dedicated shuttle may be feasible later down the road.

Issue #2 - The linkage between bus transit and Metrolink service is limited. RTA and the City of Riverside at one point were planning a bus transit center adjacent to the Metrolink station offering bus riders easier access to Metrolink. That wise proposal is still mired in fiscal chaos. Additional through bus routes will serve the new bus transfer center offering better bus transit choices
for riders, productively addressing the bus feeder opportunity in Issue #1. Secondly, officials suggested any new development should provide a pedestrian plaza linking the bus transit center and the Metrolink station. 

Issue #3 - New development near the Metrolink station should complement the existing neighborhood. The opportunity here is to designate the station block as a specific plan where higher density housing and jobs adjacent to Metrolink should transition to lower densities of three and four story structures along Howard Avenue. New buildings adjacent to existing single family homes should exhibit architectural styles that reflect the historical styles of the area. Note how the background graphic of our "We want to see High Speed Rail done right" banner incorporates high density robust private sector job growth offering both entry level and top paying jobs right here in the heart of Downtown Riverside.

The SR-91 Carpool Lane project and the braided freeway interchanges

The Compass Blueprint plan ran into another problem. According to a recent field study covering the construction of the SR-91 Freeway carpool lane extension into Downtown Riverside and as shown in this satellite picture, we're back to the drawing board in regards to getting a pedestrian bridge over the freeway and finding spots for private sector intercity bus outlets. As you may tell, part of the carpool lane extension project included plans to braid the University Avenue and 14th Street interchange ramps, pretty much exacerbating Issue #1 and making the cost to build this bridge more expensive. Also, the idea of linking the transit center to the extended carpool lanes via a direct access ramp would almost certainly need to be done a few blocks away since the freeway right-of-way width is already maxed out in this area. We believe such a grade-separated connection would allow express buses, intercity coaches, and private carpools productive seamless connections between the Downtown Riverside transit station and the high occupancy lanes without the need to weave across the freeway's general purpose lanes.

Concept: Grade-separated direct access ramps would seamlessly link 91 Freeway carpool lanes with RTA and Omnitrans transit hubs, allowing express buses and other high occupancy vehicle traffic access to the carpool lane without the need to weave across the freeway.

As we have been advocating and suggesting, a prime way to get these amenities built is to incorporate these projects into future private sector development. Because of the new braided interchanges, the bridge will most likely need to mimic the one recently built at the San Ysidro border Port of Entry complete with stairs, ramps, and seamless connections to the existing bridge over the tracks on the station side and the County Administration building pathway on the downtown side. City officials should zone the area as a specific plan and offer developer incentives to establish a marketplace job hub that is compatible to urban planning and smart growth principles. Those incentives would not be in the form of direct government handouts, but in the form of tax rebates. Cooperation between the local entities and the state would be vital. That would get the jobs, smart growth and transportation infrastructure built in Downtown Riverside at minimal cost to the taxpayer.

Carpool Lanes: Debating the "Open to All" option outside of rush hours

Proposed: SANDAG proposes high occupancy toll lanes along the I-15 from Eastvale through the Cajon Pass. During times of extraordinary traffic incidents like accidents, temporarily opening the HOT lanes to all for free with continuous access would be justifiable. In this concept, the I-15 HOT lanes are open to all with continuous access due to an accident 5 miles ahead while the I-10 HOT lanes remain open to carpools or FasTrak traffic only

Should carpool lanes really be opened up to all during off-peak hours? The Transit Coalition's A Better Inland Empire transit blog answers that question. Last week, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed AB 405 by Assemblymember Mike Gatto which would have opened the segments of the carpool lanes along the 134 and 210 Freeways in Los Angeles County to solo drivers outside of commute hours. According the Press Enterprise and several other sources, AB 405 had bipartisan support, passing unanimously in the Senate and had near unanimous support in the Assembly. However, Brown in his veto message said, "Carpool lanes are especially important in Los Angeles County to reduce pollution and maximize use of freeways. We should retain the 24/7 carpool lane control." He may have a point.

To be fair, traffic patterns on some freeways may dispute Brown's statement even though opening the carpool lanes for single-occupant vehicles on SR-134 and I-210, even if only during off-peak hours, is very questionable. The Transit Coalition does not support opening up the carpool lanes to all road users in such a fashion. A better idea is allowing local Los Angeles officials, even if it be the local Caltrans district, to have the authority to manage the carpool occupancy requirements and enforcement periods on a corridor-by-corridor basis, since local users and traffic engineers are the ones most familiar with the traffic flow of these freeways, not Sacramento. We all remember what happened with the El Monte Busway. Some basic statewide regulations will be required, especially to prevent political abuse at the local level, but basic carpool lane management certainly should certainly be done locally. For what it's worth, Assemblymember Gatto does represent the region, where SR-134 and a small portion of I-210 pass through.

This is a debatable and complicated topic. That's why we cannot support AB 405 or any other similar proposal right off the bat. As mentioned, history shows the I-10 El Monte Busway cannot be managed from Sacramento; it has to be done in LA. Another issue: How many high occupancy vehicles are choosing to drive in the general purpose lanes and why so? What is the just and right thing to do in cases where an accident or emergency crews are blocking the general purpose lanes? It's time for some straight talk.

Allow local law enforcement and Caltrans to temporarily open carpool lane access during a road incident

Both of Riverside County's major local newspapers, Press Enterprise and the Union Tribune, supported opening carpool lanes outside of rush hours as fewer cars use the lanes during free-flow hours, but it was the UT that hit the nail on the head. Here's a valid point that the editorial made:

Example: Opening up a HOT lane system to allow all traffic to bypass blocked lanes caused by a brush fire 5 miles ahead. Vehicles would also be granted continuous access.

Most everyone in San Diego who commutes by freeway has no doubt encountered an accident or road work that clogs the regular lanes during the middle of the day or at night while the carpool lanes are practically vacant. The whole idea of carpool lanes is to encourage ride-sharing, but sometimes that just isn’t feasible.

And that's true. If there's a sigalert, traffic collision, construction, maintenance work, hazard, or any other acute road incident that is tying up traffic in the general purpose lanes, allowing law enforcement and Caltrans to temporarily open up the high occupancy vehicle lane to allow such traffic to pass through would absolutely be justified. This includes relaxing access restrictions by allowing drivers to cross over the double white/yellow lines. Digital freeway signs would announce such permissions.

The PE mentioned in its editorial that "letting the carpool lanes sit empty while drivers struggle with heavy traffic on the rest of the freeway does not cut pollution or ease congestion; it merely angers motorists." In the case of a road incident, that is absolutely true. State law should also allow such cases to be applied to high occupancy toll lanes including the 91 Express Lanes. Both Caltrans and law enforcement should have the authority to open dedicated lanes to allow traffic to pass through in these extraordinary circumstances which includes permitting vehicles to cross over the double white/yellow lines. There is no reason whatsoever to suggest otherwise.

Debate: Opening up HOV lanes during off-peak hours regularly

Outside of traffic incidents, the notion of opening up carpool lanes to all during off-peak hours is debatable. Therefore, The Transit Coalition does not support this notion. Debates and decisions should take place locally on a corridor-by-corridor basis with all political bias set aside and with professional engineers writing up formulas based on fact-based data to aid local leaders in managing such lanes. The same holds true of determining whether such facilities should allow for continuous access or have dedicated access points. There are some freeways that experience very few vehicles in the carpool lane outside of peak hours, but certainly not all. Generally speaking, policies need to ensure the carpool lane remains moving at all times outside of acute traffic incidents. A firm valid objection is creating a circumstance where opening up the carpool lane to all would fill it beyond capacity during off-peak hours with solo drivers. That could be a concern for freeways in the Los Angeles area where high occupancy vehicle travel demand is high. The facts, history and various traffic patterns on different freeways are overwhelming. Here are some examples:

I-10 El Monte Busway: The El Monte Busway is an 11 mile shared-use bus corridor and high occupancy toll lane running along I-10 between downtown Los Angeles and the El Monte Bus Station. It has a long history, but in 1999, a state bill lowered the carpool occupancy requirement from three occupants to two to take place on January 1, 2000. This was intended to be a 2 year experiment but it was cancelled after only 6 months in which it congested the busway. Local transit agencies opposed the state measure, demonstrating why local officials need some decision making power to manage their high occupancy vehicle lanes. Emergency state legislation was needed and passed in July 2000 to terminate the experiment during peak hours. Currently, 3's a carpool during rush hours in both directions, 2 at other times along the El Monte Busway. All carpools must also have a switchable FasTrak transponder to travel for free in the current HOT lane system.

91 Freeway into Orange County: As many are aware, the 91 Freeway into Orange County consistently reaches unpredictable "rush hour" states well beyond the traditional peak commute hours. Right off the bat, we can safely say that the freeway's general purpose lanes and the 2+ carpool lane through Corona start to slow shortly after the lunch hour on Friday's and is congested pretty much all day and through the evening on many weekends and holidays, especially in the eastbound direction. The freeway gets worse on hot days as people headed to coastal areas and the beach to cool off fill the 91, most have at least 2 people in the car. The 91 Express Lanes is a 24/7 transponder-mandated 3+ high occupancy toll lane facility. Given the high demands for high occupancy vehicle travel in the corridor to the point where even 2+ carpool lanes are insufficient during rush hours, hot summer days and weekends, the 3+ HOT/FasTrak lanes positively cannot be opened to all outside of traditional commute hours. That would be chaotic for the entire corridor. Probably the only feasible times to regularly open the 91 Express Lanes to all would be during the late night hours.

Proposed: SANDAG proposes high occupancy toll lanes along the I-15 through the Cajon Pass. This Caltrans photo shows the existing freeway at a free-flowing state during the middle of a weekday. Opening the HOT lanes to all for free is certainly debatable and questionable. How many of the cars passing through do you think are high occupancy vehicles?

Inland Empire Freeways where the carpool lane may look empty: These freeway segments are typically at a free flowing state during the middle of the day and weekends. Therefore, the carpool lane may often look empty:

• SR-60 Carpool lanes between Moreno Valley and the Badlands hills
• Proposed I-215 Carpool lanes between Moreno Valley and Perris
• Proposed I-15 Carpool lanes between Murrieta and Lake Elsinore
• Proposed I-15 High Occupancy Toll Lanes through the Cajon Pass
• Proposed I-15 High Occupancy Toll Lanes between Temecula and Escondido

Opening the carpool lane to all along these freeways is certainly debatable under the current demographics and traffic patterns. It's a bit more complex than it looks. There are valid questions and arguments for both and against. The Transit Coalition will thus not necessarily support such a move due to these complexities.

Here's an interesting reality of such free-flowing freeways. Some HOV's won't even bother to weave across the freeway lanes to use the carpool lane during free-flow hours simply because there is no need to. That of course drives down the number of vehicles in the lane. Whenever an extraordinary circumstance such as an accident comes up unannounced, more folks including carpools are stuck in the regular lanes, especially if the carpool lane has restricted access points. This creates the problem of empty carpool lanes and congested general purpose lanes. One solution, as mentioned, is to allow law enforcement and Caltrans to temporarily open the carpool lane to all during extraordinary circumstances and to permit vehicles to cross over the double lines if there are restrictions.

