Taking up a whole parking space

[Apex]

I've always wanted to pull my 250 up to the sidewalk, shut it down and push it up to the bicycle rack. I'm sure they wouldn't like that either. hahahah

[Hadyn]

Originally Posted by Apex

I've always wanted to pull my 250 up to the sidewalk, shut it down and push it up to the bicycle rack. I'm sure they wouldn't like that either. hahahah

Hey, if bicycles can ride in the road and park in a rack, why can't motorcycles?

[FrugalNinja250]

Because motorcycles are powered vehicles required to be registered and titled for street use, and only ridden by licensed riders. They qualify as a vehicle, so they can't park at a rack the same as a car or semi can't.

Though honestly, I've been sorely tempted. If I ever owned a business with a lot of parking space I'd set aside several spaces up front, next to handicapped spaces, with a steel pipe up front for riders to lock their bike too. That would stop the pick up an carry away types of theft.

[headshrink]

There are only 3 places I park on the sidewalk, Lowes, HD, and Kaiser. Other than that, it is always in a spot (middle, end for visibility). The reason for the "big 3" exceptions is because I frequently see other bikes there, usually employees. That is as good as a MC parking sign to me.

[Hadyn]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Because motorcycles are powered vehicles required to be registered and titled for street use, and only ridden by licensed riders. They qualify as a vehicle, so they can't park at a rack the same as a car or semi can't.

Then bicycles should get off my roads!

[Blackwidow]

Originally Posted by revstriker

Indeed!

As I was reading through the thread, I kept wondering what the final poster pointed out: What if the car was parked their first, and she was returning? With the bike there, she would have no way to enter the van.

As for the handcuffs, I can only speculate he may have got pissed at his brand new bike being knocked over and the police may have thought he'd be violent.

Serves him right though.

I don't know if i agree...i think both are jerks! jsut because its a designated parking spot for the HC, doesn't mean the person pulling into it has to take justice into their own hands and completely ruin someone elses property, even if that property is illegally parked.

If it was me getting my bike dropped like that, i'd be PISSED. regardless if i deserve it or not, its not right! if I was the person in the car, i'd pull in and call the cops immediately and let them tow the bike, not hit the bike down.

[KJohnson21]

Yes, I do have a pretty good parking situation at work. All of the spaces in that row are for motorcycles.

I took this picture to show my wife how lonely my bike was that morning. There were a few others by the end of the day, but this is LA, people freak out in the rain.

The spaces do fill up sometimes at the end of summer, or if they make the parking for cars really inconvenient. That's one of the common topics of conversation around here: how inadequate the parking is, how poorly thought out it is, when they're going to do something about it, etc. I just smile and shut up.

[cifex]

Originally Posted by kyl18b

What about the striped areas at the ends of parking rows? They're usually oddly shaped triangles. I'm protected from both angles usually by the two cars parked on the end. Any thoughts on those spots?

I use em.....

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

I don't know if i agree...i think both are jerks! jsut because its a designated parking spot for the HC, doesn't mean the person pulling into it has to take justice into their own hands and completely ruin someone elses property, even if that property is illegally parked.

If it was me getting my bike dropped like that, i'd be PISSED. regardless if i deserve it or not, its not right! if I was the person in the car, i'd pull in and call the cops immediately and let them tow the bike, not hit the bike down.

In the thread on the other forum it was revealed that the bike parked after the woman had gone inside. It's fairly probable that she thought the ramp would clear and misjudged how close the bike blocked her access, or she wasn't all the way to the door when she activated the remote control for the ramp so didn't see the bike until it was too late. In any case, the accident wouldn't have happened if the rider hadn't broken the law.

I have a friend in a chair. After hearing his tales of how rude people like this rider are I have no sympathy for what happened to his bike. I also think he should pay for any damage to the ramp, because those things are hideously expensive to repair according to my friend.

After all, we've all see the picture of the car parked in front of the fire hydrant with the fire hose run through the smashed out windows and felt no sympathy for the driver, why feel any for this rider? No parking zone means no parking zone.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

I don't know if i agree...i think both are jerks! jsut because its a designated parking spot for the HC, doesn't mean the person pulling into it has to take justice into their own hands and completely ruin someone elses property, even if that property is illegally parked.

If it was me getting my bike dropped like that, i'd be PISSED. regardless if i deserve it or not, its not right! if I was the person in the car, i'd pull in and call the cops immediately and let them tow the bike, not hit the bike down.

