Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology

2012 Edition
| Editors: Robert A. Meyers

High-Occupancy Vehicle and Toll Lanes

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0851-3_326

Definition of the Subject

Traffic congestion continues to be a significant issue in metropolitan areas throughout the country. Transportation agencies at the federal, state, metropolitan, and local levels are using a variety of techniques and approaches to improve traffic flow, enhance mobility, and provide travel options.

High-occupancy vehicle (HOV) and high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane s are being used in some metropolitan areas to ease traffic congestion and enhance mobility. HOV lanes provide travel-time savings and improved trip-time reliability by encouraging travelers to change from driving alone to carpooling, vanpooling, or riding the bus. HOV/HOT lanes expand the allowed user groups to include solo drivers or lower-occupant vehicles, who can access the lanes by paying a fee.

The use of HOV/HOT lanes has evolved since the late 1960s. Today, HOV lanes and HOV/HOT lanes are in operation in 32 metropolitan areas in North America. These facilities represent an important element of...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Bibliography

Primary Literature

  1. 1.
    Texas Transportation Institute, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas, Pacific Rim Resources (1998) NCHRP Report 414, HOV systems manual. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Institute of Transportation Engineers (1988) The effectiveness of high-occupancy vehicle facilities. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Transit Cooperative Research Program (2006) TCRP Report 95, Chapter 2 HOV facilities, traveler response to transportation system changes. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Turnbull K (1992) An assessment of high-occupancy vehicle facilities in North America. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (1992) Guide for the design of high occupancy vehicle facilities. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (1989) Roadway design guide. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Institute of Transportation Engineers Technical Committee 5 C-11(1992) Design features of high occupancy vehicle lanes. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mounce J, Stokes R (1985) Manual for planning designing and operating transitway facilities in Texas. Publication No. FHWA/TX-851425-2. Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation, AustinGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    California Department of Transportation (1991) High occupancy vehicle (HOV) guidelines for planning, design and operations. California Department of Transportation, SacramentoGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Washington State Department of Transportation, Design Manual – Section 1050, High-Occupancy Vehicle Priority Treatment. Washington State Department of Transportation, OlympiaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Federal Highway Administration (2007) HOV/HOT lanes. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Federal Highway Administration (2003) Houston managed lanes case study: the evolution of the Houston HOV system. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cofiroute USA (2011) MnPASS express lanes monthly status report. Cofiroute USA, Golden ValleyGoogle Scholar

Books and Reviews

  1. Arnold E Jr (1987) Changes in travel in the Shirley highway corridor 1983–1986. Virginia Transportation Council, CharlottesvilleGoogle Scholar
  2. Beihler A (1996) The Pittsburgh busways. In: Conference proceedings, 8th international conference on high-occupancy vehicle systems, Pittsburgh. Transportation Research Board. UnpublishedGoogle Scholar
  3. Betts S, Jacobson L, Rickman T (1983) I-5 HOV lanes: three month report. Washington State Department of Transportation, OlympiaGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonsall J (1993) Development of the Ottawa transitway system. In: Conference proceedings, 6th national conference on high-occupancy vehicle systems, Ottawa, 25–25 Oct 1993. Transportation Research Record 409. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Bullard D (1991) An assessment of carpool utilization of the Katy high-occupancy vehicle lane and characteristics of Houston’s HOV lane users and non-users. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  6. California Department of Transportation (1992) Route 55 status information sheetGoogle Scholar
  7. Christiansen D, Morris D (1990) The status and effectiveness of the Houston transitway system. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  8. Crain & Associates (1978) San Bernardino expressway bus evaluation of mixed-mode operations. Southern California Association of GovernmentsGoogle Scholar
  9. Curitiba’s Surface Metro (1993) The urban transport industries report, pp 53–43Google Scholar
  10. Hultgren L, Kawada K, Lawrence S (1998) San Diego’s interstate 15 value pricing project [CDROM]. In: 68th ITE annual meeting, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  11. Institute of Transportation Engineers (1992) More for Less with HOV, The Benefits of High-Occupancy Vehicle ProjectsGoogle Scholar
  12. Klusza R (1989) Route 55 three-year status report. California Department of Transportation, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  13. Lancaster A, Lomax T (1987) Proceedings from the second national conference on high-occupancy vehicles lanes and transitways, HoustonGoogle Scholar
  14. McQueen J, Levinsohn D, Waksman R, Miller G (1975) The Shirley highway express-bus-on-freeway demonstration project: final report. U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  15. McQueen J, Levinsohn D, Waksman R, Miller G (1985) The Shirley highway express-bus-on-freeway demonstration project: final report. U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (1998) 1997 performance of regional high-occupancy vehicle facilities on interstate highways in the Washington region – an analysis of person and vehicle volumes and vehicle travel times. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Paiewonsky L (1998) A new approach to HOV entry requirements: MassHighway’s 3+/limited 2+ sticker program. TRB Pre-print 981081Google Scholar
  18. Pratt R, Copple J (1981) Traveler response to transportation system changes, 2nd edn. U.S. Department of TransportationGoogle Scholar
  19. SRF, Inc. (1987) Technical memorandum #3 case study: I-394 HOV lane six month data for I-394 Interim HOV lane, WayzataGoogle Scholar
  20. SRF, Inc. (1995) I-394 HOV lane case study: final report. Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  21. Stockton B, Daniels G, Hall K, Christiansen D (1997) An evaluation of high-occupancy vehicle lanes in Texas, 1996. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  22. Stockton B, McFarland F, Ogden M (1998) Feasibility of priority lane pricing of the Katy HOV lane: feasibility assessment. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  23. Sullivan E (1998) Impacts and lessons from value pricing on the California state route 91 express lanes [CDROM]. In: 68th ITE annual meeting, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  24. Sullivan E, Mastako K (1997) Impact assessment for the California route 91 variable-toll express lanes. Transportation Research Board Preprint No. 971046, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  25. Transcore (1997) I-66 congestion management program monitoring project final report. Prepared for the Virginia Department of TransportationGoogle Scholar
  26. Turnbull K (1988) Proceedings from the 1988 national HOV facilities conference, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  27. Turnbull K (1990) Proceedings from the 1990 HOV facilities conference, Washington, DC, 10–12 Apr 1990. Transportation Research Board Circular 366. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  28. Turnbull K (1991) HOV Facilities – coming of age: fifth national high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) facilities conference. Transportation Research Board Circular 382. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  29. Turnbull K (1991) HOV Facilities – coming of age: national conference on HOV systems, Seattle. Transportation Research Board Circular 384. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Turnbull K (1992) High-occupancy project case studies: historical trends and project experiences. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  31. Turnbull K (1992) Moving into the 21st century. In: Conference proceedings, 6th national conference on highway-occupancy vehicle systems, Ottawa. Transportation Research Board Circular 409. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  32. Turnbull K (1992) An assessment of high-occupancy vehicle facilities in North America: executive report. Texas Transportation Institute, College StationGoogle Scholar
  33. Turnbull K (1996) International HOV facilities. Transportation Research Record 1360, pp 126–137Google Scholar
  34. Turnbull K (1997) HOV, HOT lanes, congestion pricing in the United States. In: Conference proceedings, 25th European transport forum annual meetingGoogle Scholar
  35. Turnbull K, Capelle D (1998) Development of an HOV systems manual. National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  36. Turnbull K, Hubbard S (1994) HOV Systems in a new light. Transportation Research Board Circular 442. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  37. Turnbull K, Hubbard S (1994) HOV Systems in a new light. In: Conference proceedings, 7th national conference on high-occupancy vehicle systems, Los Angeles. Transportation Research Circular 442. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  38. Turnbull K, Hall K, Ringrose M (1994) High-occupancy vehicle treatments on toll facilities. Transportation Research Record 1446, pp 14–24Google Scholar
  39. Ulberg C, Farnsworth G, Etchart D, Turnbull K, Henk R, Schrank D (1992) I-5 north high-occupancy vehicle lane 2+ occupancy requirement demonstration evaluation. Washington State Transportation Center, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  40. Urbitran, Hayden-Wegman (1997) Evaluation of the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on the long island expressway: January 1997 HOV lane user and non-user survey. Urbitran, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Van Luven H (1995) Implementation of HOV lanes on I-270: lessons learned. In: Proceedings – 7th national conference on high-occupancy vehicle systems: HOV systems in a new light. Transportation Research Record 442, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. Virginia Department of Transportation (1997a) I-66 HOV-2 annual report. Commonwealth of Virginia, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  43. Virginia Department of Transportation (1997b) I-66 HOV-2 demonstration project final report. Commonwealth of Virginia, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  44. Washington State Department of Transportation (1985) I-5 HOV lanes: 20-month update, OlympiaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Landscape Architecture & Urban Planning, Texas Transportation InstituteCollege of Architecture – The Texas A&M University SystemCollege StationUSA