BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �






           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE       BILL NO: AB 405
          SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN              AUTHOR:  gatto
                                                         VERSION: 4/18/13
          Analysis by:  Eric Thronson                    FISCAL:  yes
          Hearing date:  June 25, 2013



          SUBJECT:

          High-occupancy vehicle lanes in Los Angeles County

          DESCRIPTION:

          This bill restricts the hours of operation of high-occupancy  
          vehicle lanes on State Route 134 and State Route 210 in Los  
          Angeles County.

          ANALYSIS:

          Existing law permits the California Department of Transportation  
          (Caltrans) or local transportation agencies to designate  
          particular segments of highway lanes as exclusive or  
          preferential lanes for high-occupancy vehicles (HOV lanes),  
          granting access only to vehicles with more than one occupant.   
          Prior to establishing an HOV lane, existing law requires  
          Caltrans or the local transportation agency to complete a  
          traffic engineering assessment of the proposed HOV lane on  
          safety, congestion, and highway capacity.

          In some instances HOV lanes are only restricted to  
          high-occupancy vehicles at certain specified times of day when  
          congestion is generally heaviest, and available to any vehicle  
          during less-congested times.  In other instances, HOV lanes are  
          restricted to high-occupancy vehicles all hours of the day  
          regardless of congestion levels.

           This bill  , as of July 1, 2014, restricts the hours of operation  
          of any HOV lanes on State Route (SR) 134 between SR 170 and SR 5  
          and HOV lanes on SR 210 between SR 134 and SR 57 in Los Angeles  
          County to the times of day with heavy commuter traffic, as  
          determined by Caltrans.  In addition, this bill requires  
          Caltrans to report to the Legislature on the traffic impact of  
          limiting operations of these HOV lanes by January 1, 2016.   
          Finally, this bill allows Caltrans to reinstate 24-hour HOV  
          lanes on or after May 1, 2015, if Caltrans determines that  




          AB 405 (GATTO)                                         Page 2

                                                                       


          restricting the hours of operation has created an adverse impact  
          on safety, congestion, or the environment, and submits a notice  
          of such determination to the Legislature.
          
          COMMENTS:

           1.Purpose  .  According to the author, the 24-hour HOV lane  
            restrictions in Southern California lead to motorists  
            frequently being caught in bumper-to-bumper congestion at odd  
            hours of the night while the HOV lane remains empty.  The  
            author contends that this bill resolves this issue on SR 134  
            and SR 210 by mandating that Caltrans only restrict access to  
            the HOV lanes on these highways during the most congested  
            times of day, as determined by Caltrans.

           2.Potentially-concerning precedent  .  Environmental advocates  
            claim that HOV lanes are a proven way to encourage carpooling,  
            reduce congestion, and manage traffic without adding new  
            general-purpose lanes.  HOV lanes can be challenging to  
            implement, however, due to general assumptions made by the  
            affected public that they provide little benefit to average  
            drivers and do not relieve congestion.  Advocates for HOV  
            lanes suggest that, due to their complicated and controversial  
            nature, changes to HOV lane restrictions such as operational  
            periods and occupancy requirements should be based upon  
            detailed technical analyses conducted by traffic operations  
            experts and not driven by general assumptions or anecdotal  
            experience.  Some are concerned about the precedent this bill  
            would set for the Legislature to make decisions involving HOV  
            lanes without basing those decisions on sound traffic  
            engineering studies.

           3.Previous legislation  .  AB 2200 (Ma) of 2012, suspended the HOV  
            lane on eastbound Interstate 80 in the San Francisco Bay Area  
            during the morning commute.  That bill passed the Legislature  
            but ultimately was vetoed by Governor Brown.  In his veto  
            message, the governor stated, "Encouraging carpooling is  
            important to reduce pollution and make more efficient use of  
            our highways.  This bill goes in a wrong direction."

           4.Clarifying amendment  .  This bill currently applies to SR 134  
            west of SR 5 and SR 210 east of Pasadena, creating a gap  
            between SR 5 and Pasadena in which the bill does not apply.   
            The author intended for this bill to apply contiguously from  
            SR 170 all the way to SR 57 at the Los Angeles County line,  
            and therefore requested a clarifying amendment to close the  




          AB 405 (GATTO)                                         Page 3

                                                                       


            gap.

                 On page 3, line 7, strike out "5" and insert "210"
          
          Assembly Votes:
               Floor:    72-0
               Appr: 16-0
               Trans:    15-1

          POSITIONS:  (Communicated to the committee before noon on  
          Wednesday,                                             June 19,  
          2013.)

               SUPPORT:  Automobile Club of Southern California
                         California Trucking Association
                         Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation  
          Authority
                         United Chambers of Commerce of San Fernando  
          Valley & Region

               OPPOSED:  Sierra Club California