Is this car legally parked?

[empirestate]

Assuming its back end is clear of the crosswalk, and no signed prohibition, is the silver car visible here parked legally?
http://g.co/maps/nqf7n

[agentsteel53]

Assuming its back end is clear of the crosswalk, and no signed prohibition, is the silver car visible here parked legally?
http://g.co/maps/nqf7n

the back end appears clear of the crosswalk, but not the bike path.  if it were moved about 4 feet forward it would be probably okay, unless then it gets into being too close to the travel lane.

[1995hoo]

Many states have laws prohibiting parking within a certain distance of an intersection regardless of whether there's a sign. New York does not appear to have such a law. New York does prohibit parking "within 20 feet of a crosswalk at an intersection." I don't know whether the crosswalk shown here qualifies because it's set rather far back from that intersection. The New York driver's manual (available at their DMV's website) says the crosswalk rule is a statewide law that may not always be indicated by a sign.

It's funny you raise this issue. On Parking Wars a few weeks ago one of the people in Detroit who got a ticket for parking too close to an intersection argued that because there was no sign prohibiting parking, he could do so, but the ticket-writer said that state law there says you can't park within however many feet of an intersection, period. In Virginia I believe there is a statute prohibiting parking within 20 feet of an intersection. But, as I said above, New York appears not to have such a law.

The fact that those are one-way streets, and the rule that you cannot make a right on red because there's no sign allowing it, would certainly be mitigating factors as to why it might be OK to park there. That is, that car isn't blocking a driver on another street from being able to see whether it's safe to go, which is a typical reason for banning parking too close to an intersection.

[KEK Inc.]

No.  He's parked beyond the stopping line at an intersection.

[1995hoo]

No.  He's parked beyond the stopping line at an intersection.

This comment prompted me to go back and exit Street View to look at it from above. I think KEK Inc. is absolutely correct even if there were no stop bar there. When you look at the location from above, you can see that spot is clearly within the intersection. Edited to add: The "bird's-eye" view on Bing Maps is perhaps a bit clearer.

New York law does allow for parking within an intersection if you're parking on the "horizontal" (my term for it) leg of a T-intersection. Many other states allow that too. But this isn't a T-intersection.

[Brandon]

Assuming its back end is clear of the crosswalk, and no signed prohibition, is the silver car visible here parked legally?
http://g.co/maps/nqf7n

No.  Around here, he'd be considered to be in the intersection since he is past the stop line.  Also, the typical distance from a corner is 30 feet.  He's much closer than 30 feet to the corner.

[NE2]

If you move onto the street, there used to be a no parking sign there.

[empirestate]

I'll preface this by saying I haven't by any means decided for myself what the answer is, but a couple of counter-points that come to mind:

the back end appears clear of the crosswalk, but not the bike path.  if it were moved about 4 feet forward it would be probably okay, unless then it gets into being too close to the travel lane.

Yes, it does seem in this case that he's blocking a little bit of the crosswalk and/or curb cut, but let's assume he's clear of all that stuff, because I know for sure that's illegal, and I'm more interested in his position relative to the intersection.

Many states have laws prohibiting parking within a certain distance of an intersection regardless of whether there's a sign. New York does not appear to have such a law. New York does prohibit parking "within 20 feet of a crosswalk at an intersection." I don't know whether the crosswalk shown here qualifies because it's set rather far back from that intersection. The New York driver's manual (available at their DMV's website) says the crosswalk rule is a statewide law that may not always be indicated by a sign.

I believe New York State does have such a law, but New York City seems to have its own set of rules that trump state law, and which allow parking closer to intersections that usual. (A crosswalk is not necessarily a marked or visible thing; any theoretical extension of a sidewalk qualifies as a "crosswalk" under New York law.)

No.  He's parked beyond the stopping line at an intersection.

That's certainly my perception as well. But could you argue that the north end of the crosswalk, at least, is set far enough back from the intersecting street that it counts as a mid-block crossing?

It would also probably be germane to consider the "gridlock" box, which it's a violation to occupy (and apparently now a non-moving violation, so in the same realm as parking infractions). Is that something that's going on here; that is, is the car "gridlocking" despite apparently being parked?

If you move onto the street, there used to be a no parking sign there.

So there was; I never noticed that! I wonder if the sign was officially removed so as to implicitly permit parking there? The city's parking sign database is curiously lacking in records for that block...

[Duke87]

Depends on how much of a dick the cop is and how close he is to meeting his parking ticket quota.

I wouldn't leave my car in that position since I know that any "gray" situation like this is subject to the whim of law enforcement, but that someone would park there doesn't surprise me. At the very least, it's not an unsafe place to park.

[NE2]

At the very least, it's not an unsafe place to park.

It could hide pedestrians from turning vehicles.

[Kacie Jane]

At the very least, it's not an unsafe place to park.

It could hide pedestrians from turning vehicles.

There don't appear to be any legal crosswalks or turning maneuvers it would be in the sight line of.  (But I agree that the car is clearly within the intersection/ahead of the stop line and thus illegal.)

[empirestate]

Depends on how much of a dick the cop is and how close he is to meeting his parking ticket quota.

I wouldn't leave my car in that position since I know that any "gray" situation like this is subject to the whim of law enforcement, but that someone would park there doesn't surprise me. At the very least, it's not an unsafe place to park.

I'm certainly not surprised either that people do park there; not far to the west there's a similar situation. At the intersection of Van Cortlandt Park South and Gale Terrace, there are No Parking Anytime signs along the north side of VCP South opposite Gale, and along what appears to be the west side of Gale. But actually, this is a T-intersection, where VCP South continues west of Gale as a pedestrian-only, but still fully public, street. So the No Parking zone occupies what is technically the intersection of the two roads. Of course, people park there at least as often as they do in legal spots nearby...

[KEK Inc.]

Normally, the reason why you wouldn't want to park near a stopping line is for wide vehicles (i.e., buses, trucks), but a wide vehicle wouldn't be making a sharp turn at that part of the intersection. 

Regardless, the stopping line is clearly marked before the crosswalk.  While it may not be an unsafe place to park, it's illegal. 

[mjb2002]

Assuming its back end is clear of the crosswalk, and no signed prohibition, is the silver car visible here parked legally?
http://g.co/maps/nqf7n

That is pretty borderline. The car is NOT blocking the intersection, since there are TWO DO NOT ENTER signs right there and thus no one could go opposite where the car is, but law enforcement could give the driver a warning for that.

[Kacie Jane]

I'm not sure why it was necessary to bump this thread, particularly when you're incorrect.  There are a total of four "do not enter" at the intersection. If you clicked the link without panning or zooming, then the two you're looking at are actually for two completely different legs of the intersection, and neither of them really have any bearing on the question.

Most places have laws that state you can't park within X feet of a stop sign, within Y feet of a crosswalk, or within Z feet of a corner.  That's what defines the no parking zone in and around an intersection.  I don't know what X, Y, and Z are for New York City, but they're irrelevant, since the car is parked in front of both the stop line and the crosswalk.  Ergo, the car is "in" the intersection and illegal.

The somewhat unusual geometry of the intersection makes it possible to park in front of the stop line and crosswalk without actually blocking traffic.  The one-way nature of the north and south legs makes it not particularly unsafe to park there.  But that doesn't make it legal.