Debate Over Carpool Lanes

Re “Foes of Carpool Lanes Get New Ammunition,” Nov. 29: Over the past 15 years I have logged about half a million miles on L.A. and Orange County freeways. One doesn’t need a degree or to have state-of-the-art computer models to see that carpool lanes are another miserable failure in social engineering. The entire concept is just plain stupid. Who thought this was a great idea? Let’s take all vehicles with two or more occupants and encourage them to dash across five lanes of traffic to enter and exit carpool lanes. Witness the result. Traffic comes to an abrupt halt at every carpool entry and exit point. HOV lanes have not only failed to ease traffic congestion, they’ve made it worse. Not to mention the fact that my tax dollars are being spent on lanes that I can never use.

Caltrans officials promise that diamond lanes are the wave of the future and will ease Southern California’s traffic woes. This wisdom comes from the same agency that lays out orange cones at 9 a.m. on the busiest freeways known to mankind. If there are studies needed to be done, they should be aimed at who’s running Caltrans and their qualifications.

RICHARD SMITH

Chino

*

So, New Jersey is getting rid of diamond lanes? That only confirms my suspicion that the smart people of New Jersey moved to Southern California long ago. If San Fernando Valley Assemblyman Tom McClintock gets his referendum for a “diamond lane holiday” he is sure to get the expected results. Traffic is guaranteed to move faster and smoother. Diamond lanes are not designed to move traffic, they are designed to move people. It is a small reward for the few who are willing to save money and help keep the air a little cleaner.

STANTON G. BAILEY

Lomita

*

If Caltrans really wants the diamond lanes to be effective, I would think it would designate their use for two or more licensed drivers only. When I see an adult with a child in that lane, I doubt that the child would be driving his or her own car anyway. I thought the purpose of the diamond lane was to reduce the number of vehicles on the road by rewarding licensed drivers to team up.

I would even up the incentive to carpool by allowing the use of that lane to three or more licensed drivers. Also, why not give everyone a break by opening them up to everyone on weekends? What’s the point in keeping them restricted Saturday and Sunday, when those are rarely the days people commute to work?

DOREEN LORAND

Downey

*

As a Southern California native and 55, I’ve had lots of time in traffic to think about traffic. Drivers will adapt to lower speeds but never to carpooling. Frankly, there is no solution as long as developers are allowed to exploit our tolerance for long commutes.

However, in the short run, we can easily open up our freeways. Instead of asking drivers for an unrealistic behavior change, just require them to use narrower vehicles so that we can add more lanes to existing freeways. Restrict those lanes to the smaller cars so all of us will have a new incentive to drive more efficient autos.

STEVEN M. GOODMAN

Encino

*

Your excellent article on the carpool lane controversy brings to mind another related freeway topic: Does anybody besides me wonder whatever happened to those ubiquitous, helpful white lines which used to mark off the lanes on Southern California freeways? They appear to be a thing of the past, replaced by often haphazard Botts dots and the meandering stains from previous permanent or temporary lane markings.

While it is all very Californian for us to aspire to live without constraints, I wonder whether a return of the helpful white lines would do us all some good. I bet it would reduce the accident rate; certainly it would reduce the daily stress of driving. How much can some white paint cost in this era of budget surpluses?

RICK NEWBERGER

Westlake Village

* Carpool lanes will only work if drivers with two or more in the care are fined for not using them.

JOHN WILCOCK

Topanga

*

Carpooling is fine for people who work eight-hour days. Unfortunately, most salaried employees are expected to work long, irregular hours. An employer may offer financial incentives for carpooling, such as free parking. But these are more than offset by the financial disincentives, come the annual review, of being stigmatized as a lazy clock-watcher. Similarly, the self-satisfaction of helping to reduce smog is more than offset by the dissatisfaction of not getting your work done.

RUSSELL STONE

Westchester