Lane Sharing in Oregon

[eg23232]

Oregon Department of Transportation Safety Division

News Release

Nov. 5, 2010

For more information: Michele O’Leary, 503-986-4198

Governor’s Advisory Committee on Motorcycle Safety to Meet

Committee to discuss survey about lane sharing; public input encouraged

The Governor’s Advisory Committee on Motorcycle Safety will meet at 6:30 p.m. on Fri., Nov. 19, at the Kaiser Permanente Town Hall Ballroom, 3704 N. Interstate Avenue, Portland.

The committee will discuss the possibility of conducting a statewide public opinion survey on the topic of lane sharing, lane splitting and lane filtering. Lane sharing is when a motorcyclist travels through lanes of stopped or slower moving vehicles. Lane splitting is when a motorcyclist passes between lanes of traffic in motion. Lane filtering is when a motorcyclist passes between lanes of stationary traffic. The committee would like to hear from motorcyclists, motorists, commercial vehicle drivers and other road users about whether or not to conduct a survey. People interested in this topic are encouraged to attend the meeting. If you cannot attend the meeting, but would like to share your comments with the committee, please write to the committee via mail or e-mail by Nov. 18.

Governor’s Advisory Committee on Motorcycle Safety

C/O ODOT Transportation Safety Division

235 Union Street NE

Salem, OR 97301-1054

E-mail: [email protected]

The Governor appoints members representing all areas of the state to the Governor’s Advisory Committee on Motorcycle Safety. The committee is charged with the responsibility to advise the Governor and the ODOT’s Transportation Safety Division regarding motorcycle safety. The committee reviews, proposes, and makes recommendations concerning motorcycle-related legislation as well as serving as a public forum for motorcyclists and promoting motorcycle safety to the public.

Meetings of the Governor’s Advisory Committee on Motorcycle Safety are open to the public. Accommodations will be provided to persons with disabilities. To request an accommodation, please call (503) 986-4188 at least 48 hours in advance (TTY: 503-986-3954). The Kaiser Permanente Town Hall Ballroom is located on the TriMet MAX yellow line. Parking is available behind the building and across the street.

 

[SacramentoMike]

I wish you luck on this. Show up, you Oregonians.

 

[dcarver]

exactly

 

[escapefjrtist]

For sure, maybe if lane sharing is legal in Oregon it might filter one more state north. Can't hurt for everyone to comment to ODOT via email.

--G

 

[SacramentoMike]

For sure, maybe if lane sharing is legal in Oregon it might filter one more state north. Can't hurt for everyone to comment to ODOT via email.

--G

George, you're right. I just sent one off. Probly'll convince them, too, I bet.

If nothing else, somebody will compile a report with a sentence reading something like "975 letters and emails were received, of which 87% favored proceeding with this study." Worth a try.

 

[DELETE-PLEASE]

I just hope that they make a nice public announcement if it's passed and that the public becomes AWARE of the new law. From what I understand, lane splitting is NOT fun when the drivers around you are trying to cut you off and open doors in your way because they think you're breaking the law and just trying to get ahead.

Alexi

 

[sportsguy]

Email sent in support of the survey being performed. No idea if it'll help or simply be filtered out.

 

[huckstr]

My email sent as well, with comments about how well and safely it is used in CA, and Europe, and has been for ever.

while there is a lot of talk and discussion about this topic, regarding wether or not one likes lane sharing, in places where it is legal it is not mandatory. I travel to CA frequently and love the fact that I am able to actually use my motorcycle to its full potential in traffic. Being so narrow is a hugh advantage. I hope this concept has some legs here in the NW!

 

[MojaveFJR]

Good luck guys. It does work wonders, can't tell you how much it helps us get through around here, especially at rush hr when the lights are backed up with cagers.

 

[BwanaDik]

Odot works for the Transportation Safety Division? That's a scary thought! :lol:

 

[meosborn]

I just hope that they make a nice public announcement if it's passed and that the public becomes AWARE of the new law. From what I understand, lane splitting is NOT fun when the drivers around you are trying to cut you off and open doors in your way because they think you're breaking the law and just trying to get ahead.

Alexi

The only people that even talk about doing anything like that are cagers who live in states where it isn't legal. It's just people trying to justify their fear of lane sharing because they don't know how to do it properly.

IMHO, it will be outlawed in CA before it becomes legal in any other state. Hopefully I'm wrong.

 

[eg23232]

Bumping this since the meeting is tonight.

I won't be able to attend but I've already sent an email in support.

My email:

As a motorcycle enthusiast both for pleasure (I own three motorcycles) and work (I ride motors for the Multnomah County Sheriff's Office), I would like to voice my support towards any effort to legalize lane sharing for motorcycles in Oregon.

Besides the obvious and most often referred benefits such as less impact on roads, easing congestion and traffic, and less output of harmful emissions, I believe in at least one other way the ability to filter or lane share provides more safety for motorcyclists. Riders are vulnerable in any case but are especially vulnerable when stopped in traffic. Riders have no protection other than the gear being worn from being rear-ended by inattentive motorists. A moving motorcycle has the ability to outmaneuver and outbrake other vehicles so it is generally safer when in motion. Other vehicles offer the protection of tons of steel, seatbelts, and airbags whereas motorcycles do not. Just two days ago while stopped at a red light in my county marked patrol car, I was rear-ended by an inattentive motorist. While not a fast collision, this would have been very serious had I been on a motorcycle. Being able to filter through traffic gives the rider a cushion of safety by being able to use the cars around him or her.

Weather in the Pacific Northwest isn't always ideal. Motorcycle riders are exposed to the weather more so than motorists even when the riders are wearing proper protective gear. Being stopped in traffic on a hot day causes increased stress and fatigue on the rider which can have a detrimental effect on the rider's safety. The ability to keep moving through traffic means the rider can stay cooler in hot weather. Being stuck in traffic in rain and cold isn't pleasant either and cold obviously adversely effects the rider as well.

If lane sharing or filtering is allowed, and I hope it eventually is, then I would propose reasonable restrictions on the conditions when it could be done. Using a relative speeds would be one such way. For example, surrounding traffic would have to be stopped or travelling below a certain speed for lane sharing to be allowed and then the rider's speed could be restricted to some logical amount above the slowed traffic speed. So, for example, if traffic was going 35 mph, the rider could only go 45 mph. Filtering up to intersections and construction flaggers should be allowed at all times.

I urge ODOT to proceed with this survey.

Regards,

Eric Gustafson

 

[FJR_pig]

Hey strangers,

I attended this meeting last night...as part of my job. It was quite interesting, from a few of my different perspectives (citizen rider, former police motor officer, State Police Area Commander...).

I'd estimate there were about 150+ in attendance and probably 30+ provided public testimony. Some very good points were brought up by those who attended and testified to the committee, certainly things I had not thought about before, from any of my personal perspectives.

It will be interesting to see what happens and whether the committee pursues the survey. Whether the committee believes in lane sharing, filtering or splitting, it would make better government to find out what the peeps want.

I'm out.

ig_ball:

 

[FJRay]

Hey strangers,

I attended this meeting last night...as part of my job. It was quite interesting, from a few of my different perspectives (citizen rider, former police motor officer, State Police Area Commander...).

I'd estimate there were about 150+ in attendance and probably 30+ provided public testimony. Some very good points were brought up by those who attended and testified to the committee, certainly things I had not thought about before, from any of my personal perspectives.

It will be interesting to see what happens and whether the committee pursues the survey. Whether the committee believes in lane sharing, filtering or splitting, it would make better government to find out what the peeps want.

I'm out.

ig_ball:

Good to see you are still looking in on us. I hope this works out .

 

[blufjr]

Hey strangers,

I attended this meeting last night...as part of my job. It was quite interesting, from a few of my different perspectives (citizen rider, former police motor officer, State Police Area Commander...).

I'd estimate there were about 150+ in attendance and probably 30+ provided public testimony. Some very good points were brought up by those who attended and testified to the committee, certainly things I had not thought about before, from any of my personal perspectives.

It will be interesting to see what happens and whether the committee pursues the survey. Whether the committee believes in lane sharing, filtering or splitting, it would make better government to find out what the peeps want.

I'm out.

ig_ball:

I too attended. I stayed to hear the discussion by the committee. There were approximately 250 in attendance and 38 got up and gave testimony, although they were only suppose address ya or nay to the question; should the committee proceed with a public opinion survey regarding lane sharing? It was interesting to listen to the folks that did get up and speak as pig noted. One of the committee members took a tally and it was, 35 for and 3 against. Those three were the boss of Team Oregon, RCMC road captain and BMWO of OR president. None of them were speaking for their organizations. The TO guy obviously teaches mostly new riders and Lane Sharing violates many of the basic safety riding lessons taught. The RCMC road captain comes from the same school as the TO guy, etc. Can't speak for BMWO or OR Pres., he just must be ultra conservative in his riding.

The discussion went like this: A survey of opinions will not benefit anyone and is a waste of (the State's) money. Vote to do survey: 3 nay, 2 ya. Pres. voted to make a tie so the issue would proceed on to the next meeting. Lets face it, a survey of opinions will loose if you allow anyone that hasn't lane shared before or those not even some what familiar with the act. ODOT thought a questioning of 400 auto licensees and 400 with MC endorsements would do. What good would that do? O well, maybe in the future, but most likely not now. Unless, there is a movement. (illegal?) Just do what you know is right and do it with respect for others with safety in mind and maybe others will take notice of how efficient and energy saving it is to lane share. Do it with ill regard for others while speeding and it will never get anywhere. If the powers of being can't see the efficiency of the movement of traffic or the energy savings then we have nothing. Sad to say.

That's my report, IMHO.

 

[huckstr]

Hey strangers,

I attended this meeting last night...as part of my job. It was quite interesting, from a few of my different perspectives (citizen rider, former police motor officer, State Police Area Commander...).

I'd estimate there were about 150+ in attendance and probably 30+ provided public testimony. Some very good points were brought up by those who attended and testified to the committee, certainly things I had not thought about before, from any of my personal perspectives.

It will be interesting to see what happens and whether the committee pursues the survey. Whether the committee believes in lane sharing, filtering or splitting, it would make better government to find out what the peeps want.

I'm out.

ig_ball:

I too attended. I stayed to hear the discussion by the committee. There were approximately 250 in attendance and 38 got up and gave testimony, although they were only suppose address ya or nay to the question; should the committee proceed with a public opinion survey regarding lane sharing? It was interesting to listen to the folks that did get up and speak as pig noted. One of the committee members took a tally and it was, 35 for and 3 against. Those three were the boss of Team Oregon, RCMC road captain and BMWO of OR president. None of them were speaking for their organizations. The TO guy obviously teaches mostly new riders and Lane Sharing violates many of the basic safety riding lessons taught. The RCMC road captain comes from the same school as the TO guy, etc. Can't speak for BMWO or OR Pres., he just must be ultra conservative in his riding.

The discussion went like this: A survey of opinions will not benefit anyone and is a waste of (the State's) money. Vote to do survey: 3 nay, 2 ya. Pres. voted to make a tie so the issue would proceed on to the next meeting. Lets face it, a survey of opinions will loose if you allow anyone that hasn't lane shared before or those not even some what familiar with the act. ODOT thought a questioning of 400 auto licensees and 400 with MC endorsements would do. What good would that do? O well, maybe in the future, but most likely not now. Unless, there is a movement. (illegal?) Just do what you know is right and do it with respect for others with safety in mind and maybe others will take notice of how efficient and energy saving it is to lane share. Do it with ill regard for others while speeding and it will never get anywhere. If the powers of being can't see the efficiency of the movement of traffic or the energy savings then we have nothing. Sad to say.

That's my report, IMHO.

This is really distressing. Doing a "survey" is of no value really. If they are actually serious they will do some "Study" in the places where this practice is actually done. Talking about it is opinion, not fact. If there was actually a study done, some facts might actually emerge. I have practiced lane sharing in CA and in countries where it is allowed and found it to be both safe and helpful, as do thousand and thousands of other motorcyclists. It in no way impedes car or truck traffic and as far as I know, it has not been found to be a cause of danger or increased accident rates. It does, however, allow the quick and orderly movement of vehicles, which should be the main function of the public road ways-for everyone, not just cars. It is a best use of available space. While discussion of this sort may indeed be construed as good government, it is not a good way to understand the concept or to have any idea as to it's actual results or consequences.

We are all aware of the various arguments against this practice. The main one seems to always be that it "May" lead to unsafe riding and "May" lead some angry motorists to do stupid things. Clearly, outlawing a safe and useful practice because "Some" may do stupid things is a non argument and anyone making it should be ashamed. It should be noted that there is no law allowing this practice in CA, however, there is no law against it. This is a as it should be. Naturally, anyone that does stupid things that endanger others should be stopped, just as it is for any such infraction at any other time. This goes for motorcyclists and for cagers.

Instead of thinking that this practice "May" cause anger and stupid actions by auto and truck drivers, why not think that it "May" cause them to see the value of two wheel travel? For the powers that be, the main idea should be how to enhance the use of the public roads. Allowing a practice that has proven to be safe in places with much more serious traffic problems than we currently have here in OR makes sense. Studying it in places where it is practiced makes sense. Endlessly asking about opinions about it does not.

 

[MojaveFJR]

Sounds to me as they just deferred approving the question. Commit and get it done with.

As for the motorcycle safety thing, When traffic is stopped I feel safer between all those cars, then at the tail end of the line. If the rider does this in a safe and prudent manner, then it just keeps them moving along and that is one less person/vehicle in the jam up.

 

[blufjr]

This is really distressing. Doing a "survey" is of no value really. If they are actually serious they will do some "Study" in the places where this practice is actually done. Studying it in places where it is practiced makes sense. ...........edit out.......................Endlessly asking about opinions about it does not.

They had $12,000 to do a study, so you really can't expect too much out of the study in the first place. A real study would be good, but I figure it would have to come from Calf. (they have no money) or the Fed. Gov. (MC users group isn't large enough to waste money on). And you confirmed their thoughts that surveying opinions is a waste of that money.

Sounds to me as they just deferred approving the question. Commit and get it done with.

As for the motorcycle safety thing, When traffic is stopped I feel safer between all those cars, then at the tail end of the line. If the rider does this in a safe and prudent manner, then it just keeps them moving along and that is one less person/vehicle in the jam up.

Most everyone agrees that it is good, not all but most. There really isn't any reason to waste the money on a "Opinion Survey" when it isn't going to produce anything meaningful.