| Author |
 Topic  |
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
 Posted - 03/21/2007 : 16:17:34
|
Yes, beachhead, option 2 is inevitable since the whole point to this is to do everything automatically. There may be toll gantries every mile inside the Beltway because the toll is done in segments; it is not based on your entry point alone.
NoSUV: So maybe you can tell me how, technically, they are going to do this people-counting at multiple points along the road at 65mph?
Are they going to ask us to pull over into a special checking lane fifteen times between Route 234 and the 14th St. Bridge? That is the system on SR91 and it clearly won't work in the system proposed for I95.
How will an automated toll gantry distinguish between car A with two people (cha ching), and car B with three people (free)? They don't have that problem on SR 91 because lower-priced HOV cars go into a separate toll and checkpoint lane. One Time! Not twenty.
Could carpools travel without a toll on SR91? Sure, that was the promise, wasn't it? But is it free today, in reality? Of course not! Thanks for making my point.
And yes, there can be multiple exit and entry points on an auto-tolling system... provided that the toll is the same for every vehicle and the machine doesn't have to count passengers, which it can't do, and charge different amounts. Thanks for making my point again.
Finally, legal tinting of windows is more than sufficient to make it impossible to use a video camera to count passengers, as you can see for yourself everyday on our roads. Many is the time, on a bright sunny day, when I cannot tell if the car next to us is HOV or a cheater. Plus, southern states allow darker tinting than northern states... are you going to send tickets to every dark-windowed Floridian who dares drive on a federal highway his tax dollars paid for? What about panel vans? Planning to stop them all and peer in the back?
|
 |
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2007 : 07:28:05
|
Sponge - you seem to be a savvy commuter. Have you ever used a Smart Card? Do you have to swipe your card at every station? How does the card know how much to charge you between your entry and exit point? Is there a reason the transponder in a car can't use the same technology as the Smart Card so you only have to be recorded at your entry and exit point?
Are you also saying that the technology doesn't exist for video cameras to slow the video down when reading it and that the digital clarity is less than what we currently can get on our TV sets? And why would you need to people count at multiple points instead of just entry/exit (which is what they do on SR 91)? |
|
|
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
Posted - 03/22/2007 : 13:49:48
|
Huh? Your first question doesn't even make sense -- it isn't even a question. The point isn't whether the technology exists to charge a variable amount as the cars pass under the gantries -- that isn't the issue. The issue is that it will have to charge EVERY car the SAME amount because on one day you might have two people in that car and the next you might have three and be, supposedly, able to ride for free.
Yes, I am saying that the technology DOES NOT EXIST to do that. Digital clarity? Through the side of a panel van? Huh?
Perhaps you have conveniently forgotten my previous postings in which Dr. Smith of UVA, a member of the advisory panel for HOT lanes, said that vehicle occupancy checks can only be done manually, not by video.
The reason that you need to verify passengers at each tolling point is obvious: if you have a transponder in your car, the gantry charges you at each tolling point. For HOV to be free, either your transponder will have to be turned off when you are on the toll roads and carrying three, or you will need a special transponder. So what is to keep cheaters from putting the transponder in the "sock" or oops accidentally forgetting to bring their non-HOV transponder with them that day. In other words, there is no way to stop cheating, which disrupts the business model and irritates the investors.
Ergo, the only way to operate the system to produce revenue and reduce cheating is to just toll everyone. Like they do on SR91. |
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2007 : 14:21:06
|
sponge - Ah, I see the problem. You are stuck on there being several toll points for a single vehicle on a single trip.
Not needed. Just have to record the beginning and end. That means only toll stations at entry and exit points.
Bob proposed the simplist solution to the HOV count - you put signals at the entry points (he put the idea forward to regulate traffic entry, but it solves the same purpose by allowing cameras to have the time to video the occupants as well as the plates).
So you make all entry points at least 2 lanes - those paying a toll and those believing they have an exemption. Transponders needed for both, but for the exemption, the record goes to a different file than those paying. At vehicle exit point, the transponder is again recorded and then matched up to the entry file. Those without exemption get their bill (debit); those exempt don't. Random monitoring of video determines who gets to pay the (healthy) fine for being in the wrong lane.
Too simple? |
|
|
|
MDC
Moderator
638 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 09:02:29
|
| Yes, it's too simple. Cameras can't count people in the back seats when there are darker tinted windows, or in the dark. And that's assuming that a camera can count people, which they can't. Don't suggest IR cameras because they wouldn't work during the day. |
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 12:24:59
|
| Sounds like HOV-2 would work. |
|
|
|
JRWoodbridge
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 09:04:36
|
To me it's becoming obvious that our Delegates are out of touch with the reality of driving in the I95 HOV. While, Delegate Cole's solution of expanding the HOV and regular lanes would help out the region, it is not a short term solution and will cost the tax payers billions of dollars. I'm not sure what is meant by a "Reasonable Compromise". If the intent of the HOV is to reduce congestion and help our environment, the only way to do that is to enforce the HOV 3 and reduce the number of cars on the road.
quote:
[i]Originally posted by No2HOV-1[/i]
[br]Message sent to VA Delegates:
Gentlemen, Last year the voters in Virginia were promised that the exemption for Hybrid cars to use the HOV with less than three persons would not be extended this year. It is my understanding that the exemption has been renewed. The traffic congestion on I-95 is due to volume. Allowing individuals to use the HOV offers no incentive to carpool and help reduce the number of cars on the road. In addition, as traffic becomes more congested, the amount of air pollution from regular cars only increases due to inefficiencies. The near term solution to reducing traffic congestion on I-95 South is to make the HOV three for all cars or even four to help reduce volume. I challenge either of you two gentlemen to travel on I-95 South between Washington and Fredericksburg at 5PM any weeknight and tell me less cars would not improve conditions. Please encourage Governor Kaine to veto the hybrid exemption as a benefit to a vast majority of Virginia voters. Thank you.
Response from Delegate Mark Cole:
I understand your concerns. The exemption for hybrids purchased before July 2006 was extended for another year. I think most believe that limiting it to hybrids purchased before July 2006 was a reasonable compromise and that will cause a gradual decline in the number of hybrids using the HOV lanes. Of course the real solution is to expand the HOV and regular lanes on I95 which is what I am pushing for.
Thanks,
Mark Cole
Delegate, 88th District
Stafford, Spotsylvania, and Fauquier Counties
|
|
|
|
wdossel
Senior Member Member
127 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 12:18:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by No2HOV-1
Response from Delegate Mark Cole:
I understand your concerns. The exemption for hybrids purchased before July 2006 was extended for another year. I think most believe that limiting it to hybrids purchased before July 2006 was a reasonable compromise and that will cause a gradual decline in the number of hybrids using the HOV lanes. Of course the real solution is to expand the HOV and regular lanes on I95 which is what I am pushing for.
Thanks,
Mark Cole
Delegate, 88th District
Stafford, Spotsylvania, and Fauquier Counties
translated:
"will cause a gradual decline in the number of hybrids using the HOV lanes until HOT is implemented and I and my fellow legislators won't have to deal with this issue any more"
Seriously, assuming an average 5yr life for a 1st owner hybrid (also assuming the pre-limitation tag cannot be trf to a 2nd/new owner) and the spike in sales that occured before the cutoff date was imlpemented it would seem the two neatly coincide with the above thought...
|
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 13:01:54
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by JRWoodbridge[/i]
[br]To me it's becoming obvious that our Delegates are out of touch with the reality of driving in the I95 HOV. While, Delegate Cole's solution of expanding the HOV and regular lanes would help out the region, it is not a short term solution and will cost the tax payers billions of dollars. I'm not sure what is meant by a "Reasonable Compromise". If the intent of the HOV is to reduce congestion and help our environment, the only way to do that is to enforce the HOV 3 and reduce the number of cars on the road.
[quote][i]Originally posted by No2HOV-1[/i]
[br]
Not the only way. Another way is to go back to what it was when the express lanes were first introduced and use them for buses only. Express lanes then become congestion free and because the number of cars in those lanes becomes zero, the environment becomes better. But you have to ignore the mess in the regular lanes to come to either your conclusion or the one offerred here.
However, both express and regular lane problems are better solved by both going back to pre-1975 legislation for buses only, and adding the provision that SULEV can also use the express lanes. Congestion is still solved for the express lanes, the environment is still better (much better, since the SULEV would also be used for non-commutes), and the regular lane congestion is mitigated by removing SULEV from those lanes. |
|
|
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2007 : 13:30:32
|
Wrong, as usual, NoSUV.
The goal is to move the most people in the fewest vehicles. Eliminating carpools would not drive all those people to ride the bus, because they simply won't do it. (Like you, who won't ride the bus.)
So eliminating carpools would only dramatically increase the number of vehicles in the regular lanes.
Sadly, what you are envisioning is exactly what Fluor/Transurban have in mind: they call it BRT for Bus-Rapid-Transit. It is a mega-bus vehicle capable of carrying many more people than one of the traditional highway bombers that Omniride has. A BRT is something more like a short train or a double-semi.
Fluor's plan all along has been to build BRT stations along I95 and push all the carpoolers onto the mega-buses for a ride to the Pentagon, since these creatures can't negotiate the District's streets. Read Fluor's proposal and you'll see. |
|
|
|
Hooch
Junior Member
27 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2007 : 21:49:39
|
Hey stupid, slugs contribute to the environment by getting cars of the road. Unfortunatley, those of us who bus/slug from down south (234) have had our commute times increased substantially by self serving hybrid owners who drive right by lines of people waiting in commuter lots for buses or slug rides, choosing to clog the HOV lanes. I've actually started counting hybrids that pass the bus in the morning. One day last week, 8 out of 10 vehicles that sped past the bus were hybrids. Not one had a second passenger. I didn't really think about the impact until I got within about a half mile of the pentagon and hit the backup for the exit. HOV's out the whazoo, and you'd be surprised (maybe not) how many of them took the right lane, which is for a right turn, and then turned left. Then they cut in to the correct lane to turn in to the parking areas of the pentagon. Typical self serving hybrid owners.
Hooch |
|
|
|
MDC
Moderator
638 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2007 : 13:58:04
|
| If population is the problem, then eliminate SOV for hybrids dimbulb. Voila, more people in less cars. It's not like there aren't well over 10K SOV hybrids in HOV. |
|
|
|
MDC
Moderator
638 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2007 : 16:15:33
|
| I don't see how that would lower the number of SOVs. |
|
|
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 10:17:25
|
NoSUV, there are no plans to make a bus do what you said: express to my destination. No bus goes directly from Horner or PM straight to State. Carpools do, however.
Did you ride the bus today?
Have you EVER ridden the bus? Have you EVER ridden the Omniride bus?
I do all the time. I have a much more informed opinion of bus riders than you do, since I am one myself, and literally rub elbows with them all the time.
You know NOTHING about the bus system here. Your opinion, as usual, is worthless.
On days like today, when so much worse is going on in the world, your self-centeredness, your arrogance, your elitism, your ignorance, your goading and me-firstism, your selfishness and hypocrisy, are extremely irritating. No one understands why you are on this board. Go away. |
|
|
|
CallmeMrSlug
Senior Member Member
198 Posts |
Posted - 04/18/2007 : 10:39:49
|
| Ahh the cantankerous Spongy one, I so much enjoy reading your posts... :-) |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Accountability and Petition Plans
Forum Locked
