TxDoT considers adding more HOV access after driver complaints

Pavel Lishin, says:

I'm not really sure why HOVs are limited access, anyway. Seems like a good way to block up a whole lane for miles if someone has an accident.

Andrew Laska, says:

Why do HOV lanes have limited access? See this Richardson Echo article on the topic: http://www.richardsonecho.com/News/Re...

Pavel Lishin, says:

David: An interesting example, sure, but people can (and do) swerve into any lane. Might as well put up barriers on every lane.

Then again, the article does have some impressive statistics, and I have to disagree with Alex - why is inconvenience worse than an accident? No matter what, there will be a jam after an accident.

But I still avoid limited-access HOV lanes, even when I can drive in them, especially ones with a concrete barrier - no way out of those short of reversing all the way to the nearest entrance - after everyone behind you does, of course.

Scott Doyle, says:

That's when natural selection steps in, David.

One very, very large point against limited access is that emergency vehicles use open HOV lanes all the time to get to an accident much quicker than they're otherwise able to. I cite 635...seemingly daily.

And if they strictly used 635 as a comparable system, Jebus help us (I'm looking at Andrew's FAQ's here). 635 HOV exit areas are wayyyy too close to the actual exit you're trying to make. Cutting across that many lanes in a short period of time is asking for continual accidents.

So, from a safety standpoint, lengthening the distance between HOV exits and actual freeway exits may be just as effective as blocking off the HOV lane altogether. Ambulances, fire trucks and police are able to respond to bad accidents quicker if they aren't restricted to regular lanes of traffic. Seems like common sense to me.

Maybe I'm just retarded and nobody's told me yet.

Pavel Lishin, says:

Natural selection is blind; a jackass might swerve into me and purge my genes from the pool through no fault of mine other than taking the highway to visit my parents. (Incoming jtmbls "get your genes out of my pool miscreant!") I don't think that Darwinism is a good tactic for a department responsible for people's safety.

Scott Doyle, says:

Severely doubt you rear-ending someone who jumps into the HOV lane is going to purge your genes from the pool. Suppose someone equally as stupid hits you in traffic and there's not an open HOV lane for paramedics to promptly respond. You're boned.

Just sayin.

Rick Yost, says:

We wouldn't need HOV lanes at all if everyone on the road could actually drive. I don't mean cautiously, carefully, responsibly- I mean intelligently.

Rick Yost, says:

Hey David- I understand what you're saying. I'm just going by what I see and what I understand about human behavior and traffic.
I see folks who don't have a destination- driving dangerously slow 'and proud of it', or homicidal late-to-that-appointment idiots who floor it every time traffic moves up a car length. Then there are the apparent normal folks who still will alternate their speed from 55 to 75 several times in one-mile stretch. People who completely ignore safety and common-sense rules of the road, and then my personal favorite- drivers on the phone. It's easy to tell when the tone of the conversation changes- so does their attention to their driving, or lack there of.
Yeah, I'm just venting. Hell, I can't expect good driving from a species that has yet to figure out how to walk down a crowed hallway without bumping into each other.

I guess my point is that if we thought in terms of 'flow of traffic' instead of 'I am the most special person on the road', we might get home faster and save fuel too.
I'm just sayin'.

P.S. Personal observation: People drive their cars like they push their grocery carts.

Pavel Lishin, says:

Wobbly wheel and all.