In the bike lane before a right turn... do I have a case?

[Petelite]

deleted

 

[p4i1]

It cannot be called line sharing, since unwritten rule says that splitting is when you ride between lanes separated by dashed line.
Also as far as I remember crossing solid white line is generally discouraged (i am not sure whether its a violation thou). But looks like you crossed it.
Practically, you were passing on the right, using the shoulder/bike lane, which is a violation.

 

[LongGoneJohn]

If you can't recall where you were when you entered the lane, how are you going to fight it and testify under oath that you weren't in it more than 200 feet from the intersection? Well, I get how you're going to fight it, but I mean how can you expect to win?

The GoogleMaps picture is worth nothing in evidence. The second picture is good to give an example of what you believe the officer was able to see, but he will likely testify to what he could see and thus -- the picture -- is pretty irrelevant too.

And for what it's worth, I can see the roadway behind those trees which means I'd be able to see you driving too.

 

[mean dad]

It cannot be called line sharing, since unwritten rule says that splitting is when you ride between lanes separated by dashed line.
Also as far as I remember crossing solid white line is generally discouraged (i am not sure whether its a violation thou). But looks like you crossed it.
Practically, you were passing on the right, using the shoulder/bike lane, which is a violation.

same concept, different names. it has historically been called lane splitting; an attempt to make it friendlier to the driving public has seen it changed to lane sharing.
and it is completely dependent on lane width, not markings. as long as both vehicles fit in the lane (even if both are cars), you're good to go.

 

[Alan_Hepburn]

I always assumed that when the line changes appearance - for instance when the bike lane limit line changes from solid to dotted - it was legal to cross into it. In the google image the line denoting the bike lane actually ends at a point between where you say 200 ft is, and the corner. My interpretation is that the point where the line ends is the point where you can enter the bike lane to make your turn. I have no idea if my interpretation is the legal one or not, but it's what I use.

 

[silversvs]

I was riding my scooter up to campus and rode in the bike lane to pass a bunch of cars queued up at a busy intersection. The LEO was standing on the corner of the intersection when he saw me. He pointed, told me to stop, and cited me for 21209(a), driving in a bike lane. I didn't argue, just said I was making a right turn. He said "No, look, you were way back there."

Yes I was in the bike lane, but this is legal for 200 feet before an intersection in preparation for a right turn (which I was making.) I can't remember exactly when I entered the bike lane, but it was probably on the 200 foot mark give or take 10 feet.

I'd like to fight this - beyond about 200 feet the officers line of site is blocked by a row of trees, so even if I had entered the bike lane beyond 200 feet, he wouldn't have been able to see.

So do I have a case? Are these pictures sufficient evidence, along with a well-written statement? (TBWD?)

Some pics: Red X is where the LEO was standing. Blue arrow shows my intended path through the intersection.

Officers viewpoint: 200 feet is about where the close side of the white van is parked.

Did you measure 200 ft? From the intersection? By what method?

 

[Petelite]

Did you measure 200 ft? From the intersection? By what method?

Measured with google maps scale and verified with a tape measure.

When lane sharing is it specified which side of the lane you are allowed to share? I was definitely sharing for some distance before entering the bike lane. (Or is that illegally passing on the right?)

 

[splat]

Measured with google maps scale and verified with a tape measure.

When lane sharing is it specified which side of the lane you are allowed to share? I was definitely sharing for some distance before entering the bike lane. (Or is that illegally passing on the right?)

:::Not legal advice:::


Because I wanted to see, I took it upon myself to check your google map logic. By my calculations on the 100ft 50ft and 20ft scale, you were well over 200ft before hitting the limit line of the intersection (in accordance with your original post). That doesn't take into account that the google image isn't directly downwards so scale is slightly off. I used the 20ft zoom so that it would be more accurate.

The law on lane sharing isn't defined, but the passing on the right law is.
Also because I'm fairly sure the citing officer has riding buddies on this board and that it's been screen capped, any defense in court will probably be dismissed by your admission of guilt.

At this point even a Trial by Written Declaration probably wouldn't help you.

:::Still not legal advice:::

 

[afm199]

If you look at the street markings, the bike lane starts and ENDS WAY before the right turn lane AND if you were IN IT at any time, you were way before the right turn lane. LOOK at the street markings.

PS no sympathy from me. I hate motorized vehicles of any sort in bike lanes.

 

[Flying Pig]

:::Not legal advice:::


Because I wanted to see, I took it upon myself to check your google map logic. By my calculations on the 100ft 50ft and 20ft scale, you were well over 200ft before hitting the limit line of the intersection (in accordance with your original post). That doesn't take into account that the google image isn't directly downwards so scale is slightly off. I used the 20ft zoom so that it would be more accurate.

...

