Sharrow

#Why this pattern exists

On a roadway too narrow to provide any dedicated bike space, a sharrow at least communicates that cyclists are expected users of the lane and suggests where they should position themselves relative to parked cars and the travel lane’s edge; this pattern exists to document this lowest tier of bike accommodation and its real limitations.

#Key considerations

• Provides no physical or even painted separation from vehicle traffic, and research has generally found it does little to improve comfort or safety for cyclists¹
• Should be treated as a last-resort or interim treatment rather than a target outcome; a corridor relying on sharrows is a candidate for future upgrade to a dedicated facility
• May still hold value narrowly for wayfinding continuity between two stronger-facility segments where a short interruption cannot otherwise be avoided

#Related patterns

Conventional Bike Lane (ELM-CBL-34), Advisory Bike Lane (ELM-ABL-36) (facilities this pattern should generally be upgraded toward); Stroad (ART-STD-05) (the explicit Avoid-status pattern this shares status logic with)

#References

1. Evidence-based Ferenchak, N.N. and Marshall, W.E. (2019), "Advancing Healthy Cities Through Safer Cycling: An Examination of Shared Lane Markings," International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology 8(2). Chicago before/after study: sharrows produced no statistically significant safety improvement, underperforming both bike lanes and no treatment on injury reduction.(opens in new tab)

Suggest changes to this page (opens in new tab) · Text-only version · Last updated September 26, 2026 · Share: