A recent upping of the volume for the informational (as distinct from regulatory) markings at the large shared crossing, result in no noticeable effect on behaviour of users. The second rank of text and symbols further from the kerb simply duplicate the existing and minimally effective message.
Complete with a regular commuting cyclist ignoring it all and choosing to keep to the left of the wide shared path, rather than try and merge across the oncoming flow to get to the bicycle lane and then merge back across to the left after the separated crossing. When operating as designed the pedestrians flood the pedestrian crossing as normal and fluidly pass though each other at slow speed, while bicycles form a much higher speed single file in the narrower lanes.
When paint isn’t solving the problem, adding more of the same treatment probably won’t help and here is the predictable end result despite adding a louder horn to the mix:
More of the same. Pulling a still grab from the rapid video you can see the pedestrians walking into and through cyclists trying to use the lanes.
The guides recognise the problems of mixing modalities and suggest this specific treatment with a green bicycle lane alongside a conventional pedestrian crossing:
Where pedestrian and cyclist demands are both heavy there is a tendency for pedestrians to move to the front and block the progress of cyclists using the crossing. In such cases consideration should be given to segregating cyclists and pedestrians as shown…
But somehow pedestrians are instead drawn to the bicycle lanes. Other areas of Melbourne have tried using a yellow surface colour to delineate pedestrian crossings, and this remains one of the few suggestions so far that might mitigate the problems by visually showing an alternative space for pedestrians to use.