Don't get me wrong. I think the person who knocked over the bike should probably be responsible for any damages. I say probably because I don't know the details of how it happened. But if I were in a wheel chair, and I couldn't get in my vehicle because some idiot parked his motorcycle illegally, and it blocked where my ramp comes down, I would also be pissed off.

So while both people may be at fault here, I've got no sympathy for the biker.

[headshrink]

Not taking sides here, although I feel for the poor bike.

In an accident, you still hold a degree of responsibility, even when you had the right of way IF you had an opportunity to avoid the accident and didn't. So, I suspect each person had a degree of responsibility in this. There is no way for us to know EXACTLY what happened, but we can learn from their mistakes, at least the obvious mistakes.

EDIT: Sorry, I don't know if it was clear that I was referencing the "handicap driver takes out bike" sub-topic in this thread.

[headshrink]

Here is an old pic I posted in thread months ago. Thought it appropriate for this one too.

I found the image on the Google Earth Street View. It is at the base of the Trans America building in San Fransisco.

[drowe531]

Originally Posted by headshrink

Not taking sides here, although I feel for the poor bike.

In an accident, you still hold a degree of responsibility, even when you had the right of way IF you had an opportunity to avoid the accident and didn't. So, I suspect each person had a degree of responsibility in this. There is no way for us to know EXACTLY what happened, but we can learn from their mistakes, at least the obvious mistakes.

EDIT: Sorry, I don't know if it was clear that I was referencing the "handicap driver takes out bike" sub-topic in this thread.

I believe in that other thread it was stated the handicap vehicle was there first and then the motorcycle pulled into the space next to it. That was what was stated, true or not we don't know without being there.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by headshrink

Here is an old pic I posted in thread months ago. Thought it appropriate for this one too.

I found the image on the Google Earth Street View. It is at the base of the Trans America building in San Fransisco.

Wow. Thats a lot of riders in one place.

[Hadyn]

Originally Posted by revstriker

Don't get me wrong. I think the person who knocked over the bike should probably be responsible for any damages. I say probably because I don't know the details of how it happened. But if I were in a wheel chair, and I couldn't get in my vehicle because some idiot parked his motorcycle illegally, and it blocked where my ramp comes down, I would also be pissed off.

So while both people may be at fault here, I've got no sympathy for the biker.

Later on in the thread, the OP gives some more information. Apparently the car was parked there before the bike, and the Handicapped owner pressed her remote to lower the ramp while she was exiting the Starbucks and couldn't see that a bike had parked in the way. Lowering the ramp is a pretty slow process and nothing should be in the way of the ramp anyways, so there's not really any fault with her wanting to save some time and lowering the ramp remotely assuming there wasn't anything there.

[CZroe]

The motorcycle parking by the building I work in is usually full and I am arriving when others are leaving on week days, so I take prime parking when available (the parking situation is IMPROVING when/after I get there; hence, not complaints). On weekends, there isn't a problem with me parking there as there is still plenty all around me. I also park diagonally and as close to the traffic as possible so that I am not hidden by cars in adjacent spaces. On graveyard shifts, I imagine that some people are peeved when I come out in the morning and can't find parking with my bike still that, but the lot is still filling up and someone will be getting the space as soon as I vacate it, so they should just as quickly thank me for holding ONE good space for the people who arrive 30-mins to an hour after the others. It certainly gets used as soon as I leave, so it's not like it was wasted on a little bike.

No complaints in 2 years.

Originally Posted by Flashmonkey

This is pretty cut and dry. Motorcycles, as vehicles, are supposed to park in designated parking spots. Doing anything other than that (ie: parking on a sidewalk, by bike racks, in handicap parking spots) constitutes parking illegally. That's all there is to it.

I've had this complaint before, actually. My standard answer is "suck my ______".

I found that my company referes to the bike rack *AS* "motorcycle parking." One has extra room to the side where you can squeeze a few bikes, but there usually isn't room for me. The other is that only one I've ever heard facilities refer to and it has no space (motorcycle must park in front like a bicycle). Considering that a motorcycle rider may want to chain to the rack just the same, I don't see what the problem is except that one motorcycle can displace a couple bikes. *shrug*

California says that it must be between parallel stall lines where provided, but when I see an area that I know is ONLY marked off because it couldn't fit a full-sized vehicle, I use it anyway. Most enforcers appreciate it and, therefore, wouldn't enforce the law on you. Also, many department and grocery stores seem to allow sidewalk parking and there are usually a few of those people to distract a parking enforcer (go after the others first!).

I say, use common sense. I parked in "golf cart only" spaces in Peachtree City, GA, because the same reasoning applied to motorcycles and scooters (extra spaces where full-sized ones wouldn't fit, increasing lot capacity). That city has cart paths all over. People can even send their kids to the grocery store!

I'll take a few pics of some where I will park and some where I won't.

[Guinss]

Looking at that pic, what happens if the bike furthest to the right falls over?

[headshrink]

Originally Posted by Hadyn

Later on in the thread, the OP gives some more information. Apparently the car was parked there before the bike, and the Handicapped owner pressed her remote to lower the ramp while she was exiting the Starbucks and couldn't see that a bike had parked in the way. Lowering the ramp is a pretty slow process and nothing should be in the way of the ramp anyways, so there's not really any fault with her wanting to save some time and lowering the ramp remotely assuming there wasn't anything there.

Ahh, that fills in some more blanks for me. However, I think the woman's responsibility in the accident is when she lowered the ramp without being able to see it. It is akin to changing lanes without a shoulder check, or backing out of the driveway without checking for kids. Even if there was no bike, she could have hit someone walking by (yes, I know they are supposed to move pretty slowly, but you never know). It was a little reckless... not criminal, but reckless.

Of course the biker should also have known.... that is his responsibility.

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by headshrink

Ahh, that fills in some more blanks for me. However, I think the woman's responsibility in the accident is when she lowered the ramp without being able to see it. It is akin to changing lanes without a shoulder check, or backing out of the driveway without checking for kids. Even if there was no bike, she could have hit someone walking by (yes, I know they are supposed to move pretty slowly, but you never know). It was a little reckless... not criminal, but reckless.

Of course the biker should also have known.... that is his responsibility.

I'm not so sure. The reason it is so slow is for people to get out of the way and the reason there is a remote is to have it ready and waiting. The reason the loading area is marked off in blue is to allow this. Even if the wheelchair-bound person was thinking of the possibilities, it's just like driving. There are a million things that can go wrong and you can't drive like they are all about to happen at any second. It requires some trust and eventualities like this are taken care of by insurance and "right of way" laws.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by CZroe

I'm not so sure. The reason it is so slow is for people to get out of the way and the reason there is a remote is to have it ready and waiting. The reason the loading area is marked off in blue is to allow this. Even if the wheelchair-bound person was thinking of the possibilities, it's just like driving. There are a million things that can go wrong and you can't drive like they are all about to happen at any second. It requires some trust and eventualities like this are taken care of by insurance and "right of way" laws.

This is not an excuse though. Even if that is the reason for the remote, she would still have the responsibility to ensure the area was clear. It's just like if someone was standing in an empty parking space you were trying to pull into. It doesn't matter if they are supposed to be there or not, if you hit them, its your fault. Even if you were driving slow.

[Blackwidow]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

In the thread on the other forum it was revealed that the bike parked after the woman had gone inside. It's fairly probable that she thought the ramp would clear and misjudged how close the bike blocked her access, or she wasn't all the way to the door when she activated the remote control for the ramp so didn't see the bike until it was too late. In any case, the accident wouldn't have happened if the rider hadn't broken the law.

I have a friend in a chair. After hearing his tales of how rude people like this rider are I have no sympathy for what happened to his bike. I also think he should pay for any damage to the ramp, because those things are hideously expensive to repair according to my friend.

I didn't read that far down...but i get your point, and it makes perfect sense. I just feel that both people were responsible in this situation. The rider for being stupid and parking where he shouldn't have and the lady in the car that assumed all is clear to lower the ramp. Imagine if kids were playing around the car or something. i don't know, its extreme i know. If you have a motorized object you need to be responsible with it. period.

My mom is also handicapped and in a wheel chair, so i'm fully aware of the crap handicapped people have to go through just to get in a car or having to deal with people taking up HC parking spots. I'm sure the dude thought he'll go in get his coffee and get out without anyone being the wiser, but comes out to a messed up bike...and a brand new one...does he deserve it? sure. stupid is what stupid does, just don't think he's FULLY responsible for all the repairs to his bike.

[capt_bugaloo]

Uh, I would just ask them, "So where do you suggest I park instead?"