Long term solutions would include finding ways to integrate the lanes better with dense activity centers. This would include the development of direct access ramps and transit infrastructure. HOV's may therefore be inclined to take the carpool lane during off-peak hours.

I-215 Carpool Lanes under construction between Riverside and San Bernardino: The mainline is heavily used all throughout the day, and the two county seats move many people all day long with the presence of an all day Omnitrans express bus route. Should the private sector invest in the city centers, high occupancy vehicle demand may be high enough where night owl transit service may be feasible. The carpool lane should therefore remain 24/7 with long term plans to link the lane directly to the transit centers.

I-215 Carpool Lanes between Riverside and Moreno Valley: This segment of the I-215 is consistently high in volume due to the merge of SR-60 from Moreno Valley and I-215 from Perris. Carpool demands are consistently high. A recent Coalition field study through this area showed the eastbound 2+ carpool lane between Riverside and Moreno Valley filled to near capacity on a Friday night at 9 PM as the general purpose lanes were heavy, well past the traditional rush hour. With the growth of logistics jobs in the area, this corridor certainly should maintain its 24/7 enforcement with long term plans for a dual HOV express lane system with bus transit infrastructure and upgraded corridor-based passenger rail service. More on that at later time.

Other freeway corridors with regular slowing in the general purpose lanes outside of rush hour: The long term solution needs to be exploring additional high occupancy vehicle travel options. This includes improving mass transit services and carpool marketing outside the traditional commute hour.

The carpool lane system through Interstate 10 in Ontario certainly should remain at 24/7 operations. This midday Caltrans photo shows the freeway and the carpool lane at a heavy, but stable state. Seven high occupancy vehicles are pictured in the carpool lane. There may be more in the general purpose lanes.

Due to these variants, changes such as carpool lane enforcement periods and occupancy requirements should be based upon fact-based traffic patterns and freeway segment data put together by local engineers working under the local Caltrans district or the local transportation agency such as the Riverside County Transportation Commission. The results certainly should be brought up for robust debate in managing carpool lanes and ensuring they are moving always. Infrastructure should be designed in ways that high occupancy vehicles would be inclined to use the dedicated lanes. Any statewide laws and formulas involving carpool lanes should be based on sound traffic engineering studies, not ideology.

What about AB 405?

How do the SR-134 and I-210 freeways in Los Angeles County fit into this category in relationship with the vetoed bill? Would AB 405 work specifically for these corridors? We'll let the experts working in Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena make that judgement. If engineers conclude that these freeways have a high volume of high occupancy vehicles traveling in the general purpose lanes, keep the carpool lane open 24/7 and find ways to integrate the lanes better with direct access ramps and transit infrastructure. The greater Los Angeles area has very high occupancy vehicle travel rates as demonstrated by transit routes with high ridership figures, especially along the El Monte Busway.

Detecting defective FasTraks along HOT lanes that support free non-transponder carpooling

The Transit Coalition ran across an excellent question about the We want toll lanes done right campaign, a project where we're advocating for free non-transponder carpooling for the 91 Express Lanes and along proposed Inland Empire high occupancy toll lanes for I-15 and I-10. The question deals with defective FasTrak transponders along tolled express lanes that support free non-transponder carpooling. What would happen if a solo driver wants to buy his/her way into a HOT lane system that supports free non-transponder carpooling, follows the rules of mounting a FasTrak transponder on the windshield, but unknowingly has a defective transponder that won't get read by the overhead toll antennas?

That's a great question, and on the surface it might appear to be a red flag toward supporting free non-transponder carpooling in the toll lane network. In HOT lane corridors that mandate transponders for carpoolers like the 91 Express Lanes and LA's Metro ExpressLanes, photo enforcement systems ensure that tolls are collected for any vehicles that pass through with a defective FasTrak. Cameras take the picture of the license plate of any vehicle that does not have a transponder. If the license plate happened to belong to a preregistered vehicle, the toll amount is automatically deducted from the patron's account; otherwise, the vehicle owner will get a toll payment violation notice in the mail.

Addressing the issue of defective FasTrak transponders in HOT Lanes

For HOT lane systems that support free non-transponder carpooling like San Diego County and Bay Area corridors, if the toll antennas don't detect a working FasTrak, the system assumes that the vehicle is a free carpool. So, that leaves an issue of solo drivers who follow the rules of the road but are not paying the toll.

There are three ways address this, each using intelligence driven enforcement methods. First, prevention measures would include the regular rotation of FasTrak transponders and proper maintenance of the toll antennas.

Secondly, the overhead toll antennas combined with other traffic cameras along the corridor could be set up in a way to visually detect defective transponders. If one is found, the license plate number would be photographed and agency staff would review the case in confidence. If necessary, the account holder would be asked to exchange the FasTrak transponders for no additional charge.

Lastly, the CHP would visually check for the presence of a transponder for non-carpoolers combined with using remote mobile transponder readers to check for its functionality and account status. If a FasTrak is properly mounted, but not functional, the officer would pull the motorist over and validate the FasTrak account using the transponder's ID number. If a valid toll account from any FasTrak agency is found, the account is simply billed by the officer, data collected from traffic cameras would determine the toll amount, and the account holder would be asked to replace the defective tag. The driver is then free to go. If the FasTrak is not linked to any valid account, the driver is issued a carpool violation ticket. Any counterfeit, altered or fake transponders would also be confiscated and used as evidence toward the carpool violation ticket. Those are ways to solve this problem without having to mandate transponder accounts for toll free carpools.

