Bus lanes

[The Large One]

The problem as I see it is that a bike route is a huge amount of infrastructure and something that we just don't have room for in certain parts of the town. The bike is great for a single person commuting reliably and cheaply, but it does not cater for school runs, commercial freight deliveries, or holiday traffic, all three of which are huge in the city.

I'm all for giving everyone as much room as they want, and if the city were demolished and rebuilt I think there are far better ways that everything could be arranged, but given what we currently have, if putting in a cycle lane means taking out a car lane, then I can't help thinking that it is a less than optimal use of the limited road space that we have.

Cyclists can cycle on roads, but cars can't go on cycle lanes, so the cycle lanes are essentially a luxury. What is not a luxury is the tourism industry, local commerce and education, because that's what brings in the jobs and ultimately the income for the city.

Road traffic may not be fashionable, but it is essential.

True, so when it comes to holiday routes, they're basically unaffected. The main route to the seafront (A23) has, for the most part, separate cycle lanes.

There is another point being made on here which should be challenged. Car use along Lewes Road does not make up the majority of traffic use. It was (figures from 2010) the largest group, but not the majority. 38% of journeys along Lewes Road were done by car drivers, and a further 6% by car passangers, implying that six in every seven cars is single-occupancy. Car sharing would certainly help.

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

I am 100% for efforts to make cycling in the city safer and easier. But Old Shoreham Road's cycle lane was, in my opinion a colossal waste of money which I wish they'd spent elsewhere. Some BHASVIC students use it when the weather is nice sure, but who else? Nobody working down on London Road as they have to come back up that monster of a hill. Some who work around seven dials yes. But anyone working in town won't want to cycle down there because of another giant hill. The demand just isn't there! You can say I'm wrong, but have a look at the place on a Monday morning, it's empty!

The problem they should be tackling is the flow of cyclists from the East who convene in the town centre. There are lots. Having worked in town for a few months, I can say that my journey from New Church Road to North Street was an absolute nightmare.

Church Road is hell. Cyclists running red lights, cars jumping out of turnings etc. And the seafront is fine until you get to the West Pier when it vanishes and when you get into town, when it vanishes.

 

[Gwylan]

Time the bus lanes to peak periods ie 7am 10 am 4pm 7pm as they do in London . then let the cars use the bus lanes outside of those hours

The problem with that idea is that some of the worst congestion is at weekends when the day-trippers arrive. London doesn't have that to cope with,

Bus passengers actually have to cross the cycle lane to get on a bus !!

They do in Amsterdam and Copenhagen too (and probably other places), no-one bats an eyelid.

... forcing down bus fares would encourage me to get out of my car and probably make the residents of Preston Drove happier.
..
Now I fully expect the usual suspects to claim I'm negative and Green bashing but I've not blamed the Greens directly for the current policies, it's all the parties fault.

Councils can't subsidise commercial bus routes, it's not allowed by 2000 Transport Act. The only way for fares to come down would be the arrival of a lower cost competitor. And as Big Yellow Buses found out, that's not always the easy thing to do.

I don't think it's fair to say that it's "all the parties' fault". You could say that it's an example of how party politics is being pushed aside for the greater good. In effect, Labour, Tories and the Greens have pretty much identical transport policies and that, at least, leads to stabilities.

The brutal fact is that Brighton is too full of cars. We have a car ownership that's about half the national average and that's partly due to the policies pursued by all parties. If we removed cycle and bus lanes and encouraged people to get into their cars, the traffic would be much worse (assuming national levels of car ownership). But that's not the end of it - the City plan assumes 60,000 more people within 20 years (I think). If we assume national levels of car ownership again, that's about another 40,000 cars on Brighton streets - where would they go?

So, yes, successive councils are looking to discourage car use as it's the only way to avoid gridlock in the future.

 

[Garage_Doors]

True, so when it comes to holiday routes, they're basically unaffected. The main route to the seafront (A23) has, for the most part, separate cycle lanes.

There is another point being made on here which should be challenged. Car use along Lewes Road does not make up the majority of traffic use. It was (figures from 2010) the largest group, but not the majority. 38% of journeys along Lewes Road were done by car drivers, and a further 6% by car passangers, implying that six in every seven cars is single-occupancy. Car sharing would certainly help.

When you say car use, is this specific to passenger carrying cars or been generalised as any 4 wheeled vehicles?
Is there a further breakdown as to the number of commercial vehicles, delivery vans lorries etc., as these are predominantly single occupancy due to companies not wanting to to employ two people fr deliveries therefore this will distort the figures.

 

[mikeyjh]

You don't feel feel like you're being prioritised with all the cycle lanes and cycle priority traffic lights, are you serious

All I can say is that on my commute from SBS to Edward ST, the cycle path from Hove lawns to West Pier is fine, but getting to it at either end isn't much fun. Add the fact there is a diversion to nowhere halfway along the cycle path....

 

[The Large One]

Have to agree that the OSR scheme is one of the most bizarre bits of road engineering I've ever seen. It's dangerous for everyone. Cyclists are at risk on the east bound side. Traffic comes to a complete stand still when people wish to turn right when going west bound and the risk of collision when entering from the south side has gone up incredibly. Bus passengers actually have to cross the cycle lane to get on a bus !!!

Congestion is now so bad on that stretch of the road I avoid it in the mornings and use residential rats runs - I'm sure that isn't what the Tories intended when they planned it but it's a result of the poor engineering.

You do realise that the road was always single lane - never dual lane? So that hasn't changed. You've also overlooked Lord Bassford's post on page one. The Tories didn't plan it, the engineers did. The Tories (by which you mean the whole council) generally go along with the recommendations, because no councillors are, say, qualified civil engineers or town planners.

I don't necessarily favour the car but a balance has to be struck. The idea seems to be to make things so bad for car drivers that they are forced out of their cars. I'd rather they improved the transport system for all modes of travel. For example, many of the traffic lights are badly phased - a proper review needs to be undertaken to try and get traffic moving rather than the constant stop start. Some changes have produced a stupid amount of congestion when the road worked perfectly well before - a prime example is the junction of Sackville and OSR going south. It always worked well having two lanes going south and then merging the other side. Now they have made the left hand lane left turn only the traffic backs up to Waitrose - nice bit of extra pollution for the people living in the area.

No-one is forcing anyone out of their car. If you want to use it, use it. However, it also complaining about the traffic when you're part of the traffic. What the notion of sustainable transport is is that individuals need to re-consider their mode of transport. As someone put earlier, the increase in the population (nearly 10% since 2001) only means an increased in road traffic. The additional use of cars only increases the problem.

We have a great bus service and one I sometimes use for work ( I walk, drive or bus it ). I would use the bus every day but it is extremely expensive even with a yearly pass. I often park in Preston Drove and walk in and the little bit of petrol that costs me is far less than it would on the bus. So forcing down bus fares would encourage me to get out of my car and probably make the residents of Preston Drove happier.

As you know, prices have nothing to do with the council. Not only do they have no control over it, they are not allowed to interefere.

When I walk it's frustrating the amount of clutter there is on already crowded pavements - communal bins, bike racks, unnecessary street signage, advertising boards etc - clear the pavements of crap and make walking more pleasant. What this doesn't mean is ripping up perfectly good pavements at huge cost and throwing away perfectly good paving slabs as they are doing in Edward Street.

Is that the extent of your concern? The quality of paving slabs in Edward Street?

True, some streets can be cluttered, but I'd rather have the tall green wheelie bins than rubbish sacks outside houses - a seagull's dream.

What it feels like is that the council have a huge residual income they feel they have to spend and they spend it, with the help of government grants, on grand schemes that appear to favour cyclists who are the minority. A more balanced spend would be welcome - some roads are in such a state of disrepair that it seems the council have just abandoned them ( try driving north past St Peters Church, it's like a rollercoaster ride ), use some of the residual to improve the roads themselves, it would benefit drivers and cyclists alike.

I got as far as 'huge residual income' and stopped there. There is none. They are obliged, however, to set some of the budget aside for capital projects, repairs, improvements etc.

The major projects we are talking about here don't come from this mythical 'huge residual income', they are funded wholly by government grants. They favour 'cyclists' (you actually mean sustainable transport, which includes buses, cycling and walking), because that is what the government has put money aside for. The government, except in extreme circumstances, doesn't provide money for running repairs. That has to come out of council coffers, and the council evidently prioritises holiday routes into town.

There are some streets that desparately need running repairs - Eastern Road, Elm Grove, York Place (that you've mentioned), but people then start whining when they are being repaired. No win for anyone.

 

[The Large One]

When you say car use, is this specific to passenger carrying cars or been generalised as any 4 wheeled vehicles?
Is there a further breakdown as to the number of commercial vehicles, delivery vans lorries etc., as these are predominantly single occupancy due to companies not wanting to to employ two people fr deliveries therefore this will distort the figures.

The figures from 2010, before the new layout was put in...

Car drivers - 38%
Car passangers - 6%
Bus coach - 19%
Train - 1%
Motorcycle - 1%
Bicycle - 5%
Walk - 29%
Taxi - 0%
Light goods vehicles - 1%

In terms of statistics, '0%' doesn't mean 'no-one', it means somewhere between 0 and 0.5%.

 

[mikeyjh]

Have to agree that the OSR scheme is one of the most bizarre bits of road engineering I've ever seen. It's dangerous for everyone. Cyclists are at risk on the east bound side. Traffic comes to a complete stand still when people wish to turn right when going west bound and the risk of collision when entering from the south side has gone up incredibly. Bus passengers actually have to cross the cycle lane to get on a bus !!!

Congestion is now so bad on that stretch of the road I avoid it in the mornings and use residential rats runs - I'm sure that isn't what the Tories intended when they planned it but it's a result of the poor engineering.



I don't necessarily favour the car but a balance has to be struck. The idea seems to be to make things so bad for car drivers that they are forced out of their cars. I'd rather they improved the transport system for all modes of travel. For example, many of the traffic lights are badly phased - a proper review needs to be undertaken to try and get traffic moving rather than the constant stop start. Some changes have produced a stupid amount of congestion when the road worked perfectly well before - a prime example is the junction of Sackville and OSR going south. It always worked well having two lanes going south and then merging the other side. Now they have made the left hand lane left turn only the traffic backs up to Waitrose - nice bit of extra pollution for the people living in the area.

We have a great bus service and one I sometimes use for work ( I walk, drive or bus it ). I would use the bus every day but it is extremely expensive even with a yearly pass. I often park in Preston Drove and walk in and the little bit of petrol that costs me is far less than it would on the bus. So forcing down bus fares would encourage me to get out of my car and probably make the residents of Preston Drove happier.

When I walk it's frustrating the amount of clutter there is on already crowded pavements - communal bins, bike racks, unnecessary street signage, advertising boards etc - clear the pavements of crap and make walking more pleasant. What this doesn't mean is ripping up perfectly good pavements at huge cost and throwing away perfectly good paving slabs as they are doing in Edward Street.

What it feels like is that the council have a huge residual income they feel they have to spend and they spend it, with the help of government grants, on grand schemes that appear to favour cyclists who are the minority. A more balanced spend would be welcome - some roads are in such a state of disrepair that it seems the council have just abandoned them ( try driving north past St Peters Church, it's like a rollercoaster ride ), use some of the residual to improve the roads themselves, it would benefit drivers and cyclists alike.

Now I fully expect the usual suspects to claim I'm negative and Green bashing but I've not blamed the Greens directly for the current policies, it's all the parties fault.

The key line is improving transport for all, and from where I stand the only way to do that is to improve public transport and therefore reducing the number of cars on the road. Unfortunately, this means that some individuals will need to recognise that THEY are the traffic and they'll need to change.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You do realise that the road was always single lane - never dual lane? So that hasn't changed. You've also overlooked Lord Bassford's post on page one. The Tories didn't plan it, the engineers did. The Tories (by which you mean the whole council) generally go along with the recommendations, because no councillors are, say, qualified civil engineers or town planners.

When I say 'planned' I didn't mean the technical planning I meant the planning of approving the scheme - i.e. they didn't plan that the residential streets would become rat runs.

Agreed it was never two lanes but it was wide enough for traffic to flow even when people were turning. It isn't now and it's dangerous to cyclists travelling east.

Is that the extent of your concern? The quality of paving slabs in Edward Street?

No, it's the frivolous use of money that doesn't need to be spent and the waste of re-usable materials. This is taxpayers money and tossing away re-usable materials is damaging to the environment.

The major projects we are talking about here don't come from this mythical 'huge residual income', they are funded wholly by government grants.

Wrong - this scheme was funded by the government fund, council transport budget and section 106 payments.

 

[£1.99]

This is what will happen in the future in Brighton and at what cost, the traffic along Lewes Road will not get better only worse as I can see and the people to suffer are people are people going to work, school runs and commercial vehicles. I drop the wife at the station at 7.20am then drive down to Lewes Road park up wait twenty minutes then take the daughter into before school club at 8 then jump back in the car and have to be in Lancing at 8.30 for work. On the way home I finish at 5.30 and have to pick the daughter up before 6pm then picj the wife up at 6.20pm from the station and then home to Hartington Road.... The traffic and is horrendous and I have only just started this and think I may have to find a new job due to the traffic... We have to do this to survive as we could not survive on one wage. I am starting to think the bus lanes and cycle lanes are hindering the flow of traffic not helping and you can not ignore the motorist and then slap 20mph speed limits up everywhere........... aaarrrrggghhh

Rant over

Blimey! must be a nightmare!

 

[Gwylan]

Blimey! must be a nightmare!

I was thinking the opposite. To travel 11 to 12 miles in rush hour traffic in half an hour or less is an average speed of about 25 miles an hour, that's scarcely crawling along. Last week I was on a bus in London that travelled the grand total of two miles in about 35 minutes ... that's horrendous traffic

 

[ditchy]

The problem with that idea is that some of the worst congestion is at weekends when the day-trippers arrive. London doesn't have that to cope with,

I think you find that they do and we are creating the problem at weekends by restricting the flow into the city by narrowing the main artery . Why does there have to be a bus lane operating 24/7 . As previous posters have said i think sharing is the key rather than banning /excluding one set of traffic mode or the other .

 

[Insel affe]

I was thinking the opposite. To travel 11 to 12 miles in rush hour traffic in half an hour or less is an average speed of about 25 miles an hour, that's scarcely crawling along. Last week I was on a bus in London that travelled the grand total of two miles in about 35 minutes ... that's horrendous traffic

This half an hour to travel does include finding a parking spot near the school then run to the school to collect her before 6pm, so knock off maybe 7mins which leaves 23 mins to leave Lancing que at the Roundabout to get on A27 then shoot along at break neck speed come off at A23 and shoot down the back roads Vale Avenue way Patcham up through Cordon down past Preston Park and round Preston Circus then Upper Lewes Road cut through Caledonia Road then across the Lewes Road into Franklin and find somewhere to park pick the brat up and then off to the station. Homeward Journey the worst. You try it.... No choice as no friends or family down here and we both need to work.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

This half an hour to travel does include finding a parking spot near the school then run to the school to collect her before 6pm, so knock off maybe 7mins which leaves 23 mins to leave Lancing que at the Roundabout to get on A27 then shoot along at break neck speed come off at A23 and shoot down the back roads Vale Avenue way Patcham up through Cordon down past Preston Park and round Preston Circus then Upper Lewes Road cut through Caledonia Road then across the Lewes Road into Franklin and find somewhere to park pick the brat up and then off to the station. Homeward Journey the worst. You try it.... No choice as no friends or family down here and we both need to work.

There are better rat runs than that available, Shirley? Have you not considered an option that would take you through Five Ways?

It's an interesting idea, though ... let's identify a range of individual circumstances and reshape transport strategy to suit those users of the system.

 

[mikeyjh]

There are better rat runs than that available, Shirley? Have you not considered an option that would take you through Five Ways?

It's an interesting idea, though ... let's identify a range of individual circumstances and reshape transport strategy to suit those users of the system.

We could also come up with some other crazy ideas like kids going to a local school, or getting a house near where you work, that sort of radical thinking.......

 

[Gwylan]

I think you find that they do

That's just not true. I lived in London for 20 years and there's much, much less traffic in central London than there is at the weekend. I still remember having to get to Stevenage for a football match by 9.30 and taking less than hour from central London - it would take two to three hours at a weekend. Try driving round the City on a Sunday, the streets are nearly deserted

and we are creating the problem at weekends by restricting the flow into the city by narrowing the main artery .

And that's not true either. There were plenty of tailbacks on summer Sundays before the traffic lanes came into operation.

As previous posters have said i think sharing is the key rather than banning /excluding one set of traffic mode or the other .

This I do agree with - it's crazy that 85% of traffic along Lewes Road is single occupancy. The question is, how do you stop it? There are only two ways: a congestion charge in town or a register of car sharers. Maybe, if you're prepared to give lifts then you get some form of tax relief, perhaps exemption from VED. But there would need to be an apparatus to monitor it.

 

[The Large One]

No, it's the frivolous use of money that doesn't need to be spent and the waste of re-usable materials. This is taxpayers money and tossing away re-usable materials is damaging to the environment.

Improving the area for bus, cycle and general safety is a 'frivolous use of money'? How do you know the materials aren't going to be re-used? Have you checked with the contractors?

If you're talking about the old decrepit paving and tarmac that there was along Edward Street and Eastern Road (which is also being done), you'll know it certainly needed doing.

Besides, you were arguing the opposite case in your earlier post. You were saying that London Road needed improving. Wouldn't that be the same frivolous use of money - because the scenarios are very similar?

 

[Insel affe]

We could also come up with some other crazy ideas like kids going to a local school, or getting a house near where you work, that sort of radical thinking.......

Oh yeah find me a job locally and the wife that pays what the same or slightly less then please would love that. She does go to the closest school so that's not an issue, trouble is me and wife go out of our way like most to earn a living and not take from the state and to do it we jump through hoops and then rush around like mad feckers just to get by.... Maybe I should quit my job, and sponge off the state that seems more acceptable to some than moaning about traffic and bus/ cycle lanes and 20mph speed limits where they simply are not needed.

 

[surrey jim]

This I do agree with - it's crazy that 85% of traffic along Lewes Road is single occupancy. The question is, how do you stop it? There are only two ways: a congestion charge in town or a register of car sharers. Maybe, if you're prepared to give lifts then you get some form of tax relief, perhaps exemption from VED. But there would need to be an apparatus to monitor it.

Or a P&R towards the edge of town. What is the Bridge car park used for on week days? Could the club make a few quid and let people park there during the day with a bus into Old Steine at say half hour intervals?

 

[surrey jim]

As you know, prices have nothing to do with the council. Not only do they have no control over it, they are not allowed to interefere.

Councils can't subsidise commercial bus routes, it's not allowed by 2000 Transport Act. The only way for fares to come down would be the arrival of a lower cost competitor. And as Big Yellow Buses found out, that's not always the easy thing to do.

In London part of the council tax is used to subsidise the public transport. Why is that in London only and not other towns/ cities? I wouldnt mind paying an extra bit in council tax per month if it meant cheaper travel.

Ref the Bus charges there is a massive disconnect in price vs distance traveled. Example being a colleague of mine sometimes gets the bus into work from Eastbourne [to Brighton] at a cost of £5.20 - this is good value. - For myself getting a bus in from Bevendean to the city centre is £4.70, very expensive.

*the above prices assumes tickets purchased from driver. - can be slightly lower with a key card.