Rant: Carpool Lanes

[widebody911]

Ok, I just lived through a year of construction on I-80 between Sacramento and Rosville, only to find out all the work was for naught - the lane they added is a carpool lane.

I'm a liberal, and I play one on TV, but the idea of carpool lanes just seems stupid to me. Here's why:

• Do they think people honestly say to each other "Oooh! Let's carpool so we can drive in the special lane?"
• Despite using the carpool lane, you still have to slog through the same surface street traffic as everyone else, which just about nullifies any gains of being able to bypass traffic for a short part of the commute. By the same token, it's interesting to watch someone try to get out of the carpool lane into congested traffic; they effectly stop traffic in the carpool lane.
• Driving in the carpool lane invites unwanted attention from law enforcement, eager to cash in the $271 bounty on your head
• Children and infants are accepted as qualifying carpool passengers. Why? The point is to get cars off the road. If you insist on perpetuationg this experiment in social engineering, then make the requirement 2 or more licensed drivers.
• In reality, if people who knew each other well enough to carpool lived close enough that it was convenient, they'd already be doing it, without the addition of a special lane.

I think that nice wide strip of land in the center of the freeway would have been much better used by extending light rail, which terminates less than a mile from where the carpool lanes start.

[cegerer]

Yeah, I got to experience the car pool lanes while in Calif. recently. We don't have them here. I've got my wife and 2 kids with me and at first thought, 'I'm not car-pooling here' so didn't drive in them. Then I figured, what the hell, I doubt ANYBODY is really car-pooling!! So I drove in them until, invariably, you'd run into a snag caused by some concerned citizen actually traveling at the SPEED LIMIT for god's sake!! So, bottom line, it was quicker to just utilize all six lanes and drive in whatever lane was moving the fastest .......

[Moses]

I agree completely.

Using the fast lane for social engineering is just silly. I expect someone to start a referendum to reserve the diamond lanes for high-occupancy vehicles, electric Hondas and lesbians. Sheesh!

[Icemaster]

Wanna get more cars off the road? Quit making them largerto accomodate more cars and focus on alternative means.

I would SO love to have the kind of rail infrastructure here in the states that I fell in love with in Europe.

[pbs911]

Children and infants are accepted as qualifying carpool passengers. Why? The point is to get cars off the road. If you insist on perpetuationg this experiment in social engineering, then make the requirement 2 or more licensed drivers.

I like that one. Never thought of it.

The same thin happened here in the OC. Years of traffic congestion on the freeway to widen the lanes only to install a car pool lane.

The car pool lane laws are also occupancy biased. They should be based upon maximum occupancy of the vehicle along with the minimum 2 person per car. For example, a four door car with front and rear seats can carry 4-5 individuals with comfort. But the law only requires 2 passangers to use the car pool. This effectively wastes 2-3 open seats in the vehicle and keeps 2-3 more cars on the highways. Conversly, the P-car only has two seats that can carry 2 passangers comfortably (If you disagree come ride with me from OC to LA and you can sit in the back seat.) A single driver in the P-car is therefore contributing less to traffic congestion since it does not have the ability to remove 2-3 additional cars from the highways. P-cars should therefore be rewarded with car pool privleges regardless of whether or not a passanger is present. In fairness, car pool pool laws should utilize a rule that you must be carrying 1/2 of the maximum occupancy of the car. This is readily apparent by the current rules that a normal passanger car may utilize the car pool lane with only 2 out of the 4-5 seats filed. Extending this basic rule would permit P-cars to use the car pool lane with only the driver. Sounds fair to me!

[Moneyguy1]

Maybe not all licensed drivers, but how about adults? There are some folks who, due to a disability or by choice do not have a driver's license.

[emwporsche]

screw it.
learn the cop spots.
drive in the lane.
I drove past a cop while I was alone in the carpool lane just the other day.
The key is to stay in the lane and ignore him.
(the momo seats help too)

[id10t]

Originally posted by pbs911
Conversly, the P-car only has two seats that can carry 2 passangers comfortably (If you disagree come ride with me from OC to LA and you can sit in the back seat.)

Having gone from Gainesville (N. Central Fl.) to Key West in the back of a 356 with luggage for 3 and scuba gear for 2, I can understand that! I was 15 at the time too....

[RickM]

Didn't you guys learn from us New Jerseans? Huge failure over here. Done away with at large cost in federal dollars to the state.

I think they should continue development on the automated/motorized center divider. Seems one way is usually packed and the other is empty.

[BGCarrera32]

I'm with ya. Minnesota has the same nonsense. They totally screwed up a major freeway here years ago (394) putting in the HOV commuter lanes that only run certain directions depending on the time of day, and while the rest of the freeway is packed the HOV lanes have maybe only a dozen cars on it. Rather than fixing the mess, the genius government here wants to make it a high speed pay lane, where you swipe your card through at the ramp to get on.

NEVERMIND that fact the taxpayers already payed for the construction of the freeway to begin with...

The commuter lane is unrealistic because people simply DO NOT transport that way due to their life/time/daily things to do, etc.

The lightrail here is a joke too. Not that I am against lightrail per say, but the program is not self sufficient...the revenue generated from the rider base will never cover the cost of operating the service.

[JavaBrewer]

Light rail only works for densely populated work destinations - like downtown LA/SD. They're not going to put in rail stops every 5 blocks so what do you do when your train station is still 2 miles away from your place of employment? Ride a bike? Seriously, that's never going to happen in SoCal for about 98% of the folks.

I like the carpool lane. Last year I commuted everyday with a coworker on the 15 between San Marcos and Mission Valley - benefits in gas and time. Admittedly, the Ahole who designed the carpool lane must of been was high cause it ended in Carmel Mountain - right where the traffic really gets bad. CalTrans is working now to widen from Carmel Mountain to Escondido over the next couple of years. If I'm still dong the same route I will definitely be looking for a new carpool buddy. Hopefully by then I'll be telcommuting to work 2-3 days a week too. Just when you think traffic can't get worse it does. Starts at 05:00 these days

[wckrause]

I agree that the HOV lanes on 394 were a huge mistake. Now that they are already there and underutilized it makes sense to find ways to move more traffic into them. Your only choices are to open them up to everybody, or to use them to raise some revenue to pay for other needed improvements. I like opening them up to everybody, but the state/city needs a lot of improving in other areas, so the revenue would help out.

Light Rail is stupid in this market. Expanded bus service is all that's needed, and is far cheaper (but no Federal money comes with that plan).

[Eric Coffey]

Here there are HOV lanes on the RIGHT side of the freeway. The idea was to accomadate busses (frequent exits), but it is a complete nightmare for everyone else, including those legally driving in the "special" lane.