Comments on: in defense of smart lanes http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/ Getting around the Bay Area with Denis Cuff and the Queen of the Road Tue, 17 May 2011 06:04:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: enelson http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/comment-page-1/#comment-43 enelson Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:39:54 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/#comment-43 Donald,
“Lexus Lanes” has always worked for me because it does a better job of deriding the idea. That’s not to say that the idea doesn’t have merit, but if you want to point up why some people don’t approve ot the idea, the name works. On the other hand, there are a lot of old, beat-up Lincolns driven by people who can’t afford to pay tolls to drive to work, so I don’t think that makes the point as well.
Thanks for your comment,
Capricious Commuter

]]> By: Donald Sampson http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/comment-page-1/#comment-42 Donald Sampson Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:41:55 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/#comment-42 My first thought is misuse of funds. The state will inevitably draw funds off of this revenue stream and direct them away from transportation.

Secondly, before this nickname gets off the ground, let us not advocate import products; how about “Lincoln Lane” if we just must call it something other than Smart Lane?

]]> By: Leslie Stewart http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/comment-page-1/#comment-41 Leslie Stewart Thu, 08 Jun 2006 04:31:58 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/#comment-41 You ought to read a bit more about the Orange County lanes. Information that was presented about a year ago by the Alameda County CMA when the concept for the I-680 lanes was being presented indicated that they weren’t just for the elite. Small businesses looking for on-time deliveries, moms late for picking up kids at daycare, and other “ordinary people” used them frequently although not constantly. Even a VW needs to get to the airport quickly sometimes!

Also, I believe the Alameda County CMA had committed to doing a study on how cost could be defrayed for low-income drivers so that they would not be excluded. Might be worth checking on how that is going.

]]> By: Joel B. http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Joel B. Wed, 07 Jun 2006 20:29:49 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/06/06/in-defense-of-smart-lanes/#comment-40 Toll lanes are worse than free lanes, but no lanes are worse than toll lanes. I don’t really like the idea of toll lanes, but they would be nice, for that day when I do want to get home early or whatever, one thing I think really ought to happen (but never will), is that 84 should be turned into a toll road and widened to 4 lanes (2 in each direction), that would probably get a huge amount of use, and would ease congestion on 580 quite substanially, perhaps the revenues could be used to increase ACE service.

Environmental groups ought to support this, because cars sitting in traffic generate greater pollution than cars zipping by (mainly because a car zipping by will probably be on the road for less time than a car in traffic). Transit will not generally get people out of their cars, I take ACE as often as I can, but that still averages only 2 days a week (I have a job that often works past 5). And even, as I’m sure you’re aware Capital Corridor has some very odd (and long) run times. Until transit improves, people will drive. Might as well use those together, get people who drive to pay for improving transit. (I’d love to see more and later ACE service as well as replacing the 2nd track over the Altamont that SP took out long ago.)

]]>