General Cycling Discussion - Arbitrary Bicycle Street Markers.

A week after my birthday I went out on my usual bike ride and noticed that my street had several bicycle markers on it. I thought how nice, for the city of Portland to do such kindness to me a southwesterner, the less bicycle usage part of town!

http://www.summervillain.com/fotos/riderless-bike.jpg




On riding through my neighborhood however I saw some streets that had them where others did not. My street is a main corridor so that makes sense. However another corridor SW Maplewood Rd., close by, did not. And this has several blind curves where I customarily take the lane anyway. Why would the city skip this part of the neighborhood that gets a lot of traffic?

My second question is this. How many drivers actually know what those markers represent? Do they understand that it means bicycles need to be on this part of the roadway to be optimally safe?

Go here.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php/769233-Sharrow-Failure

You sure that is a street marker? Looks like the police maybe chalked in a bicycle as part of a crime scene investigation.

It's a Sharrows marking. Sharrows generally denote on-street bicycle routes that are not bike lanes. The street that does not have sharrows probably isn't officially a bicycle route.

Good and bad: Good because they tell drivers to expect bikes and share the road. Bad because they suggest to drivers that bicycles should be restricted to where those markings are.

Good and bad: Good because they tell drivers to expect bikes and share the road. Bad because they suggest to drivers that bicycles should be restricted to where those markings are.

That makes definite sense, since the other road I'm thinking should have them is heavily used by cars. Thanks #1!

It is hilarious how these sharrows appear as you walk along side one. Elongated, like those trick books from my youth.

Hey there Cyclomania!

What's really scary to me, is the fact that the sharrows are always right in the path of an opening door. Many cyclists feel obligated to ride right straight through the "centerline" of the sharrows, even when traffic is light.

- Slim :)

I find sharrows to be one of the most useless ways of promoting cycling. The don't give any rights that cyclists don't otherwise have, and they're not binding on motorists in any way; the only motorists who would notice them are those that are already on the lookout for bicyclists.

Good and bad: Good because they tell drivers to expect bikes and share the road. Bad because they suggest to drivers that bicycles should be restricted to where those markings are.

I thought that was the argument with bike lanes. Even when bike lane use isn't mandatory, drivers always think it is. Sharrows aren't perfect, but I think they're a step in the right direction.