Yeah the "or other hazardous conditions" pretty much gives you free movement from a BL... but the problem is that if some LEO wants to press it, you have to defend yourself... which puts the onus on the cyclist (defendant) to prove innocence.
Originally Posted by
squirtdad
@ B. Carfree. You note that California is mandatory lane law state
I was curious as I didn't think that was the case and this is what I found simplified
* no or requirement to use a lane or path like a MUP if it is not on the road
* Use of lane is required, but the exceptions seem pretty common sense and not overly restrictive to me
Where bike lanes exist on roadways, CVC 21208 requires cyclists to use them, except under certain conditions. There is no requirement to ride in a bike lane or path that is not on the roadway.[3]
Permitted Movements from Bicycle Lanes
21208. (a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been established on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207, any person operating a bicycle upon the roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride within the bicycle lane, except that the person may move out of the lane under any of the following situations:
1.When overtaking and passing another bicycle, vehicle, or pedestrian within the lane or about to enter the lane if the overtaking and passing cannot be done safely within the lane.
2.When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
3.When reasonably necessary to leave the bicycle lane to avoid debris or other hazardous conditions.
4.When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
(b) No person operating a bicycle shall leave a bicycle lane until the movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 22100) in the event that any vehicle may be affected by the movement.
—California Department of Motor Vehicles, CVC 21208, Permitted Movements from Bicycle Lanes[9]