flangehead

I'm going to be providing some feedback to the City of Houston regarding some sharrows they have painted in my area. It would help me to get comments from others; I don't know where my blind spots are.

Let me start out by saying that I'm not really interested in sharrows yes/sharrows no for this scope. They are in the Houston Bike Plan "toolkit" so for now they are available as a tool. If used, I want them used sensibly.

So here's the situation: About 5 years ago, a street was rebuilt from 2 lane asphalt/bar ditch to 4 lane concrete, with 13'9" outer lanes with sharrows painted about 5 feet from curb and with "Share the Road" signage. This became a new good commute route, and I've been taking the lane. Traffic generally is light. Area is light manufacturing and warehouses; lots of semi-trailers. About 1/2 of it has frequent sidestreets and business curb cuts. Posted 40 and 45 mph; flat and straight.

At this time, the sharrows have all effectively worn off; just a few splotches of paint here and there. I called to see if they are going to repaint and they said they wouldn't. I assumed the sharrows are an experiment that failed. Lately, I've been moving over to 3' from the curb when I have traffic behind. Haven't had any issues but traffic has been light. (13'9" is practically 14'.)

But then I go to a new major 35 mph posted arterial in the area and see brand new sharrows in the middle of a 15' outside lane.

I don't know what they're thinking so I'm going to go talk to them.

My current story is that they are setting up a legally ambiguous situation and they need to stop doing it.

Texas law is FRAP, and one of the exceptions is any lane less than 14'. So a sharrow in the middle of a 15' lane means ??? In both cases, they had room to put a bike lane in, or they could have narrowed the lane and put in sharrows, in which case they would need to maintain them and should use BMUFL instead of STR signage.

If you've had experience with this issue I'd like to hear your war story.

Thanks!


After 5 years the sharrows have worn off and will not be repainted. (40 mph, 13'9" lane).


Recently rebuilt road. (35 mph, 15' lane).

Miele Man

I don't see the need for the sharrows at all. The signage should be enough.

Cheers

livedarklions

I think it's just the opposite, except for the paradox flangehead identified (see my next post).

"Share the Road" is essentially meaningless, and could just as easily be interpreted to mean "bikes have to get out of the way" as "cars must give bicycles room". A properly deployed sharrow shows you exactly which lane a bicyclist can lay claim to.

livedarklions

I see what you're talking about because there's nothing in Houston City Ordinances that would empower the city to designate a 15 foot traffic lane as being fully useable by bikes, but I wonder if the distance between the lane divider paint and the stripe on the right isn't actually 14 feet instead of 15.

Juan Foote

I am completely unfamiliar with the entire scope of the law, but here in GA if they build new state highway then a bike lane HAS to be integrated into it. I am also aware of an initiative where any streets within a city that are redesigned are supposed to have bicycle lanes be part of the consideration. What I DON'T know concerning this law is what they have to do to maintain, keep painted, safe, etc. One of the major things I would personally like to see done away with in regard to it here is that they grind these spots in such that tires make noise if you drift off lane. They have been putting these right on/in the bike lane area and anyone that has ridden over them knows they are super dangerous and uncomfortable to a cyclist.

I wish you luck but suspect that without a big dog behind you it's going to be a waste of time.

scott967

I'm not exactly sure what the issue is? You're saying if a lane is wide sharrows cause some sort of problem? My main issue is here they use that elastomeric coating (whatever it's called) and I don't like going over them, so usually pass left or right, while if they weren't there it would be better for everyone. Though if I hit them just right I can go over the down tube and top tube and split the left/right chevrons (there's a couple inch gap in there on ours).

scott s.
.

debade

I expect for the original sharrow placement, someone realized that a 45 MPH road is not designed for sharrows. I think their greatest use is in 25 MPH. From Bicycling Mag comment on sharrows "Think slower-moving neighborhood streets; you’re never supposed to see sharrows in areas with speed limits above 35 mph." I am not certain if that is a law or suggestion. The only time I remember sharrows on 40 + MPH roads is when the bike lane ends. Perhaps over the last 5 years, someone read the AASHTO, NATCO or accepted recommendation. You might want to become familiar with the latest recommendations for sharrows from one of these or similar orgs.

As for your new 15' lane, I think most road engineers with a sense for safety for all road users, would be recommending an 11' lane, which would accommodate 18 wheelers and 4 foot bike lane, given the 35 MPH. If large trucks will be infrequent or not at all, a 10' lane with a buffered bike lane would be the safest (unless you can get a protected lane) for all road users. 10/11" lanes have been shown to reduce motor vehicle accidents vs wider lanes. The bike lane will be safer for bicycles and help with traffic calming. The narrowing of the motor traffic lane supports ped safety since they cross a narrower motorized section of the street.

You may also want to remind the engineers about car speed impact on injury and death. At 30 MPH a ped has a 50% to survive. At 40 itis 10%.

Hope this helps. I will be following this as I think it will be a good learning experience.

roundypndr 

The local road works department had repaved one section of a sharrow marked street, along with their taking some time in replacing the sharrow markings, and during the time of the sharrow markings absence, motorist attitudes toward me were remarkably different, though my riding style was still the same.

Miele Man

Different for the better or worse behaviour?

Cheers

roundypndr 

Remarkably more impatient on the motorists' part.

mr_bill

Chapter 9C, MUTCD

“9C-9 Shared Lane Marking

Guidance:
02 The Shared Lane Marking should not be placed on roadways that have a speed limit above 35 mph.”

Should not. Not shall not.

https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/bikeway-signing-marking/shared-lane-markings/]Shared Lane Markings - NACTO

“On streets with posted 35 mph speeds or faster and motor vehicle volumes higher than 3,000 vpd shared lane markings are not a preferred treatment. On these streets other bikeway types are preferred.”

-mr. bill

livedarklions

That seems like "no, duh" advice.

Hard for me to imagine a 45 mph road where a sharrow would be of any use. Have you ever seen such an implementation succeed?

flangehead

mr_bill, thanks for the MUTCD and NACTO references. When I finally get through to someone I'll post outcome. Don't hold your breath.

My status is that I still haven't been able to talk to anyone with the City. I've got two more possible approaches that are "reasonable" then I'll have to ratchet up. Understand uphill battle.

Good eye. I went back to look more carefully. Most of the road has no right edge paint. The place I took the picture was where construction segments crossed over and that is old paint from the construction period. I did look more carefully at the road surface and the longitudinal grooving is applied to a little less than 13 feet. I suppose I could argue that is the lane width but that feels like legal nitpicking to me.


No lane paint next to curb (in general) and grooved to about 2 feet from the curb.

The issue is that in Texas, for lanes less than 14 foot wide, a cyclist can legally take the lane. Over 14', a cyclist has to ride as far right as practicable (which leaves other reasons such as debris, safety, etc.). So a sharrow in the middle of a 15' lane is probably indicating that a cyclist should break Texas law.

flangehead

I can't say I've made any real headway, but I do now have a contact in the City who responds and have gotten some clues; still working it.

The recent project has a long design history. It was partially funded by TXDOT and their (current) rules require minimum 14' outside lane if marked as a shared lane bike route. I found references to 14' outer lane for this project scope in documents dating back to 2011. In 2015 when project was authorized, it was stated that the project would include bike lanes. (It is a normal pattern around here to state that bicycle facilities will be installed when the project is announced, and when it is done, no bike infrastructure to be found.) In the middle of construction, the Houston Bike Plan was adopted in 2017 and the reconstruction scope was shown as programmed "Dedicated In Street ROW" bicycle infrastructure.

So the official story I was told was that was "old design" and "we wouldn't do that now" but I suspect that means "new design now". Since projects take 5-10 years from initial design to completion, I don't know how much more of this is already in the pipeline in other parts of the city.

My best guess is that 14' outer lane was the minimum to pass the TXDOT gate for bicycle infrastructure in 2015 so that defined the concrete. When finished, they painted on two center-of-lane sharrows and put up two "Share the Road" signs.. most of the 2 mile long scope has no bike signage. Either they realized it was a bad idea, or they put in the two signs so they could check the box on "Dedicated In Street ROW".

I did wrangle an invite to a meeting of an advisory committee so I'm going to bring it up there and see if there is stuff "in the pipeline" that could be improved.

So that's the update for now. Just to be clear, I'm not posting this to be critical of local efforts by any means. My professional work includes projects and I'm very sensitive to changes in scope, requirements and so on.

Transportation standards have historically been motor-centric, and as municipalities try to move to design standards and projects that are useful for pedestrians, cyclists, scooters, etc. one would expect that it won't go perfectly. I'm sharing this because some of you in other areas might be facing similar issues. The details will be different but the underlying dynamic is probably the same.

debade

It looks like you are doing this all on your own. Have you reached out to Bike Houston? A quick look at their website suggests they could be very helpful https://bikehouston.org/ . If you have and it was not successful, it would be interesting to find out why they were not supportive.

flangehead

Yes, I know them and am a member. They've recently had turnover/reduction in staff. I'm keeping them in the loop on what I'm finding.

flangehead

This will be my final post on this.

It ends up the city has a Bicycle Advisory Committee, Infrastructure Subcommittee, that meets about once a quarter and I was able to get my concerns off my chest.

The feedback I got is a lot of the projects get designed (in detail) many years before they are funded, so the standards that apply are "at design" not "at build".. and that lag can years and years in the case of federally funded projects. The only way to influence is in the public comment period of the design. For me at least, finding out about the public comment opportunity is haphazard.

My take is that this one engagement won't change anything, but at least I now know the path to engage. I suspect it will take a lot of trial, error and engagement to effect change.

Your local situation is probably different and hopefully better.

debade

It is typically not easy to learn when there is a public comment time. But shame on the quarterly committee if they cannot get a FB page or similar going for updates to the community on their quarterly meeting, including public comment opportunities. I am doing that in my town. I report the minutes from our Complete Streets committee to anyone interested enough to join our FB page. Perhaps you could suggest that to them.