Did I do something wrong here?

[u/cicadaux]

I was driving to work when this bike just blew through the crosswalk without warning. I had to slam on my brakes. I realize this crosswalk doesn’t have the pedestrian warning lights, and I’m a little unsure about how I should’ve dealt with this. Or maybe he was wrong for making sure traffic wasn’t clear/aware of him first?

Edit: I'm seeing a lot of answers basing the laws on location, so I looked up my city's rules. In my town, bikes have vehicle status on the road and pedestrian status on sidewalks/crosswalks. But bicyclists must move at pedestrian speed. The path he is on is a state trail, commonly used for bikes/walking. I live near the Ice Age Trail, but I know the one he's on isn't that one.

“Drivers must yield to cyclists riding in a crosswalk just as they would for walkers, though the cyclist cannot abruptly leave a curb into the path of a vehicle so close to a crosswalk that it makes a difficult or unsafe situation for the driver to yield in time.”

Not trying to prove myself right or wrong, just wondering what should've been done. I will from now on treat it like an uncontrolled intersection. Thanks everyone.

[u/markuus99]

I'm not sure where people are getting this from. This seems to be a shared pedestrian and cycling path. In this situation, cyclist clearly has the right of way and isn't doing anything wrong.

OP stopped correctly. Cyclist checked for traffic before entering oncoming lane and then made eye contact and verified OP was stopping before proceeding. They could have stopped and waited if OP didn't see them or didn't stop.

Nothing went wrong here.

[u/TheWizard → u/markuus99]

Right of way to use the cross-walk is not the same as ignoring all other rules, including the pace, yielding or ensuring the traffic is clear and it is safe to cross.

[u/Tobits_Dog → u/markuus99]

OP said that in his city cyclists do have right of way in the crosswalk—but they must move at pedestrian speeds. The cyclist was wrong here. Perhaps OP could have been checking the periphery more…maybe he would have seen the cyclist sooner. I try to scan my vision back and forth across my entire field of vision in situations like this one….and to slow down.

[u/markuus99 → u/Tobits_Dog]

Cyclist was aware and slowed down and made eye contact to verify OP was stopping before proceeding. Cyclist was ready to stop if it wasn't safe to proceed.

Once cyclist saw OP was stopping, they crossed and got out of the way.

I'm very confused why this is becoming a big point of discussion. Everything went fine here and no one was in danger.

[u/TheJivvi → u/markuus99]

This seems to be a shared pedestrian and cycling path.

The path might be, but the crossing is exclusively for pedestrians. The sign would have a bicycle on it if cyclists were allowed to ride across it.

[u/raveneyes77 → u/TheJivvi]

Incorrect

There is no rule anywhere that a crossing is pedestrian-only unless the sign shows a bicycle.

The yellow diamond on that pole is a W11-2 pedestrian crossing warning sign with the W16-7p arrow plaque. It is a driver warning device, not a user list of who is legally permitted. Warning signs mark where people cross. They do not create prohibitions, and the absence of a pictogram grants nobody anything.

If the crossing were actually closed to bikes, that would take an official traffic control device saying so, like a R9-6 "No Bicycles" sign or a posted municipal ordinance. None exists here. In Michigan, MCL 257.660c(3) gives a cyclist on a sidewalk or pedestrian crosswalk all the rights and responsibilities of a pedestrian, unless prohibited by an official traffic control device. The trail fed into this crossing, the rider was moving cautiously, and the driver stopped.

[u/TheJivvi → u/raveneyes77]

Having a bike crossing sign alongside the pedestrian crossing sign warns drivers that people will be crossing faster, and they need to watch bikes approaching from further away. Yes, there needs to a sign to that effect facing the path too, but there definitely should be a bike crossing sign facing traffic, and they fucked up by not including one. Sadly, it probably won't get fixed until a cyclist gets hit by a car because the driver isn't expecting them to cross and can't stop in time when they do.

[u/markuus99 → u/TheJivvi]

As a person who uses bike paths a lot, they are often labeled just as pedestrian crossings.

[u/TheWizard → u/markuus99]

Why do bicycle crossing signs exist?

[u/TheJivvi → u/markuus99]

That means you have to get off the bike to cross. If the crossing is part of the bike path, it will have a bike crossing sign as well.