Delaware removes “Share the Road” signs that caused conusion

It’s a somewhat hollow victory, as the takeaway is that motorists feel that bikes can use the full lane where there is a sign. The real problem is driver education, and signage can’t fix that.

Maybe every city should pick one really awful road, like North Capitol or something like that, and put up giant “NO BICYCLES” signs.

@scoot 124035 wrote:

I’m not a huge fan of the “Bicycle May Use Full Lane” signs for precisely this reason. Bicycles are allowed full use of a lane just about anywhere, so the sign has no legal significance.

As I read the article I was trying to think of what a sign might read that would be helpful. Outside of GWMP and interstates, bikes are allowed most everywhere, so whatever sign is used would apply almost everywhere else, also. That then creates the potential problem that drivers assume whatever the sign reads applies to that location but not elsewhere. I think that’s the crux of the problem.

One thought that came to mind was “Allow 3 feet or more when passing person on bike.” It’s a good reminder, but would drivers assume it’s malleable depending on location?

Perhaps “Allow 3 feet or more when passing person on bike (MD State Law)” [or VA or DC] That last part might serve to enhance realization that it applies everywhere.

Of course, it says nothing about where on the road the person riding the bike may ride, so drivers could still get angry that the bicyclist is taking the lane. At least they’d be reminded that they can’t buzz them as they try to pass, though.

@Steve O 124038 wrote:

One thought that came to mind was “Allow 3 feet or more when passing person on bike.” It’s a good reminder, but would drivers assume it’s malleable depending on location?

Would they think 3 ft on some roads, and 2 ft on others? No, I don’t think so. This sounds like as good a solution in terms of signage as any. Though I would hope someone who sees “bikes may take full lane” on a 40MPH road, does not conclude they need to stay to the right on 25MPH streets with narrower lane widths.

But the evidence of my FB feed suggests people believe all kinds of illogical things.

I agree that driver education is the problem, but I see, “bike may use the full lane” as part of the education program. I think that a couple of those on the busier (you’re gonna laugh) streets of Reston would be very helpful and significantly reduce the harassment that I get (from only a little, to none). Then keep putting those signs up on as many streets as needed until drivers just assume that there’s one on every street.

You know, I’m glad this came up. I was riding into work one morning in a pre-caffinated state and when I saw a “Share the Road” sign on L where the bike lane starts at 25th NW, I started asking the question I’d never asked before: who are they talking to? What if the car think I need to share with them? 😮 It really shows that its easy to make assumptions about interpretation….

@dasgeh 124052 wrote:

What about “Heavily used bike route”? It gets the point across that motorists should keep an eye out, but the negative inference on other routes is not harmful.

I would love to see signs saying “Expect [walking person] and [bicycle symbol] in crosswalk” on the ramp leading to the intersection of doom.

I love both of these ideas! I think they strike the right message of “here be bicycles/peds” without making it wound like an isolated bike zone.