Washington Votes

2005 House Bill 1176 (Allowing motorcycles between lanes during congestion)

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

  • Introduced by Rep. Jeff Morris, (D-Mt. Vernon) on January 18, 2005, to authorize motorcycles to travel between lanes during traffic congestion. This bill would authorize motorcycles to travel between lanes and between adjacent lines or rows of vehicles during periods of congestion.
    • Referred to the House Transportation Committee on January 18, 2005.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Jeff Morris, (D-Mt. Vernon) on January 18, 2005. New Comment

1) Safety - MC and Auto [by Anonymous Citizen on July 14, 2008]
Having grown up and learning to drive (and ride) in California, I have a little experience on the topic of lane-splitting I can share..

First the joke "if you can't do 70mph bumper-to-bumper you got no business on the freeway" is not really a joke. A motorcycle sandwiched between two cars is ugly at any speed, but the problem is the one behind suddenly going significantly faster than the one in front.

Lane splitting isn't about reducing commute time, it's about safety. CHP statistics have shown for years their motorcycles were involved in fewer accidents, and those accidents were less severe, if they were "lane splitting" rather than riding in the lanes. My own experience echo's that.. I've been hit from behind in traffic by folks not paying attention, where the only altercation I ever had in between the lanes was by some fortunate fool trying to take me out. (I say "fortunate fool", as the third bike behind me in the line was a CHP motorcycle officer, the fool part was his window was down and I ended up halfway in his car ready to break his neck, I say fortunate because the officer stopped me from killing him and instead arrested *him* for attempted vehicular homicide.. he got off light considering)

Given that there's a whole lot more "cage" drivers out there totally oblivious to other vehicles around them (never mind motorcycles) my odds are much worse with them behind me in a lane (and we didn't have cell phones and ipods back then!) than up ahead crawling along in traffic.

I learned to ride bikes by riding in the dirt. I learned about people by riding bikes in traffic. I learned there is no such thing as an unavoidable accident on a motorcycle, and after 40 years riding I can honestly say I know what the people ahead are going to do often before they do.. rule #1 on motorcycles is never be surprised.. I expect people to turn in front of me, open their doors on side streets, run red lights.. I always leave plenty of escape-room ahead at a stop and have both eyes locked on the car coming up behind me.. I've driven out of 3 rear-end accidents that way (they still happened, I just wasn't in the middle of it - I escaped IN BETWEEN THE LANES!).

While lane-splitting, you've got one eye on the rear-view mirrors of drivers ahead, looking for that glance, the quick head-turn.. I can see what's behind them and their opportunities in the flow of traffic much better than they can - I know if (s)he is looking to bolt to the next lane, has room to speed up, is drifting left or right.. and can adjust accordingly.

I can't do squat about the knucklehead behind me checking the next lane for clearance or wiping up the latte (s)he just spilled on her faux-leather seat and oblivious that the traffic ahead is stopping, who never even sees that motorcycle disappearing under his or her hood ornament.

I'd also like to avoid the "unsafe driving" and "following too close" tickets I got two years ago when I had to jump between the lanes getting off I-90 in Issaquah to avoid being the meat in a motorcycle sandwich developing as traffic rapidly accordianed back up onto the freeway.
Not gonna argue with the young WSP officer over what was safer to do and what he thought he saw from a mile back or why being forced to stay in the lane caused the "following too close" in the first place. Cheaper to just pay the stupid things than what it would have cost me in lost wages fighting it. First ticket on a motorcycle for me since 1974.

Shorter commute time? Not the issue. Better gas milage on a motorcycle? That's not a factor really, although stopped in traffic, everybody's gas milage is 0 mpg, motorcycles included.

It's safety. Contrary to gut feelings, lane-splitting is safer.

Motorcyclists: it's spooky when you first start doing this, and you better have more than just 3 months (maybe even a couple years) experience riding your bike before you do this even if it becomes legal, because it demands control, judgement and attentiveness that you don't get just putting around on weekends. You need to be "zen" with the traffic flow.

Cage drivers: Don't be freaking out with that motorcycle coming up along side you, and don't complain about them passing you while you're stuck in traffic. The last thing you want is my Harley sitting along side you for any period of time in traffic.. you won't be able to hear the person you're talking to on the cell phone. Just let me go.. it's just your choice and my choice and there's no conflict.

