hybrids get them off HOV |
Post Reply | Page <1234 25> |
Author | |
felixthecat
New Slug Joined: 04 Mar 2005 Location: virginia Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Mr. Bill, I agree with your comment regarding the use of hybrids. I bought mine for various reasons, however one of the mains one being that if in anyway possible I can lessen our dependancy on foreign oil then I am on board with it. I've stated in other posts that if all is said and done and hybrid owners are no longer able to travel HOV as SOV, then so be it. I've ranted enough I guess, but I just wanted to chime in and say it was good to hear someone voice a similar opinion to mine.
|
|
NoSUV
New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The problem remains on how to reduce the OVERALL congestion. HOV lanes generally have excess capacity, especially compared to the regular lanes. A balancing effort is needed. One way is to allow some of the SOVs into the HOVs, which is what the hybrid exemption does quite nicely. Another way is through the use of tolls, which would allow market forces to achieve the balance by raising/lowering the toll until the desired balance is achieved. Toll could be graduated based on occupancy: $4 base fare, reduced by $2 for each additional passenger. Could make "CF" plates count as an additional person. HOV-3 still ride for free; SOV hybrids pay $2; regular SOVs pay $4. If HOV lanes are too crowded, double the toll. If balance too far the other way, cut the toll in half. Everyone wins.
|
|
qorc
New Slug Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Location: va Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
it's not ridiculous.
IF the point of HOV IS to take drivers off the road - than any scheme, allowance or exemption that does NOT take drivers of the road should be considered. Why is this hard for some of you to understand? Current exemptions that do NOT remove drivers from 95 1. Hybrids (obviously) 2. motorcyles (they take up a lane too. Why are they on HOV???) 3. Children (again, this removes no drivers from the road). why is this so threatening of a discussion? You hypocrites that want the exemption on Hybrids ended, but want to be able to tote your kids to day care in the HOV lanes? Why? For your own convenience - typical "I want everyone else to max out on HOV, but I'll do what's convenient for me" - NIMBY syndrome for the road. I think it's all up to discussion. If you want to maximize the flow of the road on both sides, you have to minimize the number of drivers. Simple as that. but some of you are so wrapped up in your own needs (and frankly, I feel sorry for kids being toted downtown for Day Care; maybe some of you should raise your OWN children? but that's another issue), that you get personal whenever someonen challenges you factually. Flame me if you want, but that only acknowledges that you've no facts to present and you've lost the argument. |
|
VA4ver
New Slug Joined: 09 Feb 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Gorc you are obviously a pig headed man. Maybe the MEN out there should provide the the MOTHERS out there so that YES they can raise their children.
Gorc you are the typical "ME" person in DC. YOU flaunt that YOU purchased a Hybrid so that you can travel solo. Well, get your solo rear to the regular lanes and stay off this site. |
|
qorc
New Slug Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Location: va Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
got nothing to do with being pig-headed. I have children of my own.
but I find it laughable that you people want EXEMPTIONS from HOV restrictions for children, but not for hybrids or motorcycles. It makes no sense. Again, if the point of HOV is to (now read carefully and see if you can actually follow the logic) REMOVE DRIVERS FROM THE ROAD THEREBY PROVIDING MORE ROOM FOR EVERYONE, then having children of non-driving age count as slugs makes absolutely no sense. Why is it so threatening for idiots like you to even discuss it? What is this? The old Soviet Union? Get a grip. |
|
VA4ver
New Slug Joined: 09 Feb 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There is a huge difference between singling out a car filled by a family unit commuting to work/daycare and a hybrid with one person. First of all the hybrid is just one, but the family unit traveling into work is Father/Mother (2 workers) and child(ren). The biggest threat to the HOV lanes is the solo occupancy vehicle (off duty policeman, motocycle, hybrid, violator). Remember meeting the HOV3 requirement is what counts. We all pay taxes to support this road, so if HOV-3 is met, access can't be denied.
Your argument just isn't valid and the focus should be on strictly the HOT and HOV-1 issues. |
|
Bob
New Slug Joined: 14 Dec 2001 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There is another small difference. If we didn't do something about hybrids, we would have an avalanche of hybrids. If we don't do anything about motorcycles, I don't think we will have an avalanche of motorcyles.
|
|
bnvus
New Slug Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Gorc...you are an idiot. How many vehicles do you actually see in the morning with children as passengers? Really. Now count the number of Hybrids. I rest my case.
To the mothers out there who commute their kids into DC it only makes sense. What happens if the kids get sick or hurt? Better to be 10 minutes away versus 45 min-1hr away. |
|
qorc
New Slug Joined: 18 Mar 2004 Location: va Status: Offline Points: 0 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
bnvus
the idiot is you. I see LOTS of them, especially in the evening. Everyone wants the rules to suit their needs so they can use HOV, I'm only questioning any exemption that does not remove drivers from the road. That IS the point of HOV. Not to "help families commute." Frankly, if these people really cared about their kids, they wouldn't bet toting them to daycare anyway. Or is that concept too difficult for you to grasp? |
|
sluDgE
Master Slug Joined: 27 Oct 2003 Status: Offline Points: 501 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Two honest differences of opinion above. Has anyone looked up how the HOV regulation defines the 3 occupants required for legal HOV use? Does it say specify adults, children over 12 years old, infants, etc? Or is it just occupants. Until this thread, I've never heard about the possibility of any demographic restrictions on the 3 people required to be legal on HOV. Is there? [?]
qorc and VA4ver, have you looked up the regulations to support either of your arguments -- or are you both just content to call each other idiots? [V] Be nice and, Keep on sluggin'! [:)] |
|
Post Reply | Page <1234 25> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |