Washington Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on February 12, 2007

Click here to view bill details.

What kind of insanity is this? Riding a motorcycle on a freeway is danerous enough without encouraging riders to engage in such risky behavior. If someone changes lanes into one of these riders, who's at fault? I understand this is legal in California - one more strike against it.

This is not dangerous, as a rider it is much safer. I rode in California for over 20 years lane splitting and never had a problem with safety from automobiles. Riding on the freeway is not dangerous as the previous comment suggests, in fact it is safer than surface streets because there aren't any cars that can pull out of driveways, business etc.

I have ridden a motorcycle extensively in California, and have had no problems with sharing the lanes (lane splitting) with other vehicles. It would help keep traffic flowing, as the lane space that would be taken up by motorcycles would then be available for the other vehicles. It might even encourage more people to ride (fuel efficient) motorcycles or scooters, thereby reducing congestion even more. I certainly hope this bill passes!

All one has to do to debunk this emotional outburst of an argument against, is to examine the dearth of evidence that this type of lane use has created any problems there. It simply hasn't. Perhaps the writer of this post doubts their own ability to safely drive on the freeway or be observant when changing those lanes. This bill should pass. It IS about time!

You cvan do this in California and it is the best was to go. When traffic is stopped you get to go but you must be very carefull of the cagers.

I would have to ask Mr. Breneman if he rides a motorcycle. From his comments, I would venture to guess the answer is NO. It should be noted that sharing lanes would only be permitted when traffic is moving slowly. We all know how common rear-end collisions are on our freeways in stop-and-go traffic. If an automobile driver is rear-ended by an inattentive driver, the result is property damage and, occasionally, whiplash injury. If a motorcyclist is rear-ended by that inattentive driver, the result is often DEATH. Enabling lane sharing at such times enables motorcyclists to avoid the very real, very serious danger of being rear-ended. The motorcyclist isn't the problem here. It's the inattentive drivers of automobiles that present the danger. Motorcyclists are doing their part to move around more efficiently, and they deserve the protection this bill would provide if enacted.

I ride a motorcycle, and I VOTE. It should be noted that sharing lanes would only be permitted when traffic is moving slowly. We all know how common rear-end collisions are on our freeways in stop-and-go traffic. If an automobile driver is rear-ended by an inattentive driver, the result is property damage and, occasionally, whiplash injury. If a motorcyclist is rear-ended by that inattentive driver, the result is often DEATH. Enabling lane sharing at such times enables motorcyclists to avoid the very real, very serious danger of being rear-ended. The motorcyclist isn't the problem here. It's the inattentive drivers of automobiles that present the danger. Motorcyclists are doing their part to save fuel and take up less space on the freeways. We all know that motorcycles are designated by the Federal government as High-Occupancy Vehicles. Responsible citizens who ride motorcycles deserve the protection this bill would provide if enacted.

I am strongly in favor of this bill. I wish the language were a little less restrictive, and more like the California law, but I think this bill is well written. I have ridden extensively in California, and in several European countries, where lane sharing is legal and well respected by the driving public. The ability to share lanes and filter to the front of congested traffic is a boon for all drivers. More vehicles can pass the obstructions to traffic, and fewer vehicles are delayed as a result. Motorcycles are generally more fuel efficient than cars, and a moving motorcycle is far more fuel efficient than an idling car or truck. Motorcycles do far less damage to roadways than cars and trucks, and are cheaper to operate. Motorcycles also park more efficiently, which is a real advantage in urban commuting. For these reasons, motorcycles should be encouraged as a socially responsible form of transportation. If we can promote motorcycling with benefits such as lane sharing, and coordinate better rider education and public outreach, great improvements in the commuting situation can be achieved. John Coulter Seattle, WA

I am stunnded that anyone could support this bill. It is unsafe. It just adds to the hazards of the road. Rush hour traffic, where you are going along at 30 mph one minute and come to a dead stop the next, is hard enough. I don't need to be worried that a motorcyclist is trying to squeeze between me and the car next to me. I can see it now. Both cars move to (not over) the common line at the same time, and "scrunch", we catch the motorcyclist. Or, I am driving along and suddenly I am startled by a motorcyclist whizzing by on my left side, close to my car. Also, what about winter driving with ice and snow on the road? I do not support doing anything that makes driving more dangerous and this bill will do that.

