We're not meant to ride where the sharrow markings are painted. They're merely an indication that this road is part of a bicycle route. At least, that is my understanding.
To assist cyclists 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;
I dont ride over the top of the signs all the time but LATERAL POSITIONING is fairly clear.
Well that's just bizarre. Take a look at Equal2Lance's post of Cromer Parade on the last page - the sharrow's practically in the middle of the road. Why on earth would anyone ride there instead of "as left as practical"?
I'll add that I've only seen them on quiet roads where I've never had problems with cars anyway.
its probably hard to see on the pic but the arrow is pointing right not straight, so it's telling cyclists (and cars) that riders will be moving to the center of the road and then entering the bike lane on the right.
I thought that the blue cycle route signs on poles already indicated that purpose. The sharrows are then a request for car drivers to play nicely, which some refuse to do.
that's a very posh way to say the road is too narrow for 2 side by side. In Belgium, road markings like these would be across bike paths, so my guess would to ride over the middle of the road, so yeah riding where the markings are painted. Both as cyclist and car driver I can clearly see the road is too narrow for both of us.
So as a cyclist I'd be in the middle anyway (even without markings), continuing over the middle of the roundabout cutting across the middle/right and then over to the left side of the opposite road, or moving back to the middle of the roundabout if going right, to end up left side of the 3rd exit.
As car driver, coming up behind a cyclist there is no way I would move in next to the cyclist, staying behind them until they've exited the roundabout, whether going straight ahead to the opposite road, or turning right to the 3rd exit.