Seattle had their first open "Bicycle Master Plan" meeting where a half a thousand bicyclists swarmed the UW hall rented for the occasion. there was a lot of 'feelgood' roadway striping plans being introduced to more cleanly unify Seattles' broken string of veloaccomodations, but the most interesting development i saw in the various design charettes were...

SHARROWS THE SIZE OF A PARKED CAR....currently being tested in California, and soon to pass AASHTO muster for nationwide implementation.

These new, MUCH LARGER sharrows have been and are still being studied and tested in California. Drivers find these much more visible. sorry i don't have any pictures, they only had a photo on powerpoint.

Very interesting, supersized sharrows.

In rebuttal, to present the oppositions' opinion about roadway accomodations that benefit bicyclists,

In the spirit of the alpha dawg, lanegrabbing, powerweavin' "VC-APPROVED" Jedi mind-meld mirror master, "we don't neeeed no stinkeen' sharrows"

shar the ro.

SHARROWS THE SIZE OF A PARKED CAR....currently being tested in California, and soon to pass AASHTO muster for nationwide implementation.

These new, MUCH LARGER sharrows have been and are still being studied and tested in California. Drivers find these much more visible.
In my mind, this eliminates the two major problems I have with our local "bike lanes." 1) Debris, and 2) lack of width.

I like it much better. Thanks, Bek.

Sharrows are much better than bike lanes, and making them as big as parked cars takes care of the main problem with the smaller ones - implying that where the small sharrow is the one and only place where cyclists are supposed to be.

Did they say where in CA they were being tested?

..that last point about value and worth is entirely judgemental, and subject to local roadway interps, usage and grade, hed....you know that!

but i do not know where they are getting on the road testing in CA- obviously, not where hed bikes. if and when he bikes. obviously.

What is a "sharrow"?

What is a "sharrow"?

Big arrow with in this case probably a bike symbol.

Something like (but not exactly) this:
http://www.bikexprt.com/massfacil/nonstandard/images/sharrow.jpg

Big arrow with in this case probably a bike symbol.

Something like (but not exactly) this:
http://www.bikexprt.com/massfacil/nonstandard/images/sharrow.jpg

What kind of paint do they use? I would wonder how slippery those would be in the rain (a lot of the road paint used around here is so thick that it has a raised surface and is very slick when wet).

Sharrow is way better than a bike lane stripe. It designates a general 'area' for cyclists, but does not 'confine' the cyclist.

Width is a big issue, and one of my personal peeves with bike lanes: They are way too narrow and the width is inconsistent.

Sharrow is way better than a bike lane stripe. It designates a general 'area' for cyclists, but does not 'confine' the cyclist.

Width is a big issue, and one of my personal peeves with bike lanes: They are way too narrow and the width is inconsistent.

True, which is why I generally ignore them.... (of course, the ontario traffic act lets me do this, whew)

What kind of paint do they use? I would wonder how slippery those would be in the rain (a lot of the road paint used around here is so thick that it has a raised surface and is very slick when wet).

What you have is probably thermoplastic and not paint. We use paint here, even multiple layers are still flat to the pavement, and it doesn't get slippery when wet. Unfortunately on a busy road the markings get faint after only one year.

True, which is why I generally ignore them.... (of course, the ontario traffic act lets me do this, whew)

I feel that the sharrows are there mainly for the cars, not the bikes. To let them know that bikes are allowed and should be expected here.

It's been pointed out that they also serve as an irrefutable argument to wrong-way cyclists that YES, dammit, they ARE going the wrong way.

Those sharrow deals seem pretty cool to me. The designated bike lane is nice too though, although around here(many other places too) it is also the designated street sweeper dump, drunk frat boys bottle return and many other things beside just a measly bike lane.
I've taken it on as my own personal Crusade to make sure to educate people when they are going the wrong way. Part of my implementation of this new syllabus was to mount some 5" wide longhorns on the front of my SWB recumbent. I already look out of the ordinary now that I have horns on my bike, people know I mean business!(they aren't any wider than my cranks/pedals but it's funny anyway). Yelling and the Airzound are also key in this crusade.

Bike lanes are not the street sweeper dump, they are the traffic sweeper dump.

Moving traffic constantly sweeps the roadway. Since they treat a bike lane like a shoulder, they don't drive there, and, so, everything their movement sweeps off the roadway goes into the bike lane.

Street sweepers love bike lanes... it gives them purpose.

Thanks to genec for the picture by way of education for those of us unfamiliar with the sharrow :)

I like the idea

Ed

Width is a big issue, and one of my personal peeves with bike lanes: They are way too narrow and the width is inconsistent.
Bike lanes in the Netherlands are two meters wide, wide enough to ride side by side in. Bike lanes in the US are whatever size they have room left over for, generally anywhere between three and five feet wide, very ocassionally six feet.

Sharrows also work on streets without room for a separate bike lane, and I think they are a great educational tool for motorists, showing them that bikes are allowed and expected to take the lane.

I rode through Davis,California Sunday and they have wide bike lanes, crossing buttons to trigger the stoplights for bicycles, bicycle overpasses, share the road signs, etc. Where were all the other bicycles? On the sidewalk.:( I love the idea of sharrows, but will it make a difference to the average cyclist?

I rode through Davis,California Sunday and they have wide bike lanes, crossing buttons to trigger the stoplights for bicycles, bicycle overpasses, share the road signs, etc. Where were all the other bicycles? On the sidewalk.:( I love the idea of sharrows, but will it make a difference to the average cyclist?
When the infrastructure treats cyclists like pedestrians, they will act like pedestrians.

i have never ridden in davis but i highly doubt their bike transit plan treats bicyclists like pedestrians in any significant % percents, hed.

so helmet head is FOR a transportation plan that includes sharrows as part of the velo accomodation network?

glad to see you being able to support bicycling infrastructure integrated with the existing roadway, helmet head. good on ya.

next topic, just to give hed a 'heads up'- we'll discuss the advantages an uphill 'passing lane' for bikes will have for bicyclists...

I love the idea of sharrows, but will it make a difference to the average cyclist?

I have no idea what is happening in that all-american bicycling city, Davis, CA- but generally, a transportation network that vigorously supports bicyclists in the transit mix affects the numbers and riding styles of bicyclists. off the sidewalks and onto the streets, so to speak.


accomodation advantages extend even to roads without any special accoms. take the possibilities 10 "Bikes allowed use of full lane"signs, strategically placed, in a small town would have. even towns of under a thousand can have high speed choke points, and angry drivers. bike friendly accomodations like signage, sharrows and roadway striping that accomodates bikes in the traffic mix makes the difference.

in Portland, look at the recent reports in bike forums- biking trips have increased fivefold in the last decade. a vigorous transportation network that supports bicyclists makes the difference. Seattle, up %257 percent in the same time frame, i believe.

the network engineers and the roadway designers KNOW that the adage, "Build it, and they will ride." is increasingly true in more and more cities across the globe.

A vigorous transportation plan that fully supports bikes on road, on trail and intermodally, will make a difference.

Sharrows appear to be the one on-street facility that we all support. As to where they are being tested, I have seen them in San Fransisco (alas, I didn't have my bike with me there). One big obstacle to putting them in is that they are not yet approved by the official federal road signage manual (someone can add the acronym, because I have forgotten it, MUT-something or another, I think). Some local transportation planners cannot depart from that manual for bureaucratic reasons.

I think the only issue with sharrows is that they will need to be redone often as the constant wear from automobiles driving over them will wear away the paint quickly. Other than that, I can see no harm from adding them. I think they'd be a great addition to some of the high speed arterial roads around here.

Hopefully they won't be painted in the parking lane like this one in St Lous:

http://washcycle.typepad.com/./photos/uncategorized/stlsharrow_1.jpg

Sharrows appear to be the one on-street facility that we all support. As to where they are being tested, I have seen them in San Fransisco (alas, I didn't have my bike with me there).

Actually, I'm not sure that I support them! I'm not against them either, I just don't know what they contribute. The only place I have seen them they are (a) too close to the curb, and (b) so faded that you have to stand over one for a while to figure out what it is!

I'm not aware of any plans to use or test sharrows here, so I won't get a chance to experience them for myself or speak with local users any time soon.

Actually, I'm not sure that I support them! I'm not against them either, I just don't know what they contribute. The only place I have seen them they are (a) too close to the curb, and (b) so faded that you have to stand over one for a while to figure out what it is!

I'm not aware of any plans to use or test sharrows here, so I won't get a chance to experience them for myself or speak with local users any time soon.

When properly placed and used, I think they just serve as a "government-sanctioned" reminder that we are on the road and have a right to be. Kind of like those "bikes on road" signs. It won't reach all motorists, but many people are primed to give approval to those who already have some approval. Badly worded, but maybe someone else knows what I'm trying to say and can say it better?

When the infrastructure treats cyclists like pedestrians, they will act like pedestrians.

When road engineers stop designing bicycle facilities like pedestrian crosswalks... then maybe we can all grow up.

But as long as road engineers continue to get conflicting signals from cycling advocates... what are they supposed to believe.

For instance on the new 56 bike path, horse riders get better treatment than cyclists... their crosswalk buttons are placed where horse riders can easily reach them. Meanwhile cyclists are forced to act like pedestrians.

Sharrows appear to be the one on-street facility that we all support. As to where they are being tested, I have seen them in San Fransisco (alas, I didn't have my bike with me there). One big obstacle to putting them in is that they are not yet approved by the official federal road signage manual (someone can add the acronym, because I have forgotten it, MUT-something or another, I think). Some local transportation planners cannot depart from that manual for bureaucratic reasons.

Oh you mean the MUTCD which also endorses bike lanes in door zones... great "standard," eh?

Great discussion.

I like the idea. My fear, and I hope I'm wrong, for the greater Seattle area is that drivers will just use the sharrows to pass other cars, implying here that there will more accidents with bikes, not fewer. Education, strong signage such as "switch lanes to pass" and lower speed limits might (or might not) help reduce traffic accidents with bikes. I seriously think that many drivers will be disgruntled, for their reason that bikes are taking all of their pavement...the pavement that their (car) taxes paid for...etc, etc....leading to more angry drivers, leading to more road rage...I dunno, maybe I'm just paranoid.

Great discussion.

I like the idea. My fear, and I hope I'm wrong, for the greater Seattle area is that drivers will just use the sharrows to pass other cars, implying here that there will more accidents with bikes, not fewer. Education, strong signage such as "switch lanes to pass" and lower speed limits might (or might not) help reduce traffic accidents with bikes. I seriously think that many drivers will be disgruntled, for their reason that bikes are taking all of their pavement...the pavement that their (car) taxes paid for...etc, etc....leading to more angry drivers, leading to more road rage...I dunno, maybe I'm just paranoid.

The whole point of a sharrow is to remind other road users that cyclists also use that lane so if a cyclist is there first, that's your problem (or at least that how I like to think of them :)).

On a more serious note, sharrows do not mean "motorists keep out." Use this lane but look for cyclists. Basically the same thing that needs to be said for any road.

The whole point of a sharrow is to remind other road users that cyclists also use that lane so if a cyclist is there first, that's your problem (or at least that how I like to think of them :)).

On a more serious note, sharrows do not mean "motorists keep out." Use this lane but look for cyclists. Basically the same thing that needs to be said for any road.

True... too bad we have to live with all these misconceptions about roads and motorists' perceived notions of their ownership of the roads.

I would love to see campaigns that dismiss the whole tax/road misconception, and the whole bike/sidewalk misconception.

If motorists ever got it fully in their head that cyclists will be on the roads and will be using the roads just like them, then perhaps they would at least learn to move over and simply pass us.

I feel like a parrot for my 20+ years of constantly telling motorists (those who would listen) that "no, they don't own the roads." Some motorists have been frankly surprised.

I wasn't very clear...I agree completely with the concept of sharing, and, the sharrow is a great start.

I was trying to rationalize why I think education and more law enforcement will be needed to put the idea in place in people's behaviors...simply putting in a sharrow, i.e., a bigger arrow and bigger symbol for a biker, in the right-hand lane, isn't going to mean diddly to the 10mph-average-over-city-limits driver in Seattle, not w/o education and law enforcement. And, I'd like to add to what I wrote previously, education and law enforcement for both drivers, of cars and bicycles, alike.

On a more serious note, sharrows do not mean "motorists keep out." Use this lane but look for cyclists. Basically the same thing that needs to be said for any road.

And hence my doubt that sharrows do anything at all. Bikes are allowed on all roads, sharrows do not communicate that but may increase mis-conceptions. The same argument is made against bike lanes, but at least bike lanes provide benefits to cyclists... a sharrow does nothing for me.

And hence my doubt that sharrows do anything at all. Bikes are allowed on all roads, sharrows do not communicate that but may increase mis-conceptions. The same argument is made against bike lanes, but at least bike lanes provide benefits to cyclists... a sharrow does nothing for me.

It's true that a sharrow does basically nothing, except for possibly encourage more cyclists to use the roads properly. For this reason, I'd much rather see sharrows than bike lanes assuming that the sharrows get cyclists to use the traffic lanes. Bike lanes benefit motorists and reinforce any suspicion they might have had about where cyclists should ride. Cyclists using traffic lanes will do more to get people to accept cyclists on the roads than any motorist-based enforcement. Think about how motorists got the impression that bikes should not be in the roadway when all of the laws state the exact opposite. They saw bikes not using the roadway so that became the way it should be done. Kind of like the other thread where so many people accept exceeding the speed limit (because it's done all the time) (and no, this is not a great analogy but at least I recognize that fact :))

It's true that a sharrow does basically nothing, except for possibly encourage more cyclists to use the roads properly. For this reason, I'd much rather see sharrows than bike lanes assuming that the sharrows get cyclists to use the traffic lanes. Bike lanes benefit motorists and reinforce any suspicion they might have had about where cyclists should ride.

Not to re-hash everything over again, but as a cyclist bike lanes benefit me directly. (I don't really care is they have a positive or negative impact on drivers). I get a real and direct benefit from a bike lane, none from sharrows.

I'm not dismissing your argument, though. I would prefer "share the road" signs over sharrows as ways of indicating that bikes belong on the road, for one thing they don't cover one lane only. However, as I said before, I have no meaningful experience with sharrows. In practice they may well be much more effective with drivers than "share the road" signs.


Cyclists using traffic lanes will do more to get people to accept cyclists on the roads than any motorist-based enforcement.

Of course, and I fully agree. And if sharrows do get more cyclists on the roads, all the better (and ditto for bike lanes, bike route signs, safe parking, etc.)

Think about how motorists got the impression that bikes should not be in the roadway when all of the laws state the exact opposite.

I have no experience with this, so I can't comment. In three years I have had exactly one driver tell me to "get off the road". I have never had an actual conversation with anyone who did not know my bike was a road vehicle. I'm sure we have people like this here, somewhere, but they are few are far between. On the other hand, I often meet people from out of town who comment on all the cyclists on the roads here, even in winter.

In three years I have had exactly one driver tell me to "get off the road". I have never had an actual conversation with anyone who did not know my bike was a road vehicle. I'm sure we have people like this here, somewhere, but they are few are far between. On the other hand, I often meet people from out of town who comment on all the cyclists on the roads here, even in winter.

I have had conversations with motorists that did not believe that bikes belong on the roadway. The last such conversation was during an LAB road II class, when I was yelled at by a motorist that felt I should not be making left turns from a left turn lane. I was told we should ride "like those other cyclists..." I asked what other cyclists, and the indication was like those cyclists that hug the shoulder. I asked then how we were supposed to make left turns... Reply: "that's your problem." Classic.

We had not impeded traffic, we were textbook crossing of 2 (or 3) lanes into a left only lane, and we had all waited for large gaps. Yet we were "doing it wrong."

In the minds of some... bicycles just don't belong on "their" roads.

That is the thinking that needs to change... we need to be seen as equal legitimate users of the road, not just something in the way, blocking the way, that needs to be avoided... like a pothole.

I'm not dismissing your argument, though. I would prefer "share the road" signs over sharrows as ways of indicating that bikes belong on the road, for one thing they don't cover one lane only. However, as I said before, I have no meaningful experience with sharrows. In practice they may well be much more effective with drivers than "share the road" signs.

After my recent "Share the road, don't hog it" comment from a pickup truck driving travelling the opposite direction as me (WTF?), I've lost a lot of faith in the Share the Road sign. Not to say that it has that same effect on everyone but I've talked to too many people who honestly think Share the Road means cyclists should ride the edge of the pavement so cars can squeeze by.

I have no experience with this, so I can't comment. In three years I have had exactly one driver tell me to "get off the road". I have never had an actual conversation with anyone who did not know my bike was a road vehicle. I'm sure we have people like this here, somewhere, but they are few are far between. On the other hand, I often meet people from out of town who comment on all the cyclists on the roads here, even in winter.

I'm used to people marvelling at the fact that I'll ride when it's below 40F. I seem to be constantly explaining to somebody at work what the rules of the road say in regards to cyclists using the road. It's not so much that they don't think cyclists belong on the road at all but that we should do whatever it takes to get out of their way. Suburbia tends to bring out a sense of entitlement in certain people, like the BMW driver today, with no less than 4 kids in the car, forcing opposing traffic into the shoulder so he could go around me a little sooner.

I'm used to people marvelling at the fact that I'll ride when it's below 40F. I seem to be constantly explaining to somebody at work what the rules of the road say in regards to cyclists using the road. It's not so much that they don't think cyclists belong on the road at all but that we should do whatever it takes to get out of their way. Suburbia tends to bring out a sense of entitlement in certain people, like the BMW driver today, with no less than 4 kids in the car, forcing opposing traffic into the shoulder so he could go around me a little sooner.

No offense to Wilmington, but have you considered moving?

I wonder how your drivers would react to a "do not pass bikes" sign?

San Francisco pair sharrows with signs that say 'bicycles allowed full lane change lanes to pass'

i personally think sharrows work great in places where roadway striping that benefits bicyclists does not; the two can intermingle in a municipal transit grid quite nicely.

one does not exclude the other in regional roadway planning and design.

I have a vision of 'directional' sharrows across multilane, large grid roads seen often in suburbia, that lead drivers to be aware of cyclists positioning across multiple high speed lanes to lead into a left turn lane or bike box. on a lot of 45-55 MPH multi lane roads, lining up for a left is sometimes problematic.

Directional sharrows, as part of a vigorous transportation infrastructure that supports bicycling, would lead bikes to maybe go fer it, and the drivers to maybe be aware some bikers might be taking the left.

I have a vision of 'directional' sharrows across multilane, large grid roads seen often in suburbia, that lead drivers to be aware of cyclists positioning across multiple high speed lanes to lead into a left turn lane or bike box. on a lot of 45-55 MPH multi lane roads, lining up for a left is sometimes problematic.

Directional sharrows, as part of a vigorous transportation infrastructure that supports bicycling, would lead bikes to maybe go fer it, and the drivers to maybe be aware some bikers might be taking the left.
I've seen sharrows used this way in Paris.

Just for clarification, what is the definition of a sharrow? I've never heard of it other than cycle forums, so I'm sure evrybody who doesn't ride has never heard of it.........

No offense to Wilmington, but have you considered moving?

I wonder how your drivers would react to a "do not pass bikes" sign?

I've found stupid drivers everywhere I've cycled so I can't imagine things being that much better anywhere else. The only thing reduces driver stupidty are conditions that limit the speed of the drivers (well, sometimes that helps) like a congested city. I thoroughly enjoy cycling in a city environment (most of my cycling is done in the suburb areas of Wilmington and West Chester, PA). I would probably move in a heartbeat if it weren't for almost my entire family being located in Wilmington (3 of 4 sisters, 6 of 7 aunts and uncles, 14 of 17 cousins; you get the idea).

A "do not pass bikes" signs would be met with the same amount of compliance at the double yellow lines (signifying no passing) and the speed limit signs. Most people disobey them unless forced to (i.e. I'm completely in their way) but some people (like Mr. 5 series BMW) will do whatever it takes to not be slowed down by anything in their path. I really don't see a way to get a complete change of attitude of drivers but I still believe the best change that could be made is to the way cyclists use the roads. If the goverment wants to get involved, sharrows wouldn't do anything negative at least.

I've found stupid drivers everywhere I've cycled so I can't imagine things being that much better anywhere else. The only thing reduces driver stupidty are conditions that limit the speed of the drivers (well, sometimes that helps) like a congested city.

You either have an extremely negative view of people, or have had some some really bad experiences. While I agree that there are stupid drivers everywhere, but not to the extent you claim. I would be curious to have you cycle in Ottawa for a week or two and compare you experience to mine.

Sharrows are much better than bike lanes, and making them as big as parked cars takes care of the main problem with the smaller ones - implying that where the small sharrow is the one and only place where cyclists are supposed to be.

Did they say where in CA they were being tested?

There is a study on line about very positive scientific testing in San Fran. and I know they are doing a limited application on some roads in Los Angeles.

i personally think sharrows work great in places where roadway striping that benefits bicyclists does not; the two can intermingle in a municipal transit grid quite nicely.

one does not exclude the other in regional roadway planning and design.

I have a vision of 'directional' sharrows across multilane, large grid roads seen often in suburbia, that lead drivers to be aware of cyclists positioning across multiple high speed lanes to lead into a left turn lane or bike box. on a lot of 45-55 MPH multi lane roads, lining up for a left is sometimes problematic.

Directional sharrows, as part of a vigorous transportation infrastructure that supports bicycling, would lead bikes to maybe go fer it, and the drivers to maybe be aware some bikers might be taking the left.

randya,

After looking at the France picture, I'm thinking Bekologist means laterally, and possibly staggered in each lane leading to a left turn lane. I think that's a pretty good idea.

You either have an extremely negative view of people, or have had some some really bad experiences. While I agree that there are stupid drivers everywhere, but not to the extent you claim. I would be curious to have you cycle in Ottawa for a week or two and compare you experience to mine.

I'd be curious to cycle in Ottawa sometime and see what it's like. I'd also be curious for you to try some of my routes and get your opinion. I don't think I have an extremely negative opinion of people at all. I do get along with well over 99% of people on the roads. I would certainly enjoy making that 99.999% though but as I've said before, the minuses outweigh the plusses for that small of a benefit. That 1% does make cycling significantly less enjoyable for my SO though and I would like that to change (either by changing her attitude towards the stupidity or better yet, making it go away).

randya,

After looking at the France picture, I'm thinking Bekologist means laterally, and possibly staggered in each lane leading to a left turn lane. I think that's a pretty good idea.

That picture from France is not a sharrow per the definitions I've seen. It's not designating a lane to be shared with motorists but simply pointing cyclists towards a narrow corridor. Sharrow = SHAred lane aRROW.

Bike lanes in the Netherlands are two meters wide, wide enough to ride side by side in. Bike lanes in the US are whatever size they have room left over for, generally anywhere between three and five feet wide, very ocassionally six feet.

Sharrows also work on streets without room for a separate bike lane, and I think they are a great educational tool for motorists, showing them that bikes are allowed and expected to take the lane.

Hit the nail right on the head. These Sharrows are a solid indicator to motorists that bicycle are allowed, and expected, to be here.

Hit the nail right on the head. These Sharrows are a solid indicator to motorists that bicycle are allowed, and expected, to be here.

What is meant by the term Sharrow?

It's a word for "Shared Lane Marking", or "Shared Lane Arrow".

Have a link:

http://www.bicycle.sfgov.org/site/dptbike_index.asp?id=28372

As members have already posted, sharrows are generally preferred to the design of most bike lanes.

Question: would they be more effective if they were painted bright yellow?