-
You mean Lord Holmes' report? That was mainly about safety perception and experience, not actual danger. Given that all the safety apparatus we have become accustomed to is missing under shared space, I didn't find it surprising that people were concerned. But the actual danger posed to the vulnerable was never really quantified; the only results left were those of reported incidents, which actually took a nosedive.
Whether this was because of a tendency not to report incidents under shared space or not, I have no idea.
The same trend, perceived danger vs incidents reported, happened with Kensington high street, and also exhibition road (of which I'm not a fan). Albeit during a period when reported incidents across the city were also in decline (but not by as much).
The problem with SS, to me, is that it needs bedding in before it can be assessed, and it needs to be considered as part of the network it's installed in. We can only wait and see if a balance can be struck with the scheme they're putting in here. (Although they need to fix those fucking entrances)
TFL won't do anything that even slightly jeopardises bus times. Buses are king. Especially if RP can deal with it instead.
You are reading a single comment by @Kidneys and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Kidneys
I looked for data on this stuff a while back because, IIRC, central gov. was trying to stop LAs from building further shared space infrastructure. There was a report that came out from someone heavily involved in a disability charity that basically rubbished shared space in the UK. I think.
So if you have good data, I'd like to see it, because I'd like to believe :)
TFL and the RP need to get their act together and get the cycle lane out of the park and on to Park Lane. I think RP has demonstrated the demand is there. They just need to keep plugging away at it.