BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: AB 1105
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: GORDON
VERSION: 4/13/11
Analysis by: Art Bauer FISCAL: yES
Hearing date: June 7, 2011
SUBJECT:
High-occupancy toll lanes and roadway markings
DESCRIPTION:
This bill authorizes the Santa Clara Valley Transportation
Authority (VTA) to extend a high-occupancy toll (HOT) lane into
San Mateo County and conforms California's highway marking
practices to federal guidelines.
ANALYSIS:
AB 2032 (Dutra) Chapter 418, Statutes of 2004, authorizes VTA to
establish HOT lanes on two of the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)
corridors in Santa Clara County in coordination with the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the regional
transportation planning agency and metropolitan planning
organization for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area, which
includes Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. On the basis of
this authorization, VTA intends to established HOT lanes on
State Route 101 and on State Route 237. The HOV lane on SR 101
extends into San Mateo County for six miles.
Existing law :
1. Authorizes VTA, in coordination with the MTC, to
conduct, administer, and operate HOT lanes on any two of
the existing HOV lane systems in Santa Clara County.
2. Provides that all revenues generated by the HOT lanes
are available to VTA for expenses incurred to operate,
maintain, construct, and administer the HOT lanes.
3. Requires any remaining revenue generated by the HOT
lanes to be used exclusively for the preconstruction,
construction, and other related costs of HOV facilities and
the improvement of transit service in the corridor from
AB 1105 (GORDON) Page 2
which the revenues were generated.
4. Prohibits driving to the left of a double line.
This bill:
1. Authorizes VTA to extend its HOT lane on SR 101 into San
Mateo County as far as the HOV lane exists as of January 2,
2011, provided there is an agreement with the City/County
Association of Governments of San Mateo County.
2. Authorizes VTA and the City/County Association of
Governments of San Mateo County to negotiate a revenue
sharing agreement for using the revenue the extension of
the SR 101 HOT lane into San Mateo County generates.
3. Authorizes the use of double white lines to mark HOV/HOT
lanes to conform to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
requirements.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose . This bill allows VTA to convert the entire
34-mile HOV lane, which begins in Morgan Hill and extends
six miles into San Mateo County, to a HOT lane.
2. Background . A HOT lane is an HOV lane where
single-occupant vehicles may use the facility, but must pay
a toll to do so. The toll may be modified to ensure the
volume of traffic in the HOT lane remains free flowing.
Establishing variable tolls is frequently referred to as
value pricing or congestion. Carpools and buses continue
to use the facility without paying a toll.
VTA believes that the operation of the proposed SR 101 HOT
lanes will likely be more successful by including the
six-mile segment in San Mateo County. The toll charged to
single-occupant vehicles must be sufficient to cover the
cost of planning, engineering, construction, operations,
including the cost of toll collection and enforcement by
the California Highway Patrol, payments on debt issued to
finance the conversion of the HOV lane to a HOT lane, and
improvement of transit services, including operating
subsidies for public mass transit in the corridor through
which the HOT lane passes. This bill requires that VTA
negotiate with the City/County Association of Governments
AB 1105 (GORDON) Page 3
of San Mateo County the terms for the costs and
expenditures associated with extending the HOT lane into
San Mateo County.
3. Double white stripes . Currently, double yellow stripes
are used in California to separate HOV/HOT lanes from
conventional lanes. Recent FHWA regulations mandate that
double yellow lines be changed to white lines. The reason
for this is that double yellow line are used to designate a
no passing zone when there is on-coming traffic as opposed
to separating traffic operating in the same direction.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 70-0
Appr: 17-0
Trans: 12-0
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday,
June 1, 2011)
SUPPORT: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
(sponsor)
City/County Association of Governments of San
Mateo County
OPPOSED: None received.