Sharrows vs Bike Lane

My hometown, Cincinnati Ohio, has been trying to cultivate a more bike friendly environment. They've developed a master plan, which includes both sharrows and actual bike lanes in the city, along with finally connecting several larger bike trails that would allow you to ride all the way into downtown Cincy from the outer burrows. It's a 25 year plan. When a road is due for repaving, they'll do so with this bike plan in mind, so tis the plan.

On one of the very heavily congested roads I'm seeing yellow bike signs with the message "Share the Road", so I'm assuming that the wide berm (about 5' wide) is meant to be this "new" sharrow. By new I mean the road ALWAYS had a wide berm and was more of an e-lane with glass and other debris, or when someone didn't want to wait to make a right turn, they'd ride the berm to get up to the light. This is a four-lane road with a turn lane and traffic normally runs about 40mph. I honestly wouldn't ride here, just as I wouldn't a year ago before they put up these signs, so if this is what the city is thinking is "innovative" and forward thinking... pffffffttttttttttttttttttt.

Is it too much to at least ask for a stencil and a few gallons of paint to at least mark that area? Perhaps it's still too narrow to be considered a bike lane or some regulation on curbs and the like for the road itself, but the only real difference here is a sign every block kindly asking the drivers to "share", like they have to give UP something that was inherently theirs.

Road:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2676/...83731e28_o.jpg

This part of the road doesn't have a turn lane, so berm is quite large here, but it seems down the road a bit where there are turn lanes, the berm is smaller.
Perhaps I've got it all wrong here as I'm finding it hard to find information on sharrows and how they legally differ from bike lanes.

I thought I'd ask what you ladies (and men) thought.

Shannon

If I'm not mistaken, a sharrow marks a typical car lane as one where cyclists are being instructed to take the lane. That is, it is too narrow to ride to the right so it is safer to take the lane and cars are being notified that this will be occurring.

As for the berm, that would be "bike lane" but only if marked as such. Otherwise, it is just a paved shoulder. There is a fine-line distinction at least in my neck of the woods. If the paved shoulder is marked with a bike lane on the pavement then the government is responsible for street sweeping the bike lane. That is expensive and comes with liability. So they'll simply call it a paved shoulder and if a bike chooses to use it over the lane, then it is their responsibility. That said, in some areas a bike is required to use the shoulder, but not all.

I know in Arizona new roads have "road surface stabilization shoulders" installed on them. While they make nice bike lanes, technically they are not. I was told that if they were called bike lanes, they wouldn't be approved (too costly and not important), but that by calling them "road stabilization" they get approved. But, they are not swept and can be full of gravel.

My understanding of the term "sharrow" is the same as Thorn's.

I ride shoulders similar to what is shown in your picture, most unmarked as bike lanes. For the most part, there are no issues. The only time that it gets sticky is when a turn lane pops up and abruptly ends the shoulder, and then resumes on the other side. Our local bike advocacy group is working to address this issue with some selective painting to warn cars and to protect cyclists' legal rights.

Your photo looks like neither a bike lane nor a sharrow, but just a plain old shoulder.

this is a sharrow:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...,9.04,,1,16.83

(hmmmm can't seem to get the google map image to show up here... sorry, but click on the link and give it a moment to resolve [the resolution is very low when you first get there])

Honesty - they are not my favorite things..... They are meant to indicate to motorists one thing, that they should regularly expect cyclists in the lane on that street. Motorists however often misinterpret them to mean that if you are a cyclist you need to ride on them.... They way they've been implemented here they are too small and too far to the right. If you ride "on" them you are often smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. They really should be in the middle of the travel lane to be effective. I find that I get more crap from motorists on sharrowed streets than on ones that have no paint, so I would prefer that the city save the money and just leave well enough alone....

I haven't spend much time in Cincy over the past 4 or 5 years, but it looks like a paved shoulder to me. I've never seen a bike lane in Cincy, just a lot of "Share the Road" signs. That road is probably pretty popular with cyclists and someone finally got around to putting up signs.

The sharrows we have up here are on streets that are frequently used by cyclists but are too narrow to support a bike lane. The problem with them is exactly what Eden described--and some of the cops think that way too, at least by anecdotal evidence. Since you can be ticketed for taking the lane, this has the potential to be a bit of a problem.

(I really hope that they do get around to connecting all the trails up, though. Riding down to the Ohio sounds like it'd be awesome. I'd just need a ride back up.:o )

Interesting. I've never heard the word "sharrow" before and wonder if Indianapolis even utilizes them. Is that what a "share the road" sign if supposed to connote? If it does, I doubt the average motorist understands that.

