Rail-trail, MUT crossings

[mdeth1313]

Today on my way home from food shopping, I was driving by a trail crossing - there are flashing lights to warn motorists when someone on the trail is approaching, but there's nothing about stopping and there are stop signs posted on the trail (I've ridden it before). The speed limit on that road is 55 mph. Some guy on a bike is approaching and I took one look at him and figured he wasn't stopping so I slowed down and assumed --

he didn't stop- looked at my car and went before I ever began to slow down.

Even if he has the right of way - if the speed limit is 55, cars will be going faster than that. You might be right, but you'll also be dead.

I don't get it. Then again, stupidity and entitlement seem to rule the day.

[makoti]

Not everyone on a bike is a rider or knows how to do it safely. You came across an example

[Mark McM]

Here in Massachusetts:

Bicyclists must obey traffic signs, and there are always STOP signs on the rail at all road crossings. As far as who has the right of way when there are flashing lights at the rail trail crossing, Massachusetts has no laws pertaining specifically to rail trail crossings. However, the other laws still apply, including: Pedestrians always have the right of way over vehicles at marked crossing; bicycles are considered vehicles, so they do not have the right of way when crossing streets. On some rail trails there are signs advising cyclists that they must dismount and walk their bicycle across road crossing (at which point they are considered pedestrians and have the right of way), but rarely do cyclists actually do that.

For your situation, if that had happened in Massachusetts, the cyclist would not have had the right of way, and if there had been a collision, the cyclist would have been at least partially at fault (depending on other factors, such as if you could have reasonably foreseen the cyclist would not stop and you had the ability to slow down in time). As it happens, I know a cyclist who ran into the side of a car door when she did not stop at a rail trail crossing, and she was held liable for the damage caused to the car. In this particular case, the rail trail crossed a driveway to a private business. There were no warning lights at the crossing, but there was a stop sign on the rail trail (no stop sign on the driveway). There was also a hedge on the side of the rail trail, interfering with motorists ability to see cyclists approaching on the rail trail. The cyclist was incensed that she was held liable, because she "assumed" that bikes always had the right of way - but she was wrong.

[AngryScientist]

The lights serve a purpose to alert the drivers that someone wishes to cross the road.

The proper etiquette in that situation is the pedestrian approaches the intersection illuminating the flashing lights. It is up to the pedestrian to observe the driver slowing down and stopping before attempting to cross. It is up to the driver to observe the lights and slow down and stop. The lights just make the pedestrian, and their intent to cross more obvious and visible, rather than just a crosswalk.

When common sense and courtesy are applied, it's a decent system. Usually a friendly smile and wave are involved. A feel good interaction of cooperation between motorist and ped.

Obviously common sense and courtesy are not always brought to the table. Best for the pedestrian to exercise extreme caution and be sure the path is safe.

[p nut]

I deal with this all the time on a local MUT both as a cyclist and driver.
Technically, bikes are supposed to stop and wait for cars to pass. I’d say that happens about 20% of the time.
What adds to the confusion for everyone is the drivers lack of understanding the law as well. I get waved through 80% of the time when at a stop sign waiting for vehicles to pass.

[Mr. Pink]

Darwin.

[Alistair]

We have these near me. It always feels like a garbage cheap-out solution to the problem. Like, either put in a fully signaled crossing or static stop signs. The lights just confuse everybody - bikes think they get right of way, cars stop or not at random, etc.

Even worse, we get them on 4-lane major roads. One lane of cars might stop, and the next lane doesn’t (sometimes maliciously, but mostly= they just aren’t paying attention).

Thank god they’re budgeting for overpasses at most of these intersections. Just takes years to get them approved and built.

[mdeth1313]

Originally Posted by p nut

I deal with this all the time on a local MUT both as a cyclist and driver.
Technically, bikes are supposed to stop and wait for cars to pass. I’d say that happens about 20% of the time.
What adds to the confusion for everyone is the drivers lack of understanding the law as well. I get waved through 80% of the time when at a stop sign waiting for vehicles to pass.

this. when I use those trails if cars are coming, I'll stop and wait.

Cyclists are required to stop at all road crossings (which is as likely to happen as cars are to come to a full stop at most stop signs where there's no oncoming traffic).

this is NY - Dutchess Rail Trail, which is part of the Empire State Trail. If anyone if familiar with the area, it's the Rt 216 crossing closest to Rt 52 (Stormville area).

[Peter P.]

In Cheshire CT there's a trail crossing similar to what mdeth1313 describes.

Trail users have a button to press that activates the warning lights for drivers.

Signs posted warn drivers to stop for trail crossers when the lights are solid red.

The signage also says drivers may proceed when the lights switch from solid to flashing, AFTER coming to a stop.

The system fails when either party fails to follow the rules.