The following info on the purposes for sharrow usage is quoted directly from the Federal guidelines in the 2009 MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices):

1. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in a shared lane with on-street parallel parking in order to reduce the chance of a bicyclist's impacting the open door of a parked vehicle,
2. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and a bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane,
3. Alert road users of the lateral location bicyclists are likely to occupy within the traveled way,
4. Encourage safe passing of bicyclists by motorists, and
5. Reduce the incidence of wrong-way bicycling.

These sharrows on Edgehill are tucked conveniently away the "safe" Cleveland Hts. recommended 2.5 feet from the curb, right smack in the on-street parking.

Please explain to me my proper and SAFE lane riding position according to these sharrows on Edgehill. Am I to be weaving amongst these parked cars? http://bicyclesafe.com/ says this is a great way to get hit by cars! If a cyclist follows these sharrows and gets hit by a car (and God forbid, worse) is that okay with Cleveland Heights?

Please explain to me how this HELPS cyclists.

Edie

Ok, I was wrong about the law. Oops! I was minformed. I truly apologize that in my zealousness to improve the safety of cyclists, I made an error.

But please get out your yardstick again. Each LANE is 13 feet wide consistently on Euclid Heights Blvd. Any lane narrower than 14 feet can not reasonably and consistently be shared safely by a motor vehicle and a bicycle.

The last line of an article written by Mr. Matthew for the Heights Observer states:

"Because of safety concerns, the coalition advocates, and the DOT recommends, that sharrows should be installed four feet from the curb on roads without street parking, and eleven feet where there is street parking."

The sharrows were place at 2-1/2 feet on Euclid Heights Blvd, which has no parking, and again at 2-1/2 feet on Edgehill, which allows parking. So unless I am misunderstanding what he wrote, he is saying that the sharrows were not placed safely.

Ann

Although Wombat has good intentions, her understanding of the law is incorrect: Cleveland Heights is not in violation of federal, state, or local laws. Here's why:

Cities are required by law to adhere only to the STANDARDS set forth by the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), but not GUIDELINES. Cleveland Heights has not violated any MUTCD STANDARDS, and thus will not be financially penalized, nor be at risk for a "significant increase in tort liability," as Wombat claims.

The MUTCD defines GUIDELINES as "a statement of recommended, but not mandatory, practice in typical situations, with deviations allowed if engineering judgment or engineering study indicates the deviation to be appropriate." In contrast, STANDARDS are defined as “a statement required, mandatory, or specifically prohibitive practice regarding traffic control” (MUTCD Section 1A.13).

Shared lane markings, or sharrows, only have one STANDARD according to the MUTCD: "Shared Lane Markings shall not be used on shoulders or in designated bicycle lanes” (Section 9c.07) Cleveland Heights hasn't violated this standard, and thus is not in violation of the law.

The MUTCD does offer GUIDANCE on the placement of the sharrow relative to the curb: “If used in a shared lane with on-street parallel parking, the [sharrow] should be placed so that the centers of the [sharrow] should be 11 feet from the curb.” It also states, “if used on a street without on street parking that has an outside travel lane that is less than 14 feet wide, the centers of the Shared Lane Marking should be at least four feet from the face of the curb” (ibid). Although there are a few exceptions, the vast majority of Euclid Heights Boulevard and Edgehill Road are 14 feet wide or wider.

The Coalition encourages people to offer their feedback: we hear the critiques offered by the community, and are striving to make Cleveland Heights an excellent bicycling city. However, we ask that people offer their perspective in a calm and collected tone. Radicalizing a position, using extreme metaphors, or incorrectly citing the law isn’t constructive to our common goal of fostering a strong bicycling community.

Nick
Cleveland Heights Bicycle Coalition

You can download the 2009 MUTCD here.  
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009/pdf_index.htm

You can provide your feedback on the sharrows here:
http://bikesintheheights.org/sharrow-placement/

Thank you, Ray Lahood, secretary of the US Dept of Transportation. He was instrumental in making changes to the standards that Federal Government uses for signs, signals, and pavement markings (it's called the MUTCD). The 2009 version that he approved includes sharrows for the first time, and many other changes that make walking and bicycling safer, furthering the complete streets concept. The bad news is that Ohio hasn't adopted it yet - by federal law, they have about another year before the adoption deadline. And state law requires that all roads conform to these standards. As soon as Ohio adopts the 2009 MUTCD, Cleveland Heights sharrows will be out of compliance, because they are too close to the curb. The city will then be in violation of state law. To quote from the DOT site:

Non-compliance of the MUTCD ultimately can result in loss of federal-aid funds as well as significant increase in tort liability.

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/kno-overview.htm

So if a cyclist gets hurt or killed on the sharrowed roads, not only will the cyclists and their families be suffering, but also the tax payers of Cleveland Heights. If a suit is brought against the city, the lawyers will be immediately citing non-compliance.

I live on Franklin Blvd and so have seen the sharrows for a while now. Before knowing what they were (i.e., a sharrow), I just thought it was a cheap and lazy way for the City to declare that Franklin is now a Bikeway. To see a dedicated bike lane, and to see these--I mean do sharrows really foster more bicycling activity for those hesitant? 

I rode by the sharrows on Edgehill on my usual (bicycle) commuting route this morning and was apalled. I was so stunned at the ridiculousness of their placement that I stopped to take pictures with my cell phone. In fact, for a moment, I thought them to be a bad Halloween prank.

The sharrows are jammed right up against the curb on a fairly wide, smooth (no gutter potholes...yet) route heavily used by bicycle commuters (Edgehill.) They were half-covered with leaves and will be covered by snow and ice in a few weeks. But most importantly, they were perched right behind parked cars! TWO of them! Both tucked right behind parked cars. It looked like a joke, something that I would see on Failblog.org!

If they weren't so dangerous, they'd be embarrassing.

Another cyclist commuter rode by me and shook his head in disgust as he rode far around and by one of these sharrows.

Unfortunately, these sharrows are worse than no sharrows. They send an inaccurate and dangerous message to newbie cyclists and motorists alike.

I hope they go away soon.

Edie from Cleveland Hts.

Unfortunately, the City of Cleveland Heights chose to ignore federal guidelines that state that the center of the sharrow should be placed a minimum of 4 feet from the curb. They placed them instead at 2-1/2 feet, which puts them right up against the curb. This makes for a dangerous situation for cyclists, especially on a road with narrow 12 foot wide lanes like Euclid Heights Blvd - it tells them to hug the curb, which encourages motorists to side swipe them when they try to pass in the lane.

The State of Ohio published a booklet called Ohio Bicycling Street Smarts, which specifically warns against hugging the curb:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/TransSysDev/MultiModalPlanning/bicy...

Ohio bicycle law states that bicycles need to ride as far to the right as is practicable - however, is safety not an element in the execution of what is practicable?

Michael Lehto over at Boondock blogs about the impact of the Sharrows as a piece of information design. Here's an excerpt and the link:

I’m conflicted about the sharrow. I like what it represents: a community trying to do more for cyclists. But does it really communicate a message any differently than the old signage? Will I be safer now that this sign is painted on the road? Certainly it’s new, so it might attract drivers’ attentions for a while. But clearly it has the capacity to blend into the scenery out of sheer familiarity like so many other things. Moreover the painted emblems will no doubt fade over time, and what happens when the side of the street is covered with snow?