Los Angeles to kick the Leaf out of the HOV lanes

[MrFish]

LA Times article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/l...California+|+Local+News)&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Basically it states that the Mayor has planed to convert the 10 and 110 HOV lanes to Toll lanes. Goes on to specifically state that ZEV HOV stickers won't be honored for solo drivers and must pay to play.

It really shows how fragmented the state is as far as promoting ZEV's. One entity giveth and another taketh away.

 

[mwalsh]

It's all part of this whole privatization of public infrastructure that politicians in this country seem hell bent on these days. Even though I rarely use those freeways, I object to it completely and entirely.

 

[Devin]

I don't believe LA has the authority to change the definition of a valid HOV-stickered vehicle. That is up to the state. The sticker says HOV Access OK. If other cars with multiple occupants can ride in these lanes with no charge, then cars with HOV stickers can too. Otherwise it's a toll road and has to charge multiple occupant vehicles as such.

Furthermore, they expect us to buy transponders that have a service charge of $3/mo so even if I wanted to use that lane every once in awhile (I rarely drive on the 110 or 10) it would be very ineffective for me to do it. But you want to know the best part? Motorcycle riders won't get charged the toll. Motorcycles are cheap, dangerous, and have fewer emissions controls than most average cars. Why punish the people who went out of their way to buy a clean technology vehicle when HOV lane access was part of the incentive to do so only to allow motorcycle riders with little investment or care a free pass?

I think this HOT lane is colossally silly. It's a way to avoid the discussion about full on congestion charging like London. The HOT lane is like building the orange line busway in the valley instead of a proper rail solution, it's a half-arsed compromise that doesn't satisfy anybody on either side of the debate and most of all fails to satisfy most of the people who ride it due to a variety of reasons including overcrowding and lack of a truly dedicated right of way with no level crossings.

 

[EricH]

The sad part is that the very first time I used the HOV stickers was on the eastbound 10 from Walnut Grove to the 605 The overhead cost of the FastPass transponder is ugly, but there remains a vast network of carpool lanes we still have access to:

605 from 10 down to 405
210, 405, 91, 57

If it stops with the 110 and 10, I can live with it.

 

[xtremeflyer]

Furthermore, they expect us to buy transponders that have a service charge of $3/mo so even if I wanted to use that lane every once in awhile (I rarely drive on the 110 or 10) it would be very ineffective for me to do it.

You can get a Transponder from 91 Express Lanes for free for EV vehicles (no monthly fee, free to drive on the 91 except during 4-6pm, then it's half price).. These transponders are FastTrak and will work on all toll roads in California (you'll still have to pay the tolls, its only free on 91 Express) but at least you won't have the monthly fee.

 

[lincomatic]

It's all part of this whole privatization of public infrastructure that politicians in this country seem hell bent on these days. Even though I rarely use those freeways, I object to it completely and entirely.

Couldn't have said it better myself

 

[Deleted member 1464]

Villaraigosa, the mayor of Los Angeles had a deputy back in 2008 that was driving a Hummer around - I found this article from the LA times still around: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/11/local/me-lopez11

Adam Carolla has a great podcast (http://www.adamcarolla.com/ACPBlog/) where he consistently refers to the mayor as "Villa-retardo" (see this thread: http://mahalo.30.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=8174) - turns out the mayor was born "Tony Villar", but according to Carolla, took part of his wife's name so it would sound more Latino.

I have to say, with such deputies and such decisions on the HOV lanes in LA freeways, I'm beginning to agree with Adam Carolla, although "Villa-retardo" is an insult to all retarded folks out there.

 

[GregH]

Who paid for the construction of the carpool lanes in the first place? Was it the city? Or was it state or federal funds? If the City paid for it then I guess they can do what they want.. but if we've all paid for it then I don't see how they have any right to change it...my $0.02

 

[SanDust]

This is a great idea. There is no alternative other than price that allows for the dynamic control of the number of vehicles using the express lanes so as to make all traffic more efficient. Using the number of riders or the efficiency of the vehicle won't do the job because it's a fixed number of vehicles. The fixed number kills your ability to dynamically control use of the express lanes. Plus in LA that fixed number is going to be too high a number for efficiency at most times.

