[ShonTron]

I mean not necessarily. HOVs are ultimately "underutilized" compared to regular lanes and theoretically could be removed to see slight improvements in traffic.

Along the QEW in Halton, MTO originally built the corridor for 10 lanes, IIRC, but the decision to implement HOVs meant they could only do 8 lanes as the HOVs were wider. In that case, MTO could relatively inexpensively eliminate the HOVs and convert the highway to a 10-lane cross section, substantially improving capacity.

I don’t think that was the intent there. Five through lanes would still bump against the QEW/403 split at Burlington, which is already very congested.

But the suggestion that “just one more lane will fix it” for the QEW sounds like a very bad idea.

 

[Haljackey]

The way Ontario built HOVs makes them terrible for anything other than 24h operations. That buffer zone and entrance/exit area does not exist in most other jurisdictions- just another lane with a diamond marking instead.

I see a lot of abuse ahead, with people playing dumb if caught that they don't think the buffer zone rules apply when not in HOV restriction operations. Could be a lot of carnage.

A complete rework of the HOV system could yield another general lane if you removed the buffer zone and ate into the left shoulder a bit. So 1 HOV or 2 general lanes, you pick.

 

[urbancog]

HOV lanes are meant to reward groups of people who travel together in a vehicle over those who sit alone in their vehicle taking up more road-space per person. They're meant to gently encourage a change in behavior. 2 people per vehicle doesn't seem like "high occupancy" in a vehicle that can typically seat 5, but if the average occupancy was 2 people, it would substantially reduce the investment needed in highways. That's why they're important.

 

[innsertnamehere]

HOV lanes are meant to reward groups of people who travel together in a vehicle over those who sit alone in their vehicle taking up more road-space per person. They're meant to gently encourage a change in behavior. 2 people per vehicle doesn't seem like "high occupancy" in a vehicle that can typically seat 5, but if the average occupancy was 2 people, it would substantially reduce the investment needed in highways. That's why they're important.

I think everyone here understands their intent - I'm just not sure how successful they are at actually doing that, especially since they come at the cost of reduced lane utilization.

Is it better to have a lane to encourage, say, 5% of people to carpool, at the cost of a 30% reduction in lane utilization? Even worse, if you need to "remove" a lane to accommodate the HOV, this math gets even worse.

I'm not inherently opposed to HOVs, but it's worth looking at. I definitely think they have more utility in areas with high bus volumes. Most 400-series highways don't have high bus volumes though and that volume will be decreasing with RER ramping up.

 

[urbancog]

I'd argue that we already dedicate way too much of our land area to highways. The recent focus of this thread is how can we add more capacity for single-user vehicles. I'm suggesting we stop doing that.

Let's use our $s to get GO Expansion done, open the Eglinton Line, add more lines outside of core Toronto and switch to using these for mobility then we can stop eating up Canada's best farmland for highways.

 

[Haljackey]

Toronto doesn't have a lot of strictly commuter highways, which HOVs benefit the most during rush hours.

The QEW/400 carry a lot of tourist and long distance traffic, 401 carries every traffic type imaginable. 404 is probably the closest to a pure commuter highway in the metro, with the 403/410 and 427 being closer contenders.

So if we want to try off-peak HOV use, the 404 would be the best test subject for a trial.

 

[rdaner]

So The Star is saying that the 407 is going toll-free during rush hours in March. This looks like an experiment to see what the effect will be.

 

[bearcat]

So The Star is saying that the 407 is going toll-free during rush hours in March. This looks like an experiment to see what the effect will be.

Spring into Free Rush Hour Terms & conditions | 407 ETR, Express Toll Route

407 ETR, Express Toll Route

www.407etr.com

it says it's only available to "targeted customers" but doesn't explain what that means

 

[Coolibop]

Spring into Free Rush Hour Terms & conditions | 407 ETR, Express Toll Route

407 ETR, Express Toll Route

www.407etr.com

it says it's only available to "targeted customers" but doesn't explain what that means

It's a promo. They do this sort of thing all the time.

 

[imerk]

Yeah I actually got an email offering me the promo. I've used 407 maybe 5 times in the last 10 years.

 

[MichaelGeorge]

Toronto doesn't have a lot of strictly commuter highways, which HOVs benefit the most during rush hours.

The QEW/400 carry a lot of tourist and long distance traffic, 401 carries every traffic type imaginable. 404 is probably the closest to a pure commuter highway in the metro, with the 403/410 and 427 being closer contenders.

So if we want to try off-peak HOV use, the 404 would be the best test subject for a trial.

Hi Halijackey, I live in Markham and commute on the 404. There are very little amount of vehicles using the HOV lane unless they are traveling long distances, or heading to 401 WestDVP. Also, on Highway 7, many vehicles get dumped onto the 404. That's when people use the HOV lane. Then at the end of 404, The HOV lane gets thick in traffic(which personally, I think people use it without having 2+ people, just to bypass traffic). I honestly think the Hov lanes did terribly, they only used to relieve the bottleneck at Highway 7/404 North. I think the government could have done a small express collectors design(something like this:

watch from 9:40-9:50) from Major Mackenzie, all the way to 401/DVP(no tolls). Also about the DVP, I talked to a transportation engineer who helped with trying to widen the DVP, he said it was impossible, because of the curves, and the bridges belonging to CN rail.

 

[MichaelGeorge]

Hi Halijackey, I live in Markham and commute on the 404. There are very little amount of vehicles using the HOV lane unless they are traveling long distances, or heading to 401 WestDVP. Also, on Highway 7, many vehicles get dumped onto the 404. That's when people use the HOV lane. Then at the end of 404, The HOV lane gets thick in traffic(which personally, I think people use it without having 2+ people, just to bypass traffic). I honestly think the Hov lanes did terribly, they only used to relieve the bottleneck at Highway 7/404 North. I think the government could have done a small express collectors design(something like this:

watch from 9:40-9:50) from Major Mackenzie, all the way to 401/DVP(no tolls). Also about the DVP, I talked to a transportation engineer who helped with trying to widen the DVP, he said it was impossible, because of the curves, and the bridges belonging to CN rail.

Or, I suggest the government do something like On-3/401 extension In Windsor, and implement it into the DVP, starting at the Bayview/Bloor interchange, ending at the 401 exit.

 

[leopetr]

As someone who uses the HOV on the 404, 400, and QEW for roadtrips out of town, I utterly dread the loosening of already too loose and unenforced HOV rules. The HOV is great because it creates two passing lanes when you have 2+ people in the car. If someone is camping in the passing lane, you can pass them in the HOV and vice versa. What I would like to see is more restrictions and more enforcement. Buying a Tesla shouldn't come with a permanent HOV permit for single occupancy drives. I did not like the HOT experiment the Wynne government put in place, and any attempt to allow single occupancy cars in the HOV outside of rush hour will hopelessly congest it with single occupancy cars during rush hour. Enforcement is too lax to give an inch to Ontario drivers on anything

 

[turbanplanner]

As someone who uses the HOV on the 404, 400, and QEW for roadtrips out of town, I utterly dread the loosening of already too loose and unenforced HOV rules. The HOV is great because it creates two passing lanes when you have 2+ people in the car. If someone is camping in the passing lane, you can pass them in the HOV and vice versa. What I would like to see is more restrictions and more enforcement. Buying a Tesla shouldn't come with a permanent HOV permit for single occupancy drives. I did not like the HOT experiment the Wynne government put in place, and any attempt to allow single occupancy cars in the HOV outside of rush hour will hopelessly congest it with single occupancy cars during rush hour. Enforcement is too lax to give an inch to Ontario drivers on anything

I've seen police in the left (non hov) lane flash their lights to get people out, and some idiot 3 cars ahead will cross over the solid white line ahead. There's no respect even when enforcement is around

 

[MichaelGeorge]

I've seen police in the left (non hov) lane flash their lights to get people out, and some idiot 3 cars ahead will cross over the solid white line ahead. There's no respect even when enforcement is around

I see that all the time happening(drivers passing the solid line). Police charge drivers for speeding, and not for bad driving. It makes me very upset. I think the government could enforce more driving laws, and make the police more strict about dangerous driving. Maybe teach the police how to charge a bad driver.