Cycle and bus lane deemed a success

The Argus: Cycle and bus lane deemed a success Cycle and bus lane deemed a success

A bus and cycle lane has been deemed a success after officials claimed car use was down by more than 10%.

Opinion has been split on Brighton and Hove City Council’s £1.9 million scheme for a two-mile stretch of dual carriageway in Lewes Road, Brighton.

Some claimed it has pushed people on to sustainable forms of transport, while others claimed it had caused congestion and delays.

But an official year-on-year survey by the local authority has shown that the number of cars and goods vehicles has dropped by nearly 2,000 vehicles a day.


MORE:


In the same time Brighton and Hove Bus Company has reported a seven per cent increase in the number of passengers, while 40% more taxis were recorded.

Ian Davey, the council’s lead member for transport, said: “It is still early days but already the scheme appears to be delivering exactly what we promised.

“More people are using buses, taxis and bikes to travel along this key route because it’s now safer and more reliable.”

The new wider bus and cycle lanes were opened in September after ten months of construction.

Research collected in October and November has been compared with the same period in 2012.

It shows the number of cars and lorries using the stretch between 7am and 7pm has decreased by 13 per cent, down from 18,377 to 16,035.

Despite bus passenger num- bers increasing, officials said both Brighton and Hove Buses and the Big Lemon are reporting improved punctuality and reliability.

The data also reported cycle trips are up 14%, from 2,085 to 2,383.

Officials added there had only been minimal increases in journey times for general traffic, with a typical trip from Falmer to Old Steine in the morning increasing from 14 minutes to 15 minutes.

The reverse journey in the evening takes about a minute-and-a-half longer.

Officials also rejected any suggestion of increased rat-running in adjacent streets and significant displacement into other routes such as Ditchling Road and London Road.

However, Katie Baines, who lives in Hove but works off Lewes Road, said there had been an “utter destruction” of Lewes Road and her morning commute had doubled in time from 15 minutes to 30 minutes.

To mark the report, passengers can buy a week’s travel on the new route on Brighton and Hove Buses’ smartphone app for £9.99.

Comments (112)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:44am Thu 12 Dec 13

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! says...

One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power.

HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here.

Brighton ghetto
One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power. HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here. Brighton ghetto I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars!

8:52am Thu 12 Dec 13

fred clause says...

So your just gonna spout crap then Hjarrs we all know this is just green bull not one person I have spoken too who uses this route says it is now better.
So your just gonna spout crap then Hjarrs we all know this is just green bull not one person I have spoken too who uses this route says it is now better. fred clause

8:52am Thu 12 Dec 13

Cov Boy says...

Lie, **** lies and statistics!!!. I for one now avoid Lewes Road for my daily commute to work. As for saying the time from Falmer to Old Steine takes a minute longer, absolute tosh. I've seen traffic queues backed up to Coldean Lane.
Lie, **** lies and statistics!!!. I for one now avoid Lewes Road for my daily commute to work. As for saying the time from Falmer to Old Steine takes a minute longer, absolute tosh. I've seen traffic queues backed up to Coldean Lane. Cov Boy

8:56am Thu 12 Dec 13

s&k says...

The journey for cars is undoubtedly worse, funnelled into one lane. Better for buses and cyclists perhaps.
The journey for cars is undoubtedly worse, funnelled into one lane. Better for buses and cyclists perhaps. s&k

8:57am Thu 12 Dec 13

NickBtn says...

We always knew that the Lewes Road scheme would be hailed as a success by the council. The statistics here are amazing. What we see with our own eyes is quite different

When I was sitting in a queue on Lewes Road yesterday (outside rush hour at a time then the council's press release says that queues don't happen) I counted the number of bikes. Nothing like the number predicted by nearly 100 each hour every hour (as 2300 per day gives you). Congestion and journey times have definitely gone up. Rat run use of other roads too (which I must admit that I now do at peak time and travel more miles to avoid the previously quite reliable Lewes Road). And pollution up too presumably.

But I understand that all of these queues and pollution that I see aren't really happening. The council figures are correct and I will adjust my attitude to think of this as a success.....
We always knew that the Lewes Road scheme would be hailed as a success by the council. The statistics here are amazing. What we see with our own eyes is quite different When I was sitting in a queue on Lewes Road yesterday (outside rush hour at a time then the council's press release says that queues don't happen) I counted the number of bikes. Nothing like the number predicted by nearly 100 each hour every hour (as 2300 per day gives you). Congestion and journey times have definitely gone up. Rat run use of other roads too (which I must admit that I now do at peak time and travel more miles to avoid the previously quite reliable Lewes Road). And pollution up too presumably. But I understand that all of these queues and pollution that I see aren't really happening. The council figures are correct and I will adjust my attitude to think of this as a success..... NickBtn

8:57am Thu 12 Dec 13

falmer seagull says...

Perhaps the motorists have a brain and use a different route!
Perhaps the motorists have a brain and use a different route! falmer seagull

9:02am Thu 12 Dec 13

makoshark says...

I'm confused! Allegedly there has been a 10% decrease in vehicle use yet a 40% increase in taxi use! Are taxis not vehicles then?
I'm confused! Allegedly there has been a 10% decrease in vehicle use yet a 40% increase in taxi use! Are taxis not vehicles then? makoshark

9:04am Thu 12 Dec 13

Fight_Back says...

I don't know how they measure these things but it has NEVER been possible to get from Falmer to the Old Steine in 14 minutes during rush hour. When did they measure it ? Sunday morning at 6am ?
I don't know how they measure these things but it has NEVER been possible to get from Falmer to the Old Steine in 14 minutes during rush hour. When did they measure it ? Sunday morning at 6am ? Fight_Back

9:09am Thu 12 Dec 13

Tailgaters Anonymous says...

Probably the 2000 fewer are postponed perennially to feature in the next day's count or as other posters say, choosing different routes to avoid the congestion these crass measures have caused.
Probably the 2000 fewer are postponed perennially to feature in the next day's count or as other posters say, choosing different routes to avoid the congestion these crass measures have caused. Tailgaters Anonymous

9:12am Thu 12 Dec 13

bigandugly says...

Absolute rubbish report. Motorists are using other routes instead, and despite that, the queues are horrendous and delays inevitably longer. Complete waste of tax payers money. Again.
Absolute rubbish report. Motorists are using other routes instead, and despite that, the queues are horrendous and delays inevitably longer. Complete waste of tax payers money. Again. bigandugly

9:20am Thu 12 Dec 13

salty_pete says...

Obviously we have regressed to 1984 and this item of newspeak issued by the Ministry of Truth should be regarded as fact (apologies to G. Orwell)
Obviously we have regressed to 1984 and this item of newspeak issued by the Ministry of Truth should be regarded as fact (apologies to G. Orwell) salty_pete

9:22am Thu 12 Dec 13

Morpheus says...