:::Still not legal advice:::

By my calculations, your calculations are off

 

[Petelite]

:::Not legal advice:::


Because I wanted to see, I took it upon myself to check your google map logic. By my calculations on the 100ft 50ft and 20ft scale, you were well over 200ft before hitting the limit line of the intersection (in accordance with your original post). That doesn't take into account that the google image isn't directly downwards so scale is slightly off. I used the 20ft zoom so that it would be more accurate.

The law on lane sharing isn't defined, but the passing on the right law is.
Also because I'm fairly sure the citing officer has riding buddies on this board and that it's been screen capped, any defense in court will probably be dismissed by your admission of guilt.

At this point even a Trial by Written Declaration probably wouldn't help you.

:::Still not legal advice:::

I dragged the map across the 50 foot scale four times... and accidentally used the 20 meter scale

Ironically earlier on the commute a lady in a Camry spent an entire block in the bike lane just 'cause.

Oh well. Thanks guys!

 

[silversvs]

Measured with google maps scale and verified with a tape measure.

When lane sharing is it specified which side of the lane you are allowed to share? I was definitely sharing for some distance before entering the bike lane. (Or is that illegally passing on the right?)

Just to be clear, you took a tape measure and physically measured the distance? If I was the officer who issued the cite I would have used my LIDAR or a roll-a-tape to measure out where I saw you at.

In regard to lane sharing, there is nothing in writing in the Vehicle Code or any other authority outlining how it should be done. (we are working on that at the state level)

 

[BillyD]

...(we are working on that at the state level)

Oh great, just what we need.

 

[Diezel]

Oh great, just what we need.

Actually, it would be nice to have some legitimate laws on what we can and can not do. In regards to lane sharing/splitting. Since there is no official laws written on such.

As for your case OP. Suck it up bud. You hosed it on this one.

The bike lane, is a solid white line. It ends well before the turn lane begins. If you were in the bike lane, you were in the wrong. Just because you should SIGNAL 200ft before a lane change or turn, doesn't mean you should swerve to the curb 200 ft before a corner, and doing so illegally in a bike lane.


And Ernie: FWIW You keep the motorized thingies out of bike lanes. And please keep the bikes out of the MOTORIZED THINGIE LANES.

 

[splat]

By my calculations, your calculations are off

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/3149/ucsc200ft.png

Quit stealing my thunder!

 

[tgrrdr]

Because I wanted to see, I took it upon myself to check your google map logic. By my calculations on the 100ft 50ft and 20ft scale, you were well over 200ft before hitting the limit line of the intersection

By my calculations, your calculations are off

Measured with google maps scale and verified with a tape measure.

I'm not sure it makes any difference in this situation but it's not clear to me that any of you are measuring the 200 ft from the correct starting point.

365. An "intersection" is the area embraced within the prolongation
of the lateral curb lines...

21209. (a) No person shall drive a motor vehicle in a bicycle lane established on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207 except as follows:

(3) To prepare for a turn within a distance of 200 feet from the intersection.

from the pictures posted above with scales it looks like the light pole is +/- 180 ft from the intersection and you can clearly see the bike lane well past the pole. Based on my extremely precise distance estimates, if you entered the bike lane at the red mark on your picture you were closer to 300 ft from the intersection than 200 ft.

 

[splat]

I'm not sure it makes any difference in this situation but it's not clear to me that any of you are measuring the 200 ft from the correct starting point.

It does. We are measuring from the Limit line of the intersection (the line where the intersection officially begins, so if you stop, it has to be behind that line.)

Also, if you look at both the distance calculations on the google map, we're within a millimeter of each other and that bush

 

[BillyD]

Actually, it would be nice to have some legitimate laws on what we can and can not do. In regards to lane sharing/splitting. Since there is no official laws written on such.

The last thing Kalifornia needs are more freaking laws on the books.

I believe LEOs already have ample means to rein in unsafe driving whether or not someone is lane sharing.

The most likely outcome of any "State level" effort will be increased restrictions on lane sharing that apply to everyone, even those who currently do it safely.

Furthermore, having any new law relating to lane sharing will do nothing to lessen the ignorance of drivers, even in the exceedingly unlikely scenario of a new law "legalizing" lane sharing.

Be careful for what you wish...

BTW, aren't all laws "legitimate"?

 

[two wheel tramp]

If you look at the street markings, the bike lane starts and ENDS WAY before the right turn lane AND if you were IN IT at any time, you were way before the right turn lane. LOOK at the street markings.

PS no sympathy from me. I hate motorized vehicles of any sort in bike lanes.

+1. If you have a motor on your bike, stay out of the bicycle lane. Once the lane goes from solid to dashed it's fair game to enter it for the turn. Before that, absolutely not.

 

[Diezel]

The last thing Kalifornia needs are more freaking laws on the books.

BTW, aren't all laws "legitimate"?

While I certainly agree with you. Wouldn't YOU like to have your ass completely covered in the event someone "doesn't see you" while lane sharing/splitting. Or someone thinks what you did was illegal and decides to "close the gap".... I know I would.