"Steeley"




Reply New Comment

Line

2) Lane Spliting not what it appears [by Anonymous Citizen on May 27, 2008]
I drive every day in that congested traffic, and in the traffic that flows into the congestion on California highways. Let me first state that lane changing at 25 mph is a joke. Motorcyclists lane split at much higher speeds, and that includes law enforcement officers. I live in fear that I will hit someone in my blind side one day. And, by the way, in the past month I have seen at least four accidents on the road I travel where that very thing happened. Stop this dangerous practice if you can. I wish that California was a bit more concerned about the safety of motorcyclists. I for one would be more than willing to let them take up an extra space in the flow than to worry about killing one of them.
Reply New Comment

Line

3) Lane Spliting not what it appears... [by Anonymous Citizen on July 2, 2008]
Lane Spliting apparently isn't as it appears, because it's SPLITTING-TWO T'S.

It may not be what it appears, but apparently illiteracy is....
Reply New Comment

Line

4) Some insight [by Anonymous Citizen on February 24, 2006]
Motorcycle insight

IN THE BAY AREA, we as drivers have become accustomed to driving in traffic.

Everywhere we go, no matter what, our everyday activities revolve around traffic congestion. Nowadays, you just can't jump in the car and go from point A to point B without some planning.

Most California drivers always are in a big hurry, and they will "mow you down" if you don't get out of their way.

A number of families have two cars, and they leave the nice expensive one at home in the garage. Why? Because they have a commute car — you know, the one that they can "beat to death." The one that they can swing the door open and dent your car. The car they can drive on the shoulder of the road and pass another car. The one they can open the driver's door on a motorcyclist splitting lanes.

Lane-splitting by motorcyclists? Most drivers can't stand this. Are car-bound drivers jealous? Are these motorcyclists "punk kids" on a motor vehicle that is too powerful for them?

Before you judge a motorcyclist, you should know the law and not jump to conclusions.

California is one of the few states that allow motorcyclists to split lanes. Yes, it is legal!

I own two motorcycles and drive one here at work.

Lane-splitting is permissible as long as it is done in a safe and prudent manner. The definition is broad, and it's up to the officer's judgment if he or she observes a violation in their presence.

Everyone recognizes that lane-splitting is a way for motorcyclists to save time or to get through traffic quicker — which is why car-bound drivers resent it.

In the defense of motorcyclists, lane-splitting also reduces congestion and helps everyone get to their destination sooner. If a majority of the drivers on California roads drove motorcycles, there would hardly be any traffic. In addition, air pollution would be cut in half, if not more.

I was reluctant to split lanes myself.

Driving a motorcycle is difficult because you constantly have to be aware of your surroundings, and you are committed to be a defensive driver.

Most car-bound drivers are rude and do not understand the law. They think we are violating the law when we split lanes.

But do they realize that when they merge into a motorcyclist or block their path that they could get the ticket and not the motorcyclist?

I mentioned before that lane-splitting must be done in a safe and prudent manner. This means it should be done with caution and with due regard for other traffic on the road.

Usually, lane-splitting is done at slower speeds during heavy commute traffic. When motorcyclists split lanes at higher speeds, this becomes unsafe and they can be violating several traffic laws, such as unsafe lane changes, failure to signal and yield of right of way.

The dangers involved in lane-splitting are the close proximity of other vehicles, the limited space for maneuvering and the fact that few drivers anticipate your presence.

I have had a few close calls myself, and I have witnessed a number of accidents.

It is a fact that most drivers don't see motorcyclists. Motorcycles are quick, and they often are in the blind spots of car-bound drivers.

Whether you drive a motorcycle or a car, be careful, be defensive, drive safely and prudently, and know the law before you take action.

Share the road. Motor vehicles are not the only ones using the roads — pedestrians, bicyclists, truckers and other motor vehicles are on the roads, too.

