Originally Posted by
livedarklions
I disagree a bit here. I don't see much point for them on low traffic streets.
Anyhow, I'll strongly disagree.
Turn around on
SE Ankeny Street. It's a bike boulevard. The diversions serve many purposes, including anti-Wazing the street so it remains low traffic. Permitting bikes through the diversions makes it a WONDERFUL low stress bike route.
(I prefer how Vancouver handles a similar street at the Haro Street bike boulevard, with
bike stencils at intersections but not mid-block and
HARO BIKE signs mid-block.)
To give you an idea where you used to ride where they would be REALLY useful think Constance, Laurel, and Camp in NOLA, which parallel Magazine. Turning those into bike boulevards would be impressive. (Of course,
REPAVING them would be even more impressive.)
(Irony. Enountered a salmon on Constance Street who went two blocks the wrong way. In a Volvo SUV.)
But to clearly understand where sharrows do not belong. Take a street. Are there ANY traffic control devices on that street? (Lines down the middle of the street? Yield signs? Stop signs? Stop lights?) No. Then clearly traffic control devices clearly aren't needed for that street - so sharrows are also clearly not needed on that street.
-mr. bill