The Lewes Road bus lane/traffic congestion

[Gwylan]

Indeed. Granted, it didn't work for the Zulus at Rorke's Drift, but a multiple pronged attack would be much better than the current system. Rather than exacerbating the problem and alienating many thousands of people.

To a certain extent that's what's happening. The cycle lane is providing an alternative and several bus routes have increased service. People have mentioned park and ride but to make that work, the council would have to make it impossible to park in central Brighton- there's enough fuss about parking now, can you imagine the hell that would break loose?
But we did have a P&R at Withdean - a certain NSCer of this parish had a hand in it - but no-one used it, so it was scrapped.
P&R sounds like a nice solution but, apart from the parking issue, we're limited in space thanks to the national park.
The lack of car sharing is bizarre. I've used the Mitfahrzentrale system in Germany and that works like a dream, a brilliant way of optimising car space.
The trouble with the UK is that we're more used to individual space. I often cite the example of two guys who lived in the flat above us in London. They not only lived together, they worked in the same office but drove to work in separate cars: we lived about five minutes from a tube station and their office was about two minutes from one. How are you going to shake dependency like that?

As for that 'congested' Lewes Rd. I counted a grand total of five cars on my way to work this morning - really total gridlock

 

[Lord Bracknell]

But we did have a P&R at Withdean - a certain NSCer of this parish had a hand in it - but no-one used it, so it was scrapped.

Oi! That's not true.

The use of Withdean P&R increased exponentially from the day it was introduced. A few years into the scheme, we had to provide more car parking capacity, by demolishing the old tennis centre and paving over the field at the north end of the site. The scheme was doing really well, until ...

... a certain football club moved in (along with a leisure centre) and the number of parking spaces was reduced significantly. This led in turn to a reduction in the viability of the site for P&R and the inevitable slow demise of the scheme. The current option of parking at Withdean and using the slower local buses more or less works, but it's no longer the attractive option that the original scheme was.

What Withdean's P&R scheme did prove was that significant numbers of motorists are prepared to use P&R as an alternative to driving into the city centre.

 

[Gwylan]

Oi! That's not true.

The use of Withdean P&R increased exponentially from the day it was introduced. A few years into the scheme, we had to provide more car parking capacity, by demolishing the old tennis centre and paving over the field at the north end of the site. The scheme was doing really well, until ...

... a certain football club moved in (along with a leisure centre) and the number of parking spaces was reduced significantly. This led in turn to a reduction in the viability of the site for P&R and the inevitable slow demise of the scheme. The current option of parking at Withdean and using the slower local buses more or less works, but it's no longer the attractive option that the original scheme was.

What Withdean's P&R scheme did prove was that significant numbers of motorists are prepared to use P&R as an alternative to driving into the city centre.

Sorry Ed. I just remember that when the scheme was scrapped there was some claim that only about three people had used it the last weekend (or something like that). I wasn't aware of the previous success.

Now that a certain football club has moved out, why can't the original scheme be resurrected?

 

[unklbrian]

Oi! That's not true.

The use of Withdean P&R increased exponentially from the day it was introduced. A few years into the scheme, we had to provide more car parking capacity, by demolishing the old tennis centre and paving over the field at the north end of the site. The scheme was doing really well, until ...

... a certain football club moved in (along with a leisure centre) and the number of parking spaces was reduced significantly. This led in turn to a reduction in the viability of the site for P&R and the inevitable slow demise of the scheme. The current option of parking at Withdean and using the slower local buses more or less works, but it's no longer the attractive option that the original scheme was.

What Withdean's P&R scheme did prove was that significant numbers of motorists are prepared to use P&R as an alternative to driving into the city centre.

We used to use it , the down side was it was often packed to bursting & the last bus back was fairly early [6pm-ish?]

 

[Lord Bracknell]

We used to use it , the down side was it was often packed to bursting & the last bus back was fairly early [6pm-ish?]

Given the fact that the number of parking spaces at Withdean was limited by the size of the site, the decision not to run services into the evening was a deliberate decision, designed to ensure that demand for car parking spaces (particularly on Saturdays) didn't exceed the supply. In many respects, the Withdean park & ride scheme was limited in what it could achieve, other than to demonstrate that the basic concept worked. Interestingly, the overwhelming number of users were shoppers. Relatively few workers / commuters used it.

 

[marshy68]

But it is. It's breaking the highway code, as is going through a light. You're not giving the cyclists room to move off first, it's no wonder they head off early.

Maybe if the cars respected the cyclists rules the cyclists wouldn't have to break them.

One rule for one . . .

A stationary car parked in a cycle stop area is not as dangerous as bike w@nkers jumping red lights - They are in no way comparable and you know it.

 

[Stuart Munday]

The slip road that turns right into the university heading southwards disappeared so if more than one car was waiting the cars would block the main road, well this morning we have a brand new slip road, only problem is it is about a metre wide, unbelievable.

 

[marshy68]

looks like I have found my solution - I can cycle to the Amex - jump on the free 4 star hotel shuttle bus and be in the town centre in 5 minutes

 

[Albumen]

A stationary car parked in a cycle stop area is not as dangerous as bike w@nkers jumping red lights - They are in no way comparable and you know it.

Both breaking the highway code. BOTH. But one of them breaking the law is a car driver so that's ok?

 

[shaolinpunk]

Both breaking the highway code. BOTH. But one of them breaking the law is a car driver so that's ok?

I think it's more that one presents an immediate danger to themselves and others, while the other is an inconvenience

 

[marshy68]

Both breaking the highway code. BOTH. But one of them breaking the law is a car driver so that's ok?

"A cyclist was rushed to hospital with a suspected broken neck after a crash on New Church Road in Hove last night.

Paramedics were called to the scene, near to the junction of Park Avenue and Welbeck Avenue at 9.05pm on Monday.

The cyclist was travelling south on Park Avenue and was crossing New Church Road but appears to have failed to stop at the junction and collided with a blue Fiat Punto.

The 40-year-old male cyclist from Hove was taken to Royal Sussex County Hospital in Brighton with a suspected broken neck. The 24-year-old man driving the Fiat was uninjured."

Enough said really - I hope he makes a full recovery.

 

[Was not Was]

A stationary car parked in a cycle stop area is not as dangerous as bike w@nkers jumping red lights - They are in no way comparable and you know it.

The difference is that a rider RLJing (though this is usually safe, and often makes things safer than waiting) is only putting him/herself at risk. A driver parking in a cycle lane is forcing vulnerable road users into sharing with vehicles that can kill them.

And please don't say "bike w@nkers", mate!

 

[Westdene Seagull]

The difference is that a rider RLJing (though this is usually safe, and often makes things safer than waiting) is only putting him/herself at risk. A driver parking in a cycle lane is forcing vulnerable road users into sharing with vehicles that can kill them.

And please don't say "bike w@nkers", mate!

How on earth can jumping a red light ever be safe ?? It's against the law AND stupidly dangerous - as a cyclist found out to his cost yesterday in Hove.

 

[whitelion]

How on earth can jumping a red light ever be safe ?? It's against the law AND stupidly dangerous - as a cyclist found out to his cost yesterday in Hove.

Don't think that was a red light though seems it was a junction which would have been a give-way.

 

[Albumen]

"A cyclist was rushed to hospital with a suspected broken neck after a crash on New Church Road in Hove last night.

Paramedics were called to the scene, near to the junction of Park Avenue and Welbeck Avenue at 9.05pm on Monday.

The cyclist was travelling south on Park Avenue and was crossing New Church Road but appears to have failed to stop at the junction and collided with a blue Fiat Punto.

The 40-year-old male cyclist from Hove was taken to Royal Sussex County Hospital in Brighton with a suspected broken neck. The 24-year-old man driving the Fiat was uninjured."

Enough said really - I hope he makes a full recovery.

Don't think that was a red light though seems it was a junction which would have been a give-way.

Or just jumping to conclusions without knowing the full story. The cyclist may have not noticed the junction was clear. That happens to both bikes and cars.

How on earth can jumping a red light ever be safe ?? It's against the law AND stupidly dangerous - as a cyclist found out to his cost yesterday in Hove.

(again, jumping to conclusions)

Sometimes it is safer for the cyclist to head off first if clear, hence more cycle green lights which let the cyclist move first are being introduced more and more. The junction at the bottom of Ditchling Road is a good example if travelling towards Upper Lewes Road. If the cyclist doesnt get a head start the car behind will often try an overtake without the room in Upper Lewes Road.
The same for the bottom of Elm Grove heading towards town. To get to the other side to turn right it's best to head off just before the green light to avoid cars trying to ram you off the road.

 

[whitelion]

Or just jumping to conclusions without knowing the full story. The cyclist may have not noticed the junction was clear. That happens to both bikes and cars.



(again, jumping to conclusions)

Sometimes it is safer for the cyclist to head off first if clear, hence more cycle green lights which let the cyclist move first are being introduced more and more. The junction at the bottom of Ditchling Road is a good example if travelling towards Upper Lewes Road. If the cyclist doesnt get a head start the car behind will often try an overtake without the room in Upper Lewes Road.
The same for the bottom of Elm Grove heading towards town. To get to the other side to turn right it's best to head off just before the green light to avoid cars trying to ram you off the road.

Where in my statement of fact have I jumped to conclusions?

 

[Was not Was]

How on earth can jumping a red light ever be safe ??

God, this is going to be boring. But you did ask.

I'm not talking about sailing through a red light hoping things will be OK.

Here's another example:

Imagine four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. Cyclist wants to turn right at lights into side road. If s/he waits for the green light, then will be stranded unprotected in the middle of the road, while buses, cars, vans thunder past in both directions, until the coast is clear.

Alternatively, just before the lights change to green, s/he can turn right across the (about to be) oncoming traffic. Result, the cyclist is safer (and feels much safer), drivers have reduced risk of harming a vulnerable road user, no-one is inconvenienced. In a nation of sub-standard and non-existent cycling infrastructure, this is a good thing to do. But it is against the law.

At least tell me you can see the difference between this and sailing through a crossroads when lights are red.

 

[TotallyFreaked]

God, this is going to be boring. But you did ask.

I'm not talking about sailing through a red light hoping things will be OK.

Here's another example:

Imagine four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. Cyclist wants to turn right at lights into side road. If s/he waits for the green light, then will be stranded unprotected in the middle of the road, while buses, cars, vans thunder past in both directions, until the coast is clear.

Alternatively, just before the lights change to green, s/he can turn right across the (about to be) oncoming traffic. Result, the cyclist is safer (and feels much safer), drivers have reduced risk of harming a vulnerable road user, no-one is inconvenienced. In a nation of sub-standard and non-existent cycling infrastructure, this is a good thing to do. But it is against the law.

At least tell me you can see the difference between this and sailing through a crossroads when lights are red.

A good example of this is the gyratory junction travelling along the Lewis Road into Brighton. As there are no advance stop area for cyclist, to get into the right hand lane to travel around the gyratory towards Hollingdean you need to cut across the bus and car lane. Unless you are a very confident cyclist you are best slowly pulling away once the lights for bear road turn red (a few seconds before the Lewis road lights change)

 

[The Andy Naylor Fan Club]

A good example of this is the gyratory junction travelling along the Lewis Road into Brighton. As there are no advance stop area for cyclist, to get into the right hand lane to travel around the gyratory towards Hollingdean you need to cut across the bus and car lane. Unless you are a very confident cyclist you are best slowly pulling away once the lights for bear road turn red (a few seconds before the Lewis road lights change)

Although I am a car driver I like the use of the green go lights for bikes. These are phased to turn for around 10 seconds before the main traffic lights phase green. I have only seen these on the bike lanes so far, I can't see a problem if they are introduced at normal sets of main lights where bike lanes do not exist and thus giving bike users a head start on the road traffic giving them a clear route.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Although I am a car driver I like the use of the green go lights for bikes. These are phased to turn for around 10 seconds before the main traffic lights phase green. I have only seen these on the bike lanes so far, I can't see a problem if they are introduced at normal sets of main lights where bike lanes do not exist and thus giving bike users a head start on the road traffic giving them a clear route.

http://road.cc/content/news/90436-c...nly-green-lights-notorious-blackspot-junction

Cambridge approves UK's first cycle-only green lights at notorious blackspot junction
New signals will give bikes a five-second headstart over other traffic

by Sarah Barth August 17, 2013

Cambridgeshire County Council has signed off what's claimed to be the UK's first advanced green light for cyclists, giving them a few seconds to move off in safety ahead of other vehicles.

The junction at the Catholic Church on the Hills Road approach - a notorious blackspot that has seen 11 cyclists injured in collisions over the last five years to May 2013.

The Department for Transport has approved the plans, and work will be completed by autumn.

It comes as part of a wider £900,000 improvement scheme for cyling in the city.

The new style of lights could set a precedent in the UK and become widespread. They will be complemented by Trixi mirrors, new road surfacing, a red advanced stopping area, and new street lighting around the junction.

Cambridgeshire County Councillor Noel Kavanagh, Cycling Champion, said: “I am glad that the Department for Transport has backed this trial and hope, if it is successful, to see it used at other junctions in Cambridge and in other parts of Cambridgeshire.

"This should improve safety for all users at the junction as it allows cyclists to clear the junction giving extra space also for motorists. This is just one of a range of cycling improvements that are being introduced across the County.”

Cycling Campaign spokesman Robin Heydon, said: “Cambridge Cycling Campaign welcomes the trial of cycle traffic lights at this junction.

"Similar bicycle traffic lights are very common elsewhere in Europe, and we expect they are equally successful here. Enabling those on cycles to have a head start over motor vehicles will help those who are less confident, increasing the perceived safety that is important to get more people using bicycles.

"Once this trial has been formally evaluated, we would like to see this rolled out to many other light controlled junctions in Cambridgeshire and around the UK."

At the time the junction improvements were announced, we reported how Cambridge Cycling Campaign chairman Martin Lucas-Smith had condemned the plans. He told the Cambridge News outside the council meeting: “Stuffing evermore traffic through this accident-prone junction clearly remains the priority.

“We think this is totally inappropriate for a ‘cycling city’, and against its own policy to favour cycling and walking.

“The scheme is better than the current junction design, but it would be hard to make it otherwise.”

Although the Bow roundabout redesign in London also features two “bike only” lights to allow riders a few seconds' head start over drivers, the Cambridge junction is the first to use an advance stopping area within the main traffic lane.