Separating the toll traffic from carpools near the toll antennas

The I-25 HOT lane system in Denver which supports free non-transponder carpooling separates the toll traffic from free carpoolers at the overhead toll antennas. Toll paying solo drivers who drive in the tolled lane and pass through without a working EXpressToll transponder will have their license plate photographed with a bill sent in the mail. The separated HOV lane is a dedicated carpool lane; solo drivers caught in the lane will have a chat with law enforcement.

This method of enforcement works with Denver and could also work with the Inland Empire's HOT lane system. The challenge is predicting and keeping track of the number carpools and toll paying traffic to determine if additional lanes need to built to prevent bottlenecking and control lane weaving.

Are Atlanta's Interstate 85 Toll Lanes really Lexus Lanes?

A new report has given a high occupancy toll lane system in Atlanta a possible "Lexus Lane" label, a term used to show that highway toll lanes are just for the wealthy. Here in Southern California, numerous public agencies have conducted studies on HOT lanes and their results seriously question this notion. So does Atlanta really have Lexus Lanes? Here's an analysis.

Analysis of the study A Highway for All?

The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), an Atlanta-based regional nonprofit organization engaged in environmental advocacy, including promoting more sustainable transportation policies, compiled the report A Highway for All? It suggests that the I-85 Express Lanes primarily caters to wealthy drivers and thus contributes toward income inequality. The high occupancy toll lane system mandates a Peach Pass transponder for all vehicles and has a carpool requirement of 3 or more for free travel. It spans 16 miles on the northern end of Atlanta from Old Peachtree Road to Chamblee Tucker Road.

The report starts off describing the presence of other HOT lane systems throughout the country, the state's plans to expand the toll lane network to other Atlanta freeways, and then it jumps into the debate regarding income demographics:

Three general approaches have been used to assess the equity impacts of managed lanes. The first and most common approach uses driver opinion and willingness-to-pay surveys to discern whether low-income drivers have different opinions of managed lanes than higher-income drivers. The second approach examines whether low-income drivers enroll in the managed lane tolling program or obtain toll transponders at differing rates than higher-income drivers. The third and least common approach examines actual data to determine whether managed lane use changes with income level. As a whole, these studies find that drivers of all income groups share similar opinions of the lanes, enroll in the tolling programs at comparable rates, and on occasion use the lanes. However, the studies of actual use data find that low-income drivers use managed lanes less frequently than their higher-income counterparts.

San Diego County I-15 Express Lanes with
free non-transponder 2+ carpooling

And that last point is true. Most agencies concur that many toll-paying HOT lane patrons don't use the lanes every day, but at times when they need a fast travel option. For instance, we at A Better Inland Empire have a standard FasTrak transponder and use the high occupancy toll lane systems along both the SR-91 into Orange County and the I-15 in San Diego County when traveling to/from those areas, but certainly not on a daily basis. Many of our trips are also toll free carpool trips. We'll get to that in a moment. Regarding the surveys, we'll have to search for and take a look at the specific questions asked and where the surveys were sent out before making a judgement. The fact also remains that there are significant groups of people who are willing to buy their way into a carpool lane to bypass traffic.

Not surprisingly, Georgia state officials disagree with A Highway for All? The State Road and Tollway Authority told WSB-TV News, "With respect to the top ZIP codes, the report shows that the people most likely to use the lanes are those who live near the top end of the corridor. When you compare the top five median income ZIP codes map to the top five highest-use ZIP codes map, only two of the ZIP codes overlap." That's true. According to the report, here are the top five Atlanta ZIP codes that use the toll lanes: 30019, 30024, 30043, 30519, and 30548. Those areas anchor the northern endpoint area of the toll lanes. Factor in households making more than $80,000 per year and that leaves 30019 and 30024. By the way, that's household income, not individuals. The possibility of multiple workers living under a single roof has not been ruled out. Then, we have the carpool factor.

Carpools with Peach Pass toll transponder travel free

We'll keep this short. Carpools 3 or more with a Peach Pass transponder can travel in the I-85 Express Lanes free. Do we have any specific information on what percentages of the top five ZIP codes are toll free carpoolers? That remains unanswered. To be fair, when an agency mandates a toll transponder for free carpoolers, the free carpool-to-toll ratio generally leans more toward more toll-paying traffic as the extra capacity left behind by displaced non-registered carpoolers is sold to toll paying traffic.

Some points that A Highway for All and we recommend to officials...

The report does make two valid recommendations of fixing this toll lane system. Let's take a look.

Maximize Carpool Access: Before they were converted into HOT lanes, the managed lanes on I-85 were operated as carpool lanes. As part of this conversion, the occupancy requirement for high-occupancy vehicles was raised from two-persons to three. This change deters the formation of carpools and makes it more difficult for lower-income drivers to utilize the lanes via the untolled carpool option. Future toll lane proposals in the metro Atlanta region contemplate eliminating the high-occupancy option altogether. Allowing two-person carpools to utilize the region’s managed lanes is sound policy both from an equity and a transportation performance perspective.

Concept: 91 Express Lanes with free
non-transponder 3+ carpooling

While the 2+ occupancy requirement could be questioned if local carpool lanes are congested, adopting free non-transponder 3+ carpooling during peak congestion and 2+ carpooling at other times would be sound and fair policy as The Transit Coalition has been advocating.

We do understand that changing a congested carpool lane's occupancy requirement from 2 to 3 will be somewhat chaotic as 2-person carpools would be displaced, but implementing a strong marketing campaign to form 3+ carpools, vanpools, and upgrading express transit services prior to implementation would offset much of that. Such a campaign to form 3+ carpools would have to include abolishing the mandate to register for a toll transponder.

While we're on that topic, proposals of placing mandatory tolls and transponder mandates on carpoolers is irresponsible; that will drive HOV's out of the express lanes and lure more toll-paying non-HOV's into the lanes. In addition, long term planning should include doubling the HOT lane capacity with two express lanes in each direction which could make free non-transponder 2+ carpooling a feasible option with strict land use controls to combat urban sprawl in the outer regions and direct access ramps to adjacent park & ride lots and transit stations for HOV's. Speaking of that...

Use Toll Revenue to Fund Parallel Transit Service: Transit vehicles use managed lanes free of charge, and managed lane supporters argue that low-income commuters can benefit from these projects by using transit. However, this argument assumes the existence and sufficiency of transit service in the managed lane corridor. Using a portion of toll revenues from the managed lanes to fund transit service in the corridor ensures that this untolled option exists. A number of states have adopted laws requiring toll lane revenues to be flexed to support parallel transit service as mitigation strategy, and Georgia should do the same.

While the income argument is certainly debatable, having bus infrastructure and all day express transit services in place is certainly a desirable option. Do you ever wonder why we advocate for bus transit infrastructure on proposed high occupancy toll lanes with services from early morning to late night?

Lexus Lanes?

Is the I-85 Express Lanes, let alone HOT lanes in general A Highway for All? Based on the facts, the I-85 Lexus Lanes are not just for the rich. However if agencies in Atlanta together with LA Metro, OCTA and RCTC want to move more people in its express lanes than cars, the mandatory tolls for HOV's and the transponder mandate needs to be dropped. We want toll lanes done right.

Getting around the excuse-making with the 91 Express Lanes extension

Getting the 91 freeway corridor moving between the Inland Empire and Orange County has been a challenge for the last two decades. The Riverside County Transportation Commission is set to break ground next year on upgrading the corridor through Corona by expanding express bus services, adding a general purpose lane, and extending the 91 Express Lanes through Corona. RCTC illustrates the layout of the proposals which we believe don't go far enough despite the fact that Riverside County taxpayers are going into massive debt to pay for such upgrades combined with Californians paying some of the highest taxes in the nation. The Transit Coalition's future vision of the congested corridor is very similar, but mimics the existing I-15 Express Lane facility in San Diego county with the exception that the center median will be fixed--not movable--and that the occupancy requirement for carpool is 3+ instead of 2+.

The vision includes additional intermediate access points and direct access ramps to adjacent transit centers and park & ride lots which would provide express bus transit infrastructure and speed up travel times for existing and future bus routes and private carpools. The vision also includes expanded Metrolink and potential reinstated high speed intercity passenger rail service provided by BNSF or another operator.

The Coalition's 91 Future Vision appears to conflict with analyses conducted by RCTC and the Orange County Transportation Authority in regards to opposing mandatory tolls for 3+ carpools during the PM rush hour and supporting intermediate access points. According to the agencies, if the corridor supported free non-transponder 3+ carpooling 24/7 and had additional intermediate access points, traffic congestion in the HOT lanes would result, thus defeating the purpose of the HOT lanes. That notion is questionable. Time for some straight talk on these points to weed out the excuses from the facts:

Free 3+ Carpooling vs. 50% tolls during the afternoon rush hour:

In May, 2003, shortly after OCTA acquired the 91 Express Lanes for $207 million, the agency allowed 3+ high occupancy vehicles with a FasTrak transponder to travel free in the HOT lanes except during the PM rush hour where tolls are 50%. The 4-6PM eastbound toll was included because traffic studies at that time show the lanes operating at or near capacity. OCTA officials therefore concluded that the additional traffic generated by free 3+ carpooling would have congested the lanes.

To be fair to OCTA, high occupancy toll lanes were in their adolecent years back in 2003. The agency simply did not have the data that The Transit Coalition now has in regards to alternative solutions to prevent peak-hour congestion in the HOT lanes. We cannot fault OCTA on this; however there is enough data now to support the change. As mentioned before, the 91 corridor has such a high demand for carpooling that the occupancy requirement for carpool should be maintained at 3+ for now; it could be lowered to 2+ during off-peak hours once future infrastructure and additional lanes are built out.

Opening the 91 Express Lanes to additional 3+ carpoolers will bring these additional HOV's into the Express Lanes, no question. To prevent congestion, some of the toll-paying non-carpoolers will need to use the general purpose lanes. As other HOT facilities have shown throughout the nation, that can be acheived two ways:

• Designate the HOT lanes for toll-free travel for 3+ carpools while raising the tolls on other traffic further as traffic volume along the corridor increases. This will keep the toll revenue neutral while providing a greater disincentive to driving alone.  
• 3+ Carpools only - Should the HOT express lanes reach capacity, dynamic regulatory signs would permit only high occupancy vehicles to enter the facilities until capacity opens up for toll-paying traffic. FasTrak traffic already in the lanes would be permitted to complete their trips.

Of course, adopting free non-transponder 3+ carpooling for the 91 Express Lanes will significantly reduce agency toll revenue since more free carpoolers are traveling than toll-paying traffic, but as mentioned before, under no circumstances should high occupancy toll lanes be used as cash fountains. Ongoing displacement of state transportation tax money needs to stop, those resources need to be returned to our local agencies to fund transportation infrastructure, and such resources need to pay down the debt for the 91 Express Lanes and the extension into Riverside County. Once that happens, our local agencies will have no excuse to toll carpoolers in the high occupancy lane.

Intermediate Access Points/Direct Access Ramps:

Upon completion on the extension, 91 Express Lanes access points will be provided at these locations:

• Western Terminal: SR-55 and SR-91 Interchange
• Intermediate: On the 91, west of the Green River Road Interchange for drivers heading in either direction
• Eastern Terminal: I-15 and SR-91 with a direct access ramp with the I-15 to/from the south.

RCTC analyzed additional intermediate access points in Corona through an engineering study and did not adopt the proposed entry/exit points. The design variation 2 plans of a direct access ramp at Smith Avenue in Corona are also not part of the project. Traffic weaving and congestion were cited as concerns. As mentioned before, there is a solution around this which was not taken into consideration: Whenever the express lanes are too congested for additional traffic at the intermediate points or direct access ramps, signs would only permit 3+ HOV traffic to enter or tolls would simply be higher for non-HOV's. This has been demonstrated before elsewhere and the public cannot accept this as an excuse to not link the Corona Transit Center with the 91 Express Lanes.

Moving more people in the 91 Express Lanes:

We must make this point clear once more: High occupancy toll lanes need to be designed in ways to move more people, not cars. The potential consequences of mandating 3+ carpoolers to pre-register for a FasTrak and pay rush hour tolls have been the subject of much debate. These consequences include:

• Many carpoolers reverting back to SOVs or sitting in traffic in the general purpose lanes as demonstrated in LA and Atlanta.
• New solo vehicles being attracted to the corridor as a result of the additional capacity.
• All general purpose lanes, including any newly added ones, becoming congested while eliminating a free-flowing alternative to those who choose to carpool with 3 or more but do not have a toll transponder.

This is why the state needs to get its act together and stop mispending our transportation dollars. This is why high occupancy toll lanes need free non-transponder carpooling. It's time for both the public and our local agencies to stop the excuse-making and hold the state accountable for funding our infrastructure projects which includes a robust SR-91 transit corridor.

A decline in carpooling on Los Angeles toll lanes

The Transit Coalition would like to reiterate its position on high occupancy toll lanes: We generally support congestion pricing, but toll lanes need free non-transponder carpooling. What is happening in Los Angeles clearly shows why.

With that, the Metro ExpressLanes pilot project in Los Angeles released its second performance report earlier this week. Both Metro and Caltrans stress that such data is still preliminary and subject to change. There is some truth to that; carpoolers are still adapting to the fact they must pre-register for a FasTrak transponder--more specifically LA's switchable FasTrak--to travel for free in the high occupancy lanes. However, this ill-advised usage policy is why LA's system has received so much negative feedback in contrast to other HOT lanes throughout the country which support free non-transponder carpooling.

Here are some facts according to the report:

The I-110 Freeway:
In the former 2+ dual carpool lanes, an average of 54,000 high occupancy vehicles used the high occupancy lanes per day. In April, an average of 57,256 cars use the I-110 toll lanes. Even though there's a growth in the number of vehicles, the real question is how many of the 54,000 HOV's that the former carpool lanes carried are still using the high occupancy lanes? Take a look at this discouraging stat: Of the 57,256 cars using the I-110 toll lanes, 59% are toll-free HOV's and 41% are toll-paying solo drivers. Do the math and we have 33,781 toll-free HOV's. That could mean a displacement of well over 20,000 high occupancy vehicles per day and portions of that traffic may have stopped ridesharing altogether and gone back to driving alone since the incentives to carpool were declined due to the transponder mandate. That's why traffic congestion has worsened in the general purpose lanes. That's why LA is seeing more cars on the I-110 freeway.

The I-10 Freeway Stats:
Things aren't much better for the I-10. An average of about 28,000 HOV's used the former carpool lane (3+ peak/2+ off-peak). An average of 24,613 cars used the toll lanes last spring (57% HOV's, 43% toll). That adds up to 14,030 HOV's in the ExpressLanes, almost a 50% displacement ratio from before.

On the plus side:
To be fair, the number of actual people (not cars) moving through lanes may still be up, but that could also be attributed to a recovering economy. Public transit usage on the toll lanes has blossomed. Metro-sponsored vanpool programs are up. Income stats show that these "Lexus Lanes" are not just for the rich. If LA continues to work on revitalizing South LA and combatting gang and drug crimes, it may be finally safe for I-110 commuters to set up more park and ride arrangements south of Downtown. It's still too early--and difficult for that matter--to determine how many people are moving through the high occupancy toll lanes.

However, if Metro wants to move even more people through their express lanes than cars, the agency needs to get the 34,000+ displaced HOV's back into the high occupancy lanes by dropping the FasTrak mandate for private carpools. The central concept of the high occupancy lane is to move more people—rather than more cars—and to offer a practical alternative to adding more general-purpose lanes. During peak hours, high occupancy lanes can carry the majority of the people carried on the entire freeway. That's a notion that is in no way too preliminary to adopt.

Exploring Express Bypass Lanes

All throughout the Western United States, The Transit Coalition took note of how local agencies are dealing with transportation issues. Many agencies have explored free express lanes or more simply--bypass lanes. Unlike carpool and high occupancy toll lanes, bypass lanes are open for free for any motorist. Express traffic can get on and go. In some jurisdictions, the law even permits truck traffic.

Like many express carpool and toll lane corridors, bypass lanes are express lanes which bypasses local exits in a developed area to let through traffic seamlessly travel through the corridor--at least that is the intent of such lanes. Here are some examples:

I-15 Bypass Lane - Ontario:
Caltrans is currently replacing the slab and upgrading bridges along the I-15 corridor between Ontario and Devore. Construction crews built a temporary construction bypass lane in the northbound direction earlier this year to get around much of the construction activity.  Crews later switched the direction of the bypass lane for southbound motorists. Any traffic except for trucks or other vehicles restricted to the right two lanes may use it. The bypass lane will only be there for the duration of construction; SANBAG is currently studying the feasibility of high occupancy toll lanes through this area all the way up toward Victorville.

Las Vegas Strip I-15 Express Bypass Lanes:
The I-15 express lanes through Las Vegas are free express lanes which allow traffic to seamlessly bypass the exits adjacent to the Las Vegas Strip. Truck traffic may also utilize it. Think of it as a four lane rural desert freeway within an urban highway. The Coalition will continue to watch this facility as growth continues along the south side of the Las Vegas region; commuters headed to Downtown Las Vegas from the south and tourists patronizing the resorts outside of the Strip may soon fill the express lanes up during rush hours and weekends. If local officials are in a position to have to convert the bypass lanes into a high occupancy facility in the future, there will be controversy.

OCTA's 2010 Ill-advised Arterial Interchange Proposal:
Back in Orange County, one idea from a 2010 OCTA meeting that needs to be highlighted was the grade separation of local streets, also known as arterial interchanges. Major intersections would be elevated in order to minimize the need for drivers to stop at stoplights, possibly looking something like the concept design pictured above. Without transit infrastructure, the proposal had a terrible effect for cyclists, bus riders who need to transfer and pedestrians. Here is a clue: The Harbor Transitway.

Utah Timpanogos Highway Commuter Lanes:
Between Salt Lake City and Provo, Utah State Highway 92--Timpanogos Highway--houses commuter bypass lanes which connects I-15 to a Salt Lake City suburb several miles from the freeway. The lanes allows commuters and mountain tourists to bypass several traffic signals on the mainline. An adjacent dedicated multi-use pathway caters to bicycle and pedestrian traffic and offers friendly connections to the local streets. The suburbs in the area are built out and land use control in the mountains is protected. Overall, this project wasn't bad.

I-15 Express Lanes - Utah County:
Okay, the I-15 Express Lanes through Salt Lake City is a high occupancy toll lane facility, but since we're in Salt Lake, how is the facility faring since LA's system is mired in so many problems? Things aren't so bad in the Beehive State. Like San Diego's HOT lane system, Utah's toll lane facility allow for free carpools or a switchable FasTrak-like toll transponder called the Express Pass. Carpoolers and other 2+ HOV's do not need to preregister or get a transponder beforehand to use the lanes. They can get on for free and go! Tolls for non HOV's range from $.25 to $1 per zone; each zone spans the length of a local exit. Local highway patrol units use intelligence-driven enforcement tools to combat carpool/toll payment cheating. The region also has a fast expanding passenger rail and BRT network and plans are underway to develop a direct access ramp linking the HOT lanes with a local multi-modal transit center. These are amenities we would like to see in the Inland Empire.

Back to bypass lanes. There also several dedicated bypass roads throughout the country and many of them work. It certainly takes strong land use controls to prevent urban sprawl along these lanes and roads. Unchecked growth along these routes would basically turn these bypass lanes into ordinary suburban roads they were intended to avoid. Agencies must also follow Utah's example of including transit-friendly pathways for people traveling without a car. The Transit Coalition will continue to watch the progress of such highway expansion proposals.

Toll Lanes: What the press needs to question

The new high occupancy toll lanes along the I-10 and I-110 freeways in Los Angeles have been getting much negative press during the last few weeks, but why did this not happen in 1996 when the I-15 carpool lanes in San Diego County underwent the same conversion?

After the Los Angeles Times published a front page article reporting worsened traffic conditions in the main freeway lanes along the I-110 freeway, public views of toll lanes in general have declined. Although toll lanes are really not bad as many think they are, having a policy where "All HOV's must have FasTrak" causes toll lanes to deserve the reputation that they've been getting during the last few weeks.

The Transit Coalition's view of high occupancy toll lanes and congestion pricing is very clear. This mode of transportation works, but HOT lanes must support free non-transponder carpooling.

The questions that the press needs to ask LA Metro are:

1. How many toll-free HOV's versus toll-paying non-HOV's are using the Metro ExpressLanes compared to the original HOV Lanes?
2. Has the number of HOV's decreased in the high occupancy toll lanes?
3. How many HOV's are now using the general purpose lanes?

Traffic has worsened in the general purpose lanes because all of the non FasTrak-registered HOV's were displaced from the former 2+ carpool lanes; all vehicles including HOV's are now mandated to have a FasTrak transponder to use the facility. For toll-free travel, a Metro-issued switchable FasTrak is needed, not just any FasTrak. These are clear facts and here's an example:

The HOT lanes down in San Diego County which permits carpools or FasTrak traffic has better balanced traffic distribution and cut down significantly on commute times because non-registered carpools were never displaced. To be fair, San Diego's latest upgrades included additional lanes, but the actual HOV-to-HOT conversion took place back in 1996 in the original reversible lanes; no new lanes were built at that time and traffic flow did improve in the regular lanes according to reports. Therefore, the I-15 toll lanes didn't receive a negative reputation from the press.

If Metro wants the ExpressLanes to cut down on I-110 commute times, they need to get the displaced HOV's out of the general purpose lanes and back into the high occupancy lanes. If Metro desires to do this while fulfilling its long term goal of reducing the number of solo drivers in the corridor and promote ridesharing, the new regulatory burden on HOV's needs to be repealed. To be fair, most motorcycles and all plate-registered buses (public and private) are exempt from needing a transponder, but the FasTrak mandate for all other HOV's needs to be abolished and that notion needs to be adopted for all other future HOT lanes throughout Southern California. If there's suspected carpool cheating going on, get the CHP to conduct an enforcement sting with media coverage, lobby the state to increase the base fine to $500 and make it a one-point moving violation.

Improving Riverside County's Public Transportation System

What exactly needs to be done to improve transit mobility?

The Riverside Transit Agency has been working on an updated Comprehensive Operational Analysis which will provide the agency a blueprint of future transit planning. According to the February, 2013 RTA Board of Directors Agenda, the consultant firm assigned to develop the study conducted a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis. The SWOT generally affirmed several concepts and ideas already illustrated on The Transit Coalition's Future Vision of Inland Empire Mass Transit and what county officials need to do to improve mobility. Here are a few findings:

The SWOT report shows a transit mobility threat of continued freeway expansion proposals without bus infrastructure. Ever wonder why The Transit Coalition advocates for direct access ramps between HOV/HOT lanes and major transit centers? Will there be seamless bus transit connections between the Corona Transit Center and the extended 91 Express Lanes? Constrained financial resources and high unemployment: Are cities and Riverside County establishing business-friendly and transit-oriented land use decisions for marketplace job development to reduce long distance solo commuting? A local robust job marketplace provides the resources for productive public transit service. Reported Dial-a-Ride constraints: Paratransit gives mobility to the immobile, but is hard on the taxpayer if overused by mobile riders. What can RTA do to improve its Travel Training program? Has RTA considered putting in a team of volunteer transit ambassadors into Travel Training to better educate mobile riders on using the fixed route system?

Keeping the Carpool Incentives

(3/5/13) – IE Transit Talking Points Short

USA Today interviewed Jim Bak of INRIX, a traffic congestion tracking firm based in Washington. Bak stated, “Drivers (in the Inland Empire) have a lot of incentive to carpool.” He is correct, to an extent. With the 91 Freeway ranked the 10th worst freeway in the country, demands to rideshare and use high occupancy lanes to bypass traffic congestion is high. 16% of all commuter traffic in San Bernardino County alone are HOV’s according to the US Census Bureau.

So with an overwhelmingly high HOV market demand in the area shown by congested freeway carpool lanes and filled park & ride lots, the focus may be incentives to convert 2-person HOV's into 3+ HOV's. Why then are 3+ HOV’s mandated to use a FasTrak transponder to use the 91 Express Lanes into Orange County and pay tolls during the PM rush hour in the peak direction? Why are these lanes carrying more toll-paying non-HOV’s than 3+ HOV’s? It’s clear that there are legit 3+ HOV’s being displaced from Orange County’s high occupancy toll lanes with the extra capacity being sold to non-HOV’s. It seems like incentives to carpool with 3 persons or more drop when such HOV’s are strapped with ill-advised usage policies in a publicly owned high occupancy toll lane corridor. “Nanny lanes” anyone?

New HOV Lanes and Omnitrans Route 215

(2/26/13) – IE Transit Talking Points Short

Transportation officials have begun the construction of an HOV lane on a 7 ½ mile stretch of the I-215 Freeway between San Bernardino and Riverside. The new lane is expected to be completed later in the summer. Omnitrans should expect improved productivity for the existing express bus Route 215 which runs through the corridor linking the two downtown areas. Private sector buses headed through the corridor can expect better efficiency with the presence of the HOV lane. Let’s get those bus routes into the HOV lane and get them moving.

Carpools 2 or more only - Corporations OK?

The California Vehicle Code should specifically state that a vehicle occupant for carpool is a born, bodily, living human being.

Once again, loopholes in written law are being exploited at the expense of vehicle registration taxpayers and law abiding freeway motorists. San Rafael political activist Jonathan Frieman has a problem with corporations being defined as persons, but his campaign involves exploiting a loophole in the California Vehicle Code combined with citing the opinion of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. His intent is to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court case.

Frieman traveled solo with corporate paperwork in Bay Area carpool lanes purposely trying to get caught by the CHP so he can get his case through the court system. Citing both CVC 470 and the opinion of the Citizens United case, he frivolously argues that a corporation can count as a passenger to satisfy the occupancy requirement to travel in a 2+ carpool lane. As unusual as it sounds, Frieman actually hopes to keep losing through the court system so he can appeal the corporate personhood case back to the U.S. Supreme Court. He recently lost at the Superior Court level and has planned to appeal.

The Transit Coalition does not take sides on any political matters that do not relate to transportation. However, the state legislature must close the claimed loophole in the California Vehicle Code immediately. Even though Frieman hopes to lose his case throughout the appeals process, should a judge at any level decide to rule in Frieman’s favor, HOV lanes as we know it could be in dire trouble statewide. The legislature needs to write into law who a vehicle occupant is in the California Vehicle Code: a born, bodily, and living human being.

Robust debates in a free democracy are welcome and if Frieman has a solid argument against Citizens United, he should take action. However, exploiting California Vehicle Code loopholes and being a carpool cheater to advance agendas through the courts does nothing to get Southern California moving. And if the CHP took as long as Frieman claimed to catch him driving alone in an HOV lane, lawmakers might as well increase the carpool violation penalty and increase CHP enforcement to better deter carpool cheating. Set the base statewide fine to at least $500 and make it a one-point moving violation.