Officer Dan Harvey is a traffic officer with the city of Fremont. His column appears every Wednesday. If you have questions you want answered, you can e-mail him at dharvey@ci.fremont.ca.us.
Reply New Comment

Line

5) Europe Experience [by Anonymous Citizen on December 5, 2005]
Well I can tell you that as a traveller to Italy, I was sideswipped by a cycle traveling between cars/lanes. Its very un-nerving. I also saw a bike hit when the car he was passing wass taking a left turn. Lane designations are there to define and control traffic flow lanes, so that you can count on certain actions being taken by co-drivers - to remove that guidance would hinder flow control and diminnish public safety.
Reply New Comment

Line

6) Huh? [by Anonymous Citizen on December 5, 2005]
It has been working just fine in California, a state with several of the most traffic congested cities in the country for some time now so I think you may be touting the exception not the norm. I too have driven in both Europe and in Asia while in the Military and I can tell you quite factually, there is absolutely NO comparison to standards, driving habits, road upkeep and drivability (with maybe the exception of the autobahn and its limitless speed)or safety between the US and there...none.
Reply New Comment

Line

7) Bravo [by Anonymous Citizen on November 4, 2005]
As a former Californian Biker, I can tell you that lane sharing works. It's great, saves time, relives congestion. I live in WA now and I applaud the effort.
Reply New Comment

Line

8) Let's make effective legislation on lane splitting [by MarkS on September 12, 2005]
I recently moved to Seattle from Southern Cal, and in looking into lane splitting, I've been amazed to see Seattle having such horrible commuting conditions (worse than most of So.Ca.) yet motorcycles are forced to take up just as much space as cars because the legislature has not been effectively educated as to the benefits of a well implemented lane-splitting strategy. In one query to a legislator, I was told that lane-splitting will probably never pass because there are already too many motorcycle fatalities in Washington State. This is just silly.

Lane-splitting is done properly only at low speeds, thereby significantly reducing the potential for life-threatening injury. By allowing motorcycles to advance to the head of traffic, you also improve their visibility to other drivers and help avoid intersection accidents (the major driver behind fatalities). Another benefit in congested traffic conditions is that a bike can position itself between vehicles thereby avoiding a rear-end collision in bumper to bumper traffic. There is even a 20 year old study that looked at motorcycle accidents and even suggested that lane-splitting improves safety for riders (Hurt, 1981).

The fact that Texas has just joined states that allow lane-splitting should give legislators more pause to seriously reconsider this bill since California and Texas together combine to cover more than 50M people or about 20% of the total population (according to the 2000 census) and have definitively the worst commuting problems in the nation. Which brings me back to Seattle.

Seattle has got to be one of the worst single examples of traffic management I've ever seen. Granted, it is an access limited land mass, but given the mostly two lane traffic situation, there really is no excuse to not look at easily implementable solutions such as lane-splitting (in a safe and reasonable manner) to reduce the commuter issues in the short term.

What about the danger of high-speed motorcycles? In California, I was just as uncomfortable as everyone else when bikers drove between lanes of moving or stopped vehicles at 20mph or more than the speed of traffic which is the California State law. These people are a danger to themselves and to everyone around them. They do not drive in a safe manner and should be immediately ticketed or reported. As a rider, I fully support taking people that endanger themselves and/or others around them off the road. However, those high speed drivers are few and far between, and do not represent the vast majority of riders who use lane-splitting to effectively reduce commute times, lower pollution, and use less parking space in crowded urban areas.

In summary, I don't see any reason why the legislature should point to general accident statistics and use them to determine the fate of lane-splitting in Washington State. This is absurd, as it has been approved and adopted in the commuter strategies in the two largest states, and when used safely, provides greater protection for riders, and reduces traffic congestion in the process.

I for one, would like to see a speedy review of Bill 1176 and a more open discussion of the perceived safety issues that seem to be on the minds of legislators. My believe is that a bill with more definition of when and how lane-splitting is to be used and respected would go a long way in passing a successful bill, and help reduce the traffic congestion in Seattle and other urban areas in Washington State long before any major road projects are implemented, and fundamentally at no cost.
Reply New Comment

Line

9) Clear Economic Benefits [by MarkS on September 12, 2005]
Just as an additional note:
In addition to my motorcycle, I own a Toyota SUV. So, some comparative stats:
-My SUV gets 17mpg commuting. My motorcycle gets 60mpg.
-My commute in traffic into Seattle over the 520 bridge takes 40 minutes by car on average, and 20 minutes by motorcycle.
-Parking in downtown costs $100/month for my SUV, it is free for my motorcycle.
That is at least $200 extra per month that I get to stick into the local economy rather than spend it stuck in traffic during my commute. Multiply that by the number of licensed riders in the Seattle area, and you start to see the economic benefit of this bill, in addition to reducing the commuter stress and pollution generated by being stuck in traffic.
Bill 1176 deserves the full attention of our legislators because of the clear benefits it brings to everyone.
Reply New Comment

Line

10) Money back to the enconomy??? huh? [by Anonymous Citizen on November 2, 2005]
You're already putting the $200 into the local economy, but spending it on gas and parking. So the local economy would most likly be losing money, as you'd probably see to save some of that for vacation or spending outside the region.

I'm all for lane sharring, but just pointing out the hole in your argument.
Reply New Comment

Line

11) Money Back to the Economy? Huh?? [by Anonymous Citizen on July 14, 2008]
"You're already putting the $200 into the local economy, but spending it on gas and parking. So the local economy would most likly be losing money, as you'd probably see to save some of that for vacation or spending outside the region.

I'm all for lane sharring, but just pointing out the hole in your argument. "

Oh, come on... Think it *all* the way through - the $100 a month isn't lost to the parking attendant, someone else will (gladly) take the spot and pay it - not like there's a surplus of parking downtown is there?. The other $100 not spent on gas a month, even if spent "outside the region" will probably still go to someone in the State, or at least the US, not OPEC. And if that vacation is on the motorcycle, at 50 MPG, it could well end up being widely spent in the state or US..

See ya on the road.. probably in my rear-views...

-Steeley

Reply New Comment

Line

12) Lane splitting pros and cons [by Anonymous Citizen on September 1, 2005]
I have lane split in other countries and in CA on my motorcycle, so have first hand experience with it. I will try to list the pros and cons as impartially as I can:

Pros
- more efficient travel for motorcyclists. This saves both time (for motorcyclist AND cars stuck in jams albeit much less so) and resources, less (expensive) gas used idling.
- it might encourage more car drivers to consider motorcycling which is again more efficient. Fewer resources used to create a 300 - 600 lb motorcycle compared to a 3500 - 10000lb car. Less gas used - motorcycles get anywhere from 30 - 80 mpg if we're comparing 1 or 2 people per vehicle.
- more motorcyclists means fewer car drivers, relieving congestion for everyone.

Cons
- drivers MUST be educated to accept lane splitting as the norm. In CA I've seen drivers actually move aside to allow a motorcycle to lane split. Otherwise more accidents may occur (to the detriment of the motorcyclist).
- minor side-swipes and contact will be inevitable for inexperienced lane-splitters. Educate motorcyclists on the right thing to do.
- more motorcycle/car accidents will occur, but these will be rare and usually minor, from my experience. These can be reduced by limiting lane splitting only to traffic jam situations or to traffic moving slower than 25 mph.

As a motorcyclist I am in favor of lane-splitting. It does not inconvenience those driving cars, and can help motorcyclists significantly during peak hour jams.
Reply New Comment

Line

13) Good idea [by Anonymous Citizen on August 31, 2005]
Traffic volumn in western washington is increasing and any measure such as this will help ease congestion.

All the arguments that this is dangerous are really not valid since this works both in most of the western world (europe, asia) and CA.
Reply New Comment

Line

14) Any updates [by Anonymous Citizen on August 31, 2005]
Is there any updates on whats going on with this idea?
Reply New Comment

Line

15) It went nowhere [by Anonymous Citizen on August 31, 2005]
What you see is what you get. The bill never moved out of the committee.
Reply New Comment

Line

16) Yes! Finally!! [by Anonymous Citizen on August 16, 2005]
I like it.
Reply New Comment

Line

17) Great IDEA!!! [by Anonymous Citizen on August 15, 2005]
WA traffic is terrible and mainly due to bad road design and very poor driving standards.

Anything that can help the commute should be done. I fully support lane splitting, especially if it has worked in other states. DUH!

My air cooled bike has stalled twice this summer due to over heating. My 7 mile commute took 1.25 hours. Over heated bikes are dangerous since I had to coast to the shoulder and wait for it to cool down.

Reply New Comment

Line

18) Safer than waiting [by Anonymous Citizen on August 15, 2005]
Lane sharing in heavy slow moving traffic has many advantages. Safety being the most important. The chances of a bike and rider overheating are minimized....the vulnerable bike and rider are not sitting ducks in traffic for a cell-phone-wielding SUV driver....and it helps everyone because they bikes are not taking up valuable space.

It works great in California...been proven there....LET'S DO IT HERE!!!

thanks
Reply New Comment

Line

19) Best Idea ever [by Anonymous Citizen on August 14, 2005]
This is the most intelligent idea regarding traffic that I have heard in decades. In my experience the only nay-sayers are non-motorcycle aware 4-wheel vehicle drivers. It has worked very well in California for a long, long time and it would greatly help congestion and related over-heating of air cooled engines.

Why has it taken this country so long in following in the footsteps of other countries, ie. European countries, when it comes to sensible options for traffic improvement?
Reply New Comment

Line

20) Let's all make this a reality [by Anonymous Citizen on August 14, 2005]
It works so well everywhere else, why not here?
Reply New Comment

Line

21) Re: All vehicles...same rules [by Anonymous Citizen on August 12, 2005]
WRT the comment "all vehicles should use the same rules," the way it works in CA is that lane _sharing_ is legal, provided there is room for more than one vehicle to occupy the lane concurrently. So, if the lane is wide enough for two cars, you can lane share in your car! Works fine, same rules for all...

There's no lane _splitting_ in CA, but there's plenty of lane sharing! It's effective at reducing congestion for several reasons:

1) It allows motorcyclists to progress when all traffic is stopped [this creates spaces/movement for cars that would otherwise be occupied by a bike.]

2) Motorcyclists are at far greater risk from being rear-ended by inattentive drivers ("motorcycle sandwich") than they are from being side-swiped by someone trying to change lanes in stopped traffic. Ergo, fewer secondary accidents = roads clearing quicker.

3) It encourages more riding. As a greater percentage of the roads are occupied by High Occupancy Vehicles like carpools & motorcycles, _everyone_ benefits from the reduced congestion.
Reply New Comment

Line

22) Breakdown lanes too [by Anonymous Citizen on August 12, 2005]
The use of breakdown laes by motorcycles diring congestion should be included. I'm specifically thinking of 520/405 interchange where 520W backsup past the 405N ramp. Let the bikes run up the emergency lane to the ramp.

Reply New Comment

Line

23) Motorcycles Filtering [by Anonymous Citizen on August 12, 2005]
When mmotorcycles filter between or beside congested traffic, it relieves the use of that space. More motorcycles filtering, more space opened to other vehicles.


Reply New Comment

Line

24) Works very well BUT only when drivers are educated [by Anonymous Citizen on August 11, 2005]
In London lane splitting is legal in stopped or slow moving traffic. It works simply because drivers know it's legal and expect it.

There are some pretty lame justifcations posted as to why this should be allowed but here are some thoughts based on real experience in the UK:

In WA, bikes in congestion are simply adding to the congestion for everyone.

Allowing lane splitting effectively removes bikes from the congestion.

When the congestion eases the bikes fall back in line. (In the UK the police will ticket a bike who in their opinion was splitting when traffic was moving freely).

At green lights queued bikes will be on their way and again traffic congestion is eased. Each bike represents one less car on the road (during congestion).

However, the real risk to this bill is in educating the general driving community that lane splitting is legal. Today WA drivers will be incited into road rage if they see bikes splitting.
Reply New Comment

Line

25) Agreed, however... [by Anonymous Citizen on August 15, 2005]
There are too many inattentive/distracted drivers driving in this state to safely start doing this, and too many squidly punks riding now with no regards to anyone else on the road that will also make this fail. While I think this is a good idea to start allowing this in WA, something must be done with the enforcement of our current laws regarding our currently unsafe drivers before allowing this new use of the public roads. I have been motorcycling for the past 19 years and commuted solely by motorcycle for over a year, and have on occasion done my share of illegal lane splitting in stop and go traffic. If drivers were better educated, more courteous and attentive, and all motorcycle riders were also better/safer riders I'd be fully behind enacting this new law. However on the whole, the fact that it is too easy in this state to get and keep a vehicle license altogether, make this a unsafe idea in the current environment.

Raising the gas tax by a significant amount and solely dedicating the proceeds to improving the entire driving environment (law enforcement, driver education and higher testing standards, and road maintenance and expansion) should come first, or concurrently with this new change if enacted.
Reply New Comment

Line

26) Agreed [by Anonymous Citizen on August 12, 2005]
I, also, believe this would be a very beneficial measure to the entire commuting populace. However, it will not be used much unless this information is included in EVERY driving instruction course through out the state and is made common knowledge to the general driving public. Until that point, it would be risking severe injury and/or "road rage" from drivers to share lanes on a motorcycle.
Reply New Comment

Line

27) Lane Splitting is Safer [by Anonymous Citizen on August 3, 2005]
USC's Accident Research Department has dome research on lane splitting and found that it is actually safer for motorcyclists. Here is an article discussing it:

http://www.motorcyclecruiser.com/streetsurvival/lanesplit/

Also, it is obvoiusly a more fuel efficient use of our roadways.
Reply New Comment

Line

28) Experienced Lane Splitter [by Anonymous Citizen on June 13, 2005]
Having recently moved from California - and an avid motorcyclist - LANE SPLITTING WORKS. My biggest fear in Washington (Seattle commuter) is the inattentive driver making me the meat in their car sandwich. A car can easily survive a minor rear-end accident. For a motorcyclist, this is most likely injury - if not worse. Lane splitting, done responsibly, and with proper public education is a time saver, convenient for motorcyclist, but most important - it is a potential life saver. The benefits of riding a motorcycle are many - and fellow citizens benefit as well from reduced congestion, reduced demand on oil/fuel, more parking, etc. This law makes sense and will add to the benefits society receives from motorcyclists.
Reply New Comment

Line

29) Max Speed Diff [by Anonymous Citizen on May 23, 2005]
I agree that a little more definition would be helpful. Such as a maximum speed differential of say 15mph while sharing lanes.

If motorcycles are allowed to split, that's just fewer vehicles stuck in traffic - everyone gets out sooner.

I like the idea and fully support this.
Reply New Comment

Line

30) Define the Bill [by Anonymous Citizen on May 14, 2005]
I like the Lane Spliting bill but I need more info...are there specific hours like 6:00am to 9:00am and 4:00pm to 6:00pm?
Reply New Comment

Line

31) Fantastic Idea [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2005]
This bill is a terrific idea. Having been a touring motorcyclist for years, it is always a pleasure to find myself in California, where this proposed bill is law. Commuting for motorcyclists on congested, stopped freeways becomes practical and efficient when lane splittig is allowed. Safety is a an obvious concern, with education and awareness being top priorities. Remember though, when traffic is stopped cars are not moving between lanes as they have nowhere to go, leaving clear, unobstructed paths for motorcycles to travel. I completly support this bill.
Reply New Comment

Line

32) define "congestion" [by Anonymous Citizen on May 2, 2005]
During periods where the traffic is dead stopped... OK, perhaps this does make sense. But in stop and go traffic? I don't think so.

Also, likely the traffic is stopped for a reason... could be poor weather has caused an accident and traffic is stopped due to ice, oil on roadway, etc. Now you could end up with a wrecked motorcycle added to the mix.
Reply New Comment

Line

33) Lighter traffic load [by Anonymous Citizen on April 30, 2005]
I completely agree with this bill. Allowing the motorcycles to pass in a traffic jam would not only benefit the motorcyclist, but eveyone else as well by lightening the traffic load in the backup. Putting a restriction on speed will ensure that this does not endanger the motorcyclists and the drivers and will keep the motorcycle moving, which prevents it from overheating and running out of gas, causing further traffic problems.
Reply New Comment

Line

34) It works in CA [by Anonymous Citizen on March 28, 2005]
Lane splitting by motorcycles in CA is both legal and routine. Cars allow bikes to pass without incident. This helps both cars and bikes get to their destination quicker, wasting less fuel and producing less polution. Cars benifit as the bikes are no longer taking up space in the traffic jam.
Bikes are also less likly to be rear-ended in traffic when splitting then when idleing in a traffic jam.

Reply New Comment

Line

35) Motorcyclist should be allowed to skip ahead in real traffic jams [by Anonymous Citizen on March 25, 2005]
I agree with the previous comments that motorcycles etc. should not be allowed to go between lanes to go into the first row at a traffic light that is just backed up a little.

However, allowing motorcycles to skip ahead in real traffic jams is something that I support for the following reasons:

* It is much more tiring for a motorcyclist to sit in traffic than for a car driver.
* Motorcycles have much smaller gas tanks and therefore run a higher risk of running out of gas.
* Motorcycle gear is usually very comfortable at riding speeds. However, in the sunshine it can be extremely exhausting under a leather jacket and a helmet.

Distinguishing between real traffic jams and simple backups can be done with a simple rule along the following lines.

Motorcycles are allowed to skip ahead if the traffic backup is longer than 0.5miles.

Best Regards


Reply New Comment

Line

36) Additionally, [by Anonymous Citizen on March 26, 2005]
Motorcycles have a greater chance to overheat than cars do, my temperature is at approx 235 degrees when I get stuck in stop and go traffic. Would you rather get stuck in a traffic jam because a motorcycle has overheated, or just let them pass?


Reply New Comment

Line

37) All motorized vechicles should use same rules. [by Mark Nihart on February 1, 2005]
Allowing motorcycles, bikes, pocket bikes, motorized foot scooters, etc. to ride between lanes to avoid traffic "congestion" (what is congestion)is dangerous and would produce the opportunity for road rage. Motorcycles already receive reasonable special privileges--HOV and Parking. They should not receive privileges that jeopordize themselves and the commuting public. This bill does not solve a problem but creates many problems it should be withdrawn or voted down.
Reply New Comment

Line

38) Wrong [by Anonymous Citizen on November 4, 2005]
You are simply wrong. You don't seem to understand how effective lane splitting works.
Reply New Comment

Line

39) No no; lane spliting is good [by Anonymous Citizen on August 12, 2005]
Dude, you're a moron. In Italy we lane split, it cuts hours a day form our commutes. Of course, we also know how to drive back home. Think of this, if this bill passes, then you can trade in your gas guzzling SUV for a motorcycle, spend one fifth what you do on gas, and cut considerable time off your rush hour commute. Wave at all the suckers that are traped in their Ford Exploders like you once were.
Reply New Comment

Line

40) What parking priveledges ? [by Anonymous Citizen on August 12, 2005]
Please point out which parking priveledges are given to motorcycles in the RCW?

To my understanding the HOV "priveledge" is defined at the federal level.

So really..what extra benefit does this state specifically give to riders?

Reply New Comment

Line

41) Your wrong [by Anonymous Citizen on August 7, 2005]
let's make an incentive to get gas guzzling vehicles with single occupancy off the roads, approve this bill and I will park or sell my truck and buy an economical motorcycle.
Reply New Comment

Line

42) Puurleeease [by Anonymous Citizen on August 16, 2005]
Lane-splitting on a motorcycle does not pose any threat to other motorists. I live in California, ride a bike and really can't see how a 500lb motorcycle can be a danger to anyone in a 2000 lb car/SUV. Banning cell-phones while driving or actually teaching motorists to drive more safely would be a better idea. How about a 25mph speed limit on bikes if they lane-split??
How can anyone seriosly think lane-splitting is a problem?? I think some people are just pissed off because they are the ones stuck in jams and want everyone else to be too. Get a life.
Reply New Comment

Line

43) lane sharing should be allowed in traffic jams [by Anonymous Citizen on April 20, 2005]
"Allowing motorcycles, bikes, pocket bikes, motorized foot scooters, etc. to ride between lanes to avoid traffic "congestion" ..."

bikes, pocket bikes, scooters are not legal forms of transportation on the freeways. Where this is most beneficial.During stop-and-go traffic even the carpool lane often comes to a standstill.

Example, 4/19/2005, I-5 North and Southbound were stopped for many miles. In this case all motocyclists are forced to travel on arterial streets posing greater danger motorcyclists.
The other option would be to park the bike on the shoulder to avoid overheating and dead batteries.
Another safety consideration.

"Motorcycles already receive reasonable special privileges--HOV and Parking"
These privileges come with great risks.

The answer is education and awareness for the motorcyclitsts and other motor vehicle operators.
I will take time, as it did in CA.


Reply New Comment

Line

44) Motorcycle Traffic between lanes [by Anonymous Citizen on February 1, 2005]
Has the proponents of the bill ever travelled in Europe where at every stoplight all the motorbikes and every scooter imanginable creep forward en masse to the front of the line and then it's like the start of the INDY 500 when the light goes green. YEEEEE HAWWWWWW!
Reply New Comment

Line


Copyright © 2008 USA Votes, Inc.  Patent Pending.  All rights reserved.  Terms of use

Capitol Building

Search legislation: