[Brighton] New cycle lane a259 Brighton

[Robot Chicken]

It's an utter calamity. Journeys across town are a disaster.

Get this damned incompetent Green council OUT.

 

[Stat Brother]

Have a look at Amsterdam on Google maps, and work out for yourself how their infrastructure can support both cars and bikes so effectively.

If we demolished Brighton and started again, we could do it just like them, we really could.

Easier to demolish the small minded selfish simpletons who have had a stranglehold on this countries transport infrastructure for the last 50+ years.

 

[Official Old Man]

My dreaded cycle lane I've been shouting about for weeks and no body listened back then.
I had a long (over one hour) talk, chat, argument with the designer of this cycle lane. Basics being get rid of cars, don't need them, put cycle lanes everywhere. I reckon even #StatBrother would have smacked him in the mouth in the end.
In case you forget, I own two souvenir shops on Kings Road and see all day every day the traffic chaos.
I put forward to him every side of the argument to this cycle lane, even admitting it was needed in a small way and yet Kings Road needs four lanes of traffic. First up was the emergency services. The road is blocked most of the day and emergency vehicles push their way through. His reply, emergency vehicles use the cycle lane. Yes, unbelievably he said emergency vehicles traveling 'against the flow of cycles'. I asked again and he stated emergency vehicles will travel towards the pier going against the flow. At that point I realised he may be brain dead but he was serious. Two lanes of traffic down to one. His argument, take away the road and people wont use it. I pointed out the cars belonged to both locals and tourists (we were stood by the road at the time). Not his problem. I pointed out how, having only one lane will cause tail backs all the way down to the pier and beyond. Same reply, no it wont. I then moved on to the touchy subject of cyclists not stopping at lights. At the time we were stood next to the pedestrian lights that cyclists must, by law, stop at. I stupidly said how cyclists will just continue fast through red lights likely mowing down children crossing. Not his problem. Wait up, yes it is his problem. At that exact time a cyclist lost from La Tour in full Lycra shot past on the path ringing his bell. There is clearly a give way sign on the cyclepath which he ignored. Very close call. Next up, and this gets technical, the junction with West Street. West bound now has one lane but for about 75 metres it reverts to two lanes leading up to West St. Right lane turns right, left lane goes straight on. Queues going right always stretch back beyond the 75 metre mark thus cars going straight on will be stuck waiting to get past the right turning cars. He could not see this, brain dead. Did I mention there will be small bollards placed along the solid white line now in place. Cars may still get through a gap to get out of the way but this is illegal as he pointed out. Yes, in one sentance he said cars could get around the West St queue by using the cycle lane but, he added, this is illegal. 100% brain dead.
As I say, one hour of chat but at no time would he admit to any queues or accidents in the making, only that it is good for cyclists, good for the town and take away a road and people will stop using it.
ps coming home today, Friday, at 13:00 queue went all the way back to the Level on both the A270 and A23 and it was a quiet day.

 

[BN41Albion]

Yes, the issue is that it is a key route in a populous city.

You've contradicted yourself. You say locals know otherwise, but that it is a key route in the city. Its bloody difficult getting across town from Kemptown side of town other than using that route.

As I said before, imo it's ludicrous to make traveling across town by car even more difficult before providing an efficient public transport network from east to west (which would, obviously, be a massive job)

Cylcing just isn't an alternative for many people, removing road lanes is ridiculous

 

[BN41Albion]

My dreaded cycle lane I've been shouting about for weeks and no body listened back then.
I had a long (over one hour) talk, chat, argument with the designer of this cycle lane. Basics being get rid of cars, don't need them, put cycle lanes everywhere. I reckon even #StatBrother would have smacked him in the mouth in the end.
In case you forget, I own two souvenir shops on Kings Road and see all day every day the traffic chaos.
I put forward to him every side of the argument to this cycle lane, even admitting it was needed in a small way and yet Kings Road needs four lanes of traffic. First up was the emergency services. The road is blocked most of the day and emergency vehicles push their way through. His reply, emergency vehicles use the cycle lane. Yes, unbelievably he said emergency vehicles traveling 'against the flow of cycles'. I asked again and he stated emergency vehicles will travel towards the pier going against the flow. At that point I realised he may be brain dead but he was serious. Two lanes of traffic down to one. His argument, take away the road and people wont use it. I pointed out the cars belonged to both locals and tourists (we were stood by the road at the time). Not his problem. I pointed out how, having only one lane will cause tail backs all the way down to the pier and beyond. Same reply, no it wont. I then moved on to the touchy subject of cyclists not stopping at lights. At the time we were stood next to the pedestrian lights that cyclists must, by law, stop at. I stupidly said how cyclists will just continue fast through red lights likely mowing down children crossing. Not his problem. Wait up, yes it is his problem. At that exact time a cyclist lost from La Tour in full Lycra shot past on the path ringing his bell. There is clearly a give way sign on the cyclepath which he ignored. Very close call. Next up, and this gets technical, the junction with West Street. West bound now has one lane but for about 75 metres it reverts to two lanes leading up to West St. Right lane turns right, left lane goes straight on. Queues going right always stretch back beyond the 75 metre mark thus cars going straight on will be stuck waiting to get past the right turning cars. He could not see this, brain dead. Did I mention there will be small bollards placed along the solid white line now in place. Cars may still get through a gap to get out of the way but this is illegal as he pointed out. Yes, in one sentance he said cars could get around the West St queue by using the cycle lane but, he added, this is illegal. 100% brain dead.
As I say, one hour of chat but at no time would he admit to any queues or accidents in the making, only that it is good for cyclists, good for the town and take away a road and people will stop using it.
ps coming home today, Friday, at 13:00 queue went all the way back to the Level on both the A270 and A23 and it was a quiet day.

That's hugely depressing. But hats off to you for arguing your point. It's going to be a nightmare

 

[Stat Brother]

That's hugely depressing. But hats off to you for arguing your point. It's going to be a nightmare

Only for lazy car drivers, so nothing to worry about really.

 

[Gwylan]

It's an utter calamity. Journeys across town are a disaster.

Get this damned incompetent Green council OUT.

It's not a Green council - the leader's Green but they're nowhere near a majority (they have 19 out of 54 councillors). Every policy put forward has the support of at least one other party (and often two)

 

[BN41Albion]

Only for lazy car drivers, so nothing to worry about really.

Give it a rest, if there was a decent public transport system in the city from east to west I would use it. There isn't. I walk everywhere when I can, I can't for work, and cycling isn't possible either.

 

[Stat Brother]

Give it a rest, if there was a decent public transport system in the city from east to west I would use it. There isn't. I walk everywhere when I can, I can't for work, and cycling isn't possible either.

Then you are the very definition of someone who should be rejoicing at this, then holding the councils feet to the fire over public transport.



I'll not give it a rest, because it's pointless.

This is just gammons being gammons, selfishly cocooned in their little penis extension boxes sticking 2 fingers up at everybody else, as they expect the country to bow to their red faced screams.


I proved a different opinion - ignored.
I provide anecdotal evidence -ignored.
I proved scientific research - ignored.
I prove agreement to the criticism - ignored.

It's just gammon, gammon, gammon, so I might as well join in.

 

[beorhthelm]

obviously, any journey across Brighton centre is completely unnecessary. approaching from the east, turn north at the pier, up A270 Lewes rd, on to the A27, immediatly turn off for Falmer and turn around to rejoin the A27 westbound. when you get to the Dyke turning you can turn off and southward on Dyke road. take the first or second right (Dyke road itself will take you back to the centre) and navigate through the residential roads back to the A259 somewhere in Portslade, regardless if that where you want to be. those driving from west reverse the simple process.

 

[Acker79]

But in this case I do actually agree with you.

There are 2 pedestrian routes across the seafront, the massive promenade with a strict 'no cycling policy'.
&
A 'shared' path 20 yards away, next to the road.


That should be an all bells and whistles 2 way cycle path with no pedestrians, proper lanes and segregated from the road.

I'm a regular cyclist and can't understand why the council did not just double the size of the existing cycle track along Hove lawns etc. If the new cycle lane remains the same as last night I won't be using it, it looks too dangerous especially as taxis and others were parking and stopping on it.

This bike lane was announced a short while back and there is a thread about it already, where people have made this point and as I was cycling along there this morning this argument sprung to my mind, as I was approaching that little section with the boarded off area that pushes everyone into the road near the bottom of west street.

Isn't there the argument against the widening of the existing bike path on the basis of access for those less mobile? Sure, at the lawns there is the promenade on one side of the lawns allowing the pavement to be given over to a wider cycle path, but prior to the lawns if you widen the bike lane you lose the only pavement that is easily accessible to people with mobility issues. The ramps down to the lower promenade interspersed with stairs making it harder for people in wheelchairs, with push chairs, or people who find stairs difficult, to get to the alternative path that they would be forced to use if the exist pavement is given over to a cycle lane. Then there is the argument that a major part of what has spurred this on is the difficulty of social distancing on narrow bike paths - forcing pedestrians who were spread across two paths to now share one path goes against that social distancing aim (and that's before considering just how busy the lower promenade gets on good weather days).



I also saw that there are zebra crossing patterns added to the bike lanes where the new parking spaces are, and the new bike lane means westbound cyclists on the road will now encounter traffic lights. Given how few cyclists stop at the give way markings on the existing bike path, it'll be interesting to see if this leads to more cyclists stopping when they should.

 

[Garage_Doors]

The weather is great why are people driving!?

I need my tools equipment and ladder to go to work. And i need to get to peoples residences in both Brighton & Hove.

 

[upthealbion1970]

Slowly but surely tourism and cars are being driven out of the city.

It’s ok though we’ll just replace tourism with block after block after block of student accommodation.......

 

[Stat Brother]

This bike lane was announced a short while back and there is a thread about it already, where people have made this point and as I was cycling along there this morning this argument sprung to my mind, as I was approaching that little section with the boarded off area that pushes everyone into the road near the bottom of west street.

Isn't there the argument against the widening of the existing bike path on the basis of access for those less mobile? Sure, at the lawns there is the promenade on one side of the lawns allowing the pavement to be given over to a wider cycle path, but prior to the lawns if you widen the bike lane you lose the only pavement that is easily accessible to people with mobility issues. The ramps down to the lower promenade interspersed with stairs making it harder for people in wheelchairs, with push chairs, or people who find stairs difficult, to get to the alternative path that they would be forced to use if the exist pavement is given over to a cycle lane. Then there is the argument that a major part of what has spurred this on is the difficulty of social distancing on narrow bike paths - forcing pedestrians who were spread across two paths to now share one path goes against that social distancing aim (and that's before considering just how busy the lower promenade gets on good weather days).

But that's the point I think most cyclist make - don't just spend £50 on paint and signs and call it a cycle path.


It's that kind of thinking that gets to this point.
It's that kind of thinking that created the shared path fudge in the first place.
and crucially
It's that kind of thinking that upsets everybody.


Do it once - do it properly.

That should have been the motto 40 - 30 - 20 - 10 years ago.

It needs to be the motto from now on, it's not.
If it was it would still take the same amount of time to make Brighton's transportation fit for the 20th century!

 

[Garage_Doors]

Need or want?

Need.I certainly wouldn't drive unless i had to.

Do you really think that all those cars are just people out for a jolly drive for the sake of it?
Seconds thoughts your stupid enough to think they are.

 

[BN41Albion]

Then you are the very definition of someone who should be rejoicing at this, then holding the councils feet to the fire over public transport.



I'll not give it a rest, because it's pointless.

This is just gammons being gammons, selfishly cocooned in their little penis extension boxes sticking 2 fingers up at everybody else, as they expect the country to bow to their red faced screams.


I proved a different opinion - ignored.
I provide anecdotal evidence -ignored.
I proved scientific research - ignored.
I prove agreement to the criticism - ignored.

It's just gammon, gammon, gammon, so I might as well join in.

I have no idea wtf you're talking about

 

[Stat Brother]

I have no idea wtf you're talking about

That's for the best.

 

[Garage_Doors]

I have no idea wtf you're talking about

I'm not sure he does himself or anyone else for that matter. I get the feeling he just likes the sound of his own voice.best to just ignore him.

 

[South Stand Bonfire]

Don't worry I'm sure the Council will be out with the metal poles to provide a barrier as they have done on the extended Old Shoreham Road cycle highway, which about 5 cyclists seem to be using, in addition to the cyclists still using the pavement.

I’m a keen cyclist, but driving to work from Shoreham to Hove this morning ( as I had to drive for a site visit later today) , there was one cyclist using the East bound lane from the Sainsbury’s junction to Hove. If I ever cycle to work, there is no way I’d go along the OSR. I take the longer but more pleasant seafront route. The OSR cycle route is a cock up from start to finish.

 

[blue-shifted]

I like the idea of fewer cars in the city and more people cycling, who wouldn't, but I'm really not convinced by the idea of replacing vehicle lanes with cycle lanes on what are already busy roads. Seems very simplistic thinking to me and completely counter productive when you end up with snarled up cars belching fumes.

What other space do you think cycle lanes usually come from?