I support SB 5985 and HB 2160 to permit motorcycles to ride between slow or stopped lanes of traffic. This can not only ease traffic congestion but can be safer for the motorcyclist, in spite of the reflex response many non-riders may have for these bills. I spent more than a decade as a motorcycle safety instructor in the State of Washington. I have also also struck from behind on my motorcycle while stopped in traffic by a car that 'didn't see me'. Had I been able to pass between the cars up to get clear of the traffic, that accident would not have happened. I have ridden in places where riding between stopped or slow cars is considered common practice. In those places, it accomplishes the goals addressed by these bills, to improve traffic flow and increase the safety of motorcycle riders. This practice also places an increased responsibility on all users of public highways. Riders and drivers all need to be aware of the traffic around them. This is not a blank check for riders to act irresponsibly.

This concept has been in affect in California and Europe now for decades and the dearth of evidence that points to any traffic problems stemming from this type of policy clearly shows that drivers who present this kind of nonsensical drivel are 1)in the minority and 2)so doubtful of their own driving skill that they would suppose that all drivers are similarly as irresponsible and inattentive as they are themselves. This bill is long overdue and this time, it should pass.

As a long time rider here and in Europe, I support this approach whole-heartedly. While any changes in traffic rules have associated risks, riders and drivers benefit when incentives to ride exist. We should be sure we proivide adequate education and awareness support for this change.

It looks like my last post did not make it, but this is the right thing to do for our riders and our drivers. While there are risks associated with any traffic law change, the right education and awareness will help insure the benefits out weight the costs TM Seattle

Every major motorcycle accident study done since the Hurt Report in 1981 has supported the fact that lane-splitting (when done properly as this bill supports) is safer than sitting in stop and go traffic. I'm sure that many folks that have a knee-jerk reaction against this bill are picturing somebody flying through fast-moving traffic, moving at reckless speeds. That kind of irresponsible behavior is illegal, and would remain so with this bill. This bill merely makes it legal for a rider to take the safer route when in stop & go traffic- to pull out and move through the congestion. This does nothing to hurt car drivers and in fact may help ease some congestion. It also means the motorcycle rider is in a safer condition- one where they are visible and can react to situations, rather than trapped in behind bigger vehicles where they cannot be seen or move.

the knee jerk reaction of people who don't ride will be to fear this proposal. In some peopels eyes it may be seen as condoning those "wild people racing down the highway between cars"...the truth, however, is a littel different. None of the poeple that ride Scotters adn motorcycles want to die. in fact maost try very hard to avoid situations where that may occur. Lane splitting simply allows a much smaller vehicle to continue to progress through traffic. The legalization of lane splitting also defines rules for it...isn't it better to have a rule defining what can happen instead of having people randomly doing this and putting themselves and others at risk?

In CA it is not legal or illegal to share lanes. They have no law prohibiting it. Vehicle drivers in this state will not be able to handle the result of this bill psychologically. Road rage is already a problem we deal with on a daily basis. I have seen this repeatedly against a rider that split lanes on 520. People in SUVs attempt to open doors or move their car into his path to hurt the rider. A better use of time for the legistlature would be to extend the vehicle insurance requirements to all vehicles with engines greater then 50cc. Yes, I have been rear ended on my bike. Yes, I have been nearly killed several times by careless, inattentive, and negligent drivers on raodways and freeways. It is part of the risk I assume when riding.

These bills will help us riders be safer, because we'll have a legal way to get out of the path of inattentive drivers. I won't do it all the time, but there are some places I'd feel much safer with this possibility. It's also fine that it's only for slower speeds, as that will keep limits that will help newer riders. It will also be a good thing for car drivers, because the more of us leave our cars behind and get out of the main flow of traffic, the more room will be left for the rest of the cars. There are other benefits when more folks are on bikes: Parking becomes more available, traffic flows better, and we use less gas too. I've been riding since the early '80s and feel this would be good for both bikes and cars, and strongly urge its passage. --- John, 48th district

Gretchen raises concerns over the following 1. Its unsafe and hazardous. In what way is it unsafe and hazardous? You metioned that you are worried, but that would be interpreted as your inability to drive and stay in the center of the lane instead of swerving left and right, that too when the traffic is going really slow! 2. Driving on Ice and Snow. We had a snow fall this Jan. I didnt see a single motorcycle on the street for the entire week. Did you? 3. All the concerns are totally based on speculation and no facts. You imagined what would happen and then posted the message w/o even realizing that there are states that allow riding between lanes and have had no problems for several years.

this is absolutely the right thing to do. motorcycles take up a tenth of the space in trafic and parking, use a fraction of natural resources, and if someone elects to ride a motorcycle, they should be afforded benefits similiar to carpooling. Safety is at the discretion of the rider as with any motor vehicle, and these parameters around speed and traffic flow are well thought out. All cities in Europe and SE Asia already subscribe to this model. They realize moving people efficiently is paramount.