Make it the complainers' problem to come up with a better solution.

[capt_bugaloo]

Originally Posted by GeneJunkie

They are everywhere in Cali... I laugh every time I see one, especially one on the freeway.

I have never understood "SmartCars". What is so smart about them?

They get about 40 mpg and cost $15,000. My used Chevy is a V6 with a lot more comfort and power, gets 28 mpg and cost me $3,000. The average American car gets driven maybe 1000 miles in a month, if that, so the "SmartCar" driver might burn up 25 gallons of gasoline to my 36 gallons of gas.

Last time I drove through the States (April) gasoline was about $3.15 US per gallon. That means I spent $35 more per month on gas than Mr. SmartCar. When you factor in the cost of insurance and maintenance, that doesn't seem like much of a saving - plus my car cost $12,000 less, is more comfortable, and can carry more cargo when needed.

I don't see how they are very 'Smart". Maybe if you live in a place where gasoline is a lot more expensive (I think gasoline approaches $9 or $10 a gallon in some European countries) but for North America they don't make much sense.

[Cab305]

Originally Posted by noche_caliente

Yes. Those areas are so that the vehicles in those spaces have room to fully open their doors and maneuver around the vehicle as necessary. As someone who uses h/c spaces due to my knees, that's one of my pet peeves.

Please tell me you have a h/c sticker on your bike?

If you do you must post pic, I can definitely see that being in the motivational poster tread. You could do like Rossi and walk away from bike with a cane.

[Sailariel]

I still park by bicycle racks. I don't chain up to them because I am not in the spot a long time. So far (2years) I have not had a problem. I feel that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. I do have a Handicap placard in my cage. I can use it for the MC as well---problem is, that it is one of those one hangs on the mirror, so on the MC it would get stolen. I suppose I could get a handicap plate. That, however would be overkill. I'll just keep doing what I have been doing until I have to do otherwise.

[Techno250]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Because motorcycles are powered vehicles required to be registered and titled for street use, and only ridden by licensed riders. They qualify as a vehicle, so they can't park at a rack the same as a car or semi can't.

Seriously? It's a law that motorcycles can't park at a rack? Link please!

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by capt_bugaloo

I have never understood "SmartCars". What is so smart about them?

They get about 40 mpg and cost $15,000. My used Chevy is a V6 with a lot more comfort and power, gets 28 mpg and cost me $3,000. The average American car gets driven maybe 1000 miles in a month, if that, so the "SmartCar" driver might burn up 25 gallons of gasoline to my 36 gallons of gas.

Last time I drove through the States (April) gasoline was about $3.15 US per gallon. That means I spent $35 more per month on gas than Mr. SmartCar. When you factor in the cost of insurance and maintenance, that doesn't seem like much of a saving - plus my car cost $12,000 less, is more comfortable, and can carry more cargo when needed.

I don't see how they are very 'Smart". Maybe if you live in a place where gasoline is a lot more expensive (I think gasoline approaches $9 or $10 a gallon in some European countries) but for North America they don't make much sense.

They are supposed to be "Smart" because they get good gas mileage (but not as good as a hybrid), and they are small. In Europe where parking is very limited and cities are dense, they are a handy vehicle to have. In the US however, they are just a gimmick. Unless you live and park in a big city like New York, you'll probably never get the chance to take advantage of the small size.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by Techno250

Seriously? It's a law that motorcycles can't park at a rack? Link please!

It all depends on where the rack is and the jurisdiction. Here for instance, around public buildings like stores, there is a clearly marked Fire Zone where no motor vehicles are allowed to park. That would include motorcycles but not include bicycles. Other areas of the city do not allow motor vehicles to park on the side walk, and they can be ticketed or towed for this. Again, this would include motorcycles.

Most laws refer to motor vehicles which would include motorcycles.

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by CZroe

I don't see what the problem is except that one motorcycle can displace a couple bikes. *shrug*

Well I'm in Canada and up here its pretty damn illegal to do that (I have no idea what the laws in your city are...so bare with me). Besides, Toronto has already made the provisions to allow motorcycles to park on the street for free already....so why the hell am I gonna park on a sidewalk for?

As usual the problem is that this kind of law isn't enforced consistently. Some people park on the sidewalk, others don't. Bottom line for me is that I've been trained to park in a parking space and the law obliges me to park in an appropriately designated parking spot...whether they enforce it at that particular moment or not. Until this changes, I will continue to park in a full blown parking spot (circumstances permitting....I have parked in weird areas before )

People whining about me taking up an entire space because it inconveniences them will get cussed out like no tomorrow haha. I'm a reasonable fellow. If they have a good enough reason to need my spot more than I do, I'll park on a lawn somewhere....no problem. If it's just some random jerk going on about some stupidness...well...I can get pretty creative with my insults.

So far the only people to confront me about being annoyed by my taking up an entire spot have been my friends....so those arguments usually end in some laughs and harmless pinching.

[izmail1215]

Originally Posted by Flashmonkey

This is pretty cut and dry. Motorcycles, as vehicles, are supposed to park in designated parking spots. Doing anything other than that (ie: parking on a sidewalk, by bike racks, in handicap parking spots) constitutes parking illegally. That's all there is to it.

I've had this complaint before, actually. My standard answer is "suck my ______".

____? what? ok jk

[capt_bugaloo]

thumb?

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by Blackwidow

I didn't read that far down...but i get your point, and it makes perfect sense. I just feel that both people were responsible in this situation. The rider for being stupid and parking where he shouldn't have and the lady in the car that assumed all is clear to lower the ramp. Imagine if kids were playing around the car or something. i don't know, its extreme i know. If you have a motorized object you need to be responsible with it. period.

My mom is also handicapped and in a wheel chair, so i'm fully aware of the crap handicapped people have to go through just to get in a car or having to deal with people taking up HC parking spots. I'm sure the dude thought he'll go in get his coffee and get out without anyone being the wiser, but comes out to a messed up bike...and a brand new one...does he deserve it? sure. stupid is what stupid does, just don't think he's FULLY responsible for all the repairs to his bike.

Unfortunately, the flaw in this reasoning is that someone breaking the law can shed some responsibility to others for the consequences of breaking the law. This same reasoning would make it possible for me to run out on the freeway to get hit by a car, then claim the driver was partly responsible and should pay for some of my damage.

At some point, lawbreakers should be held fully accountable for the consequences of their illegal actions. It makes no sense, nor should it, to place any blame, not even one percent, on the innocent victims. In any case, there's not enough detail to know exactly what happened in this particular case, but based just on the evidence of the pictures I would say that for now I believe the rider is one hundred percent responsible for the damage to the bike and any damage to the ramp.

The fact is, this would not, could not, have happened if he'd obeyed the law.

[Grn99Kawi]

wow.. so much debate... lol

just take up the whole spot.. its your right as a motorist.
Around here we dont have 'motorcycle parking'... must be a cali thing..

[Flashmonkey]

Originally Posted by izmail1215

____? what? ok jk

LOL...it's left blank so you can insert whatever you want in there. Like those old 'choose your adventure' books.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by Techno250

Seriously? It's a law that motorcycles can't park at a rack? Link please!

For instance,
http://www.amlegal.com/austin_nxt/gateway.dll/Texas/austin/title12trafficregulations/chapter12-5stoppingstandingandparking?f=templates$fn=altmain-nf.htm$3.0#JD_12-5-38
Austin § 16-5-16 PARKING PROHIBITED IN CERTAIN SPECIFIED PLACES
No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic-control device ... on a sidewalk or any part of the sidewalk area...

Some definitions in Texas law:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...htm/TN.541.htm

Specific definition of a motorcycle and sidewalk:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...htm/TN.541.htm
(9) "Motorcycle" means a motor vehicle, other than a tractor, that is equipped with a rider's saddle and designed to have when propelled not more than three wheels on the ground.
(16) "Sidewalk" means the portion of a street that is:

(A) between a curb or lateral line of a roadway and the adjacent property line; and

(B) intended for pedestrian use.

State law on where you can and cannot park:
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...htm/TN.545.htm

Specifically,
Sec. 545.302. STOPPING, STANDING, OR PARKING PROHIBITED IN CERTAIN PLACES. (a) An operator may not stop, stand, or park a vehicle:

(1) on the roadway side of a vehicle stopped or parked at the edge or curb of a street;

(2) on a sidewalk;

The state law is fairly broad and not well defined, but the first example of a local ordinance is more likely.

You may wonder why I focused on sidewalks. It's because that's where bike racks are commonly found, as opposed to places where cars normally are such as roadways and parking lots.

I supposes one could use as a defense that the "offense" occurred on private property and there for wasn't subject to police enforcement, but the reality is simple: A court case will eat up your time, and more importantly, your money since you should hire an attorney to represent you. As they say, a person representing themself in court has a fool for an attorney.

Are you likely to get a ticket? It's probably fairly low since most PO are more interested in higher revenue moving offenses such as speeding. Does the fact that you're likely not to get a ticket mean that an officer with a bug up his or her ass can't or won't write you one? Ah, that's where all the gray area is.

Fire lanes are an entirely different subject...

[Hadyn]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Unfortunately, the flaw in this reasoning is that someone breaking the law can shed some responsibility to others for the consequences of breaking the law. This same reasoning would make it possible for me to run out on the freeway to get hit by a car, then claim the driver was partly responsible and should pay for some of my damage..

This is how it should work, but look at all the self-defense cases where the criminal who was breaking and entering, carrying a weapon, and intended commit larceny gets shot by the homeowner and then successfully sues for damages.

Our legal system is kinda wonky.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by Hadyn

This is how it should work, but look at all the self-defense cases where the criminal who was breaking and entering, carrying a weapon, and intended commit larceny gets shot by the homeowner and then successfully sues for damages.

Our legal system is kinda wonky.

They fixed that here in Texas with the new Castle Law.

[addy126]

I park my motorcycles where "I" believe them to be safe from being "tipped over" or collided with when parked. If I cannot locate an area in the vicinity of where I need to go that can be safely parked at.... I just don't go and locate another shop that is more accomodating for the bikes. Just take my business elsewhere. At work, they overlook the motorcycles parked in the white zones in the parking garages by the stairwells. 3 of us use the one area consistently.. never an issue. Who's gonna screw with an E.R. employee... nooooobody... lol

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by revstriker

This is not an excuse though. Even if that is the reason for the remote, she would still have the responsibility to ensure the area was clear. It's just like if someone was standing in an empty parking space you were trying to pull into. It doesn't matter if they are supposed to be there or not, if you hit them, its your fault. Even if you were driving slow.

What excuse? These things don't just pop out. They aren't silent either. There is no way a kid with functioning senses could have been unaware of it being deployed. In fact, they'd likely be very interested! Any deaf/blind kids would be under supervision and not running around in a parking lot under deploying handicap ramps.

It is not her responsibility to ensure that it remains clear any more than it is a train's responsibility to make sure that cars don't cut through the railroad crossing as it passes. Trust.

Once again, these things deploy very slowly for that very reason. They include a remote specifically so that you can have it deployed and ready when you arrive, meaning that you aren't expected to always be there to witness it. The kid analogy fails because they can and WOULD get out of the way. An inanimate object can't and that's why its owner is at fault 100%.

Someone standing in an empty parking space is not breaking the law (without specific signals and signage, pedestrians always have the right of way), so that doesn't apply either.

Originally Posted by Flashmonkey

Well I'm in Canada and up here its pretty damn illegal to do that (I have no idea what the laws in your city are...so bare with me). Besides, Toronto has already made the provisions to allow motorcycles to park on the street for free already....so why the hell am I gonna park on a sidewalk for?

As usual the problem is that this kind of law isn't enforced consistently. Some people park on the sidewalk, others don't. Bottom line for me is that I've been trained to park in a parking space and the law obliges me to park in an appropriately designated parking spot...whether they enforce it at that particular moment or not. Until this changes, I will continue to park in a full blown parking spot (circumstances permitting....I have parked in weird areas before )

People whining about me taking up an entire space because it inconveniences them will get cussed out like no tomorrow haha. I'm a reasonable fellow. If they have a good enough reason to need my spot more than I do, I'll park on a lawn somewhere....no problem. If it's just some random jerk going on about some stupidness...well...I can get pretty creative with my insults.

So far the only people to confront me about being annoyed by my taking up an entire spot have been my friends....so those arguments usually end in some laughs and harmless pinching.

In the lots I visit every day, the bicycle parking actually isn't on the sidewalk and the facility maintenance crew refers to them as the "East and West Motorcycle parking areas." There is some additional bicycle parking on one of the sidewalks, but the majority is elsewhere and motorcycles are clearly welcome. Also, many places have dedicated motorcycle parking areas ON sidewalks

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by Grn99Kawi

wow.. so much debate... lol

just take up the whole spot.. its your right as a motorist.
Around here we dont have 'motorcycle parking'... must be a cali thing..

The debate is about other stuff.