Caltran study out... no more new HOV stickers

I have been driving the HOV lane between Redwood City and San Jose in my Prius since February 2006. during that time along that stretch of road I have found only 4 things that causes the speed in the HOV lane to be reduced to the same as the standard lanes:

1. An increased number of illegal single-driver cars in the HOV lane, usually due to greater-than-usual congestion in the standard lanes at the time.

2. Getting behind a slow-moving bus, truck or gardener's pick-up.

3. Getting behind a legitimate HOV occupant who consciously or un consciously drives at the same speed as the left-most standard land regardless of the open lane in front of them.

4. Bad highway design – whoever thought it would be a good idea to have the HOV lane of 85N merge with the HOV lane of 101N should be shot. This is now the source of stop and go traffic in the HOV lane EVERY DAY as opposed to a free flow before this ramp was built. Also of special note are the numbers of drivers who upon approaching this Caltran-designed congestion, change lanes out of the HOV lane to the LEFT into the merging lane so they can get 4 cars ahead and then have to re-merge back into the HOV lane. Not to mention the number of people who use the ramp to the 101N HOV lane even though they are getting off at the very first exit, causing them to put on their brakes as soon as they get into the HOV lane and throw on their turn signal to try to cross 4 lanes in a few hundred feet. Caltran, what were you thinking?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alrobot @ Sep 8 2006, 01:21 PM) [snapback]316545[/snapback]</div>

I absolutely agree, traffic free floing in the carpool lane in early 2005? Not in Silicon Valley.

A more realistic measure might be the relative difference between the carpool lane and the non carpool lane speeds. When the non-carpool lanes are at 0 mph (aka parking lot) and carpool lane traffic is moving at 35mph, I much rather be in the 35mph lane than the 0mph lane.

How many people in the carpool lanes drive 70mph on wet pavement in the rain when the non-carpool lanes are a parking lot? I've been in the situation and have considered purchasing a motorcycle helmet for use in the car. Its rather dangerous to have a car pullout from the 0mph non-carpool lane to the 70mph carpool lane in the rain. And I have seen this many times.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 8 2006, 07:15 PM) [snapback]316763[/snapback]</div>

Little Johnny would be getting there at the same speed as any other actual carpool - even when the hybrid HOV access is removed.

About 90% of the time that I use the HOV lane, I have a REAL High Occpancy Vehicle, and it happens to be fully electric (and solar-powered). I'm moving three people, and I'm not contributing to the air pollution. Having you get to your work quicker driving solo in your gasoline-burning Prius is helping society how? Stick three people in your Prius, and I'll go to bat for you.

Personally, I don't think anybody should be using the HOV lanes if they're driving solo. For my money, Little Johnny and his mom and dad have more right to be in the HOV lane than you do driving solo in your Prius.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(inventor00 @ Sep 9 2006, 11:20 AM) [snapback]316968[/snapback]</div>

Good Catch, inventor00

And here we see how a simple, obscure "correction" allows the mass-media to effectively LIE and DISTORT to further the whims of their masters (read: advertisers), while claiming "oh, we posted a correction to the story" while other papers point to the "original" as some form of truth.

Absolutely atrocious. Where have we seen this before? Oh yeah, the obviously "unbiased" ConsumerReports?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Curtis SAC @ Sep 8 2006, 10:32 PM) [snapback]316848[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rufaro @ Sep 8 2006, 11:08 PM) [snapback]316863[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Curtis SAC @ Sep 9 2006, 12:33 AM) [snapback]316878[/snapback]</div>

Whaaa, whaaa, whaaaa!
I knew my “King of Caltrans Decree†would ruffle some parental feathers. SO WHAT!

Parents don't carpool others' kids to school so they can gain access to the HOV lanes. They carpool others' kids because they save time by rotating the duty of which kids' parents drive on whatever day.

Driving kids to school, in most situations, is an asinine, environmentally incorrect, yuppie phenomenon. And don't even try to talk about the 'need' to drive kids because of crime rates. They were much higher back in the '60s and '70s when my 'uncaring' parents forced me to be independent and get my skinny little nice person to school on my own.

We Americans, as a society, really do suffer from Affluenza these days.
http://www.pbs.org/kcts/affluenza/

When I was a kid, I walked or rode my bike six blocks to my elementary school, one mile to my junior high school, and two miles to my high school - until we were old enough to carpool ourselves. It didn't matter if it was raining or cold. I had a jacket. I had a rain coat. And I had shoes and a bike too! <_<

My carbon footprint as a kid was much smaller than that of your over-coddled, spoiled, little brat!
***So just go on defending your kid-carpooling-HOV-access-rights. *** But don't for a second think you are doing society or your child any favors. YOU'RE NOT!!!! And that goes for you grandparent HOVing types too!

No wonder we have an epidemic of fat, dumb, lazy kids today.

The HOV concept is to reduce pollution by taking cars off the road. The HOV lane qualifying person being an unlicensed grandma or breastfeeding infant doesn't take a potential second car off the road, or reduce air pollution.

I'd rather the grandmother, infant, and all others who qualify, automatically gain access to the HOV lane with either a handicap placard or a “Baby On Board†sign in the back window.
- Sound asinine? EXACTLY!!!
The grandma and baby qualify without the signs!!!! The fact that non-licensed persons qualify is what is dumb. They don't remove drivers.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Sep 9 2006, 09:11 PM) [snapback]317228[/snapback]</div>

Well, if that is directed at me, rest assured . . . I don't drive single in the HOV lanes. Even though I have the HOV stickers – I haven't put them on the car.

Not only am I not driving single in the HOV lane, I'm preventing some other hybrid driver from doing it too.

So, do I get extra credit or demerits? :huh:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(inventor00 @ Sep 9 2006, 08:20 AM) [snapback]316968[/snapback]</div>

I wonder what back page they buried ths correction on. Front page something to get people po'd and then do an oops on page 55 and the bottom next to the obits. :wacko:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(GuyLaFurie @ Sep 9 2006, 01:10 PM) [snapback]317061[/snapback]</div>

The HOV lane designation doesn't mean you have the right to drive it like you're on the autobahn. I absolutely will not push beyond 70 (and at about 65~68 I will usually move into the standard traffic lane if the speed is the same). To the stupid idiot in the HUMMER on my bumper that wants to go 75 or 80, go by on the RIGHT! :angry: (And BTW, you're welcome for the windshield wash I just gave your shiny black beast.)

As to lane speed differential, I try to use the same rule that is applied to motorcycles when they ride-up through slow moving traffic. Never, never go past a lane of stopped or slower moving traffic faster than about +15mph differential. It is just insane to do this since you have no way of reducing the impact (notice I didn't say avoiding) if someone swerves out into the HOV lane. At up to +15mph you do get some chance (if you're paying attention and not distracted by what you're talking about on the cell phone) to change the accident from a direct impact into something glancing. I shudder to think what it would be like to bash someone that has pulled partway into your HOV lane with a differential of 40~50. I suspect it could launch you in a way you might even clear the center divider and drop in front of someone going in the opposite direction. Surprise, surprise!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Curtis SAC @ Sep 8 2006, 10:32 PM) [snapback]316848[/snapback]</div>

That was pretty well spoken.

I think the term "carpool" was meant to indicate a bunch of people who used to drive separate cars got together and all ride in one. Unless all the people in the car are licensed, then no "carpool" exists. The lane was designed to reduce total cars and pollution, not make it convenient for folks to tote their kids around. A solo doctor on his way to an emergency care situation is denied the use of the lane while another can use it to bring his mother into town for an appointment? Where is the logic of this?

The only reason we have the yellow stickers is because we contribute to the basic logic stated above: pollution reduction. Whether we get the stickers or not, I believe the carpool lane should be used by people who are committed to the original concept.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mehrenst @ Sep 12 2006, 09:56 AM) [snapback]318427[/snapback]</div>

I think that common courtesy would be, when someone wants to get by me, I turn on the signal and pull over at the first safe spot. I can then get back into my lane of choice without some road-rage yahoo riding my bumper. I am not a highway patrolman, it is *not* my job to regulate traffic. If a guy wants to do mach 4 in the HOV lane, it sure as hell isn't up to me to dissuade him/her and any traffic cop will tell you the same thing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 11 2006, 03:59 PM) [snapback]318019[/snapback]</div>

Nah! I don't think you are preventing anything at all. How are you preventing others from riding in the HOV lanes? Are you tying them up?

You appear, from the tone of your posts, to be a mean spirited blowhard ranting at the world.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 11 2006, 03:59 PM) [snapback]318019[/snapback]</div>

WOW! This one is gonna tick a lot of people off. Then again, anytime a human is told they are living wrong they automatically get defensive and start denying or making excuses. There are some pretty good debates in your post. I can't argue with your logic though. It is basically what a lot of scholars are teaching and the effects are very evident if people open their eyes..

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Sep 11 2006, 05:59 PM) [snapback]318019[/snapback]</div>

Punk.

 

Just to re-butt the original topic- AB 2600 was passed yesterday and now 10,000 more carpool stickers will become available for California....YEAHHH-- and good until 2011 not the original 2008...