Commuter Lane and Bench Style Seats

[Thefeeder]

A question that has come up and no real answer has been had.

So, LEO's here is the question

Are pick-up trucks with only one bench seat (no rear or side seats) considered a two seater and good to go in the commuter lane which are for 2 or more?

Is it the number of seat belts and not the number of seats?

[WDE91]

Umm I thought it was the number of beating hearts?, excluding those in a womb if it applies?

[EOD3]

I think you're asking about two people on a pickup bench seat accessing a "three" or more carpool lane. Correct?

[Thefeeder]

Originally Posted by EOD3

I think you're asking about two people on a pickup bench seat accessing a "three" or more carpool lane. Correct?

Correct.....Seat has a center consol (articulating), three seat belts.

[AAShooter]

Good question. I have an old Toyota Pickup with a bench set. Three seat belts but reasonably two adults fit in the seat. Does it qualify for a two-seater for the 3 or more carpools?

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by Bjkearns

Umm I thought it was the number of beating hearts?, excluding those in a womb if it applies?

Ditto.

Less than 2 (or 3) people = ticket.

3 people in a vehicle with only 2 seatbelts = ticket.

3 people wearing 3 seatbelts = G2G.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by AAShooter

Does it qualify for a two-seater for the 3 or more carpools?

Not sure I'm understanding this.

Is there an exemption that allows 2-seaters to be in the 3+ HOV lane?
If that is the case, I think the 3rd seatbelt and fold-up armrest make it a no-go.

[Bigtwin]

I am non LEO but are you asking for 2=carpool or 3=carpool? Different palces have different rules as to what =carpool?!

[TRICKSTER]

If the vehicle was designed with 3 sets of seat belts it's a 3 seater.

[9mmepiphany]

It is determined by the number of seatbelts...as designed or imported.

Most pick up trucks 3 occupants across the front to qualify for a 3 or more lane
Mazda MX-5 gets a pass with just 2 occupants
Porsche 911 was always interesting with it's 2 rear seats
McLaren F1 only needs the driver

[oldsmoboat]

Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany

It is determined by the number of seatbelts...as designed or imported.

Most pick up trucks 3 occupants across the front to qualify for a 3 or more lane
Mazda MX-5 gets a pass with just 2 occupants
Porsche 911 was always interesting with it's 2 rear seats
McLaren F1 only needs the driver

Cool, I think I'll run on out and buy an F1!



I wish

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany

McLaren F1 only needs the driver

And there you have it. If you have enough money, you can get around pretty much any law, even a carpool lane ticket!

[TRICKSTER]

Originally Posted by oldsmoboat

Cool, I think I'll run on out and buy an F1!



I wish

You could always get one of these.

[powerstrokemike]

think they should change the law. to either two or three lic. drivers.. these soccers moms with there infinets in a car seat isnt helpling traffic.. if it was set up for cars with two or three lic drivers that means another one or two cars are off the road...

[freonr22]

kids are people too, what about a pregnant lady? 2 people?

[SixPointEight]

Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany

McLaren F1 only needs the driver

even though it has 3 seats?

[9mmepiphany]

And there you have it. If you have enough money

Ralph Lauren had 3...he just liked the way they looked. Gordan Murray really could draw a nice line

[9mmepiphany]

Originally Posted by JT1989

even though it has 3 seats?

The federalized version removed the two outboard rear seats

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany

Ralph Lauren had 3...he just liked the way they looked. Gordan Murray really could draw a nice line

Ya, and in fairness, motorcycles are cool in the HOV as well, but they aren't for everyone.

So to get around the HOV law, it takes money or huevos

[TRICKSTER]

Originally Posted by freonr22

kids are people too, what about a pregnant lady? 2 people?

The purpose of the law was to cut down on traffic by taking vehicles off the road. For that to work, you need licensed drivers to get out of their car and carpool. Young kids and infants are not licensed drivers. What we have is just another poorly written, feel good, law that doesn't do what it was stated it would do.

