Carpool Lane Frustration

In my state, all the federal funds put up for HOV lane expansions came from the DOT, not the EPA. That argues strongly for the congestion relief purpose, not for the emission control purpose.

 

True, but how often recently has the California state government thumbed it's nose at the Feds?

 

Interesting to watch. Presumably Assemblyman Bloom can say he is setting limits (4-yrs?) on the amount of cars. Hard to imagine if the Model 3's sell as big as pre-sales suggest.

Virginia (the original free HOV for hybrids state) cut back on the program in 2006 and cut back more again in 2011. The rational given was Federal mandate for traffic flows, but I believe it was basically a state policy decision to make that excuse. The hybrids here had become target of criticism as they started to fill up the HOV lanes, especially since we have a fairly successful car pool program called slugging in the Wash DC area..

 

On my commute home (San Diego county) the HOV lane only goes a little more than half way. Its stops exactly at the same time as the other lanes and from that point on it pretty much tracks the other lanes. It funny how close it is to the same speed. There usually are some stretches were it will go slightly faster. The big advantage for me is that I can get on the freeway using a dedicated HOV ramp which saves me some time getting to point at which it stops and from then on I don't have to worry about changing lanes or people cutting in front of me. I would say it cuts off maybe 10 - 15 minutes on a 45 minute commute.

 

Just an FYI in case no one knows it. Green and white stickers will be extended an additional 3 years past the 2019 expiration date for 17/18 cars. Just need to reapply in January 2019.

 

I feel sorry for all you city boys talking about HOV lanes. I drove through a National Forest when I went to work about 40 miles outside of Chicago.

 

There has not been too much discussion here about implications of the new HOV rules.
Does this mean cars before 2017/18 such as PiPs and older Leafs Volts lose the HOV or can they re-apply?

 

From https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/decal

What I don't understand is, the statements have said that 2017-2018 owners will be able to apply for the new decals in 2019, but the current ones expire Dec 31, 2018, so what happens between Jan 1, 2019 and when you actually can get the new decals??

 

So let's say you have a PiP or older Leaf/Volt without HOV stickers today. Sounds like you can apply now? That would give that vehicle more sales value. On the other hand, if the vehicle has already HOV expired, that vehicle would sell cheaper.

 

Actually, the way I read it, any vehicles 2016 or earlier will expire in 2019 as previously stated. Only 17/18 vehicles can reapply for the additional 3 years.

2019 vehicles and later will receive the standard 3 year sticker that will expire the same time as the "extended" 17/18 vehicle HOV stickers. At least that's the way I understand it.

 

So you are saying it is Model Year or (new car) purchase in 2017/2018.
That would say all plug-ins 2016 and before losing HOV next Jan? Or do BEV have life-long access?
If so many are losing HOV, then perhaps lots of new purchases to get the HOV benefit.

 

So annoying, quite a few people at both dealerships really didn’t care.

 

You will not be able to use the carpool lane between 1/1/19 and the time you get your new sticker. This is no different than the lag time between when you got your license plate and the time you first received your sticker.

That's incorrect. All green and white stickers issued before 1/1/19 will expire, period. Any stickers issued after 1/1/17 (has nothing to do with the model year of car) can reapply for a new sticker that expires 1/1/22. Hence, if you don't already have a sticker on your Gen 1 plug in or Prime, it's in your best interest to get one now even if you don't use it, because it will add value to your car. Likewise, vehicles with green or white stickers issued before 1/1/17 will be (if not already) losing value.

For 2019+ vehicles, a new sticker (obviously not a green/white extension) will allow HOV access for a minimum of 3 years and a maximum of 4 years. For example, a 2019+ vehicle with a sticker issued between 1/2/19 and 12/31/19 will expire 1/1/23. All stickers issued on or after 1/1/22 will expire 9/30/25.

 

You are making a presumption there. Carpool/HOV lanes exist to reduce the number of cars on the road. Less congestion is certainly not the only benefit of having fewer cars on the road. Fewer cars means less emissions/pollution. Encouraging the use of very low emissions vehicles also contributes to the goal of reducing emissions/pollution. If reducing congestion is the only purpose behind HOV lanes, then why do they allow motorcycles with one rider to use them? That does not reduce congestion.

 

You are replying to someone with a Washington State perspective. Here, it is strictly for congestion relief, our air is much cleaner than yours. Funding support here came only from the DOT, not EPA.

Plus, Hybrid & BEV adoption here has been quite good even without special HOV-lane privileges.

Plus, we have already put plenty of real carpoolers into our HOV lanes. Our HOV system cannot afford a major influx of SOVs without creating congestion. FWIW, I carpooled in our HOV lanes for 15 years, before Prius existed, and strongly support our system of no special HOV privileges for these cars. Even hybrid/PHEV/BEV drivers ought to be forming or joining real carpools. (After ceasing carpooling due to a changed commute route, I was able to bicycle to work quite often.)

The motorcycle lobby is quite strong, and demanded this for their safety, claiming that stop-and-go traffic in the congested regular lanes is more hazardous to 2-wheel than 4-wheel vehicles. Accurate or not, the legislature bought it.

 

I've heard people express the just-for-traffic-congestion point of view since back in 2003 when I bought my first hybrid, though I've usually heard it from people who don't own hybrids. That an owner of a hybrid would be a proponent of it does give me pause and does make me reconsider the issue..

In my view, traffic congestion is a direct result of people wanting to live too far from where they work. It began with the decision to build the federal interstate highway system that effectively subsidized cars rather than investing in public transportation. I don't think getting more people into fewer cars will ultimately address traffic congestion.

Here it is already common for people to have traffic-congested commutes of 120 miles or more per day. I have a friend who commutes over 140 miles each day because, although he must work in the city, his wife wanted a very big house in a suburban setting so they could start having kids (who, in turn, will create more congestion in 16 years). To get a house like that that he could afford, he moved over 70 miles away from his work. He could've bought a smaller house where I live for less than what his house cost. He certainly considered the commute when he moved, and his particular route was made less daunting by the installation of HOV lanes which left the normal lanes less-congested. His choice is not an uncommon one.

I, for one, don't want subsidize the absurd commutes that people undertake with ever-expanding freeways and HOV lanes which then encourage people to undertake even longer commutes. I drive about 5,000 miles per year, and rarely at heavy traffic times. When I do have to drive in rush hour traffic in my city, the HOV decals will save me a great deal of time (primarily on on-and-off ramps and transition ramps). I think that is completely fair given that I've chosen to live a lifestyle with a minimal impact on traffic, pollution and energy usage.

Some cities are acting to restrict the ability of people to drive and/our park in congested areas by the use of parking permits issued only to residents and fees charged to drive private cars in certain heavily-congested areas. I think those efforts are far more likely to reduce congestion than efforts that encourage options like carpools.

I don't think the motorcycle lobby could carry anywhere near the weight of lobbies for the environmental and hybrid/electric car manufacturers. Their use of HOV lanes doesn't create controversy because there are so few motorcycles on the road. Hybrid and electric vehicles (now just plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles) are also allowed to use carpool lanes because there are relatively few of them (and a limited number of decals) and they help to reduce pollution. It makes much more sense to allow these energy-efficient, low emission vehicles to use the HOV lanes than it does to allow motorcycles, most of which are actually heavy polluters with poor mileage from what I understand.

In any event, my first hybrid wouldn't even be eligible for HOV decals now. In about 10 years, I'm guessing there won't be many (if any) decals, even for electric cars. Then those HOV lanes will be back to facilitating and subsidizing the commutes which are very often undertaken by people who could make different choices. When traffic gets bad enough, people like my friend will not be willing to live so far from their places of work. Traffic congestion will force them to make different choices. Until then, my tax dollars spent on HOV lanes and other freeway expansions go to subsidizing their desire to live in big houses.

 

Don't forget all the tax breaks, etc. that highly congested towns keep providing companies to locate in places that are already too packed. It's a shame the alternate is not common where companies are encouraged to locate where congestion is lower so people can afford to live nearby, take alternate forms of transportation like a bicycle or use Prime only in EV mode.

 

Something that I don't see mentioned often is the HOV transponder. This seems to me to negate the 'reduce pollution' and 'reduce congestion' arguments to just so much blather. If the 'soccer person' driving her old Suburban that gets 10 smoking MPG can just get a EZ pass or FastPass (whatever your state calls them), then it becomes just about money and all the arguments otherwise are just moot.

It would be and interesting study to see if just adding extra lanes to an existing freeway without calling them express or HOV would actually reduce the commute times times of all rather than the special lanes that just reduce it for those who can afford it.
After all, most freeway construction projects are subsidized by tax dollars paid by all, shouldn't everyone benefit from extra lanes?

And despite views to the contrary, real freeway traffic congestion will only be solved when autonomous vehicles are the ones allowed to use them. Or didn't you watch the Mythbusters episode on the true causes of traffic jams? When every car is aware of what every other car is doing, there will be no traffic jams. But there are the 'pry the steering wheel out of my cold dead hands' type that are delaying the inevitable.

Just my $.02.

 

No matter how aware they all are, you can only get so many marbles in the jar.

I like that expression, but it could applied to not just hands on steering wheels, but peeps and their cars.

 

So this is huge event in January 2019 in Ca.?
every plug-in except newer ones lose their HOV privileges?
So everyone has to trade in their old plug-in for a new one if they want to keep the HOV?
I see it as a gigantic plug-in sales promotion in Ca, for years to come.