I have recently moved to WA from England where "white lining" as lane-splitting is called there is legal. In twenty years of riding I have never encountered a problem in doing so. The advice there is that the motorcyclist should proceed carefully and without excess speed, and that car drivers should indicate and make visual checks before changing lanes (as they should already). Indeed, by proceeding to the front of a traffic queue a motorcyclist becomes more visible and is therefore safer than when hidden admist a crowd of other vehicles.

While communting 13 miles in stop and go traffic on my motorcycle (1) I'm constantly afraid that I will get rear ended and have to always have a way out. (2) Also, I'm using two times the gasoline that I would without traffic. (3) I'm constantly tempted to break the law while thinking that I should be able to split the lane at a red light. (4) Overall my stress level increases due to traffic congrestion and safety issues and the fact that I'm using more fuel than I need to be. Honestly, since the roads don't get enough improvements to handle the population density increases, I feel that this is the least the government can do to give citizens a potential way to save fuel and traffic congestion stress (read high blood pressure). for drivers who fear they will be more likely to hurt or kill a motorcycle rider, they need to realize the lane splitting will only legally happen at low speeds or when cars are stopped. it's essentially the same as motorcycles driving past parked cars.

As a long time motorcyclist I whole heartedly support this bill. Unfortunately I’m sure this bill will fail since the state, counties, or cities never make sensible traffic revisions. Here is a bill that will cost the state nothing and help alleviate traffic congestion, while the state argues over spending billions on a stupid tunnel. I know this would improve my commute where 520 turns into Avondale RD. Redmond/King County spent all sort of money to redo the intersection and didn’t bother adding a right hand turn lane onto Union hill RD even though there was plenty of room to do so, WTH. What did they do instead; they put up a sign that reads “No Shoulder Driving” since everyone is now using the wide shoulder to make right hand turns.

I've been riding a motorcycle in WA for three months, and safety is my primary concern. My initial reaction to Lane Sharing/Splitting was "NO WAY"! However, after learning more about it I've changed my opinion. I believe, if taken seriously (like anything on the road), this practice could be to the benefit to everyone who are on the road: car drivers AND bike riders. Thanks!

The examples in the original comment are unfounded, and are purely imaginary. The benefits of Line Sharing outweigh the risks.

I am very much in favor of this bill. When traffic is crawling at 5 mph, many air-cooled motorcycle begin to overheat. This would allow them to move fast enough to prevent their engines from overheating and becoming another distraction on the side of the road.

I commute most days to Microsoft on my 250cc scooter. Doing so saves gas, the environment, and parking space. The public benefits by my riding a scooter, rather than driving a car. The most frightening part of my commute is the stop and go traffic on 520. As the cars stream in behind me I am helpless if someone isn't paying attention. Lane sharing would allow me to slowly move forward between cars, and not be trapped with a car behind me. The data from California shows that this would significantly reduce the chances of me being injured or killed while driving to/from work.

The absense of any law prohbiting an act makes said act legal. Therefore, in California, lane splitting is legal. DOH!

As a lifetime motorcyclist with 15 years on the road and over 250K miles on a bike, I fully support this bill. People that believe this will make the streets unsafer for both bikers and drivers need look no further than California and European nations like England, and our friends to the south in Australia. Lane splitting under CORRECT conditions aides traffic flow and gives an advantage to those who are willing to take advantage of it, and has been shown to be no more or less dangerous. In most situations where an accident does occur it is because the driver, not the motorcyclist, has attempted to "take the law into their own hands".

Dr. Larry Hurt is probably the leading expert on motorcycle safety and accidents. The "Hurt Report," which he published several years ago at the University of Southern California, is probably the most comprehensive and detailed analysis of accident data ever. Hurt and his fellow researchers discovered that, if anything, lane sharing is actually slightly safer than staying in the lane in heavy, crawling traffic. Hurt theorizes that this is because motorcyclists have an easier time steering around threats than stopping frequently. The Hurt report has shown that a large percentage of accidents are motorcycles being rear ended (driver not seeing the motorcyclist). Lane sharing is the best defense against these kind of accidents. In addition, Evans Brafield, Motorcycle Cruiser's Associate Editor and an instructor for the California Motorcycle Safety Program, reckons that the ability to see ahead and get early warning of what traffic is doing is part of the advantage of lane sharing. Certainly, you put virtually all the threats ahead of you and therefore reduces the need to look away to watch your mirrors. Furthermore, the California Highway Patrol has actually testified against a bill that would have banned it for civilian mototrycles several years ago. Police officers see accidents day after day; and therefore, they see the need for lane sharing. David Peterson, president of the Montgomery CA Street Motorcycle Club, has stated, "The level of safety is about the same because what you lose in space you make up for in heightened awareness." I think he's on the right track regarding the increase in awareness. I'd much rather have the cars that are a danger to me in my field of vision, than behind me where I can't see them. Lane-splitting gives bikers that unique opportunity. And those who ride older, air-cooled motorcycles say they have to keep moving to prevent their engines from overheating and breaking down.

As a safe rider of many years in the state of Washington I have found in many occasions it would be safer to be able to split lanes of traffic. Of course it would necessary to pay close attention to what is happening in traffic, but those that ride already know that this is necessary at ALL times.

I have ridden motorcycles for over 25 years. I spent eight of those years riding in Europe where lane splitting is allowed. The biggest problem I have EVER encountered in this matter are the jerks that want to pull out and force you to stop, or force you off the road when they see you passing. They apparently think that since they have to sit in traffic so should everyone else. There are several reasons for allowing lane splitting. As it was said before, motorcycles, not just older ones (mine is a 2003) are frequently air cooled and must remain in motion or risk overheating. Second, when enough people see the advantage, maybe more will begin to ride, thus raising the level of awarness, which makes riding safer, and also reducing the use of fossil fuels making Washington even greener.

It is time for Washington to stand up and realize that something has to be done about the traffic congestion in our state. Allowing riders to pass between cars will reduce congestion as it will effectively reduce the space taken up by motorcycles on the roadway during periods of heavy traffic. Additionally, it allows the rider greater safety as there is no longer a vehicle immediately behind the rider while he is stopping. Allowing this could also be seen as additional incentive for those who might consider commuting on a motorcycle as it would reduce their travel time (sometimes considerably!) and also save on fuel costs. This could put more bikes on the road and further increase driver awareness of motorcycles which increases the safety of all riders. Legalizing the ability of motorcycles to be ridden next to one another is another way to reduce their negative impact on traffic.

I agree it should be legal. I just got back from a trip through CA. We hit SF during the evening rush hour. 15 minutes of lane splitting saved us about an hour of sitting in traffic. It was safe for the most part. The only problems we encountered were the drivers that saw us coming and tried to block us. Riding two side-by-side is already legal. RCW 46.61.608(4). I see WSP riding side-by-side all the time.

This is great and I am all for it; but there are many side streets that have similiar problems that only have one lane going in a direction that this doesn't help. How about something similiar to allow the motorcycle to use the shoulder in such cases? Case in point, 5 mile backups on East Lake Sammamish.

I’m not aware of any state that allows shoulder riding on city streets. As a rider, I think it’s a great idea for the freeways. But, there are too many variables on city streets that make shoulder riding far more risky. Intersections, traffic lights, people waiting at bus stops, pedestrians (in crosswalks or not), bike lanes, etc. These issues are not a problem on a freeway making lane splitting and shoulder riding relatively safe. I wouldn’t ride on the shoulder of a city street even if it were legal.

This bill really needs to be passed. The benefits far outweigh the risks.

I agree. There are a number of benefits to this.

In driving school, you're driving instructor told you to not go five seconds without having glanced in each mirror. In addition to always knowing when a car is in your blind spot, you would then be able to easily see an approaching lane splitter. I'm disgusted that drivers unaware of their surroundings have licenses in the first place. Furthermore, if the motorcyclist sees a driver that's NOT staying in the center of his lane, the motorcyclist will slow down and wait for him to center himself, or reenter a lane. It is proven successful, as you may have missed from other comments, mentioning that it's legal in parts of Europe and Asia. Having just visited England, where bicycles are allowed to filter in the busy city, it's clearly safe if the driver is capable of being aware of his surroundings.