[Brighton] New cycle lane a259 Brighton

[Chicken Run]

Or we could just talk about it, for another 20 years and get absolutely nowhere, because someone (the motorists) always say no.

As much as I don't agree with 'bosh, cycle lane - deal with it'.

I welcome something actually being done, which can then be worked with.
Instead of 'it won't work so don't even try'.

As a pedalphile what are your views of the increasing number of elec scooter users using cycle lanes?

Yesterday whilst out with dog a mob of 7 passed using the OSR temp. lane?

 

[Marty___Mcfly]

Are these cordoned off lanes meant to be permanent? I assumed they were a short-term measure.

I would think that there is space on the OSR and probably a solution on the seafront to provide a decent 2 way cycle lane, properly separate from the road, and retain 2 lane traffic.

It’s clearly a problem at junctions - if it creates more queues that is very bad for air quality and surely no one wants more pollution?!

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Or we could just talk about it, for another 20 years and get absolutely nowhere, because someone (the motorists) always say no.

As much as I don't agree with 'bosh, cycle lane - deal with it'.

I welcome something actually being done, which can then be worked with.
Instead of 'it won't work so don't even try'.

But that's EXACTLY the reason we are where we are - lack off planning - joined up planning. That's why we have a mish mash of cycle lanes many of which aren't fit for purpose. After all planning prevents piss poor performance. If a team sat down and did some proper planning, published it as say the 10 year travel plan and it was then consulted on and if necessary tweaked then I wouldn't have an issue with it being forced upon us. How it's been done previously and now clearly doesn't work properly for anyone yet along the same track we trot. Remind me of that saying about doing the same thing again and again yet expecting a different outcome ?

 

[Stat Brother]

As a pedalphile what are your views of the increasing number of elec scooter users using cycle lanes?

Yesterday whilst out with dog a mob of 7 passed using the OSR temp. lane?

I have no idea how someone hasn't killed themselves, or worst still someone else, on them. I'm amazed by how fast they can go.
There only saving grace is the user must be acutely aware of their own mortality as flip-flops and Hawaiian shorts aren't your traditional protective clothing.

I don't have a problem with them, but as always it comes down to the same issue - space.

If 'we' are all crammed into the same narrow channel with pedestrians on 'shared' pathways it's a law suit and tabloid outcry waiting to happen.

All the while the death toll caused by 'accidents' is allowed to continue and, if reported at all, will continue to be done so as 'incidents' and a footnote on local news.

 

[Stat Brother]

But that's EXACTLY the reason we are where we are - lack off planning - joined up planning. That's why we have a mish mash of cycle lanes many of which aren't fit for purpose. After all planning prevents piss poor performance. If a team sat down and did some proper planning, published it as say the 10 year travel plan and it was then consulted on and if necessary tweaked then I wouldn't have an issue with it being forced upon us. How it's been done previously and now clearly doesn't work properly for anyone yet along the same track we trot. Remind me of that saying about doing the same thing again and again yet expecting a different outcome ?

There's always a ten year travel plan.
They just don't work with a five year government cycle (no pun intended)

That's how we get half a structure then a new plan.
That's how we get cycle lanes that just stop in the middle of nowhere.
Why you can't drive from Worthing to Chichester.
Why much of the population live nowhere near a train station.
And why that train takes 4 changes, 10 tickets and £1000 to get anywhere - slowly.


I totally agree with you, (or should that be you totally agree with me) but we've tried 10 year travel plans and they don't work.

So I'm currently quite happy with a 'F**k it - 10 days now suck it up and stop crying like a little bitch' transport policy.

It's somewhat refreshing and very out of character for the UK.

 

[theboybilly]

It’s clearly a problem at junctions - if it creates more queues that is very bad for air quality and surely no one wants more pollution?!

There are plans for alterations to the Highway Code to give priority to those whether on foot, 2-wheels or 4, going straight ahead. So when turning left a car will have to give way to a cyclist going straight on or even, perhaps, pedestrians crossing a side street.

 

[Gwylan]

There are plans for alterations to the Highway Code to give priority to those whether on foot, 2-wheels or 4, going straight ahead. So when turning left a car will have to give way to a cyclist going straight on or even, perhaps, pedestrians crossing a side street.

It's already the case that cars have to give way to pedestrians when turning left (Rule 170)

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Give it a go. See how it works out. Give it a chance. Another way might be a better way.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

It's already the case that cars have to give way to pedestrians when turning left (Rule 170)

Really? Makes sense. If they have started to cross mind you.

 

[Hamilton]

Isn't it brilliant.

A once in a lifetime chance to change the way we live our lives and stop giving precedence to the private motor car. I love it.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

There's always a ten year travel plan.
They just don't work with a five year government cycle (no pun intended)

That's how we get half a structure then a new plan.
That's how we get cycle lanes that just stop in the middle of nowhere.
Why you can't drive from Worthing to Chichester.
Why much of the population live nowhere near a train station.
And why that train takes 4 changes, 10 tickets and £1000 to get anywhere - slowly.


I totally agree with you, (or should that be you totally agree with me) but we've tried 10 year travel plans and they don't work.

So I'm currently quite happy with a 'F**k it - 10 days now suck it up and stop crying like a little bitch' transport policy.

It's somewhat refreshing and very out of character for the UK.

But you say you're happy with the 'F**k it' approach because, currently, the policy is towards something you agree with. I'd suggest you'd be less happy with the approach if the council decided to have a policy that favoured cars.

I have a vested interest in all the modes of travel - my youngest walks to school so I want safe pedestrian travel ( without maniac cyclists on the pavement ), my middle cycles to college so I want safe cycle lanes for him ( without idiot drivers - particularly van drivers - nearly running him down ) and my eldest uses the bus to go to Uni and work so I want decent bus lanes without idiot pedestrians, cyclists and drivers using them. Equally I drive and therefore I want easy flowing traffic without idiot pedestrians, cyclists and buses trying to make me swerve. It's a conundrum but only one that can be solved by the input of every party. Not the use of 'F**k it' policies.

 

[Stat Brother]

But you say you're happy with the 'F**k it' approach because, currently, the policy is towards something you agree with. I'd suggest you'd be less happy with the approach if the council decided to have a policy that favoured cars.

I have a vested interest in all the modes of travel - my youngest walks to school so I want safe pedestrian travel ( without maniac cyclists on the pavement ), my middle cycles to college so I want safe cycle lanes for him ( without idiot drivers - particularly van drivers - nearly running him down ) and my eldest uses the bus to go to Uni and work so I want decent bus lanes without idiot pedestrians, cyclists and drivers using them. Equally I drive and therefore I want easy flowing traffic without idiot pedestrians, cyclists and buses trying to make me swerve. It's a conundrum but only one that can be solved by the input of every party. Not the use of 'F**k it' policies.

But every party can't agree which why there's stalemate - in every sense of the word.


Councils have had policies that favour cars for the last 50+ years that's how we got to this.

That's why the coast road doesn't move.

Why we've ended up with the insane situation of 500 people stood in front of the pier and 50 people sat in their pollution boxes occupying MORE space and it still not being enough room.

That's what trying to involve everybody results in.

As asked in the Delft video a few posts back, how can you not want that for Brighton?
It has to start somewhere and suddenly, for the first time ever, we have a start.
People will find a way to make it work and that way might no longer be 'oh let's just drive' which is a win for everyone.

The biggest winners being 'but I genuinely actually have to drive'.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

But every party can't agree which why there's stalemate - in every sense of the word.


Councils have had policies that favour cars for the last 50+ years that's how we got to this.

That's why the coast road doesn't move.

Why we've ended up with the insane situation of 500 people stood in front of the pier and 50 people sat in their pollution boxes occupying MORE space and it still not being enough room.

That's what trying to involve everybody results in.

As asked in the Delft video a few posts back, how can you not want that for Brighton?
It has to start somewhere and suddenly, for the first time ever, we have a start.
People will find a way to make it work and that way might no longer be 'oh let's just drive' which is a win for everyone.

The biggest winners being 'but I genuinely actually have to drive'.

And yet you call out motorists as being unable to compromise when you clearly won't either. You go around calling people 'gammons' when you yourself act like one - only clad in lycra. And for the record, any man wearing full lycra and those tippy tappy cycling shoes looks like a complete prick - similar to the full kit w@nkers.

 

[Stat Brother]

And yet you call out motorists as being unable to compromise when you clearly won't either. You go around calling people 'gammons' when you yourself act like one - only clad in lycra. And for the record, any man wearing full lycra and those tippy tappy cycling shoes looks like a complete prick - similar to the full kit w@nkers.

Cyclists have had to compromise for xx years and look where that's got them abused, injured and dead.

The moment someone says 'transport around Brighton don't work, isn't fair, isn't safe, isn't economical, isn't environmental friendly let's make it work for the majority' look what happens.


