The Lewes Road bus lane/traffic congestion

[The Fifth Column]

It seems bus users, cyclists and pedestrians are all being catered for but screw anyone that has the temerity and cheek to actually own a car and want to use it to drive on the same roads, you know those car drivers who pay all that road tax. All done in the name of safety of course, which is good now those hundreds of pedestrians and cyclists aren't being mown down on Lewes rd like they were before.

 

[The Wizard]

Improvements that I've noticed and that have benefited me:-

As a regular bus user, it certainly speeds up my travel times. There are more bus shelters, with better seats and better bus information. As an operator of minibuses that can use the bus lanes, the scheme has improved our journey times and, more importantly, reliability. And, as a pedestrian, there are improved facilities (such as the heavily used new pedestrian crossing between Queensdown School Road and The Avenue). And there is significantly less conflict with cyclists.

I agree, though, that the Vogue gyratory (BP/Sainsburys) needs sorting out. Work on doing that phase of the scheme will, I understand, start soon.

Hmmm I use that bus route a lot and the traffic in the first part of Lewes road between Elm Grove and Saunders park seems to make the journey longer than it was before for me, not by a lot but it does. I suppose it depends what time of day you travel through but just yesterday I was sitting on a bus for about 20 minutes waiting in traffic in the said area, I can see certain benefits of it for certain people but its completely destroyed the traffic flow. In a car around that area it's beyond a joke though.

 

[£1.99]

It seems bus users, cyclists and pedestrians are all being catered for but screw anyone that has the temerity and cheek to actually own a car and want to use it to drive on the same roads, you know those car drivers who pay all that road tax. All done in the name of safety of course, which is good now those hundreds of pedestrians and cyclists aren't being mown down on Lewes rd like they were before.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

ROAD TAX WAS ABOLISHED IN 1937!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23694438

 

[teaboy]

It seems bus users, cyclists and pedestrians are all being catered for but screw anyone that has the temerity and cheek to actually own a car and want to use it to drive on the same roads, you know those car drivers who pay all that road tax. All done in the name of safety of course, which is good now those hundreds of pedestrians and cyclists aren't being mown down on Lewes rd like they were before.

Hang on, what about all those roads that go everywhere? I also take it you've never been a pedestrian...

 

[ofco8]

ROAD TAX WAS ABOLISHED IN 1937!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23694438

In name but not reality. I have a car and pay road fund tax (a term used by the government on their websites). If I didn't own a car then I wouldn't pay Road TAX. If I parked my car on my drive and never drove it I wouldn't need to pay Road TAX. Therefore it is a tax for owning a car and driving on the road. This doesn't apply to cyclists who do not own or use cars but use the highway.

 

[The Fifth Column]

ROAD TAX WAS ABOLISHED IN 1937!

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23694438

Yeah very clever, Road tax, car tax, vehicle excise licence whatever you want to refer to it as it's the same bloody thing you pedantic smartarse.

The point is, the largest group of road users and those that contribute billions to the governments coffers are seen as the enemy in this city with cycle lanes, bus lanes, pointless 20 mph speed limits etc all being championed but when has there recently been a road scheme in the city designed to make it easier and more beneficial to car users? Successive local governments love to follow fashion and spout off about carbon footprints, pollution, safety, sustainable Eco friendly biodegradable paper buses etc etc ad nauseum . I get that pedestrians and cyclists may be a little safer and that bus users are better off but it's at the expense at car drivers who get no benefit whatsoever.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Yeah very clever, Road tax, car tax, vehicle excise licence whatever you want to refer to it as it's the same bloody thing you pedantic smartarse.

The point is, the largest group of road users and those that contribute billions to the governments coffers are seen as the enemy in this city with cycle lanes, bus lanes, pointless 20 mph speed limits etc all being championed but when has there recently been a road scheme in the city designed to make it easier and more beneficial to car users? Successive local governments love to follow fashion and spout off about carbon footprints, pollution, safety, sustainable Eco friendly biodegradable paper buses etc etc ad nauseum . I get that pedestrians and cyclists may be a little safer and that bus users are better off but it's at the expense at car drivers who get no benefit whatsoever.

And - apart from the fact that you think delivering a benefit to car drivers will personally benefit you - what exactly is the case for council tax payers helping out motorists?

 

[Gwylan]

Therefore it is a tax for owning a car and driving on the road.

That implies that all car drivers who use the roads have to pay it - but that's not the case. You can own and drive a car and not have to pay VED

 

[Barrel of Fun]

If the money does end up in the same pot, cyclists (with or without a car) may well be contributing more to the upkeep of roads than a sample car owner. So let's do away with cyclists don't pay for roads. Everyone pays for roads unless they don't contribute in the slightest.

 

[yxee]

If the money does end up in the same pot, cyclists (with or without a car) may well be contributing more to the upkeep of roads than a sample car owner. So let's do away with cyclists don't pay for roads. Everyone pays for roads unless they don't contribute in the slightest.

Clutching at straws a bit here...

 

[Gwylan]

Clutching at straws a bit here...

Why is that? A multimillionaire who doesn't drive will contribute far more to the upkeep of roads than a motorist paying basic-rate tax. So, what BoF said was patently correct - don't see how that's clutching at straws

 

[Mutts Nuts]

So, who is affected by the ridiculous volumes of traffic trying to squeeze through the single lane on Lewes Road and the subsequent queues on all roads attached to it?

I've not seen the effect during the day yet but rush hour is just mad; it adds about half hour onto my journey now, whichever route I take. The gyratory is at a complete standstill for minutes at a time.

Still - not like any of us could possibly have seen this coming

You sound like the guy from early doors

 

[The Fifth Column]

And - apart from the fact that you think delivering a benefit to car drivers will personally benefit you - what exactly is the case for council tax payers helping out motorists?

Council tax payers are also motorists too and if they are helping out other road users then why not motorists? What is your case for them to be excluded from any benefit? And it won't benefit me in particular since I ride a motorcycle so am blissfully unaffected by the congestion generally as I filter through the queues of angry frustrated car drivers but it annoys me that car drivers are seen as second class road users in this city. I fail to see how causing massive traffic congestion and pissing off one of the main groups of users of the road along with hundreds of residents having to put up with stationary traffic outside their doors for longer is benefitting anyone? Still, you use the bus and cross the road lots so your alright jack, well done.

 

[teaboy]

Driving is a choice, not driving is the default.

Personally I'd like VED abolished and fuel tax increased to cover the cost. Drive more = pay more. Drive an inefficient car = pay more. Drive a car inefficiently = pay more. No more "I pay road tax" stupidity. No more tax disc administration.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Council tax payers are also motorists too and if they are helping out other road users then why not motorists? What is your case for them to be excluded from any benefit? And it won't benefit me in particular since I ride a motorcycle so am blissfully unaffected by the congestion generally as I filter through the queues of angry frustrated car drivers but it annoys me that car drivers are seen as second class road users in this city. I fail to see how causing massive traffic congestion and pissing off one of the main groups of users of the road along with hundreds of residents having to put up with stationary traffic outside their doors for longer is benefitting anyone? Still, you use the bus and cross the road lots so your alright jack, well done.

I'm not arguing against car drivers being provided with a reasonable share of the nation's transport resources. It's the expectation that some people have that, in Brighton, this should be funded by Brighton & Hove council tax payers.

Like a large proportion of users of Lewes Road, I pay my council tax outside Brighton & Hove. I pay national taxes. I'm quite content that it is the national budget that is funding capital spending on the roads that I use. I'm also content with the principle that national transport priorities should determine how that spending is allocated. Don't blame the local council if you don't agree with those priorities. Blame the government.

 

[The Large One]

EVERYONE pays for the roads - motorists and non-motorists - through general taxation. The money from VED is not ring-fenced. The taxation you pay is for the vehicle not the road, and the amount of VED you pay in mainly dependent on the emissions the vehicle makes.

Bearing in mind owners of some cars pay nothing, I guess in the minds of those who are misguided enough to feel a sense of primary entitlement to the roads also feel that the zero-tax group have no entitlement...

 

[Lord Bracknell]

... Still, you use the bus and cross the road lots so your alright jack, well done.

And, as well as using buses when I can (this morning, for example), I regularly drive along Lewes Road (several times a week, as it happens, including a planned journey this coming evening).

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Driving is a choice, not driving is the default.

Personally I'd like VED abolished and fuel tax increased to cover the cost. Drive more = pay more. Drive an inefficient car = pay more. Drive a car inefficiently = pay more. No more "I pay road tax" stupidity. No more tax disc administration.

Not taking sides on this one but the argument against this has always been that people living in rural and more remote areas would be penalised. My sister, for example, has to drive over 20 miles to visit her nearest big supermarket.

 

[soistes]

EVERYONE pays for the roads - motorists and non-motorists - through general taxation. The money from VED is not ring-fenced. The taxation you pay is for the vehicle not the road, and the amount of VED you pay in mainly dependent on the emissions the vehicle makes.

However often you keep patiently repeating this simple fact, there will be a minority of ill-informed posters on here who simply cannot understand that this (Vehicle Excise Duty) is not a hypothecated tax, and that all these claims about the special rights/benefits that they think ought to accrue to motorists who pay the tax are therefore entirely spurious.