Indy's handful of bike lanes are ill conceived in my opinion. Most are typcially full of debris and those that are downtown have some pretty scary interfaces with traffic. The changes they made to the actual traffic lanes are confusing as a motorist. So, it's the worst of both worlds. I preferred it before when I just took the lane as I saw fit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indysteel

Interesting. I've never heard the word "sharrow" before and wonder if Indianapolis even utilizes them. Is that what a "share the road" sign if supposed to connote? If it does, I doubt the average motorist understands that.

---

I don't think so. I think "Share the Road" signs are like "Please Don't Litter" signs -- reminders that we're supposed to act nice, nothing more. My cynic side says a waste of money -- the people who need them won't get the message; the people who share the road/don't litter don't need the sign.

To compound things, I've read elsewhere that some drivers think that the Share the Road sign isn't directed at them, but at the bicyclist! As in, yield to the motor traffic! Egads.

I always thought sharrows are supposed to be painted down the middle of the lane. This thread is the first time I've heard they're painted at the edge. That's really odd. I can see why that would be confusing.

Thanks!! It's as I thought... just signage to try and make motorists more aware of cyclist on the road and not a proper sharrow.

The road gets really heavy traffic and the pic I posted was of the road down the hill from me that was actually widened and repaved in 03' and has MUCH wider berms then the road where I've seen the signs pop up at... about half the width actually, plus you have places where turn lanes mean the berm gets taken way like Becky describes. Meaning if your a cyclist you're GOING to have to merge left or get run off the road. With cars traveling at 40mph I'm sure this could be REALLY harrowing.

According the the city's own bike map this stretch of road is listed as "avoid" and hazardous...

I guess something is better then nothing. There are parts of town where they've installed honest to goodness bike lanes.

http://www.urbancincy.com/2009/12/ci...g-dana-avenue/

I cringe at the thought of riding on the street in this town.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


Shannon

That looks like a decent bike path.

I'm going to rant a bit about Indy's for a second. I happen to park in a lot that's part of the Federal Building in downtown Indy. About two years ago, they retroactively "installed" bike lanes on stretches of two one-way streets that travel east and west through the heart of downtown. To accomodate the bike lane, they reconfigured the lanes and, for whatever reason, there are spots where it went from four down to two lanes (with the third being a dedicated turn lane or parking lane). Of course, the traffic volume in the morning didn't change, so it soon became a mess each morning.

I've since moved, but when I lived near downtown, I traveled on the the westbound road every day. The bike lane runs right next to the guard station for the Federal Building. This is one of the spots where the lanes have been reduced down to two, along with a left turn lane). To pull into the guard station to park in the lot or make a delivery, you turn right--right into the bike lane. As you might imagine, it's horribly dangerous for all involved.

In the thick of rush hour, vehicles tend to back up right outside the guard station, as we have to stop, present i.d. and then wait until the arm goes up and the gates down to pull through. Now, I won't block the bike lane, but plenty of other cars do. But when I or somebody else holds our ground, there's usually some jerk behind us bleeping their horn and yelling expletives for us to pull to the right (into the bike lane) so that other traffic can get through. Plus, some delivery trucks can't pull in far enough so they end up blocking the lane or, even better, they pull past the guard station and park on the far right side of the road--right on top of the bike lane. And because the guards have to fully inspect the truck inside and out, it can sit there 5 to 10 minutes.

It's a cluster every day.

Not long after the bike lanes were installed, I contacted the group that was in charge of working with the city on them. I suggested additional signage that specifcially indicated that vehicles are not to block the bike lane and to urge drivers to be aware of approaching cyclists. While I got an email thanking me for my input, NOTHING has changed. This, despite the fact that there have already been some accidents at this interface.

Now, I realize that most of the problems are caused by motorists, not bicyclists, but for one, the lane is just not safe and, for another, it just engenders nothing but irritation and hatred among motorists. As much of a cyclist as I am, I myself hate being on this stretch of road. You can't just put a bike lane on any given road and then hope for the best. It's just not that easy.

End of rant.

When they revamped the major surface street here that runs into downtown, they made a lot of changes to the bus stops, and added a bike lane. Problem is, many of the intersections around here make no sense whatsoever (even to people who live here) and you get a lot of traffic because of the hospitals. Add buses and a bike lane that disappears and reappears seemingly randomly and :eek: