Missed connection

[DismalScientist]

@dasgeh 54317 wrote:

Even if the trail has a stop sign (and assuming those signs are now legal — which they wouldn’t be unless VDOT has approved signs), once in the crosswalk, the ped/cyclist has the right of way. You may be being a Helperton here.

If you are stopped at the stop sign, you are not in the crosswalk and can only enter with “due regard to traffic.” One could interpret this as saying the cars have the ROW. Of course, it the cars are stopped waiting for you, you can enter (and this contradicts the what a stop sign means if it were on a street rather than the trail).

[dasgeh]

@DismalScientist 54322 wrote:

If you are stopped at the stop sign, you are not in the crosswalk and can only enter with “due regard to traffic.” One could interpret this as saying the cars have the ROW. Of course, it the cars are stopped waiting for you, you can enter (and this contradicts the what a stop sign means if it were on a street rather than the trail).

Plain language of the statute: the car must yield the ROW to anyone in the crosswalk.

Not anyone in the crosswalk who entered with “due regard”.

[ShawnoftheDread]

Squirrel!!

[bobco85]

@dasgeh 54317 wrote:

Even if the trail has a stop sign (and assuming those signs are now legal — which they wouldn’t be unless VDOT has approved signs), once in the crosswalk, the ped/cyclist has the right of way. You may be being a Helperton here.

I understand your point about trails and fully admit I act as a Helperton in some cases. I try to avoid conflicts whenever possible, and I find that sacrificing a couple of seconds for a simple wave-through helps when a driver seems confused as to who has ROW and/or seems annoyed/aggressive. However, I do feel that the people going around me are not being safe by entering the crosswalk with disregard for the situation in front of them even if they are not legally required to stop.

[viennabiker]

@bobco85 54331 wrote:

I understand your point about trails and fully admit I act as a Helperton in some cases. I try to avoid conflicts whenever possible, and I find that sacrificing a couple of seconds for a simple wave-through helps when a driver seems confused as to who has ROW and/or seems annoyed/aggressive. However, I do feel that the people going around me are not being safe by entering the crosswalk with disregard for the situation in front of them even if they are not legally required to stop.

This is not a safe situation, but I’m not sure it’s the people going around you who are the problem here.

I’ve been in this situation a few times and it has almost resulted in me being hit once. Here’s what happens: there is a crossing where either bikes clearly have the right of way (no stop sign, or perhaps bikers have the light) or cars are braking in order to yield to bikers. A group of bikers is waiting to cross (or one is stopped and another one pulling up) and a Helperton biker waves the cars on–and the other bikers, with their eyes on the car and making eye contact with a driver (often waving the bikers through) rather than looking at the Helperton, proceed.

When you wave a car on, you are waving only for yourself, without the knowledge of other bikers who, as I say, may not even be noticing your wave.

So by all means, stop and yield as often as you like. But don’t wave cars into the paths of oncoming cyclists.

[DismalScientist]

@viennabiker 54344 wrote:

When you wave a car on, you are waving only for yourself, without the knowledge of other bikers who, as I say, may not even be noticing your wave.

So by all means, stop and yield as often as you like. But don’t wave cars into the paths of oncoming cyclists.

This is the same situation for the driver who waves a cyclist through, no matter whether cars are coming in the opposite direction or in the same direction on a multilane road.

If you take the (legally correct) position that a stop sign on the trail doesn’t assign right-of-way, if no one is in the crosswalk yet, it’s the wild west out there.

[baiskeli]

@dasgeh 54325 wrote:

Plain language of the statute: the car must yield the ROW to anyone in the crosswalk.

Not anyone in the crosswalk who entered with “due regard”.

But that’s only part of the statute. The other part gives the car ROW when it’s not safe to cross in front of it (due regard). If you are in the crosswalk because you jumped out right in front of a fast-moving car that couldn’t stop to yield, it isn’t required to yield. That is to say, it wasn’t responsible for the collision that would cause one to figure all this out after the fact.

[baiskeli]

@viennabiker 54344 wrote:

This is not a safe situation, but I’m not sure it’s the people going around you who are the problem here.

I’ve been in this situation a few times and it has almost resulted in me being hit once. Here’s what happens: there is a crossing where either bikes clearly have the right of way (no stop sign, or perhaps bikers have the light) or cars are braking in order to yield to bikers. A group of bikers is waiting to cross (or one is stopped and another one pulling up) and a Helperton biker waves the cars on–and the other bikers, with their eyes on the car and making eye contact with a driver (often waving the bikers through) rather than looking at the Helperton, proceed.

When you wave a car on, you are waving only for yourself, without the knowledge of other bikers who, as I say, may not even be noticing your wave.

So by all means, stop and yield as often as you like. But don’t wave cars into the paths of oncoming cyclists.

Yeah, same bad situation can happen with cars. Like when one stops to let you across the GW Parkway Crossing of Doom, but traffic in the next lane doesn’t know what’s going on because they can’t see you crossing, and speeds through just as you’re reaching their lane.

I usually wait until I’m sure the second lane is going to stop too – and sometimes that prompts to first lane’s helperton to get impatient and decide I’m not crossing and start to move just as I’m about to cross in front of him/her.

[Hancockbs]

Probably a long story, but what is this reference?

[baiskeli]

@Hancockbs 54359 wrote:

Probably a long story, but what is this reference?

A “Helpy Helperton” is someone who helps a little too much or is a little too nice, to the point of backfiring. Like someone who yields even when they have the right of way, causing hazardous confusion and delay.

[mstone]

@baiskeli 54352 wrote:

But that’s only part of the statute. The other part gives the car ROW when it’s not safe to cross in front of it (due regard). If you are in the crosswalk because you jumped out right in front of a fast-moving car that couldn’t stop to yield, it isn’t required to yield. That is to say, it wasn’t responsible for the collision that would cause one to figure all this out after the fact.

The due regard doesn’t alter the right of way, it adds an additional requirement on the pedestrian which may be argued as a contributory factor. It in no way alters a motorist’s responsibility.

@baiskeli 54354 wrote:

I usually wait until I’m sure the second lane is going to stop too – and sometimes that prompts to first lane’s helperton to get impatient and decide I’m not crossing and start to move just as I’m about to cross in front of him/her.

The solution is to move into the first lane (blocking traffic) while determining whether it is safe to enter the second lane.

[dasgeh]

@viennabiker 54344 wrote:

This is not a safe situation, but I’m not sure it’s the people going around you who are the problem here.

I’ve been in this situation a few times and it has almost resulted in me being hit once. Here’s what happens: there is a crossing where either bikes clearly have the right of way (no stop sign, or perhaps bikers have the light) or cars are braking in order to yield to bikers. A group of bikers is waiting to cross (or one is stopped and another one pulling up) and a Helperton biker waves the cars on–and the other bikers, with their eyes on the car and making eye contact with a driver (often waving the bikers through) rather than looking at the Helperton, proceed.

Just to pile on: I’ve had this happen where a cyclist (a stealth Helperton) was ahead of me, facing my direction, but stopped on the right at a crosswalk. It looked to me like stealth Helperton was looking at a computer or phone or something. A car was stopped at the crosswalk (as the cyclist had the ROW). I slowed, seeing the car, then started to go, seeing that the car had stopped. What I couldn’t see was that Helperton waved the car on, not knowing that I was behind him. Luckily, I was slow enough to avoid a collision.

If you really want to be a Helperton, please at least look around and make sure there aren’t other cyclists that would be endangered by your actions. Please.

[bobco85]

From reading all the feedback, I’ll make a compromise:

Whenever I decide to be a Helperton on the trails, I will check to make sure there are no cyclists approaching from behind me or farther ahead before waving a driver on.

[KelOnWheels]

You: The dude salmoning up Washington Blvd by the Pentagon last night.

Me: WHAT?!

[viennabiker]

@bobco85 54386 wrote:

From reading all the feedback, I’ll make a compromise:

Whenever I decide to be a Helperton on the trails, I will check to make sure there are no cyclists approaching from behind me or farther ahead before waving a driver on.

You’re not being Helpy Helperton any more, you’re being Solomon the wise. Thank you in advance.

[A true story: I was once in a small town in Minnesota in a line for coffee. When the cashier at the front of the line asked for the next customer, the woman *in front* of me in line turned around to ask me if I minded if she went first.

You’re not from Minnesota by any chance?]

[Author]

Posts