The HOV lanes that run on US-75 between I-635 and Allen opened last month with mixed reviews. The introduction of these lanes has produced much controversy, rumor and myth. Much of the criticism revolves around the barrier system, and lack of entrances and exits particularly that there are no entrances and exits in Richardson. This has additionally produced much finger pointing with fingers oftentimes pointed the wrong direction. In this article we hope to set the record straight… or at least a little straighter.

We spoke to the city council members of Richardson and Kelli Petras, spokesperson for the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and various officials from Richardson.

Where does the HOV lane run?
The HOV lane runs from I-635 up to near Bethany Road in Allen. There are entrances at Midpark, in Plano and in Allen.

What is TxDOTs relationship to the cities affected and to DART?
TxDOT spokesperson Kelli Petras stated, “DART is in charge of operation, maintenance, and enforcement.” She jokingly says that TxDOT can’t go out with shovels and work crews to get violators out of the HOV lane.

How was this configuration chosen?
Petras states,“The US-75 HOV lane came together in a partnership between DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) and the NCTCOG (North Central Texas Council of Governments). The need and process started 15 to 20 years ago.”

How was this configuration chosen?
Originally, the design had been conceived to be one single direction managed lane.

“However, Richardson lobbied and said it needed to be two concurrent HOV Lanes,” Petras stated, “(TxDOT) examined the traffic forecast and agreed that two lanes would be a greater benefit to the public.”

“[Then Mayor] Gary Slagel went to TxDot and told them Richardson wouldn’t benefit from a single lane,” Richardson city council person Dennis Stewart said, “So [the concurrent lane configuration] is from the efforts of Slagel and Bill Keffler.”

How long has the process of designing the configuration been going on? Wasn’t the current configuration an after thought?
“Before the planning of the High Five Interchange was complete we were talking about the HOV lane configuration,” Slagel said, “It’s been an ongoing thing for a long time.”

Petras said, “When the High Five was going in we saw that as an opportunity.” Since the HOV lane was on the regional transportation plan it made sense, both physically and economically, to do it at that time.

Was a two-lane system really cheaper?
Frequently, officials note a cost savings of going from a managed single direction lane to the concurrent two-lane system. No official I asked, including Richardson officials and traffic engineers, could give me an exact figure. The reason is that the two systems cannot be compared side by side. Figures of savings are often stated casually as being in the millions.

According to Richardson traffic engineers, the single managed lane was intended to end in Plano but the two-lane system goes to Allen. Also, the City of Plano rolled in exit improvements along 75 into the project that wouldn’t have been there in the single lane version, and therefore the scope cannot be compared. However, most say that the savings would be significant if one only included the HOV work on a mile-per-mile basis.

Who was ultimately responsible for the configuration?
In short, TxDOT. Although planning involves all the affected agencies, TxDOT ultimately implements the plan.

“[Richardson] doesn’t control it,” said Richardson Mayor Steve Mitchell, “The design is a TxDOT decision.”

Why isn’t there an access point in Richardson?
The short answer: Traffic projections, if correct, show that if there was an access point in the Arapaho Road-Campbell Road area then the HOV lane would become ineffective.

The long answer: “The point of the HOV lane is to move traffic,” Petras states, “Engineers tell us that at about 1600 to 1800 vehicles per hour an HOV lane becomes ineffective.”

According to Petras, the traffic projections state that in Allen an average of 1026 cars would enter the HOV lane per hour. In Plano, as the HOV lane is now configured with an access point, 554 vehicles would enter and 256 would exit. This leaves just over 1300 vehicles in the HOV lane. The projections for a hypothetical Arapaho-Campbell access point in Richardson would add 766 cars and 254 would exit. This puts the total over 1800 vehicles, which is above the high-end limit of the HOV lane.

“Since the job is to move vehicles safely and effectively,” Petras said, “according to this projection [a Richardson access point] would be ineffective.”

Did Richardson officials simply accept these projections?
It appears not.

Mayor Mitchell stated, “We didn’t just accept this. We have felt there ought to be an on and off ramp in Richardson.”

Former Mayor Slagel stated, “When I was Mayor, I intended and the staff intended that it would have an exit for people who work in Richardson and then it turned out not to be. I thought there was going to be an exit north of the [George Bush Turnpike] and then the poles went up. I’m no longer mayor and so I was less engaged in the process.”

If the configuration ultimately changes, who will make the changes?
TxDOT.

“If [the affected cities of DART] want to change it, they come to TxDOT,” Petras said.

Why not just add an extra lane of traffic each way and not an HOV lane?
Richardson city councilman Rhea Allison said, “If it’s not feasible to have [a Richardson access point] why not do away with it and open it up?”

Petras said, “We got federal money for an HOV lane and it can’t be used to a regular traffic lane.”

She stated it would have been extremely difficult to get any federal money for regular lanes of traffic. With an HOV lane, TxDOT and NCTCOG (who does the traffic projections) showed that an HOV lane could increase mobility and reduce congestion, and clean the air. Because of that federal funds were available.

Why was a “picket fence” used?
One target of criticism was the barrier system used to separate the HOV lane from the regular lanes of traffic. This barrier gets all sorts of nicknames such as “picket fence” and “popsicle sticks.”

The actual name of the barrier is, “mountable curb and pylon system.”

Petras says safety was the main reason it was adopted. TxDOT studied the accident rates on I-635 before and after the HOV lanes were installed.

“Accident rates increased near HOV entrances and exits,” she stated, “as well as in the HOV lane and the HOV adjacent lane. There are a number of reasons for this including speed differential.” She stated that it was not feasible to erect permanent barriers so TxDOT choose to the use the pylon system.

What do people say about the pylon system?
“The lollypop sticks are a bad design and they look ugly,” councilperson Bob Townsend declared.

Councilman Allison stated, “It’s ugly and hate those slates.”

Can the configuration be changed to include a Richardson access point?
Petras said that is that after about six months the actual use does not live up to the projections noted above that TxDOT would consider changing the configuration.

“Richardson understood the traffic projections,” Petras said, “They understood we could evaluate traffic flow after 6 months.”

Who do you contact if you have comments about the configuration?
Mayor Mitchell said, “People ought to contact TxDOT and let them know how they feel.”