You'll get used to it, stop crying like a little bitch.

 

[Acker79]

As well as the cycle of 10 year plans for 5 year councils, isn't there also the issue of how much scope there is? With roads already laid and buildings on either side of most roads, there isn't a great deal of scope to reimagine transport systems across the city. And it's not just the various parties in council struggling to agree, there's also all the driving equivalent of nimbys. Yeah, we need to improve public transport, and separate bikes and pedestrians, but why does it have to interrupt my preferred route? I like, I mean, I need to bomb along that road, don't restrict cars there! So many drivers talking about how there needs to be a solution, but don't want 'their' roads messed with.

Are these cordoned off lanes meant to be permanent? I assumed they were a short-term measure.

Just temporary. There's a sign up on the seafront one clarifying that it is temporary. But I don't know if they have a deadline or if in 30 years there'll be uproar when the lane gets removed because no one remembers that it was meant to be temporary.

 

[BN41Albion]

Very busy and slow moving westbound at the roundabout at 10am on a cloudy Sunday morning. Excellent stuff

(I wasnt driving, I hasten to add)

 

[Stat Brother]

As well as the cycle of 10 year plans for 5 year councils, isn't there also the issue of how much scope there is? With roads already laid and buildings on either side of most roads, there isn't a great deal of scope to reimagine transport systems across the city. And it's not just the various parties in council struggling to agree, there's also all the driving equivalent of nimbys. Yeah, we need to improve public transport, and separate bikes and pedestrians, but why does it have to interrupt my preferred route? I like, I mean, I need to bomb along that road, don't restrict cars there! So many drivers talking about how there needs to be a solution, but don't want 'their' roads messed with.




Just temporary. There's a sign up on the seafront one clarifying that it is temporary. But I don't know if they have a deadline or if in 30 years there'll be uproar when the lane gets removed because no one remembers that it was meant to be temporary.

That's the thing.

Throughout all the bazillion identical threads on here, I've always tried to be consolatory, while explaining the greater good.
We've all studied plans, many like this one I've said 'no that doesn't seem safe, or the best use of space' yet I still get mocked, red- lighted and subjected to collective death threats (clearly not serious, but they become less funny when someone is actually acting in a manner that can kill).


All it takes is a global pandemic for people to not use their cars, the place to be instantly better for it and the council to say 'bollox to it we're doing it anyway'.


I just hope it's temporary long enough for people to think 'I didn't agree but you know what, this might just work'.

 

[studio150]

I welcome something actually being done, which can then be worked with.
Instead of 'it won't work so don't even try'.

Good to see you embracing the current in thing of not looking at the detail and ignoring experts.

Despite the Council's keen take on temporary cycle lanes after Johnson said ride ride ride (or some other slogan) surely there must have been an impact assessment, a financial benefit assessment all within an overall medium/long term City transport plan.

It would be interesting to see what the experts said in the planning phase, or was it just a political decision with no concern on the impact of the changes.

 

[Stat Brother]

Good to see you embracing the current in thing of not looking at the detail and ignoring experts.

Despite the Council's keen take on temporary cycle lanes after Johnson said ride ride ride (or some other slogan) surely there must have been an impact assessment, a financial benefit assessment all within an overall medium/long term City transport plan.

It would be interesting to see what the experts said in the planning phase, or was it just a political decision with no concern on the impact of the changes.

There's a 1001 studies concerning city wide transportation, they all reach the same conclusion.
It boils down to:-

Less cars = Better economy.



There's genuinely isn't a single study that states cities businesses, tourism, economy and all financial knock on effects, house prices etc, are harmed by a reduction in cars.

Now there's a 1001 pieces of anecdotal evidence from transportation luminaries like Felicity Kendall that will tell you otherwise, but I'm going to suggest she may not be well versed on all aspects of the science behind transportation.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

That's the thing.

Throughout all the bazillion identical threads on here, I've always tried to be consolatory, while explaining the greater good.
We've all studied plans, many like this one I've said 'no that doesn't seem safe, or the best use of space' yet I still get mocked, red- lighted and subjected to collective death threats (clearly not serious, but they become less funny when someone is actually acting in a manner that can kill).


All it takes is a global pandemic for people to not use their cars, the place to be instantly better for it and the council to say 'bollox to it we're doing it anyway'.


I just hope it's temporary long enough for people to think 'I didn't agree but you know what, this might just work'.

Like **** have you ..... you've been nothing but a cycling Gammon.