I'm supposed to know what a sharrow is. It's a bike safety pictogram, but my first response was to wish the pictogram user had employed words since hieroglyphics don’t speak to me.

So what does this new pictogram– about 75 yards east of the transit center– mean? Does it mean there is a corporal on a bicycle nearby? Or that this is where the motorized vehicles flatten bicycles?

My guess was right, that there wasn't enough room for a bike lane, so motorists should be alert for bikes taking advantage of their right to use the full vehicular travel lane.
Commentator Bill Emory puts up a new photo nearly every day at


Sharrow ? Even in the city where more people read books than any other, my guess is, this will confuse more than inform.

Only bike's with roofs allowed?

100% of bike safety is the responsibility of the bicyclist. C. Y. A.

It is, in effect, a "Share the road" sign. Scarcely worth the trouble.

Its a Mario Kart speed burst for bikes

"You must bounce twice to bunny hop?" Nahh Turn it upside down it's Tweety Bird. And you have to be a bird brain to share the road with the drivers around here, bike lane or common lane.

They can paint all the pictures on the streets they want, Darwin rules.

I would consider all the previous statements regarding sharrows as ignorant of the law and common decency. But then those who wrote those posts say "ignert" because evolutionary thought has not touched them and probably never will.

It would be more effective if there a rider on the bike...

Or better still a sign of a bike getting run over and a rider flying thru the air so that cyclists can understand the need to watch out for those 2000 lb machines filled with blind spots and imperfect people. (in a hurry)

A sharrow is supposed to indicate that a cyclist may use the full lane. The sharrows on Water Street are problematic, because their shape implies that the cyclist should position him or herself over them, which is still too near the door zone.

A cyclist on Water Street, and any other street that has a lane that is too narrow to share, may use the full lane to discourage "shooting the gap." I generally position myself in the left tire track, but use your own judgment.

The one on Maury, just north of JPA is comical, since it basically points to the rear of parked vehicles.

It looks like the tootsie pop owl is eating his mortarboard.

I would respect the bike riders if they respected the traffic laws. It is common to see them ride through red lights, stop signs, and up onto sidewalks. Let's put some signs up to remind them to obey the rules of riding in the road.

I would respect drivers if the respected the traffic laws. It is common to see them drive through red lights, stops signs, and into bike lanes. Let's put some signs up to remind them to obey the rules of driving in the road.

Hey cyclist, how much in taxes do you pay to the highway. No more than me so get off my asphalt and obey the law yourself


The roads are a public resource; they don't belong to anyone, certainly not you.

But if you want to play that game, given the amount of income taxes, property taxes, and even gas taxes when they do drive, cyclists pay plenty for roads. Statistically, I pay more to care for roads than the median Virginian -- does that give me more priority than others?

On top of that, cyclists put zero wear and tear on the road, don't spew pollutants, and don't take up any parking.

"you park on a driveway and drive on a parkway......' go figure.

Some motorists and some cyclists just don't get it. A roadway is a shared space; the construction and maintenance of that roadway is a shared expense. Share and share alike. Get off your soapboxes in your personal sandboxes, and start behaving like you belong in a community with others. If you didn't learn that in kindergarten, it's time you did.

Get real DID. Your not living in a world were most drivers are not rational, be it on a bicycle or behind the wheel. Trying to make what once were nothing more than wagon tracks into a thruway for cars AND bicycles defies the laws of logic knowing what we know about people. If you want to put your derriere on the line and trust in ALL drivers doing the right thing ,fine. But remember, when your time comes, and it will, I said I told you so.

sez you, thanks for those soothing, reassuring words. Your kindness, thoughtfulness overwhelm me. Welcome to the community.

Statistically speaking, sez you, cycling is not really a whole lot more dangerous than driving, especially if one is reasonably alert (lights at night, properly positioned in the lane, signals, etc.), so there's really no need for the "I told you so" bit. Unfortunately we've become such a bubble-wrap society that more and more people are eating up your fear-mongering.

To Messers Did and Peddler,
I take no position on ones rights, or wrongs, when it comes to bicycling on public streets or county roads. My point is only these byways were not designed to accommodate all the traffic we see today. When you through bicycles into the mix the chances for fatalities and major injuries become incidental. Its not if but when. The driving habits I see today are deplorable, add in cell phones, well, you get the point. Me personally? not on your life.

My point is that your fears are not warranted by statistics. Cycling can be quite reasonably safe -- even when the car drivers aren't. I mean, if you're that worried about the state of driving today (which _is_ kind of pathetic), then you really ought not to get out on the interstate, or worse, two-lane highways like 250 and 20. Those are real killers.

I don't say this to argue with you, but because I don't think irrational fear should hold people back.

I _do_ agree with you, however, that the streets _could_ be made safer, but few have the will to commit funds to it. The roads in the county are grossly underrated for the traffic they see, which is why when people complain to me about bikes being in their way, I always suggest they contact their council members about widening the roads and building bikeways.

When cyclists start having to register their bikes, pass a written and riding test, then they can start squawking about bad drivers. Last month I almost had a bad accident on Garth Rd because 4 bikers decided to yet again, ignore the law, and not ride in tandem. They rode in a staggered pattern, and one decided to pull right in front of me to pass his buddy, forcing me to swerve all the way into the opposite lane to avoid hitting him.

I am going to start mounting a camera so that I can film this stuff. When you guys have license plates, I can then send the footage into the cops should you cause an accident and I will sue you to the nth degree.

Aren't traffic signals derived from train signals? Cars should be upset to be held to train standards and rally for more traffic circles where you don't actually have to, gasp, stop! So now these silly bike symbols are trying to get bikes to conform to road patterns that have their origins with trains. Sheesh! I'm a cyclist and say let bikes ride anywhere they want and run red lights when safe--the risk of damage to others is minimal. And if you run a red light and are hit by a bus that's on you! I'm tired of being shackled by train signals--I can stop my bike on a dime, cars can stop more on like a CD, and trains can stop on say the circle in the middle of a baskeball court. There ain't no trains on the road, man.

Without defending the cyclist, since I've seen my share of bonehead moves, I have to ask: why weren't you already in the other lane to pass them? Garth Road is a prime example of a County road in need of upgrading; it's pretty much impossible to pass a cyclist safely without crossing into the other lane, so why not move all the way over?

I'm a firm believer in not tempting fate. True, the stats dictate that I might be safer but that guy that got killed on 4th and Main last year sealed the deal for me.