-
Shared non-designated space generally works in making people slow down and take more care..
Or those with the most power - in this case goons on bikes - bully the others, the pedestrians.
I don't buy the shared space hubris - it ignores two key things. One, people are trying to get somewhere, and purposefully limiting their efficiency in doing this seems silly, and two, as above, the powerful dominate those with most to lose, the peds.
It scares the shit out of people who can't see well, too.
Howard-
But.. it does actually work? The vulnerable generally feel more vulnerable at first. but the actual data usually shows that they are less vulnerable under shared space.. at least in the long term as behaviours change. Then again, there's some data out there relating to cars, about the confidence of the vulnerable user shifting as the volume of cars increases. Below a certain level, pedestrians held their ground and cars remained nervous, but over the threshold, cars became overconfident and bullied peds back to old habits at the side of the road.
I agree with you on the blind thing, which is also an issue with CC's and cycle infra outside of hospitals, etc.
Purposefully limiting people's ability to get somewhere dangerously is ok in my book. You can still get there, just more carefully. Sure, it's irritating if you're trying to get there fast, but too bad! Leave earlier! /MH chat
Beyond putting an actually segregated cycle lane in the park (park veto'd) or putting some infra on park lane (ridiculously expensive and TFL veto'd).. I'm not sure what else could be done.
If you put better (read: faster) infra in the park, cyclists will continue to storm it, and pedestrians will still walk into it taking selfies. The problem won't get solved.
Kidneys
I don't know. Shared non-designated space generally works in making people slow down and take more care.. it might be scary, but so are Copenhagen crossings, etc. Of course, there will still be risks, and a period of adjustment..