Another Voice: HOT Lanes Make Sense

Editors Note: I've received a lot of reaction to my recent post (Lexus Lanes Just Wrong, March 25, 2007, CommuterPageBlog) agreeing with Marc Fisher's column in the Washington Post that was negative regarding HOT or Lexus Lanes. In the interest of fairness I'm providing another view that was done in the form of an Op-Ed by Geoffrey Segal in the Times Community News yesterday. I should note that many of my industry colleagues hold the same view as Mr. Segal. Let us know what you think.

Another Voice: Hot Lanes Make Sense
Recently, Prince William Board of County Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart (R) called High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes "a sham." It seems Stewart and his colleagues on the Prince William Board of County Supervisors would rather see commuters stuck in traffic than give them an option to spend more time with friends and families at home.

HOT lanes have successfully relieved congestion everywhere they've been implemented. They've been so successful that they're supported from the political left and right alike, from environmental groups such as the Environmental Defense Fund to local business associations.

If you're unfamiliar with HOT lanes, they use variable pricing to mitigate congestion and ensure a free flow of traffic. As demand goes up, so does the toll; likewise, the price goes down with a drop in demand.

The ability to adjust prices enables the operator to manage the flow of traffic dynamically and keep the lanes relatively free of congestion, even at the height of rush hour.

Southern California, home to the country's worst gridlock, has had great success with HOT lanes. On Orange County's 91 Express Lanes, drivers pay a variable toll that goes up during rush hours, in exchange for access to a lane that is guaranteed to be moving at 65 miles per hour. If the average speed is less, commuters see their toll refunded.

HOT lanes operating in Houston, Minneapolis, Salt Lake City, Denver and San Diego show that variable pricing works. By using a price to discourage some people from traveling in peak hours, HOT lanes actually provide more mobility. A free-flowing highway lane has much greater throughput per hour than a congested lane - about 50 percent more. Orange County's HOT lanes account for just one-third of the highway's lanes but carry half of all rush-hour traffic.

Buses and carpools of three or more people would continue to ride free, while others could choose to pay a toll upwards of $1 per mile to use congestion-free lanes. At that price, a 21-mile rush-hour trip from the Pentagon to the Prince William Parkway would cost as much as $22.28 - one of the most expensive commutes in the country.

While too expensive for many, HOT lanes will find users. With a peak rate of $9.25 for a 10-mile ride, California's SR-91 had more than 12 million users.

HOT lanes give every motorist "congestion insurance," an alternative to gridlocked freeways for those times when they really need it - if they're willing to pay a premium.

Opponents, including Stewart, argue "that only the very affluent will be in those lanes." The reality based on experience and data proves him wrong. People of all income levels use HOT lanes, but very few people use them every day.

Over a decade of data available from the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County and the HOT lanes on Interstate 15 in San Diego indicate that the vast majority of drivers - high and low income - use the HOT lanes only occasionally, not daily.

While studies of the 91 Express Lanes indicate that use increases slightly with income group, 20 percent of the users are from the lowest income group, and another 23 percent are from the second-lowest income group.

In 2005, there were more than 12 million trips on the 91 Express Lanes, with most people using the lanes as congestion insurance. When people have to pick up their kids at day care, they know the toll is less than the late fees. When they have to make a flight or get to a child's soccer game, they know they have a traffic-free alternative.

The lowest-income users are least able to afford the cost of congestion, yet studies show they welcome the choice.

In addition, Stewart's line of argument ignores how HOT lanes benefit all commuters. For every car that chooses to use HOT lanes, one less car is using the free lanes, improving traffic flow on those lanes, as well.

Planners also see HOT lanes as a way to boost transit service by providing open roads for buses. Indeed, the HOT lanes being added to the Katy Freeway in Houston guarantee transit 25 percent of the capacity. Tolls from solo users help pay for the transit operations (as well as for local road improvements).

The bottom line is, HOT lanes work. They improve mobility, give commuters an opportunity to escape congestion and improve transit operations. Our freeways don't have to resemble parking lots. HOT lanes will be a vital piece in our war against congestion.

Geoffrey F. Segal is the director of government reform at the Reason Foundation and is a senior fellow at the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy.

Comments

[Nicholas Norko]

All of you are forgeting one thing we pay taxes to the government to provide infrastructure as well as many other things. They are responsible for budgeting and applying the necessary funds to cover the needs of the people infrastructure being one of those needs. Any official that is for this project should be removed from office. If they cannot handle the job of applying the peoples money responsibly then they do not deserve to be in office.

[Bob]

I note that the pro HOT crowd consistently ignores two key facts: 1. There is a difference between a new build HOT lane and a conversion, such as is planned for 395. 2. The 395 corridor is a major HOV success story. Basically all other HOTs in the country were failed HOV systems.

The greatest argument against HOT lanes is the threat to the existing HOV. The fairness issue is a side issue compared to the potential to damage HOV.

[washcycle]

It kind of makes sense. Prices should go with demand. You pay more for Metro during rush hour than during off-peak. You can't do that with gasoline taxes. It especially makes sense if the money generated by the tolls gets used for transit - especially for running low-fare buses in those HOT lanes. Having a private company provide this makes me nervous though.