My criticism is that it doesn't go far enough. Why should two gardeners in an F-350 or a suburban mom taking her child to school in an SUV be entitled to a preference? I'd get rid of all preferences based on number of occupants or vehicle efficiency. The "taxpayer" argument is a little weird because, if you have a Leaf, you've already gotten a $7500 tax rebate and probably a $5000 CARB rebate. You can use some of that taxpayer money to pay the tolls. I don't think we as Leaf owners are in a position to complain about taxpayer subsidies.

 

[TomT]

Here's where you sign up for it: https://www.91expresslanes.com/2010/specapp.pdf

You can get a Transponder from 91 Express Lanes for free for EV vehicles (no monthly fee, free to drive on the 91 except during 4-6pm, then it's half price).. These transponders are FastTrak and will work on all toll roads in California (you'll still have to pay the tolls, its only free on 91 Express) but at least you won't have the monthly fee.

 

[hill]

LA Times article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/l...California+|+Local+News)&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Basically it states that the Mayor has planed to convert the 10 and 110 HOV lanes to Toll lanes. Goes on to specifically state that ZEV HOV stickers won't be honored for solo drivers and must pay to play. . . . . . . . . . . . .

not necessarily so - the Bay Area gets free toll . . . . so L.A. can do it too. It'd be really bad P.R. if they went down the "no EV" promo road.

 

[thankyouOB]

I dont like the varied rules for EVs around the state on state and federal hiways. I get that cities can do that for parking charges.
It is also very pernicious, leaving aside the EV issue, to have one set of rules for the rich and another for the poor on the hiways.
This is short-sighted and discriminatory.

Of course, I don't like the change for EVs. If the state says EVs have HOV access and issues the sticker, it should apply statewide on all state and federal roads.

And the PR could be more accurate. They should rename them the Lexus Lanes, and just make clear who our Galtian leaders want to benefit.

 

[Jimmydreams]

My criticism is that it doesn't go far enough. Why should two gardeners in an F-350 or a suburban mom taking her child to school in an SUV be entitled to a preference? I'd get rid of all preferences based on number of occupants or vehicle efficiency. The "taxpayer" argument is a little weird because, if you have a Leaf, you've already gotten a $7500 tax rebate and probably a $5000 CARB rebate. You can use some of that taxpayer money to pay the tolls. I don't think we as Leaf owners are in a position to complain about taxpayer subsidies.

You're kidding, right? The $7500 is federal, not state or city, and you're assuming that everyone qualified for AND files for the credit. What does the federal tax system have to do with the city taking some highways hostage to toll-fees? (btw, what, then is the gas-tax for?)

The $5000 CARB rebate is exhausted, so that was a limited-time offer. It's half of that number now.

The "I don't think we as Leaf owners are in a position to complain about taxpayer subsidies" line is amazing. You assume that since we qualified for specific rebates that we give up our right to complain? Then how can ANYONE complain because to some extent, EVERY person in this country receives value for their tax burden. Our military, highways, social security, medicaid, etc., are all programs everyone uses. But if you take your idea to it's logical conclusion, then the more taxes you pay, the more you can complain? If that's the case, then everyone whip out your 1040 form and let's line up everyone's opinion based on the number at the bottom.

(sheesh!)

 

[awallis]

It's all part of this whole privatization of public infrastructure that politicians in this country seem hell bent on these days. Even though I rarely use those freeways, I object to it completely and entirely.

+1

Ah, the myth that EVERYTHING is more "efficient" if it is private...

 

[MrFish]

As I see it, there are two issues here:
First, is the State and Federal government has made it policy to promote the deployment of electric vehicles. One strategy being used is allowing the cleanest vehicles to use the HOV lanes with solo drivers as a stimulus. What Los Angeles has done in this case is to negate the stimulus which makes it appear that the city does not support green technology.

The second issue is about money, money, money. The conversion of HOV lanes, which were created to reduce traffic congestion, reduce highway construction costs and improve air quality. Converting HOV to toll roads are all about money and abandon the 3 primary reasons for their creation. Leaf owners are seen as potential sources of revenue.

So, the City of Los Angeles states that it supports green tech, unless.............$$$$$

 

[MrFish]

As a follow-up I sent the following to both the mayors office and the editor of the LA Times.

Regarding the conversion of the 10 and 110 HOV lanes to toll lanes the article states "Solo drivers of electric and natural gas vehicles, who get a free pass on carpool lanes elsewhere in the county, will have to pay the same toll as other lone motorists in the new HOT lanes."

First, the State and Federal government has made it policy to promote the deployment of electric vehicles. One strategy being used is allowing the cleanest vehicles to use the HOV lanes with solo drivers as a stimulus. What Los Angeles has done in this case is to negate the stimulus stating that electric vehicles would have to pay the same fee as a Hummer, which makes it appear that the city does not support green technology.

The second issue is about money, money, money. The conversion of HOV lanes, which were created to reduce traffic congestion, reduce highway construction costs and improve air quality. Converting HOV to toll roads are all about money and abandon the 3 primary reasons for their creation. Electric vehicle owners are seen as potential sources of revenue.

So, the City of Los Angeles states that it supports green tech, unless.............$$$$$....there's money to be made.

 

[Herm]

They need the money badly, make the HOV lane pay-per-use or multiple occupancy.

LA needs to do the same thing as many European countries, actively discourage people from driving.. That should reduce the population density a bit.

 

[thankyouOB]

From Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol

The scene below offers Scrooge's response to a request to name the amount he wishes to donate to the merchants' fund for the needy:

``Nothing!'' Scrooge replied.

``You wish to be anonymous?''

``I wish to be left alone,'' said Scrooge. ``Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.''

``Many can't go there; and many would rather die.''

``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides -- excuse me -- I don't know that.''

Our Galtian contributor has an equally righteous ancestor.

 

[SanDust]

The "I don't think we as Leaf owners are in a position to complain about taxpayer subsidies" line is amazing. You assume that since we qualified for specific rebates that we give up our right to complain?

I'm not saying you can't complain. I'm saying the complaint is extremely weak. There was never much reason to allow efficient vehicles into the HOV lanes in the first place. The purpose of HOV lanes is to move people rather than vehicles, so allowing efficient vehicles to have an HOV permit never made any sense, and was adopted only because there wasn't a sufficient number of true multiple occupant vehicles. Since the technology now exists that allows for a better solution than simply ginning up a reason to issue HOV stickers, it's time to give all vehicles other than those with multiple passengers the boot. (If you don't think the HOV sticker system isn't arbitrary then you'll have to explain why relatively inefficient Gen I Prius had stickers and more efficient later generations didn't. And explain the attraction of natural gas vehicles. What makes them so special?).

The point about sucking down $12,500 in subsidies is related to the underlying idea that as an EV owner you're "entitled" to an HOV permit. Where does the sense of entitlement end? The idea expressed in this thread is that, since the government supports EVs, then as an EV driver you should be entitled to special parking privileges and free power and free HOV lane access and on and on and on. Seems to me that $12,500 is a big inventive and that, having being the recipient of this largess, claiming that you're entitled to yet another something is unseemly. If you don't see it then you don't see it.

 

[SanDust]

Ah, the myth that EVERYTHING is more "efficient" if it is private...

The idea isn't that a private toll road would be more efficient, it's that that people should pay for the services that they use and the costs they impose on others. For example, if you can drive on the freeway at any time but choose to do it at rush hour, then you're adding to the congestion. That's your right but you should pay for the time delay you've imposed on other drivers. This is the same concept that says that drivers of ICE vehicles should pay the costs of the health problems they create for those living near freeways or that tobacco companies should pay for the health costs their products impose on society.

A "congestion tax" is designed to have drivers pay for the congestion they create. Since AFAIK a Nissan Leaf imposes the identical amount of congestion as does a Nissan Sentra, the drivers of both cars should pay the same tax. In this case the "tax" comes in the form of a "toll" you pay to avoid the congestion and to decrease it for other drivers, but the principle is the same.

As an FYI, I-15 in San Diego has implemented this system and it works well. You can read about it here: http://fastrak.511sd.com/GettingStarted.aspx