Retirees, joyriding teenagers, workmen enjoy carpool lanes at everybodys
expense.

Published Wednesday, April 5, 2006, in the San Jose Mercury News

Gripes du jour? You guessed it: those darn carpool lanes, again

By Gary Richards

Q My main complaint is your support of carpool lanes. I have not seen
even one instance of someone joining a carpool so that they could go
in a carpool lane. On my commute, the carpool lane on Highway 237
is mostly empty, while the remaining two lanes are crowded, slow,
irritating and dangerous. Meanwhile, it costs extra money to build
special overpasses for carpool lanes such as at 101 and 85. ... No
one has been able to show me that the creation of carpool lanes has
ever created even one new carpool. I have tried to get some data
that would justify carpool lanes, but it apparently is just not out
there. Vehicles using these lanes are merely cars with two or more
occupants, such as retirees going to an appointment, teenagers out
for a joyride, workmen in their pickup heading to Home Depot, etc.

Ted Rees, Don Burklo and more

A A few years ago a survey showed that two to three of every five
carpoolers were riding with someone who lived outside their home --
How many would carpool even without diamond lanes? Your guess
is as good as mine. But before you anti-carpoolers get too cocky,
consider this:

Washington state officials recently yanked out a carpool lane on
Interstate 5, and here's what happened according to a report in
The Oregonian: the commute got slower and more congested, and more
accidents occurred.

* With a carpool lane, 4,000 cars per hour moved along I-5. When
lanes were opened to solo drivers, the number dropped to 3,500.
More cars flocked to the road, causing more delays.

* When carpool hours were in place, solo drivers covered three miles
in about 13 minutes. After the carpool lane was removed, everyone
took 19 minutes.

* With the carpool lane, there were two incidents a day. Without
the carpool lane, the average was 15 a day.