Perhaps it is time for a naked car drive to claim the empty roads back.
Perhaps it is time for a naked car drive to claim the empty roads back. Morpheus

9:30am Thu 12 Dec 13

Crystal Ball says...

It can only be called a success inasmuch that traffic has reduced in "that area".

Due to BHCC's lack of foresight and arrogance, all they have succeeded in doing is pushing the traffic to areas that are unable to cope with large volumes i.e. single carriageway b-roads with the irony that the dual carriageway Lewes Road was actually able to carry larger volumes of vehicles prior to the debacle that has ensued.

If there had been any grain of thought in Kings House then implementation of a bus lane would have taken the form of timed, peak-hour, closures with the road being fully open during all other times. But thought requires a modicum of brain cells...
It can only be called a success inasmuch that traffic has reduced in "that area". Due to BHCC's lack of foresight and arrogance, all they have succeeded in doing is pushing the traffic to areas that are unable to cope with large volumes i.e. single carriageway b-roads with the irony that the dual carriageway Lewes Road was actually able to carry larger volumes of vehicles prior to the debacle that has ensued. If there had been any grain of thought in Kings House then implementation of a bus lane would have taken the form of timed, peak-hour, closures with the road being fully open during all other times. But thought requires a modicum of brain cells... Crystal Ball

9:32am Thu 12 Dec 13

upsidedowntuctuc says...

What a load of absolute Bull crap!
typical of Davey empty head.
Bullying people away from Brighton is the real statistic here
This saddo has 17 months left
What a load of absolute Bull crap! typical of Davey empty head. Bullying people away from Brighton is the real statistic here This saddo has 17 months left upsidedowntuctuc

9:33am Thu 12 Dec 13

PaulOckenden says...

The only possible way they could get the "one extra minute" figure would be for the initial figure to come from during uni/school term time, and the after figure recorded when they are all on holiday.

I regularly take an extra 10mins to get from Coldean Lane to the Gyratory, and that includes bombing through the side streets north of the railway bridge.
The only possible way they could get the "one extra minute" figure would be for the initial figure to come from during uni/school term time, and the after figure recorded when they are all on holiday. I regularly take an extra 10mins to get from Coldean Lane to the Gyratory, and that includes bombing through the side streets north of the railway bridge. PaulOckenden

9:43am Thu 12 Dec 13

DC Brighton says...

Another entirely anecdotal piece of "evidence" from our so-called "lead member for transport". There's not a shred of real research here - just a half-baked vehicle count. Any entry-level statistician would laugh at this. No measurement of the surrounding roads (the rat runs), measured over a very short period....I could go on. Not to mention the heroic (and untested) assumption that X leads to Y. There is no actual evidence to suggest that more cyclists on this route equals less cars. The council would actually need to speak to people to discover this, which they are too arrogant and too afraid to do.

Better not to treat us like fools and keep this rubbish to yourselves.

On another note, since when has an increase in taxi journeys been part of the green agenda? Driving diesel Skodas up and down Lewes Road all day is really not helping the environment.
Another entirely anecdotal piece of "evidence" from our so-called "lead member for transport". There's not a shred of real research here - just a half-baked vehicle count. Any entry-level statistician would laugh at this. No measurement of the surrounding roads (the rat runs), measured over a very short period....I could go on. Not to mention the heroic (and untested) assumption that X leads to Y. There is no actual evidence to suggest that more cyclists on this route equals less cars. The council would actually need to speak to people to discover this, which they are too arrogant and too afraid to do. Better not to treat us like fools and keep this rubbish to yourselves. On another note, since when has an increase in taxi journeys been part of the green agenda? Driving diesel Skodas up and down Lewes Road all day is really not helping the environment. DC Brighton

9:45am Thu 12 Dec 13

Sussex jim says...

I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean.
I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?
I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean. I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it? Sussex jim

10:06am Thu 12 Dec 13

Cov Boy says...

I see the picture seems to have cut off the sign on the corner of Lewes Road and Coombe Road asking for witnesses to a collision that happened there!!!
I see the picture seems to have cut off the sign on the corner of Lewes Road and Coombe Road asking for witnesses to a collision that happened there!!! Cov Boy

10:09am Thu 12 Dec 13

Cov Boy says...

I believe there is a public meeting in Moulescomb Leisure Centre on 13th December to discuss the 'improvements' to Lewes Road.
I believe there is a public meeting in Moulescomb Leisure Centre on 13th December to discuss the 'improvements' to Lewes Road. Cov Boy

10:18am Thu 12 Dec 13

bikerjimbo says...

This news item arrived just at the right time for me. Yesterday I drove from the gyratory en route to B&Q which meant I was in the outside lane but had to turn right before the traffic lights. Fortunately I have advance training because as I began to turn, having indicated my intention for about 75 metres, I saw a taxi speeding along on my nearside I slowed, turned to my right and allowed him to pass and believe me it was a bit 'tight'. I estimated his speed about 40 mph. My point is it is these turns across a traffic flow who believe they have right of way which is a danger. Having left B&Q I headed for Coldean Lane to be greeted with a yellow police accident appeal sign re an accident in the vicinity of the Coombe Road/Lewes Road junction. This is one hell of a stupid road scheme but I know we have got to get used to it along with a 20mph speed limit all over Brighton which I don't think will ever be reversed for financial reasons. I feel Brighton is now a very sad place to live in.
This news item arrived just at the right time for me. Yesterday I drove from the gyratory en route to B&Q which meant I was in the outside lane but had to turn right before the traffic lights. Fortunately I have advance training because as I began to turn, having indicated my intention for about 75 metres, I saw a taxi speeding along on my nearside I slowed, turned to my right and allowed him to pass and believe me it was a bit 'tight'. I estimated his speed about 40 mph. My point is it is these turns across a traffic flow who believe they have right of way which is a danger. Having left B&Q I headed for Coldean Lane to be greeted with a yellow police accident appeal sign re an accident in the vicinity of the Coombe Road/Lewes Road junction. This is one hell of a stupid road scheme but I know we have got to get used to it along with a 20mph speed limit all over Brighton which I don't think will ever be reversed for financial reasons. I feel Brighton is now a very sad place to live in. bikerjimbo

10:24am Thu 12 Dec 13

Brighton Living says...

All they have took in to account the residents of Brighton and the turnover of both students and migrants that have come to Brighton to study or work in hotels and use a bike @ first before abandoning them on the streets. Plus do they monitor other areas because I avoid this road because there still is road works and the bus lane is a hazard for al,l because the markings and signage is that bad not to mention the pot holes. Think again about the word success because most would call it a disaster area, but the green spin it as a success because they are out of touch with the residents and don't listen that show it's incompetents. GET THEM OUT!
All they have took in to account the residents of Brighton and the turnover of both students and migrants that have come to Brighton to study or work in hotels and use a bike @ first before abandoning them on the streets. Plus do they monitor other areas because I avoid this road because there still is road works and the bus lane is a hazard for al,l because the markings and signage is that bad not to mention the pot holes. Think again about the word success because most would call it a disaster area, but the green spin it as a success because they are out of touch with the residents and don't listen that show it's incompetents. GET THEM OUT! Brighton Living

10:37am Thu 12 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

The residents of Woodingdean and Ditchling Road and Hollingbury will tell you different.
The traffic now comes off the A27 and heads into the town via these routes. At 6.30pm last night the traffic on Ditchling Road was queued up past the speed camera. My mate who lives along thee says it was never, ever like that.
The residents in Woodingdean will tell you the same.
The cycle lane on the Lewes road has not changed since a year ago. There are bits where the lane goes behind bus stops but as a cyclists on this route, the Lewes road is still ****.
Last night there were five cars parked in the cycle lane at Elm Grove, then two more outside Grubbs burgers. The road surface itself is shocking. This morning I cycled along the Upper Lewes Road. The road surface is appalling and downright dangerous.
So suddenly a newly painted line on the Lewes road makes people jump on buses and bikes. No it hasn't. People are driving different routes. I live off the Lewes road and I also drive and ride a motorbike, I now never, ever use the Lewes Road by car, I cut up Woodingdean and Ditchling just like everyone else.
Do these council officers actually live locally.
The residents of Woodingdean and Ditchling Road and Hollingbury will tell you different. The traffic now comes off the A27 and heads into the town via these routes. At 6.30pm last night the traffic on Ditchling Road was queued up past the speed camera. My mate who lives along thee says it was never, ever like that. The residents in Woodingdean will tell you the same. The cycle lane on the Lewes road has not changed since a year ago. There are bits where the lane goes behind bus stops but as a cyclists on this route, the Lewes road is still ****. Last night there were five cars parked in the cycle lane at Elm Grove, then two more outside Grubbs burgers. The road surface itself is shocking. This morning I cycled along the Upper Lewes Road. The road surface is appalling and downright dangerous. So suddenly a newly painted line on the Lewes road makes people jump on buses and bikes. No it hasn't. People are driving different routes. I live off the Lewes road and I also drive and ride a motorbike, I now never, ever use the Lewes Road by car, I cut up Woodingdean and Ditchling just like everyone else. Do these council officers actually live locally. Maxwell's Ghost

10:45am Thu 12 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

As for the 40 percent increase in taxis that's because taxis can use both the bus and vehicle lane and they weave in and out of the traffic something the buses cannot do so they are now the only form of transport which can get you to a destination on time.
I now use taxis to get me to the station for a London commute as the buses are now so unreliable on this route unless you leave vast amounts of time to get a short distance. only last night the bus company issued travel info to radio travel bulletins that congestion was causing delays in the town.
Madness but great business for the taxis. If we continue to see a growth in taxi numbers it will outweigh the claimed savings.
Idiots at the council.
As for the 40 percent increase in taxis that's because taxis can use both the bus and vehicle lane and they weave in and out of the traffic something the buses cannot do so they are now the only form of transport which can get you to a destination on time. I now use taxis to get me to the station for a London commute as the buses are now so unreliable on this route unless you leave vast amounts of time to get a short distance. only last night the bus company issued travel info to radio travel bulletins that congestion was causing delays in the town. Madness but great business for the taxis. If we continue to see a growth in taxi numbers it will outweigh the claimed savings. Idiots at the council. Maxwell's Ghost

10:45am Thu 12 Dec 13

gheese77 says...

Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove. gheese77

10:46am Thu 12 Dec 13

The Prophet of Doom says...

How can BHCC's report on the results be objective and impartial? It was always going to be a self-congratulatory "pat on the back", just like most of the hair-brained schemes they dream up and, sadly, implement at the detriment of the tax paying residents.

A bit like a student marking their own work and claiming to have gained a PhD...
How can BHCC's report on the results be objective and impartial? It was always going to be a self-congratulatory "pat on the back", just like most of the hair-brained schemes they dream up and, sadly, implement at the detriment of the tax paying residents. A bit like a student marking their own work and claiming to have gained a PhD... The Prophet of Doom

10:52am Thu 12 Dec 13

Joshiman says...

I never use this route anymore.Anyone with any intelligence avoids it.
I do the same when using the A259 .I cut through Ovingdean.
Motorists have had enough of the spin .Incidently I really feel sorry for pedestrians and cyclists in Brighton at night.The new (not fit for purpose street lights) are so dark its difficult to see them when driving even at 20 mph which no one bothers with anyway.
I never use this route anymore.Anyone with any intelligence avoids it. I do the same when using the A259 .I cut through Ovingdean. Motorists have had enough of the spin .Incidently I really feel sorry for pedestrians and cyclists in Brighton at night.The new (not fit for purpose street lights) are so dark its difficult to see them when driving even at 20 mph which no one bothers with anyway. Joshiman

11:00am Thu 12 Dec 13

charlie smirke says...

It seems to me that all politicians are inherent liars but these green idiots are far worse than most.
It seems to me that all politicians are inherent liars but these green idiots are far worse than most. charlie smirke

11:00am Thu 12 Dec 13

whatevernext2013 says...

i wonder what effect the new bus/cycle lane has had on local businesses on the Lewes road ,i have not been to any of them in over a year ,spending my money elsewhere
i wonder what effect the new bus/cycle lane has had on local businesses on the Lewes road ,i have not been to any of them in over a year ,spending my money elsewhere whatevernext2013

11:08am Thu 12 Dec 13

whatevernext2013 says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The residents of Woodingdean and Ditchling Road and Hollingbury will tell you different.
The traffic now comes off the A27 and heads into the town via these routes. At 6.30pm last night the traffic on Ditchling Road was queued up past the speed camera. My mate who lives along thee says it was never, ever like that.
The residents in Woodingdean will tell you the same.
The cycle lane on the Lewes road has not changed since a year ago. There are bits where the lane goes behind bus stops but as a cyclists on this route, the Lewes road is still ****.
Last night there were five cars parked in the cycle lane at Elm Grove, then two more outside Grubbs burgers. The road surface itself is shocking. This morning I cycled along the Upper Lewes Road. The road surface is appalling and downright dangerous.
So suddenly a newly painted line on the Lewes road makes people jump on buses and bikes. No it hasn't. People are driving different routes. I live off the Lewes road and I also drive and ride a motorbike, I now never, ever use the Lewes Road by car, I cut up Woodingdean and Ditchling just like everyone else.
Do these council officers actually live locally.
i am still struggling as to how a white line costs so much ,the LEWES rd is shocking, for the cost of the scheme i would have expected a resurfaced road
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The residents of Woodingdean and Ditchling Road and Hollingbury will tell you different. The traffic now comes off the A27 and heads into the town via these routes. At 6.30pm last night the traffic on Ditchling Road was queued up past the speed camera. My mate who lives along thee says it was never, ever like that. The residents in Woodingdean will tell you the same. The cycle lane on the Lewes road has not changed since a year ago. There are bits where the lane goes behind bus stops but as a cyclists on this route, the Lewes road is still ****. Last night there were five cars parked in the cycle lane at Elm Grove, then two more outside Grubbs burgers. The road surface itself is shocking. This morning I cycled along the Upper Lewes Road. The road surface is appalling and downright dangerous. So suddenly a newly painted line on the Lewes road makes people jump on buses and bikes. No it hasn't. People are driving different routes. I live off the Lewes road and I also drive and ride a motorbike, I now never, ever use the Lewes Road by car, I cut up Woodingdean and Ditchling just like everyone else. Do these council officers actually live locally.[/p][/quote]i am still struggling as to how a white line costs so much ,the LEWES rd is shocking, for the cost of the scheme i would have expected a resurfaced road whatevernext2013

11:15am Thu 12 Dec 13

Mr Baxter , London says...

HOw is it progressive to force people out of their highly ttaxed cars into a private company operating a for profit bus service?

Will that bus service get me around on Christmas day? You betcha (NOT)
HOw is it progressive to force people out of their highly ttaxed cars into a private company operating a for profit bus service? Will that bus service get me around on Christmas day? You betcha (NOT) Mr Baxter , London

11:41am Thu 12 Dec 13

micklin says...

What a load of utter rubbish, get rid off this council that is slowly but surely killing this city
What a load of utter rubbish, get rid off this council that is slowly but surely killing this city micklin

11:58am Thu 12 Dec 13

wippasnapper says...

It comes as no surprise to hear the Green run council is playing down the rat-running in other streets to bypass the congested Lewes Rd as a survey was probably only dun on the Lewes Rd and probably not on any of the other streets to show traffic had increased duo to the congestion and delays on the Lewes Road.

And duo to the congestion it comes as no surprise many have taken to using the busses or taxis as to more taking to there bicycles I wouldn’t be to shore but I am shore of one thing there appears to be more cyclists using the public footpaths sins the cycle lain was put in place and there appears to be a grater number of cyclists not using lights at night witch is a criminal offence.

I was watching something on TV this morning and it was stated that even though Trucks only make up to 8% of traffic usage on the roads more accidents had accrued between cyclists and Lorry’s and the government was rolling out training courses for lorry drivers so they became more aware of cyclists witch to be honest it made me shake my head as anyone of use could quite honestly say through observation that it was the cyclists that needed to be aware of Lorry’s on the road and it’s the cyclists that should be taking an aware courses!

Lets be honest if motorcyclists did what most cyclists do on the roads more of them would become sacristies and the government would step in but it appears if you’re a cyclist your less likely to be the course of a fatal accident than any other road user even if the cyclist was the course of the accident duo to there lack of awareness… so its about time the government made it a legal requirement that all cyclists that an awareness course to become more aware of other road uses like lorry’s that need that extra room!
It comes as no surprise to hear the Green run council is playing down the rat-running in other streets to bypass the congested Lewes Rd as a survey was probably only dun on the Lewes Rd and probably not on any of the other streets to show traffic had increased duo to the congestion and delays on the Lewes Road. And duo to the congestion it comes as no surprise many have taken to using the busses or taxis as to more taking to there bicycles I wouldn’t be to shore but I am shore of one thing there appears to be more cyclists using the public footpaths sins the cycle lain was put in place and there appears to be a grater number of cyclists not using lights at night witch is a criminal offence. I was watching something on TV this morning and it was stated that even though Trucks only make up to 8% of traffic usage on the roads more accidents had accrued between cyclists and Lorry’s and the government was rolling out training courses for lorry drivers so they became more aware of cyclists witch to be honest it made me shake my head as anyone of use could quite honestly say through observation that it was the cyclists that needed to be aware of Lorry’s on the road and it’s the cyclists that should be taking an aware courses! Lets be honest if motorcyclists did what most cyclists do on the roads more of them would become sacristies and the government would step in but it appears if you’re a cyclist your less likely to be the course of a fatal accident than any other road user even if the cyclist was the course of the accident duo to there lack of awareness… so its about time the government made it a legal requirement that all cyclists that an awareness course to become more aware of other road uses like lorry’s that need that extra room! wippasnapper

12:02pm Thu 12 Dec 13

thevoiceoftruth says...

I have never read such nonsense in my life. Ian Davey, come up here and hold a public meeting with the residents so we can tell you face to face what we think.

2,000 cars are now heading through the back streets, cutting through Woodingdean and taking any other route possible. You have just shifted the problem elsewhere.

14 minutes to get to from Falmer to Old Steine and 15 minutes back? Are you in a flying car? It now takes 14 minutes or more for me to get to the end of my road (which is just off Lewes Road) and round the gyratory!

Utter bull, all of it. This article has really raised my blood pressure!
I have never read such nonsense in my life. Ian Davey, come up here and hold a public meeting with the residents so we can tell you face to face what we think. 2,000 cars are now heading through the back streets, cutting through Woodingdean and taking any other route possible. You have just shifted the problem elsewhere. 14 minutes to get to from Falmer to Old Steine and 15 minutes back? Are you in a flying car? It now takes 14 minutes or more for me to get to the end of my road (which is just off Lewes Road) and round the gyratory! Utter bull, all of it. This article has really raised my blood pressure! thevoiceoftruth

12:04pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

I have two bikes, a road and hybrid. I never use the road bike in town as the surfaces are shocking. However, the Upper Lewes Road and the section of road opposite the Level at Southover Street and the old technical college are just unacceptable and yet we have to use them to get to the Lewes road lane so I am shocked that Davey suddenly thinks a small stretch of cycle lane suddenly generates a mass change in human behaviour. Is he thick? I am actually considering changing my hybrid for an off-road bike with shock absorbers because it's a dangerous and bone shaking experience riding in this town. To cycle along the Upper Lewes Road one had to cycle in the centre of the road.
I have two bikes, a road and hybrid. I never use the road bike in town as the surfaces are shocking. However, the Upper Lewes Road and the section of road opposite the Level at Southover Street and the old technical college are just unacceptable and yet we have to use them to get to the Lewes road lane so I am shocked that Davey suddenly thinks a small stretch of cycle lane suddenly generates a mass change in human behaviour. Is he thick? I am actually considering changing my hybrid for an off-road bike with shock absorbers because it's a dangerous and bone shaking experience riding in this town. To cycle along the Upper Lewes Road one had to cycle in the centre of the road. Maxwell's Ghost

12:22pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Mark63 says...

A success for their own selfish ideas maybe but what about they people they have forced out of their cars due to congestion and charges? What of their needs and human rights? Now they have to share the smelly loud bus service full of inconsiderate louts and drunks, not to mention foul language from youngsters who need teaching a lesson. Selfish Council - simple!
A success for their own selfish ideas maybe but what about they people they have forced out of their cars due to congestion and charges? What of their needs and human rights? Now they have to share the smelly loud bus service full of inconsiderate louts and drunks, not to mention foul language from youngsters who need teaching a lesson. Selfish Council - simple! Mark63

12:54pm Thu 12 Dec 13

fredaj says...

Whatever - because nobody is fooled.
Whatever - because nobody is fooled. fredaj

1:03pm Thu 12 Dec 13

the red head says...

All of the new road measures have been very successful... In making traffic find alternative routes. Idiotic spin from the council again. I avoid this area now and regret the impact on now more favoured routes but I have to get to work on time.
All of the new road measures have been very successful... In making traffic find alternative routes. Idiotic spin from the council again. I avoid this area now and regret the impact on now more favoured routes but I have to get to work on time. the red head

1:09pm Thu 12 Dec 13

BrightonHoveboy says...

Crystal Ball wrote:
It can only be called a success inasmuch that traffic has reduced in "that area".

Due to BHCC's lack of foresight and arrogance, all they have succeeded in doing is pushing the traffic to areas that are unable to cope with large volumes i.e. single carriageway b-roads with the irony that the dual carriageway Lewes Road was actually able to carry larger volumes of vehicles prior to the debacle that has ensued.

If there had been any grain of thought in Kings House then implementation of a bus lane would have taken the form of timed, peak-hour, closures with the road being fully open during all other times. But thought requires a modicum of brain cells...
A brain cell in Kings House? What a novel idea! In the last few years the traffic schemes have resulted in a VAST increase in pollution and congestion acrooss Brighton AND Hove. It is now an awful place to live now thanks to these Green politicians who have come to OUR town to ruin it.
And as one of those people who can use the bus lanes, I see nothing but frustration causing bad driving, understandably so, when these problems are "man-made" ( I use that term very loosely), and recent. My fuel usage has gone UP, for a given mileage so there must be more pollution- more expense, and we're being poisoned by the council too.
Oh, and I would love a 40% increase in my money please? My business certainly has not shown much up, bar the usual pre-Christmas increase that will soon die a death.
[quote][p][bold]Crystal Ball[/bold] wrote: It can only be called a success inasmuch that traffic has reduced in "that area". Due to BHCC's lack of foresight and arrogance, all they have succeeded in doing is pushing the traffic to areas that are unable to cope with large volumes i.e. single carriageway b-roads with the irony that the dual carriageway Lewes Road was actually able to carry larger volumes of vehicles prior to the debacle that has ensued. If there had been any grain of thought in Kings House then implementation of a bus lane would have taken the form of timed, peak-hour, closures with the road being fully open during all other times. But thought requires a modicum of brain cells...[/p][/quote]A brain cell in Kings House? What a novel idea! In the last few years the traffic schemes have resulted in a VAST increase in pollution and congestion acrooss Brighton AND Hove. It is now an awful place to live now thanks to these Green politicians who have come to OUR town to ruin it. And as one of those people who can use the bus lanes, I see nothing but frustration causing bad driving, understandably so, when these problems are "man-made" ( I use that term very loosely), and recent. My fuel usage has gone UP, for a given mileage so there must be more pollution- more expense, and we're being poisoned by the council too. Oh, and I would love a 40% increase in my money please? My business certainly has not shown much up, bar the usual pre-Christmas increase that will soon die a death. BrightonHoveboy

1:09pm Thu 12 Dec 13

BrightonHoveboy says...

Crystal Ball wrote:
It can only be called a success inasmuch that traffic has reduced in "that area".

Due to BHCC's lack of foresight and arrogance, all they have succeeded in doing is pushing the traffic to areas that are unable to cope with large volumes i.e. single carriageway b-roads with the irony that the dual carriageway Lewes Road was actually able to carry larger volumes of vehicles prior to the debacle that has ensued.

If there had been any grain of thought in Kings House then implementation of a bus lane would have taken the form of timed, peak-hour, closures with the road being fully open during all other times. But thought requires a modicum of brain cells...
A brain cell in Kings House? What a novel idea! In the last few years the traffic schemes have resulted in a VAST increase in pollution and congestion acrooss Brighton AND Hove. It is now an awful place to live now thanks to these Green politicians who have come to OUR town to ruin it.
And as one of those people who can use the bus lanes, I see nothing but frustration causing bad driving, understandably so, when these problems are "man-made" ( I use that term very loosely), and recent. My fuel usage has gone UP, for a given mileage so there must be more pollution- more expense, and we're being poisoned by the council too.
Oh, and I would love a 40% increase in my money please? My business certainly has not shown much up, bar the usual pre-Christmas increase that will soon die a death.
[quote][p][bold]Crystal Ball[/bold] wrote: It can only be called a success inasmuch that traffic has reduced in "that area". Due to BHCC's lack of foresight and arrogance, all they have succeeded in doing is pushing the traffic to areas that are unable to cope with large volumes i.e. single carriageway b-roads with the irony that the dual carriageway Lewes Road was actually able to carry larger volumes of vehicles prior to the debacle that has ensued. If there had been any grain of thought in Kings House then implementation of a bus lane would have taken the form of timed, peak-hour, closures with the road being fully open during all other times. But thought requires a modicum of brain cells...[/p][/quote]A brain cell in Kings House? What a novel idea! In the last few years the traffic schemes have resulted in a VAST increase in pollution and congestion acrooss Brighton AND Hove. It is now an awful place to live now thanks to these Green politicians who have come to OUR town to ruin it. And as one of those people who can use the bus lanes, I see nothing but frustration causing bad driving, understandably so, when these problems are "man-made" ( I use that term very loosely), and recent. My fuel usage has gone UP, for a given mileage so there must be more pollution- more expense, and we're being poisoned by the council too. Oh, and I would love a 40% increase in my money please? My business certainly has not shown much up, bar the usual pre-Christmas increase that will soon die a death. BrightonHoveboy

1:10pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Bob_The_Ferret says...

gheese77 wrote:
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Poor air quality which will only get worse with traffic slowed down to a crawl by the scheme!
[quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.[/p][/quote]Poor air quality which will only get worse with traffic slowed down to a crawl by the scheme! Bob_The_Ferret

1:16pm Thu 12 Dec 13

wippasnapper says...

A message to the green councilors and council officers of B&HCC take your heads out of your anises and breathe the toxic prelusion you have moved from the Lewes Rd to other parts of Brighton to get a true data that you sweep beneath the carpet of you bull-S**T
A message to the green councilors and council officers of B&HCC take your heads out of your anises and breathe the toxic prelusion you have moved from the Lewes Rd to other parts of Brighton to get a true data that you sweep beneath the carpet of you bull-S**T wippasnapper

1:21pm Thu 12 Dec 13

gheese77 says...

Bob_The_Ferret wrote:
gheese77 wrote:
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Poor air quality which will only get worse with traffic slowed down to a crawl by the scheme!
For your information air quality was bad enough before the scheme that the council (not green at that time) was legally obliged to take measures to improve it.
[quote][p][bold]Bob_The_Ferret[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.[/p][/quote]Poor air quality which will only get worse with traffic slowed down to a crawl by the scheme![/p][/quote]For your information air quality was bad enough before the scheme that the council (not green at that time) was legally obliged to take measures to improve it. gheese77

1:26pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Cyril Bolleaux says...

At 5:30PM tonight or any weekday night go to http://www.bbc.co.uk
/travelnews/sussex
You will not be able to see Brighton because it will be covered by signs showing travel delays.
I suggest the Argus gets an independent polling company to question local people regarding their quality of life - has it got better or worse as a result of the Green traffic policy? Mine has got worse.
At 5:30PM tonight or any weekday night go to http://www.bbc.co.uk /travelnews/sussex You will not be able to see Brighton because it will be covered by signs showing travel delays. I suggest the Argus gets an independent polling company to question local people regarding their quality of life - has it got better or worse as a result of the Green traffic policy? Mine has got worse. Cyril Bolleaux

2:21pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Thumper Hove says...

Of course the Greens will say that this has been a success, they don't measure according to traffic flow. The so-called drop in car numbers is the number of car drivers using alternative routes into Brighton as this area has now become a nightmare. If the Greens are so confident that this has not happened then why haven't they measured this??

Whoopeedo that they claim more cyclists use the area now (no doubt less now cold weather has arrived)......how about they do some measuring of the failure of the Old Shoreham Road cycle-way. Millions spent and the only thing has been massive tailbacks. Well done Greens, your mission to destroy our city is the only success of your administration.
Of course the Greens will say that this has been a success, they don't measure according to traffic flow. The so-called drop in car numbers is the number of car drivers using alternative routes into Brighton as this area has now become a nightmare. If the Greens are so confident that this has not happened then why haven't they measured this?? Whoopeedo that they claim more cyclists use the area now (no doubt less now cold weather has arrived)......how about they do some measuring of the failure of the Old Shoreham Road cycle-way. Millions spent and the only thing has been massive tailbacks. Well done Greens, your mission to destroy our city is the only success of your administration. Thumper Hove

2:31pm Thu 12 Dec 13

NickBtn says...

The bus offer is quite cynical. It is only for the 23/25 route - ie mainly the student routes and not all of the routes which use the Lewes Road. And, even better, it starts just as the student term ends and finishes and the students return... So a clever way of getting a headline while giving very little away.

Why doesn't the bus company give this "celebration" offer to all services which use the Lewes Road (eg. 48, 49, 28, 29, 81)
The bus offer is quite cynical. It is only for the 23/25 route - ie mainly the student routes and not all of the routes which use the Lewes Road. And, even better, it starts just as the student term ends and finishes and the students return... So a clever way of getting a headline while giving very little away. Why doesn't the bus company give this "celebration" offer to all services which use the Lewes Road (eg. 48, 49, 28, 29, 81) NickBtn

2:47pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Mr P Brown says...

But an official year-on-year survey by the local authority has shown that the number of cars and goods vehicles has dropped by nearly 2,000 vehicles a day.. . . . . . Maybe they could now tell us how many more vehicles a day are using Ditchling Road, Falmer Road and the backstreets round Coombe Road etc . I'm sure they will say that the traffic flow has not changed, because everything they say is undiluted bu//**** Roll on 2015
But an official year-on-year survey by the local authority has shown that the number of cars and goods vehicles has dropped by nearly 2,000 vehicles a day.. . . . . . Maybe they could now tell us how many more vehicles a day are using Ditchling Road, Falmer Road and the backstreets round Coombe Road etc . I'm sure they will say that the traffic flow has not changed, because everything they say is undiluted bu//**** Roll on 2015 Mr P Brown

3:18pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

And when it snows the buses along the route get cancelled as the unis shut down so sod anyone else who has to get to work. Any transport modifications have been for the unis who plan a further 5,000 more kids in the city yet none of the student homes are being built on their car parks. In fact the Preston Barracks on the Lewes Road will have students homes with 550 parking spaces. Mr Davey is economical with the truth and he should be ashamed of himself.
Last year my wife had to get her car off Bear Road and drive all over the city collecting nurses from their homes so they could keep shifts covered because the bus company refused to run services along the flat Lewes Road but no one from the Green Party said a word about the disappointing service.
If you work from home or potter about in retirement like the time rich Greens and their supporters, you are stuffed in this town.
And when it snows the buses along the route get cancelled as the unis shut down so sod anyone else who has to get to work. Any transport modifications have been for the unis who plan a further 5,000 more kids in the city yet none of the student homes are being built on their car parks. In fact the Preston Barracks on the Lewes Road will have students homes with 550 parking spaces. Mr Davey is economical with the truth and he should be ashamed of himself. Last year my wife had to get her car off Bear Road and drive all over the city collecting nurses from their homes so they could keep shifts covered because the bus company refused to run services along the flat Lewes Road but no one from the Green Party said a word about the disappointing service. If you work from home or potter about in retirement like the time rich Greens and their supporters, you are stuffed in this town. Maxwell's Ghost

3:24pm Thu 12 Dec 13

PJW Brighton says...

Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.
Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens. PJW Brighton

3:41pm Thu 12 Dec 13

upsidedowntuctuc says...

gheese77 wrote:
Bob_The_Ferret wrote:
gheese77 wrote:
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Poor air quality which will only get worse with traffic slowed down to a crawl by the scheme!
For your information air quality was bad enough before the scheme that the council (not green at that time) was legally obliged to take measures to improve it.
Yes and Davey Crocked Head is increasing it with his Numpty green idiots.
The arrogance of his spin here is breath taking even on his own low standards
17 months and he will be on his bike
[quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob_The_Ferret[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.[/p][/quote]Poor air quality which will only get worse with traffic slowed down to a crawl by the scheme![/p][/quote]For your information air quality was bad enough before the scheme that the council (not green at that time) was legally obliged to take measures to improve it.[/p][/quote]Yes and Davey Crocked Head is increasing it with his Numpty green idiots. The arrogance of his spin here is breath taking even on his own low standards 17 months and he will be on his bike upsidedowntuctuc

3:47pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Can this be says...

An excellent advertisement for the petition requesting an "Independent Transport Commission" on the B&HCC website. Some objective thinking is required - sign up!
An excellent advertisement for the petition requesting an "Independent Transport Commission" on the B&HCC website. Some objective thinking is required - sign up! Can this be

3:53pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Cov Boy says...

PJW Brighton wrote:
Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.
Maybe co-workers do not live close enough to car share. Or they could be on their way to pick someone up. Don't be so judgemental.
[quote][p][bold]PJW Brighton[/bold] wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.[/p][/quote]Maybe co-workers do not live close enough to car share. Or they could be on their way to pick someone up. Don't be so judgemental. Cov Boy

4:06pm Thu 12 Dec 13

RottingdeanRant says...

What a silly claim. I doubt that car use is down at all - I think it has just moved to other roads. So unless the council have been monitoring all routes its an unsupportable claim. However, looking at the increase in traffic on the Falmer to Woodingdean route i suspect the traffic has just moved.
What a silly claim. I doubt that car use is down at all - I think it has just moved to other roads. So unless the council have been monitoring all routes its an unsupportable claim. However, looking at the increase in traffic on the Falmer to Woodingdean route i suspect the traffic has just moved. RottingdeanRant

4:09pm Thu 12 Dec 13

aat99 says...

Cov Boy wrote:
PJW Brighton wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.
Maybe co-workers do not live close enough to car share. Or they could be on their way to pick someone up. Don't be so judgemental.
yeah right .... most car drivers do not want to share ... but they shoould see the light ... I did it for a couple of years to crawley with 2 others .... petrol bill slashed ... and best of all ..2 out of 3 journeys I could doze on the way home ...admittedly I had to put up with Southern FM and 25+C temperatures from one of my car sharers ... but when I looked ast my petrol bill ... it was a price worth paying .....

SEE the light !
[quote][p][bold]Cov Boy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PJW Brighton[/bold] wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.[/p][/quote]Maybe co-workers do not live close enough to car share. Or they could be on their way to pick someone up. Don't be so judgemental.[/p][/quote]yeah right .... most car drivers do not want to share ... but they shoould see the light ... I did it for a couple of years to crawley with 2 others .... petrol bill slashed ... and best of all ..2 out of 3 journeys I could doze on the way home ...admittedly I had to put up with Southern FM and 25+C temperatures from one of my car sharers ... but when I looked ast my petrol bill ... it was a price worth paying ..... SEE the light ! aat99

4:14pm Thu 12 Dec 13

thevoiceoftruth says...

PJW Brighton wrote:
Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.
It's funny you say that because I used to car share every day. However, now Lewes Road has became a mess, I wouldn't be able to. The traffic being so backed up means it would take about 20 mins to get through it to pick up my car sharer. Then I would have to return back to the same spot on the Lewes Road and rejoin the traffic. It would take me up to an hour before I even reached the A27. So creating gridlock does not encourage car sharing!
[quote][p][bold]PJW Brighton[/bold] wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.[/p][/quote]It's funny you say that because I used to car share every day. However, now Lewes Road has became a mess, I wouldn't be able to. The traffic being so backed up means it would take about 20 mins to get through it to pick up my car sharer. Then I would have to return back to the same spot on the Lewes Road and rejoin the traffic. It would take me up to an hour before I even reached the A27. So creating gridlock does not encourage car sharing! thevoiceoftruth

4:20pm Thu 12 Dec 13

gonzospecial says...

Like other people here I am amzed at the arrogance of the council and particularly Mr Davey. Sure there may be a reduction in people using Lewes Road but they have NOT taken to public transport. The problem has moved elsewhere and in particular onto the A259. The queues now in evening rush hour are horrendous. Prior to the supposed improvements to Lewes road you could get past the St Dunstans roundabout before getting held up and then it was only for a few minutes. Now you hit trafiic at Rodean and it takes 15 to 20 mins to get past Rottingdean. Double lane traffic adding huge amounts of pollution and wasting scare fuel resources. Where do these people get such satisfaction from an ill conceived and regressive piece of development? This green council has to go before Brighton and Hove is totally ruined ... if it';s already not too late!
Like other people here I am amzed at the arrogance of the council and particularly Mr Davey. Sure there may be a reduction in people using Lewes Road but they have NOT taken to public transport. The problem has moved elsewhere and in particular onto the A259. The queues now in evening rush hour are horrendous. Prior to the supposed improvements to Lewes road you could get past the St Dunstans roundabout before getting held up and then it was only for a few minutes. Now you hit trafiic at Rodean and it takes 15 to 20 mins to get past Rottingdean. Double lane traffic adding huge amounts of pollution and wasting scare fuel resources. Where do these people get such satisfaction from an ill conceived and regressive piece of development? This green council has to go before Brighton and Hove is totally ruined ... if it';s already not too late! gonzospecial

4:24pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Cov Boy says...

aat99 wrote:
Cov Boy wrote:
PJW Brighton wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.
Maybe co-workers do not live close enough to car share. Or they could be on their way to pick someone up. Don't be so judgemental.
yeah right .... most car drivers do not want to share ... but they shoould see the light ... I did it for a couple of years to crawley with 2 others .... petrol bill slashed ... and best of all ..2 out of 3 journeys I could doze on the way home ...admittedly I had to put up with Southern FM and 25+C temperatures from one of my car sharers ... but when I looked ast my petrol bill ... it was a price worth paying .....

SEE the light !
I would love to car share but as I commute out of Brighton there is no one this side of Brighton to car share with. I DO SEE THE LIGHT.
[quote][p][bold]aat99[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cov Boy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PJW Brighton[/bold] wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.[/p][/quote]Maybe co-workers do not live close enough to car share. Or they could be on their way to pick someone up. Don't be so judgemental.[/p][/quote]yeah right .... most car drivers do not want to share ... but they shoould see the light ... I did it for a couple of years to crawley with 2 others .... petrol bill slashed ... and best of all ..2 out of 3 journeys I could doze on the way home ...admittedly I had to put up with Southern FM and 25+C temperatures from one of my car sharers ... but when I looked ast my petrol bill ... it was a price worth paying ..... SEE the light ![/p][/quote]I would love to car share but as I commute out of Brighton there is no one this side of Brighton to car share with. I DO SEE THE LIGHT. Cov Boy

5:32pm Thu 12 Dec 13

bluemonday says...

lewse rd doesn't get jammed going into brighton until after 8.30am,you lot work great hours,why don't some of you leave half hour earlier then you get there nice and early and not so stressed from sitting in traffic
lewse rd doesn't get jammed going into brighton until after 8.30am,you lot work great hours,why don't some of you leave half hour earlier then you get there nice and early and not so stressed from sitting in traffic bluemonday

5:37pm Thu 12 Dec 13

peachesncream says...

gheese77 wrote:
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Well, unless you were born in the 19th or early 20th century, you cannot complain about the number of vehicles passing your house - you knew what it was like before you moved there. Don't try to blame others for the mistake you made when moving to a house on a main arterial road.
[quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.[/p][/quote]Well, unless you were born in the 19th or early 20th century, you cannot complain about the number of vehicles passing your house - you knew what it was like before you moved there. Don't try to blame others for the mistake you made when moving to a house on a main arterial road. peachesncream

5:37pm Thu 12 Dec 13

peachesncream says...

gheese77 wrote:
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Well, unless you were born in the 19th or early 20th century, you cannot complain about the number of vehicles passing your house - you knew what it was like before you moved there. Don't try to blame others for the mistake you made when moving to a house on a main arterial road.
[quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.[/p][/quote]Well, unless you were born in the 19th or early 20th century, you cannot complain about the number of vehicles passing your house - you knew what it was like before you moved there. Don't try to blame others for the mistake you made when moving to a house on a main arterial road. peachesncream

5:41pm Thu 12 Dec 13

AGT999 says...

