Comments on: Sharrows to become federal standard?

By: W Sanders

W Sanders — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:17:01 +0000

My little town of Lafayette CA has just painted sharrows on the one busy street in town. This street has parallel parking along most of its length, and in places lanes that are only about 11 feet wide. I ride down this street on my bicycle every day.

My only complaint is that the paint used is the thick epoxy stuff, and the sharrows work like rumble strips, so I am inclined to avoid riding over them.

As an experienced bike commuter, I’m in the “bike lanes provide no additional safety benefit” camp, so I don’t care one way or the other if these catch on.

By: Richard C. Moeur, PE

Richard C. Moeur, PE — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:54:02 +0000

Remember that until the final version of the next MUTCD is published (probably sometime in late 2009), shared lane markings are still considered experimental, and that FHWA experimental approval is required for use. For more information on shared lane markings, see the NCUTCD Bicycle Technical Committee website at http://members.cox.net/ncutcdbtc/

By: dan baker

dan baker — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:31:30 +0000

Sharrows have been approved and used in Santa Fe, NM with reasonable success. The City has failed to promote them with any followup articles in the Newspaper, so some motorists are unsure what they are…. Although giant chevrons with a bike midlane are not hard to figure out.

One problem we have measure from the right is that sub-contractors dont always understand the intent to indicate the cyclist should ‘take the lane’, and place them too close to street-side parking. I believe the placement should be a consistent 5′ from the LEFT of the traffic lane so that motorists are not tempted to pass unsafely.

Sharrows are really only needed in cases where there is no room for a shoulder or safe passing… less than 13′ feet or so, and on streets with 25mph speed limits. The idea is that streets with higher speed limits, or wider width, can have striped shoulders or dedicated bike lanes.

By: Fritz

Fritz — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:32:01 +0000

Thanks for the comment, Wheelman.

1. I think the main objection to the sharrows is that it can be a compromise solution. In a city like Chicago with strong cycling advocacy, however, I think it can be thought of as one more tool in the toolbox of good facilities for cyclists.

2. The diagram shows 11 feet from the curb to the sharrow symbol in instance where cyclists ride next to parked cars. That’s outside of the door zone. The problem right now is that with the lack of a standard, sharrows are placed inside the door zone in many cities.

By: da' Square Wheelman

da' Square Wheelman — Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:51:37 +0000

Here in Chicago we have both dedicated and sharrow lanes. I’m under the impression that our city DoT uses the latter as the first stage in setting up the former. My concerns then are:

1. Will this new federal standard motivate the city DoT to pull back on dedicated bike lane expansion?

2. How will it prevent the biggest cause of bike-cager accidents: dooring?