"Like playing Russian roulette": Blind people raise concerns about 'floating' cycle lane bus stops

You beat me to it.  I had thought that this design had come over the Channel too, so presumably there is a lot of data from there to explain how to establish and use floating bus stops safely...?

I don't know but there's a BicycleDutch article and video on bus stops which is worth a watch, which shows that:

a) They should have the usual tactiles to guide people to them across other spaces (e.g. cycle paths).
b) They don't normally visually mark crossing points on the actual cycle track (e.g. with painted zebras) as an additional alert for cyclists.  Note the Dutch do mark this in some other places  Arguable either way but this is very different from the UK where the few examples I've seen go wild with markings because *CYCLISTS!  BEWARE!  THERE ARE CYCLISTS HERE!*

How this works in practice?  Presumably it's not much different than crossing any other space e.g. a non-signalised crossing of road or cycle track elsewhere.  I don't think there are many if any signalised crossings of cycle paths and in NL it's likely you'll need to cross these quite regularly.  From here, the rules for the disabled regarding crossing roads are (or were in 2017 - Dutch Road Law 2.19 Pedestrians Article 49):

1 Drivers must give priority at all times to blind or partially sighted pedestrians carrying a white cane with one or a number of red rings around it and also to all other persons with disabilities.

2 Drivers must give way at all times to pedestrians and drivers of invalid carriages who are crossing, or obviously waiting to cross at a pedestrian crossing.

So it sounds like it's not that different to the UK's "just step out and the drivers will stop" but maybe a little more clear what's expected?

From the UK perspective the Ranty Highwayman has some thoughtful information on bus stop / cycle path designs.

For a different perspective there is a negative comment from a Dutch person with visual imparment in the following article (note - coming from the US - in my experience visiting Americans are often incredulous about the number of cyclists and the lack of regulation):

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-27/easing-tension-betwee...

maybe the difference is they simply train their guide dogs a bit differently.

I think the majority of riders are smart enough to cope with giving blind people extra space and time, for sure there are those that wont, but we dont build infra on the basis of the few who arent capable of self control.

Im not sure Id even use one of these as a route if there was a bus picking up or offloading passengers.

They will - but it's not just that.  It may even be that we can improve on what we've got in NL for the blind and visually impared.  However - as alluded to with the mention of the RNIB not having any figures on "deaths by cyclist" I suspect it's not really an "issue" there either.

The chap interviewed - I have sympathy because "change" and it's hardest for him.  However there's still a part of me thinking "and you're happy navigating the rest of the environment - on and off public transport, presumably across roads - but you're worried about *cyclists*?!"

If we have mass cycling - like in NL - then there will be the usual human percentage of people who're intoxicated, distracted or reckless - cycling.  Mostly travelling less than 15mph.

In the UK we don't have mass cycling so these people will often be in a car.  Mostly travelling more than 20mph.  The children and some of the disabled will have to get someone to drive them.

I prefer the first picture.

Not sure why you feel you wouldn't use the route if buses were loading/unloading?  Maybe it's the vision of how it could be in the UK with a massive stream of passengers looking at the cyclist in horror or disapproval and you having to stop?  Again, don't know but I suspect in NL you slow, there's a moment of eye contact, someone pauses for a couple of seconds and you've cycled past and they're crossing behind you.

Because the UK doesnt have a mass cycling culture and consequently pedestrians rarely have cyclists top of their mind.

I notice it all the time on shared infra and even on the road, you're treated as the odd exception and most pedestrians cant handle the exception

I've seen it even with a separated cycle path passing a bus stop that has a wide pavement in between, they all get off the bus and most wander straight across into the cycle lane even though it means stepping over a ankle high barrier, to which if you are approaching you ring a bell or shout, and they look totally shocked to see you.

The thought of passing a bus with passengers piling out where I'm cycling much closer. I'd take my chances on the road.

True - like any change, all the people living through it are guinea-pigs / crash-test dummies.  I've had that confrontation moment where I found myself pointing at the "shared use" sign right next to us - of course by then it's not helping anyone...

Fortunately if changing from more cars to more cycling the amount of harm is likely to be much less than the change we have already gone through (from cycling and no cars to cars and almost no cycling).  I believe the longer-term effects will be hugely positive.

Some of this is due to things we almost certainly could have avoided.  The obvious one is "sign a cycle facility into existence" with "shared use" on already narrow footways - leading to much confusion, conflict and resentment.  Many places do not properly mark pedestrian and cycling areas where they are separate.  There's also zero standardisation across the UK - imagine if we had different road designs, widths, markings and signage all over the place.  Trivial example: where it's even marked there are at least 3 widely-used colours for cycle paths - blue, green and red.  These are also used in different places for "walkway"...

They are near the top of their mind, except that in their mind the cyclist has horns and glowing eyes an£ speaks like Hannibal Lecter...

I encountered a pedestrian on a shared path yesterday, seemed to be meandering about and could tell they werent looking out for or expecting cyclists in anyway, so I rang my bell just as a hello heads up you might want to be aware Im approaching, and they just stopped turned round and simply stared at me like that last scene out of the body snatchers,  I dont know if they were tripping out on drugs or my front light was causing them depth perception issues or something else, but  I virtually had to then stop right in front of them because they just werent going to move out of the cycle lane, and I couldnt move sooner in case they suddenly did then move into my path, and I was left kind of then to go around them like a roundabout, and they didnt say a single damn word

I guess the short of it is:
a) disabled people already have a raw deal
b) they are often disproportionately affected by changes
c) they may have by necessity invested a lot of effort into learning how to work with the current system
d) ...so they're rightly concerned.

As someone who isn't disabled it's easy to dismiss this because I feel that moving some people from driving to cycling will reduce both risk and lessen consequences of accidents.  I'm also persuaded that good quality cycling infra facilitates independent mobility for many (disabled) people.  However we should take these concerns seriously and listen to them when they come from those affected.  That doesn't mean there isn't also bogus "selective concern" of those who merely wish to preserve the status quo.

I should have written "someone who isn't disabled yet" - as a bumper sticker read: "Please be considerate.  We're not exclusive - disability is a club anyone can join."