OK to ride wrong way on Brighton streets (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
OK to ride wrong way on Brighton streets
3:10pm Thursday 1st November 2012 in News By Kimberly Middleton, Acting chief reporter
Road markings in Robert Street, Brighton, show the two-way cycle lane markings
Roads are being painted to allow cyclists to ride the wrong way along one-way streets.
A total of 12 streets in Brighton’s North Laine will allow two-way cycling alongside one-way traffic from mid-November.
Brighton and Hove City Council hopes the move will discourage cyclists from mounting pavements, squeezing along alleyways and taking illegal shortcuts.
Church Street, Jubilee Street and New Road already have two-way cycle paths. From next month the remainder of Church Street, Foundry Street, Gloucester Road, part of Gloucester Street, Kemp Street, Kensington Place, Kensington Street, Over Street, Queen’s Gardens, Robert Street, Tidy Street and Trafalgar Street will all open as contra-flow roads for cyclists.
The city’s keenest cyclists are thrilled by the plans, though some North Laine workers have expressed concern.
Councillor Ian Davey, chairman of the council’s transport committee, said: “This is designed to make the area easier for people to move around.
“It will address issues raised by local residents and businesses about cyclists who use pavements by permitting people to cycle legally on the street.
“We will continue to work with the local community as the changes are rolled out so that it is safe and works well.”
Software engineer Rob Kent, who commutes from his Hove home to Brighton on his bicycle, said the project is a “very good thing”.
Motorist awareness
However, he added: “It has to be done properly and motorists have to be made aware of what’s going on, otherwise it’s going to cause a lot of conflict and frustration.
“They should stick up big temporary signs for motorists, telling them to be aware of cyclists in both directions.
“At the moment if you’re a cyclist you cannot get across town because everything is one-way.”
Carpenter and cyclist Richard Scofield said: “I understand the theory of it but I think a lot of bike lanes in Brighton are confusing for cyclists, pedestrians and motorists.
“If a bike is heading the wrong way people just assume the cyclist is being cheeky. It’s probably more dangerous for pedestrians, because they will not expect cyclists to be coming the other way.”
North Road worker Gary, is against the project. He said: “The council seems to be endorsing breaking the law by letting people cycle down a one-way street the wrong way.
“They flout the law as it is by cycling on pavements and things.
“The council seems to be narrowing the roads to eliminate cars from Brighton. They are totally congesting the city.”
See the latest news headlines from The Argus:
- Author Peter James 'lucky to be alive' following 70mph racing crash
- Hove murder: wanted man phones The Argus
- Shoreham Rugby Club holding charity barbecue and fun day
- Police investigate spate of car crime across Sussex
- Sussex Police get Chinese book of sayings as thank you gift
Add us to your circles on Google+
Comments(89)
RobO.
says...
3:24pm Thu 1 Nov 12
And surely if the rules are changing about how you can cycle, then it's not the "wrong way" as your headline suggests.
How about reporting this as a positive act by the council, making it easier for cyclists to get around, and safer for pedestrians?
leobrighton
says...
3:26pm Thu 1 Nov 12
leobrighton
says...
3:28pm Thu 1 Nov 12
RobO. wrote:Agreed. Many Argus stories seem to be designed to wind people up will never buy it on principle
Why does this article need a poll? To stoke up the divisions between cyclists and drivers? That's a bit low, isn't it?
And surely if the rules are changing about how you can cycle, then it's not the "wrong way" as your headline suggests.
How about reporting this as a positive act by the council, making it easier for cyclists to get around, and safer for pedestrians?
Bob_The_Ferret
says...
3:30pm Thu 1 Nov 12
StyleCop
says...
3:34pm Thu 1 Nov 12
So long as it's clear that streets are designated 2 way for bicycles then I don't see an issue with this.
Drivers feeling the need to be aggravated in such a warren of streets should ask themselves why they are there in the first place...
AFAICT most vehicles in the laines are either;
a. Lost & bewildered Tourists looking for parking spots/cut throughs to avoid the one way systems
b. Lost & bewildered delivery drivers looking for premises and/or seeking cut throughs to avoid the one way systems
c. Local Householders who know their way around and have no trouble with getting in/out of the maze of streets
In theory, due to the labyrinthine nature of the area - cars/drivers should be taking care and driving slowly, so cyclists heading at them (apparently) the wrong way, should easily be avoided.
But of course, I'm sure someone will cry 'accident waiting to happen... **** greens... etc'
StyleCop
says...
3:36pm Thu 1 Nov 12
PorkBoat wrote:QED
It'll end in tears.
StyleCop
says...
3:38pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Bob_The_Ferret wrote:in a word..
I drive too fast on Lewes Road. Should I therefore expect the council to change the speed limit back up to 40 mph just to accommodate me?
No.
Fight_Back
says...
3:39pm Thu 1 Nov 12
I wonder if a FOI request will show if the council have raised an RTO to make this legal. My guess is that they have not !
aBloke
says...
3:40pm Thu 1 Nov 12
taman
says...
3:43pm Thu 1 Nov 12
StyleCop
says...
3:45pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fight_Back wrote:Good point.
Given the streets they are doing this two alternate between one direction and the other surely it's not too much to ask cyclists to go all of 10 feet or so to use the street that flows in the correct direction for ALL traffic. I wonder if a FOI request will show if the council have raised an RTO to make this legal. My guess is that they have not !
Tallywhacker
says...
3:47pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fairfax Sakes
says...
3:47pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Anyway, keep it up Argus, its a great website for a laugh even if I wouldnt dream of buying the paper.
Fight_Back
says...
3:47pm Thu 1 Nov 12
StyleCop
says...
3:48pm Thu 1 Nov 12
taman wrote:'They' - being ALL cyclists presumably...?
What a total waste of paint !!! everyone knows they ride the wrong way up one way streets... what next make it official they can ride straight through red traffic lights ??
ha ha.. yeah... red lights, cyclists... right of way... lol...
Because 'They' all do it... so why not... Funny.
StyleCop
says...
3:53pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Tallywhacker wrote:See... that's better... "Most" being the operative here.
Don't see it making much difference really. Most cyclists ignore signage anyway so the only possible damage will be to pedestrians who don't expect a bike coming from the wrong way.
Personally, I find when I cross a road/street, I tend to look both ways regardless of it's direction of flow - that's mainly because, as a pedestrian I'm not necessarily privvy to the road signage aimed at drivers, and I value my safety when crossing a road.
Either that or it's because I'm part of the 'tufty'/'green cross code man' generation and had it drummed into me...
Just a thought.
freeranter
says...
3:56pm Thu 1 Nov 12
StyleCop
says...
3:59pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fight_Back wrote:Sorry... what cyclists...? I was too busy shaking my head at the driver in the background being on their mobile phone and having no tax or insurance, or parking permit... just like 'They' all don't...
Please note the picture as well - neither cyclist is wearing a helmet or high viz clothing nor do they have lights - much like a majority of cyclists. I guess they don't want motorists to have any chance of seeing them.
bl00dy drivers...
:P
billy goat-gruff
says...
4:05pm Thu 1 Nov 12
inadaptado
says...
4:20pm Thu 1 Nov 12
aBloke wrote:So, according to you, every driver and cyclist in this town is a selfless ****, and out-of-towners are idiots who can't read traffic signs. Aren't you cheerful?
it's great to try to keep Brighton moving (yeah right, like that's ever gonna happen!) but this just looks like a really bad idea - the picture alone illustrates a problem - what's going to happen when that cyclist going the 'wrong' way meets the car going the other way at that wheelie bin that's taking up half of the road - a tip of the hat and a good solid dose of Christmas cheer ('after you sir, no please, after you'), or a load of argie bargie between the car and the cyclist about who has the right of way! - plus, the inevitable 'out of towner' that follows the cyclist the 'wrong' way as they don't know any different and assume they can turn into the road - anyway, if thinking up these ideas gives the council something to do when there's clearly no other problems to solve, I guess why not
Fercri Sakes
says...
4:20pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fercri Sakes
says...
4:25pm Thu 1 Nov 12
aBloke wrote:Well it should be the same as what happens when two cars only have enough room to let one through. The more patient road user allows the less patient driver through. Often the driver will signal his appreciation whilst driving past - but these days that sometimes doesn't happen. Some people are just a little bit selfish.
it's great to try to keep Brighton moving (yeah right, like that's ever gonna happen!) but this just looks like a really bad idea - the picture alone illustrates a problem - what's going to happen when that cyclist going the 'wrong' way meets the car going the other way at that wheelie bin that's taking up half of the road - a tip of the hat and a good solid dose of Christmas cheer ('after you sir, no please, after you'), or a load of argie bargie between the car and the cyclist about who has the right of way! - plus, the inevitable 'out of towner' that follows the cyclist the 'wrong' way as they don't know any different and assume they can turn into the road - anyway, if thinking up these ideas gives the council something to do when there's clearly no other problems to solve, I guess why not
In the image above I'd say the car driver should let the cyclist past first as the bin is taking up the driver's lane. Simples!
CliveA
says...
5:02pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fight_Back wrote:Your point being?
Please note the picture as well - neither cyclist is wearing a helmet or high viz clothing nor do they have lights - much like a majority of cyclists. I guess they don't want motorists to have any chance of seeing them.
Neither helmets nor hi-viz are required and - guess what - that picture was taken in the daytime, so lights aren't required either.
So what were you pointing out?
anubis
says...
5:03pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(1) I grew up on a push-bike-- everywhere I went (if alone), it was on the bike -- and that applied well into my teenage years.
(2)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
(3)
anubis
says...
5:10pm Thu 1 Nov 12
I'd better finish off while I can .....
My guess is that a MAJOR reason why cyclists are so frequently, proportionately, accident victims is because they don't REALLY understand the safe rules of the road; hence statistically it's young cyclists, who aren't also car drivers, who are most often in trouble ....
Indigatio
says...
5:15pm Thu 1 Nov 12
PorkBoat wrote:I'm a cyclist (and a motorist and a pedestrian) and I agree. Great idea on paper but in practise it will not work. Get these idiot Green's out
It'll end in tears.
Brightonscouse2
says...
5:19pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fight_Back wrote:I'm surprised you can spot the cyclist. What with him being camouflaged and rendered invisible by the lack of lights/high viz etc.
Please note the picture as well - neither cyclist is wearing a helmet or high viz clothing nor do they have lights - much like a majority of cyclists. I guess they don't want motorists to have any chance of seeing them.
I often think motorists that insist cyclists wear high viz clothing during the day should perhaps be paying more attention to their surroundings. If you need a piece of luminous clothing to be able to see someone, you're obviously not looking hard enough.
It's also interesting the amount of comments an article on cyclists legally being allowed to use a contra flow system has garnered. In comparison to the story below showing motorists going the wrong way down a one way street, and moving road work signs.
Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit
says...
5:30pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Helen Ariel
says...
5:38pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Bob_The_Ferret
says...
5:55pm Thu 1 Nov 12
StyleCop wrote:Exactly, so why should cyclists be exempted from the one way rules, just because so many of them are too lazy to comply.
Bob_The_Ferret wrote:in a word..
I drive too fast on Lewes Road. Should I therefore expect the council to change the speed limit back up to 40 mph just to accommodate me?
No.
With the precedent now having been set, how many cyclists riding the wrong way down any other one way street does it take for the council to just change the rules to suit them, regardless of the road safety consequences.
Brightonscouse2
says...
6:03pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Bob_The_Ferret wrote:It's simple, the rules are being amended to make the journey in/out/around town quicker for cyclists. Cycling is being promoted because its cleaner, cheaper and reduces the amount of traffic. Driving on the other hand is expensive, causes congestion and pollution so is therefore being discouraged.
StyleCop wrote:Exactly, so why should cyclists be exempted from the one way rules, just because so many of them are too lazy to comply.
Bob_The_Ferret wrote:in a word..
I drive too fast on Lewes Road. Should I therefore expect the council to change the speed limit back up to 40 mph just to accommodate me?
No.
With the precedent now having been set, how many cyclists riding the wrong way down any other one way street does it take for the council to just change the rules to suit them, regardless of the road safety consequences.
Please stop crying, I know it doesn't appear fair. But it will even benefit motorists, with less traffic on the road, eventually.
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
6:04pm Thu 1 Nov 12
For those cyclists who dont: If you are knocked over or seriously injured by a driver and you attempt to make a claim against their insurance for your care/injuries etc, you may find you do not have one if it is proved that you were not obeying the law.
I once covered a case where a cyclist suffered catastrophic head injuries as a driver rammed him up the rear end at night.
The case went to the High Court where he lost the case as it was proven that his rear lights did not meet British Standards.
Sadly he could not work, he could not support his family and he could not make a claim against the driver.
Be careful. The cyclist always comes off worst and you will lose your right to claim.
I am also a driver before anyone gets the hump with me.
Andy R
says...
6:22pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Tulyar
says...
6:44pm Thu 1 Nov 12
On balance the cost and lack of effectiveness in policing a ban on cycling counter to the flow of motorised traffic, maes the sensible option, one of providing for 2-way cycling and 1-way motor traffic.
The UK has a perverse outlook on this, when compared against most of Europe, where the 'normal' condition is that cycle traffic moves in both directions on all roads and is only prevented from doing this where conditions are unsuitable.
A contra-flow cyclist is perhaps safer in their relationship with car drivers, given that in facing each other practically eye-to-eye neither has the ability to invoke that old SMIDSY excuse.
Perhaps the better solution for all using The Laines, would be to restore a road hierarchy, which would put the pedestrian back to the top. By this I refer to having a condition that any pedestrian movement has priority over any vehicle movement, and Mastermind rules apply to moving vehicles - whoever has started is allowed to complete the manoeuvre.
funkyyoyo
says...
6:51pm Thu 1 Nov 12
way street,,,tut tut, i smell the 'torte of malsfeasance' again.when did government give councils permission to rewrite current road traffic legislation,,,answer
??? NEVER!!!
deve
says...
8:06pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Bill in Hanover
says...
8:07pm Thu 1 Nov 12
ruberducker
says...
8:43pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fight_Back
says...
9:13pm Thu 1 Nov 12
CliveA wrote:My point being that for a few pounds cyclists could make themselves easily visible to all motorists. Instead they decide to bleat on how nasty drivers drive so close to them or don't see them.
Fight_Back wrote:Your point being?
Please note the picture as well - neither cyclist is wearing a helmet or high viz clothing nor do they have lights - much like a majority of cyclists. I guess they don't want motorists to have any chance of seeing them.
Neither helmets nor hi-viz are required and - guess what - that picture was taken in the daytime, so lights aren't required either.
So what were you pointing out?
When I do something dangerous like drive I wear a seat belt - not because it's the law but because it's common sense.
So now cyclists are being allowed to ride against the direction of the road yet most are too stupid to protect themselves.
dunfearn
says...
9:44pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Morpheus
says...
10:05pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Fairfax Sakes wrote:So when somebody does something illegal, just solve the problem by making it legal. Jimmy Savile would have liked this approach.
This is a perfectly reasonable and useful initiative by the Council, aimed at REDUCING illegal manoeuvres by cyclists. The Argus is increasingly tending towards a tabloid style, anti-liberal focus. Polarising your target market is a poor idea considering the demographic of the city...Greens may not be everyone's cup of tea but last tiem I check they were democratically elected??
Anyway, keep it up Argus, its a great website for a laugh even if I wouldnt dream of buying the paper.
mictrix
says...
11:01pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Barquentine
says...
11:30pm Thu 1 Nov 12
Hove Actually
says...
11:43pm Thu 1 Nov 12
How soon before we have conflict on a road where the new cycle lane markings do not run the whole length of the road.
PJW Brighton
says...
8:52am Fri 2 Nov 12
HJarrs
says...
9:27am Fri 2 Nov 12
A few weeks ago there was a similar story about Windmill St in Hanover. The council had got the signage wrong; the Argus reported correctly that cyclists were being directed illegally down a one way street. Credit to the council, the signage was quickly replaced with two way cycle signs, one way for motorised traffic. I noticed no follow up article (nor a follow up article about a bike parking in Hanover, which is fully used).
These North laine streets are no longer one way. They are becoming two way streets with one way restrictions for non-cycle transport. Quite right too and I can't believe it has taken so long. A poor reflection on previous administrations.
The only controversy would be if the council got the signage wrong again.
Things are looking up for those on a bike wanting to get into town for a part of Brighton. Perhaps by the end of next year there will be a much improved cycle route from the universities and Stanmer Park all the way down into the North and South laines.
PJW Brighton
says...
9:50am Fri 2 Nov 12
HJarrs wrote:Quite right. The Lewes Road improvements will help with this, but don't expect to read that in the Argus or to hear that from the usual suspects on this website.
Its the monthly bash a bike story! The Argus has as usual spun a positive story shamelessly to drum up controversy.
A few weeks ago there was a similar story about Windmill St in Hanover. The council had got the signage wrong; the Argus reported correctly that cyclists were being directed illegally down a one way street. Credit to the council, the signage was quickly replaced with two way cycle signs, one way for motorised traffic. I noticed no follow up article (nor a follow up article about a bike parking in Hanover, which is fully used).
These North laine streets are no longer one way. They are becoming two way streets with one way restrictions for non-cycle transport. Quite right too and I can't believe it has taken so long. A poor reflection on previous administrations.
The only controversy would be if the council got the signage wrong again.
Things are looking up for those on a bike wanting to get into town for a part of Brighton. Perhaps by the end of next year there will be a much improved cycle route from the universities and Stanmer Park all the way down into the North and South laines.
Bristol VR
says...
9:58am Fri 2 Nov 12
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
10:03am Fri 2 Nov 12
The cycle lanes are not policed so almost all of them have people parking in them, trying to find an available cycle rack in town is near impossible, the racks at the railway station are a haven for thieves, the city seems to have more than its fair share of spiteful bastards who stamp on wheels and the current council is driving a wedge between road users so its now not unusual to be verbally abused even by one of the city's monopoly company drivers and the shared cycle routes are dangerous and I suffered a broken collar bone on the seafront when a dog on an extendable lead ran across my path.
I think it's now more difficult than five years ago. Oh and don't forget the pedestrian crossings every ten metres which make cycling a staccato challenging experience.
But the comments about cycling being easier comes from casual users who choose a leisure route.
Joshiman
says...
10:11am Fri 2 Nov 12
Brightonscouse2
says...
10:16am Fri 2 Nov 12
Joshiman wrote:Some do already, try walking down Elm Grove with someone in a car following you so they can find a parking space.
Can car drivers now drive on the pavements to avoid the cyclists who have taken over the asylum that is Brighton.
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
10:21am Fri 2 Nov 12
The charges have had a huge impact in my area with businesses and visitors dumping their cars for free.
HJarrs
says...
11:00am Fri 2 Nov 12
Bristol VR wrote:Its ok. its coming out of my council tax from the bit that usually goes towards providing road markings and signage for motorists.
Can't see the point in wasting money on this... most cyclists cycle anywhere they like anyway so a complete waste of my council tax painting any cycle lanes & lines in this city
ripmaxman
says...
11:21am Fri 2 Nov 12
Cyclist ridding the wrong way down one way streets is a common occurrence in St Aubyns South and I have witnessed a number of near misses with cars going in the correct direction. I can see the headlines now “Cyclist mown down by car”.
As the council are supporting the cyclist (which I have no objection too) by giving them cycle lanes around the city and the seafront I would like them to take strong action against cyclist that ride on the pavements, ignore traffic lights, other road signs and not having lights.
I have personally been clipped by cyclists when crossing the road when they have jumped the lights and the pavement when you point out the wrongdoing all you get is a mouthful of abuse.
Green’s give the pavements back to pedestrians and introduce fines for any cyclist breaking the law!!!
Fercri Sakes
says...
12:38pm Fri 2 Nov 12
mictrix wrote:Do you really enjoy killing people and creating orphans? You need to go to Broadmoor or a war zone.
lol this council really doesn't know what to waste money on next hahaha its never going to work...lots of squished cyclists mwaah hahahahahahahahaha
Please keep away from the streets of Brighton.
Fercri Sakes
says...
12:43pm Fri 2 Nov 12
Bristol VR wrote:Thanks for adding to the debate here. Which such non-blinkered insight like this I really feel we can start to solve the road use issue we have in this city.
Can't see the point in wasting money on this... most cyclists cycle anywhere they like anyway so a complete waste of my council tax painting any cycle lanes & lines in this city
Your suggestion of the removal or road marking will help everybody get around that bit faster. Sure lives will be lost but that's the price people pay for leaving their homes and spending money in the local community.
Keep up the good work!
IndigoTram
says...
2:55pm Fri 2 Nov 12
The only "downside" is that all road users are going to have to accept that they need to learn to share the public space with everybody else.
VegasSeagull
says...
4:52pm Fri 2 Nov 12
In my city bike lanes don't exist as they think cars will use them or not respect them and that this will cause accidents.
It is easy to see a bike rider coming toward you and it's easy for the rider to see your car.
wander1er
says...
5:26pm Fri 2 Nov 12
How would it be argued out in court a vehicle hit another vehicle travelling legally in the wrong direction in a one way street?
mictrix
says...
7:05pm Fri 2 Nov 12
Fercri Sakes wrote:lol i think your find its the retards who are allowing cyclist to ride head on into a ton plus of cold steel that need to be in the asylum its all gonna end in tears hahahahahahahahahaha
mictrix wrote:Do you really enjoy killing people and creating orphans? You need to go to Broadmoor or a war zone.
lol this council really doesn't know what to waste money on next hahaha its never going to work...lots of squished cyclists mwaah hahahahahahahahaha
Please keep away from the streets of Brighton.
hahahahaha
hubby
says...
7:40pm Fri 2 Nov 12
Fercri Sakes
says...
8:03pm Fri 2 Nov 12
hubby wrote:It's so stupid that much of the civilised world has been using this system for years without any bad effects. How dare we steal some of the better ideas from other countries!
Stupider than the stupidest thing that the most stupid person in the world ever thought up in his most stupid moment ever.
But, as some the above posters have speculated, some British drivers may not have the intelligence or consideration to share the roads safely with cyclists. Along with a strange superiority that overcomes many drivers who see cyclists and pedestrians as second class citizens.
mictrix
says...
9:00pm Fri 2 Nov 12
Fercri Sakes wrote:no he is 100% correct THE most stupid idea ever.also remember the motorist is having to pay for all this nonsense as we pay extortionate rates of road tax etc lol
hubby wrote:It's so stupid that much of the civilised world has been using this system for years without any bad effects. How dare we steal some of the better ideas from other countries!
Stupider than the stupidest thing that the most stupid person in the world ever thought up in his most stupid moment ever.
But, as some the above posters have speculated, some British drivers may not have the intelligence or consideration to share the roads safely with cyclists. Along with a strange superiority that overcomes many drivers who see cyclists and pedestrians as second class citizens.
Helen Ariel
says...
11:29pm Fri 2 Nov 12
Fercri Sakes
says...
12:12am Sat 3 Nov 12
Helen Ariel wrote:He was either being sarcastic or incredibly stupid. Not sure which.
Most people who cycle also drive cars and pay road tax Mictrix! The 2 aren't mutually exclusive!!
michael201273
says...
3:41am Sat 3 Nov 12
76robmac
says...
7:42am Sat 3 Nov 12
hatstand123
says...
1:54pm Sat 3 Nov 12
And by the way cyclists pay more road tax than road users per km. Money for roads comes out of general taxation. The 'Road Tax' motorists pay is linked to the polluting ability of your car and is a way of paying for the damage that cars do to the environs
Dirk Von Roden
says...
6:11pm Sat 3 Nov 12
"IF" that is the way this country is becoming ffs let me out! open letter to B+H Council ¬ We do not change the law to suit a minority! we change laws that are wrong ! There is a process for changing a rule in Law and it is obvious you have disregarded this !
Old Ladys Gin
says...
10:53am Sun 4 Nov 12
The UK has the second (It may by now be the first) highest off crossing pedestrian casulty rate in the EU; decade after decade we resolutely refuse to follow our neighbours and do something inexpensive about it.
This present idea for the professional drivers among you has a familiar name - potentially dangerous!
hubby
says...
6:52pm Mon 5 Nov 12
hatstand123 wrote:I haven't seen it in Spain and I have been here 10 years.
This happens all over Europe. The apocalypse did not happen there despite drivers predicting carnage and some research has shown that it actually makes streets safer as drivers are more careful when cyclists and pedestrians are closer to them.
And by the way cyclists pay more road tax than road users per km. Money for roads comes out of general taxation. The 'Road Tax' motorists pay is linked to the polluting ability of your car and is a way of paying for the damage that cars do to the environs
Lots of cycle lanes though and God help the motorist if he hits a cyclist or motor cyclist.
When passing either you have to give them a metre and a halfs clearance,which the Spanish (who aren't the greatest drivers) actually take seriously.It's the ex pats who sqeeze past.
bruce_
says...
11:52am Wed 7 Nov 12
Purple55
says...
6:12pm Wed 7 Nov 12
As an aside, whilst Brighton is encouraging more cyclists in the town and changing laws to keep them happy, other cities are going in the opposite direction – http://menmedia.co.u
k/manchestereveningn
ews/news/s/1588902_h
undreds-fined-as-pol
ice-launch-crackdown
-on-pavement-cyclist
s – It seems to be totally ignored in this fluffy town that pavement cycling is an offence; our council wants more money (e.g. parking meters increase) so why not actually start fining law-breaking cyclists, it would raise a small fortune at £30 per offence!
On a final note, i've decided to walk down the middle of the road wearing hi-vis vest with BS6102/2 reflectors on my legs and LED flashing light on my head as the pavements are clearly no longer the pedestrian's domain.
P.S. http://www.ridingabi
ke.co.uk/html/cyclin
g_myths_busted.html#
CP
Lewesroadresident
says...
12:47pm Thu 8 Nov 12
This statement has as much fact to it as all of the comments about 'Them', i.e cyclists.
Some cyclists break laws. Some motorists break laws.
Everyday I see at least 4 vehicles go through red lights at the bottom of Elm Grove, and I'm only there for approximately 1 minute (waiting at red lights, funnily enough). I haven't noticed anyone crying out for more enforcement for motorists.
More cyclists reduce congestion, improve health, and reduce pollution. These things save us all money.
Can anyone here give me ONE negative result of having more cyclists on the roads?
davyboy
says...
1:01pm Thu 8 Nov 12
faded green
says...
2:32pm Thu 8 Nov 12
Now, sick humour aside, I wonder how the courts will rule when the inevitable happens.
Walking through the North Laine, I noticed that both Tidy Street and Kensington Place are now both way for bicycle traffic.
Why ?
These two streets are parallel, just a few meters apart. You enter Tidy Street from Trafalgar Street and exit into Trafalgar Street from Kensington Place.
Simples.
Until now.
Are cyclists that lazy that they cannot just use a simple one way system the way it was intended.
What is the point of making these 2 streets a potential hazard ?
peterthomas
says...
1:04pm Fri 30 Nov 12
ther road users/the need for lights at night etc etc. Make cyclists pay some road tax and carry insurance and use that money if you must - better still would be to enforce the highway code and prosecute a few of them instead of treating them like a protected species!
PorkBoat says...
3:23pm Thu 1 Nov 12