And, if you’re curious, should an officer be around and decide he’s in bad enough of a mood to ticket you, the total fine is $173.50 and 2 points. (Though I would think in all likelihood, the police isn’t going to care enough, or at least let you off with a warning. But, in a college or younger town, who knows? I’ve never heard of anyone getting ticketed for jaywalking until I went to Seattle, so it’ll depend on the mood of your local constabulary.)
Breaking the law doesn’t necessarily make you a dick though. Sometimes, obeying the law makes you a dick, and enforcing certain petty laws can make you a dick, especially if you’re not a law enforcement officer at all and are just trying to play junior deputy.
Basically, I think the legal analysis going on in this thread is irrelevant to the question of “who’s the dick?”.
I agree. My ranking of who is being dickish in this scenario is not based on the law but courtesy. If I can get pissed off at the occasional bike rider who uses the sidewalk (and this really pisses me off when it’s an adult), I can get irritated at the motorist who impedes on the lanes specially reserved for bikes which will hopefully encourage them to stay the fuck out of the sidewalk. (I honestly don’t see many sidewalk riders around here. I’m hoping it’s the increase in bike lanes that has made this possible.) Put it this way, if I pulled over into the bike lane to wait for someone and a bicyclist chewed me out, I would think I deserved it for trying to get away with it.
Not necessarily. He could have been so much of a dickwad, that even tho he never uses the bike lane, (since he wants to ‘be safe’ and ride on the sidewalk) he’s still angry over a nasty old car taking over the rights of the glorious cyclists!
Sorry, I didn’t follow his link. I saw the number of the statute he mentioned, which was the same one I had found, so I just assumed he was linking directly to the statute as well.
At any rate, as was said above, I wasn’t rating your dickishness; just addressing a specific point of law. I certainly don’t think every traffic infraction involves being a dick. Just the ones that involve other folks getting in my way. 
Biker’s the dick, don’t yell at someone who’s parking and its not a handicap space, and even then how do you know he’s not handicapped?
Bike lanes are for traveling, but in many cities, its the closest area to the curb. If you have to temporarily park or make a turn, you’re going to overlap it. In this case, I think its perfectly fine to park there to wait for a passenger. Biker should just go around him
Now I’m confused! Did you block the bike lane? Or did you drive up onto and block a dedicated bike path?
I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that you don’t bike around town much. Ride daily through busy traffic for a full week, then come back and tell us how trivial it is to avoid all the cars that are illegally blocking your lane.
No, it’s not perfectly fine. In fact, actions like this are exactly why dedicated bike lanes were created.
Where I’m from, bike lanes are in the street, and there’s either a shoulder or lane for parking to the right of the bike lane nearer to the curb.
If the city has not found it in their interests to allow cars to park or pull up to the curb without interfering with bike commuters, I’m not going to blame the driver. In that case, what they call a “bike lane” is actually a shoulder and they just called it a bike lane to appease bikers who vote.
That’s solely the city’s fault. Cars need access to the curb. Taking that access away and calling it a “bike lane” is bad for bikers and drivers alike, and it’s just asking for situations like this (or worse) to occur.
To waste taxpayers money, slow traffic and pander to the “feel good” crowd?
Cyclists rarely use them.
Around here, we do. Not everyone for sure, but plenty enough that a car parked in the middle of a busy commuting route is a PITA.
Very well said.
Bike lanes are a great idea. We have lots of them here and I ride in them often.
But the idea that cars are supposed to stop out in car traffic lanes instead of at the curb, or the idea that the presence of a curbside bike lane means no stopping for cars for any reason, is silly. Neither of those ideas passes the laugh test.
The intent of bike lanes is to provide space between the car traffic and the edge of the road and any non-moving vehicles sitting there. Not to create a sacrosanct limited access expressway for bicycles.
Well, in Los Angeles and the SF Bay area, they ride on the sidewalk or in traffic lanes instead. usually on the sidewalk. Yes, I was exaggerating. Maybe 30-40% do actually use the lanes.
But you have a lane which at the very best sees little traffic, then less than half of it’s intended users using it, and you have a waste.
The cost of bike lanes is a fraction of what it costs to add facilities for cars, and despite the claims of some they do get used. It may not seem that way to some, but they do get used. Bike lanes have helped reduce the number of cyclists on sidewalks - I haven’t seen many doing that at all since the lanes went up, Where I did see it was on streets without bike lanes.
For those saying that bike lanes are perfectly OK to park or stop in, please read the law as quoted by several folks in this thread.
Why is it OK for cars to block the lane designated for bikes but not block the lane designated for cars? If there’s a road with no parking at the curb and no bike lane - just a lane of traffic that goes right to the edge - is it OK for cars to park in it and block that lane of traffic?
As a matter of fact, the intent of bike lanes is to create a lane with limited access for bicycles, thus the laws preventing people from parking in them.
This is idiotic. Why do you think people are riding outside of the bike lanes in your ridiculously exaggerated made-up stats? Could it be because the bike lanes are blocked? Do you really think that given a choice between an unblocked bike lane, a busy traffic lane, and a congested sidewalk, that people will choose not to ride in the bike lane?
Cite?
Try looking at the Embarcadero in SF.
The law is rather vague. And, a minor traffic violation? Geez, we all violate those on a daily basis.
Its only temporary. No one should expect that their dedicated lane is clear 100% of the time. This doesn’t apply to just bikes, but everyone. Pedestrians have to cross streets, sometimes there’s no crosswalk, so cars should be careful around pedestial heavy streets. Sometimes a bus will park right in the lane to pick up or drop someone off, so the cars behind them will have to wait. I believe in bike lanes and think they do a lot of good but some people seem to want to give bike lanes and no other types of lanes 100% leeway for bikes 100% of the time.
What if the orientation is sidewalk - bike lane - street,in that order? How’s a car or pedestrian supposed to cross it? There are side streets and driveways cutting into a bike lane all the time. Not every bike lane is like this. And even if it is, the cars on the left have to cross the bike lane to get into the street. Bikers need to watch out for people and cars just as pedestrians and cars have to do. Bikers want cars to share the road, which many of us do, but pretend they don’t have to do the same. Sometimes cars will have to veer into or drive across or park in the bike lane, just get over it. The OP didn’t mention if there were any signs saying you couldn’t park there so what he did might not even be illegal.
Again, I suppose bike lanes, I want them everywhere. But for temporarily picking up or dropping someone off, you do that in the bike lane, not in the driving lane, because its safer. Bikers shouldn’t expect that no one else will ever come into their lanes just as cars and pedestrians don’t expect that no one else will ever cross them either
The bike lanes arent blocked in the areas I have seen.
According to those I have asked they say it’s because it safer for them to ride on the sidewalk. They are being selfish and making the sidewalk unsafe for pedestrians.
So, yes, given a choice they pick the sidewalk.
http://www.ibiketo.ca/blog/few-bike-lanes-cause-most-sidewalk-cycling
*Breaking news is that a cyclist on the sidewalk at Finch and Sentinel killed a pedestrian recently *…
(this last does say that cyclist WOULD choose to use a bike lane, but since there are none, insists upon using the sidewalk- illegally)
http://archive.peninsulapress.com/2013/01/07/san-jose-sidewalks-become-places-of-contention-for-bicyclists-and-pedestrians/
*The biggest complaint that we are getting has nothing to do with the lanes, but rather the fact that the bicyclists are still not using them,” said Kymberli Brady, president of the San Jose Downtown Residents Association. “They continue to ride their bikes on the sidewalks, and people who are out walking their dogs or their strollers or just taking an evening walk over to dinner are constantly having to dodge these people on bicycles.”
Downtown resident Brian Vaeth wrote this comment on the Downtown Residents Association’s Facebook page: “I always hate having to dodge bicyclists on sidewalks, and for some reason people continue to use the sidewalks instead of the bike lanes.”
Another comment on the Facebook page, by Susan Strehlow: “As a bike rider, I originally loved the idea of the bike lanes. Unfortunately, they are not being used very much! I walk my dog several times a day and usually NO one uses the bike paths. Bike riders continue to bike on the sidewalk, many times almost running me over and scaring my dog.*”
http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/jumping-the-curb/Content?oid=3321829
"Yes, I bicycle on the sidewalks. I do not know or care what the laws say in my area. "
“yep. there isn’t a bike lane i feel comfortable with more of like 2 feet and then the curb. and no one else is using them. i’m not trying to get run over”
DrDeth, did you actually read the articles you linked to? They make the exact point as I did - people ride on sidewalks because of a lack of safe, unblocked, continuous bike lanes.
And really, what are you trying to prove with this “look! squirrel!” argument? Why does the fact that some bikers are jerks, or some ride on sidewalks, mean that cars should be allowed to illegally park in designated bike lanes?