Double white line rule is confusing

Re: “First HOT commute going good,” Renton Reporter, Wednesday May 7, 2008

Re: “First HOT commute going good,” Renton Reporter, Wednesday May 7, 2008

The Washington Urban Corridor administrator (Craig Stone) proudly toots his own horn to claim the HOT changes as “going good.”

However, the success of the HOT-lane modifications really depends on the viewpoint of the actual users. As I traveled down State Route 167 intending to use the HOV lane, I found that I couldn’t get in the HOV lane after getting on the freeway because of the DOUBLE LINE, then I found I couldn’t get out of the HOV lane when I saw my exit coming up because of the DOUBLE LINE. This obviously compounds the problems for use by carpooling vehicles and results in total confusion and frustration.

It seems that the primary purpose of the HOV lane to encourage car pooling has been sacrificed for the sake of sole-occupant vehicle drivers willing to pay the price and pad the state wallet.

To maintain the primary intended purpose of the HOV lane, all multi-occupant vehicles should be allowed to cross the DOUBLE LINE at any point without a $124 traffic fine. In addition, other vehicles in the regular lanes should yield to multi-occupant vehicles attempting to reach or exit the HOV lane. Why change the long-standing rules for a few deep pocket individuals?

Abiding by the ridiculous DOUBLE LINE rule for carpooling vehicles will be even more difficult during winter months when daylight hours and visibility of exits are reduced.

I sincerely believe the state has truly goofed on the HOV changes and has severely discouraged multi-occupant vehicle driving and use of the HOV lane. Let’s make the changes necessary to restore the primary intended purpose of the HOV lanes and make it convenient for those users willing to carpool.

Carpooling in HOV lanes cuts down on the number of vehicles on the road and preserves our fuel resources, “HOT” use does not! LET’S PUT THE EMPHASIS WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE!

Gerald Wooldridge


Talk to us

Please share your story tips by emailing

To share your opinion for publication, submit a letter through our website Include your name, address and daytime phone number. (We’ll only publish your name and hometown.) Please keep letters to 300 words or less.

More in Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor for the week of March 13

Reader worries about the county’s reach Dear editor, The article regarding King… Continue reading

Letters to the editor for the week of Feb. 14

Tommy the turtle — a childhood friend Dear editor, “Tommy the Turtle”… Continue reading

Letters to the editor for the week of Jan. 31

Voting can bring us together Dear editor, In response to Jerry Cornfield’s… Continue reading

Letters to the editor for the week of Nov. 15

Reader’s child enjoys stories about community Dear editor, I just read “It’s… Continue reading

King County and my grassy lawn

King County and my grassy lawn Do people know that some King… Continue reading

Why not change the name to match the location?

To Lakeside Industries, As a longtime resident of Renton, I’m concerned about… Continue reading

Addressing concerns, inaccurate statements

To facilitate fact-based discussion about Lakeside Industries’ application to relocate its Covington… Continue reading

Responsible pet ownership in Renton

In Renton we are blessed with our own Animal Control. Stray pets… Continue reading

Location all wrong for asphalt plant

I am writing to you to express my opposition of the Lakeside… Continue reading

Continued support needed this election for Renton Schools

We would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to every Renton… Continue reading

Invest in our future

I am writing to you to express my support for both the… Continue reading

Vote yes to support Renton schools

Two important school funding measures are on the Feb. 12 ballot. Voter… Continue reading