Operational Effect of Allowing Single Occupant Hybrid Vehicles into High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes Chris Breiland Fehr & Peers Associate Lianyu Chu, Hamed Benouar California Center for Innovative Transportation (CCIT) UC Berkeley
Energy Use/Air Quality Issues Increased Vehicle Miles Traveled Antipathy Toward HOV Lanes Hybrid Hype Origins of “Hybrid-HOV” Laws
SAFETEA-LU Requirements –States can allow energy efficient, clean air SOVs in HOV lanes –No operational degradation Policy Specifics
Implemented prior to passage of SAFTEA-LU Different definition of HOV lane degradation –Primarily density/LOS based versus speed based Policy Specifics - California AB 2628
Hybrid Population Data Policy Design scenario Estimate hybrid demand Select study site Build micro-simulation model Calibrate micro- simulation model Run simulation for each scenario Performance measures Estimate SOV / HOV demand Planning model Compare simulation results Policy Implications Methodology
Study Scenarios Baseline: Existing Conditions Scenario 1: Existing Hybrid Population Scenario 2: 50,000 Hybrid Checkpoint Scenario 3: 75,000 Hybrid Maximum Scenario 4: Eight Percent Hybrid Share Scenario 5: Nineteen Percent Hybrid Share
Irvine, CA –Highly Detectorized –Fairly Busy –Variety of HOV Lane Geometries Source: Google Maps Study Location
Paramics Simulation Model
Model Calibration / Validation
Based on California Law and Virginia HOV Task Force Report –HCM 2000 Level of Service based on density –Change in HOV lane travel time –HOV lane flow rates Performance Measures
Results
No significant degradation of HOV lane operations in study area –Flows on SB I-5 in Santa Ana reached 1515 vph Results do not preclude degradation on other facilities in the state or country Conclusions
Policy may be implemented without widespread HOV lane degradation Hybrid sales strong “Take away” problem Virginia law set to expire on July 1, 2006 Phase in toll lanes Better use of HOV lanes HOT lane Priority-based HOV operation Policy Implications
Questions?