[freonr22]

but its justification to open toll lanes... ie revenue

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by powerstrokemike

think they should change the law. to either two or three lic. drivers.. these soccers moms with there infinets in a car seat isnt helpling traffic.. if it was set up for cars with two or three lic drivers that means another one or two cars are off the road...

Agreed.

Same for commercial vehicles and private buses. While a public bus bugs me, it's use is proper in that it is getting people off of the road, but a bus heading to an Indian casino, or a class-A RV, or for that matter, any number of commercial vehicles that seem to have a hard time maintaining 55mph have no business over there.

Every day, I'll get into a backup in the HOV when the #1 lane is moving fine (faster than the HOV). Work my way up, and find some kind of commercial truck (landscapers, bus, RV, etc....) doing 50 with nobody in front of it for 1/2 mile.
A former friend used to lay tile and install shower pans. He would stop by Home Depot and pick up an illegal. Had no use for the guy... all they ended up doing was carrying mud, this guy was fully capable of doing the whole job himself, but to him, it was worth the $50 to be able to use the HOV if his job was on the other side of LA.

Originally Posted by freonr22

kids are people too, what about a pregnant lady? 2 people?

That has been attempted in traffic court and failed.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by TRICKSTER

The purpose of the law was to cut down on traffic by taking vehicles off the road. For that to work, you need licensed drivers to get out of their car and carpool. Young kids and infants are not licensed drivers. What we have is just another poorly written, feel good, law that doesn't do what it was stated it would do.

The original HOV lanes were a failure.
Caltrans created the "Diamond Lanes" on the 10 from the east LA interchange out through Santa Monica.
The loss of that one lane caused such a heavy impact to traffic that after less than 6 months, Caltrans was given 15 days to remove all evidence of the "Diamond Lanes". This was back in the late '70s. Another item from Jerry Brown's sack of BS.

It wasn't until the Feds imposed HOV requirements a few years later that the HOV lanes started making a come-back.
Today, any urban project that receives federal funding must add or maintain an HOV lane.

[AAShooter]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

Not sure I'm understanding this.

Is there an exemption that allows 2-seaters to be in the 3+ HOV lane?
If that is the case, I think the 3rd seatbelt and fold-up armrest make it a no-go.

Yes, exemption for 2-seaters.

Yes, 3rd seatbelt and foldup armrest . . . I suspect no-go but hoping.

[Digital_Boy]

Has there been a change to HOV lane policy statewide that now mandates 3 persons or more in a vehicle that was designed for it, or does that only apply in localities where it's specifically designated?

[9mmepiphany]

the number of required riders in a vehicle to qualify for use of the lanes in determined by the locals depending on how they want to regulate traffic...changing from 3 to 2 increases use of the lane

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by Digital_Boy

Has there been a change to HOV lane policy statewide that now mandates 3 persons or more in a vehicle that was designed for it, or does that only apply in localities where it's specifically designated?

It's not statewide. There are some HOV lanes, such as I-10 east of Los Angeles, that have always been 3+.
Most HOV lanes are 2+.
Also, some toll roads have a "3+" lane that offers a free or 50% toll, such as the 91.

[Toast]

3+ HOV lanes? Madness!!

[retired]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

It's not statewide. There are some HOV lanes, such as I-10 east of Los Angeles, that have always been 3+.
Most HOV lanes are 2+.
Also, some toll roads have a "3+" lane that offers a free or 50% toll, such as the 91.

Are you sure about that? Admittedly, I haven't used that fwy much since I've retired, but when I carpooled with 2 other sgts. from the jail in 2001-2002, there was a sign posted on the e/b side that stated there had to be 3 people after a certain time (IIRC, it was 3 or 4pm). If it was before that, only 2 people were necessary. We met it in any case since there were 3 of us and we were on it at 1:30pm.

I do not know if that sign has been changed/removed and 3 are now required all of the time.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by retired

Are you sure about that? Admittedly, I haven't used that fwy much since I've retired, but when I carpooled with 2 other sgts. from the jail in 2001-2002, there was a sign posted on the e/b side that stated there had to be 3 people after a certain time (IIRC, it was 3 or 4pm). If it was before that, only 2 people were necessary. We met it in any case since there were 3 of us and we were on it at 1:30pm.

I do not know if that sign has been changed/removed and 3 are now required all of the time.

I usually use the 210 or the 60 (and the few times I use the 10, I either don't have anyone with me or I'm not on the bike), but I'll have to look again.
Last time I looked at the signs on the 10 was actually mid-late 90s, so the time frame may be something newer. I've never seen any time-restrictions on HOV lanes outside of the Bay Area. Always bummed me out that the HOV on the 101 into San Jose was a "normal" lane during off-peak hours and we don't have any down here.

[EOD3]

Have you ever noticed that people from the Los Angles area always refer to highways and freeways as "the" 210, or "the" 5, etc.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by EOD3

Have you ever noticed that people from the Los Angles area always refer to highways and freeways as "the" 210, or "the" 5, etc.

Ya... that was pointed out to me by a friend from Portland.
Probably because of the mix of state and interstate highways. We only have a few actual "freeways" that are also state highways, such as the 60, 78, 76, and US highways are pretty much a thing of the past with 101 and 395 being the only remaining that I can think of off the top of my head.
In casual conversation, nobody is going to say "US 395"... they're just going to say "the 395", or maybe "highway 395".

[mej16489]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

...for that matter, any ... vehicles that seem to have a hard time maintaining 55mph have no business over there.

Every day, I'll get into a backup in the HOV when the #1 lane is moving fine (faster than the HOV). Work my way up, and find some kind of commercial truck (landscapers, bus, RV, etc....) doing 50 with nobody in front of it for 1/2 mile.

This is a huge part of why I generally won't use an HoV lane even when I can...

[mej16489]

Originally Posted by EOD3

Have you ever noticed that people from the Los Angles area always refer to highways and freeways as "the" 210, or "the" 5, etc.

Its a SoCal throwback to when freeways were primarily referred to by name and not by number. i.e. the Long Beach, the Santa Monica, the Pasadena, the Hollywood.

You still occasionally here things that way in traffic reports, but its getting more and more rare.

[mej16489]

Originally Posted by Cokebottle

I've never seen any time-restrictions on HOV lanes outside of the Bay Area. Always bummed me out that the HOV on the 101 into San Jose was a "normal" lane during off-peak hours and we don't have any down here.

Its certainly not 'urban-LA', but "the" 14 has time designated HoV lanes for rush hours.

[9mmepiphany]

The HOV lands in the Sacto area are rush hour specific too.

I remember growing up in the L.A. area and hearing folks give directions using the names of freeways and exits.

It is some much easier to find your way around with numbered freeways (because the names used to change) and numbered exits

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany

I remember growing up in the L.A. area and hearing folks give directions using the names of freeways and exits.

It is some much easier to find your way around with numbered freeways (because the names used to change) and numbered exits

+10,000

A guy I used to work with had relatives visiting from the Philippines.
He lived in Burbank off of Buena Vista and the 134. They flew into Ontario.
He told them to take the 210 to the 134, and off at Buena Vista.

When they were 3 hours late, he finally got a call.

They got off of the 210 in Monrovia... never made it into Pasadena to hook up with the 134.

And of course, there's a Buena Vista ramp off of I-5 as well.

[Ron-Solo]

OK, maybe I can settle something about 3 people being required in HOV lanes. When they first put the "Diamond Lane" on the I-10 from LA to Santa Monica in the 70's, it required 3 people at all times. It was not very popular and was later changed to 2 persons. The section of the I-10 from El Monte into LA was the same, but is now only 3+ during certain hours.

So everyone is right.

And I think it was "Wierd Al" who came up with the song, "Driving in the Lane With Diamonds" to the tune of the Beatles' "Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds" in honor of the fiasco.