The only reason on that traffic is down is because people are avoiding going to Brighton and taking their cash elsewhere
The only reason on that traffic is down is because people are avoiding going to Brighton and taking their cash elsewhere AGT999

5:56pm Thu 12 Dec 13

keswick says...

Yet another example of how incompetent anyone that works for this council is. Anybody who believes these statistics is as stupid as the person who compiled them.
Yet another example of how incompetent anyone that works for this council is. Anybody who believes these statistics is as stupid as the person who compiled them. keswick

5:58pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Bill in Hanover says...

There is no actual decrease in traffic as drivers like myself just go over the race hill to Woodingdean or up Coldean Lane to miss the queues.
There is no actual decrease in traffic as drivers like myself just go over the race hill to Woodingdean or up Coldean Lane to miss the queues. Bill in Hanover

6:10pm Thu 12 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power.

HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here.

Brighton ghetto
Morning, GATLING GOB, !!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power. HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here. Brighton ghetto[/p][/quote]Morning, GATLING GOB, !!!!!!!! ARMANA

6:14pm Thu 12 Dec 13

PorkBoat says...

Somewhere deep in the basement of Kings House, there is a giant ar5e, and when the council need to back up or justify one of their harebrained schemes, they send someone down to pull some statistics or financial projections out of it.
Somewhere deep in the basement of Kings House, there is a giant ar5e, and when the council need to back up or justify one of their harebrained schemes, they send someone down to pull some statistics or financial projections out of it. PorkBoat

6:53pm Thu 12 Dec 13

bluemonday says...

NickBtn wrote:
The bus offer is quite cynical. It is only for the 23/25 route - ie mainly the student routes and not all of the routes which use the Lewes Road. And, even better, it starts just as the student term ends and finishes and the students return... So a clever way of getting a headline while giving very little away.

Why doesn't the bus company give this "celebration" offer to all services which use the Lewes Road (eg. 48, 49, 28, 29, 81)
wouldn't worry it won't last long,cause it's all about the money with some people
[quote][p][bold]NickBtn[/bold] wrote: The bus offer is quite cynical. It is only for the 23/25 route - ie mainly the student routes and not all of the routes which use the Lewes Road. And, even better, it starts just as the student term ends and finishes and the students return... So a clever way of getting a headline while giving very little away. Why doesn't the bus company give this "celebration" offer to all services which use the Lewes Road (eg. 48, 49, 28, 29, 81)[/p][/quote]wouldn't worry it won't last long,cause it's all about the money with some people bluemonday

8:15pm Thu 12 Dec 13

indiequeen says...

bluemonday wrote:
lewse rd doesn't get jammed going into brighton until after 8.30am,you lot work great hours,why don't some of you leave half hour earlier then you get there nice and early and not so stressed from sitting in traffic
I can assure you that the queueing starts BEFORE 8.30 as I am stuckin it every morning. I already leave 30 minutes earlier than i used to so I'm not late for work. Unless schools / offices varied their opening times you will always have 'rush hour'. Any other pearls of wisdom?
[quote][p][bold]bluemonday[/bold] wrote: lewse rd doesn't get jammed going into brighton until after 8.30am,you lot work great hours,why don't some of you leave half hour earlier then you get there nice and early and not so stressed from sitting in traffic[/p][/quote]I can assure you that the queueing starts BEFORE 8.30 as I am stuckin it every morning. I already leave 30 minutes earlier than i used to so I'm not late for work. Unless schools / offices varied their opening times you will always have 'rush hour'. Any other pearls of wisdom? indiequeen

8:16pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

PJW Brighton wrote:
Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.
Interesting to note that one of our greeny friendly posters seems to blow the journey time claim from Dozy Davey right out of the water as this particular greeny cycles past lines of cars - hardly consistent with the claimed marginally longer times !

Still when did the truth, or other peoples opinions ever interest a green zealot.
[quote][p][bold]PJW Brighton[/bold] wrote: Funny to see all these people who choose to spew toxic fumes from their cars apparently worried about toxic fumes. Every morning I cycle along Lewes Road past lines of cars with only one person in them, the other 4+seats empty, spewing out fumes, all going in the same direction. Headless chickens.[/p][/quote]Interesting to note that one of our greeny friendly posters seems to blow the journey time claim from Dozy Davey right out of the water as this particular greeny cycles past lines of cars - hardly consistent with the claimed marginally longer times ! Still when did the truth, or other peoples opinions ever interest a green zealot. Idontbelieveit1948

8:23pm Thu 12 Dec 13

BtnLaurence says...

Did anyone really expect them to say otherwise? If motorists have dropped it's because we're driving and spending out of town - I'm sorry to say.
Did anyone really expect them to say otherwise? If motorists have dropped it's because we're driving and spending out of town - I'm sorry to say. BtnLaurence

8:32pm Thu 12 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur.

I have had a quick look at the report, available below;

http://www.brighton-
hove.gov.uk/sites/br
ighton-hove.gov.uk/f
iles/Lewes%20Road%20
-%20November%202013%
20Monitoring%20Repor
t.pdf

When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this.

Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.
Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur. I have had a quick look at the report, available below; http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/sites/br ighton-hove.gov.uk/f iles/Lewes%20Road%20 -%20November%202013% 20Monitoring%20Repor t.pdf When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this. Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd. HJarrs

8:47pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

40 per cent increase in taxi journeys. Taxis are cars.
40 per cent increase in taxi journeys. Taxis are cars. Maxwell's Ghost

8:56pm Thu 12 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
40 per cent increase in taxi journeys. Taxis are cars.
I included taxi journeys and taxis do not tend to cause parking issues in the city. Even including taxis there would be a reduction of 1750 vehicles.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys. Taxis are cars.[/p][/quote]I included taxi journeys and taxis do not tend to cause parking issues in the city. Even including taxis there would be a reduction of 1750 vehicles. HJarrs

9:06pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking. Maxwell's Ghost

9:31pm Thu 12 Dec 13

PorkBoat says...

HJarrs wrote:
Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur.

I have had a quick look at the report, available below;

http://www.brighton-

hove.gov.uk/sites/br

ighton-hove.gov.uk/f

iles/Lewes%20Road%20

-%20November%202013%

20Monitoring%20Repor

t.pdf

When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this.

Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.
I refer you to my comment above.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur. I have had a quick look at the report, available below; http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/sites/br ighton-hove.gov.uk/f iles/Lewes%20Road%20 -%20November%202013% 20Monitoring%20Repor t.pdf When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this. Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.[/p][/quote]I refer you to my comment above. PorkBoat

10:50pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Sevensisters says...

10% less cars because like me they all use an alternative route
10% less cars because like me they all use an alternative route Sevensisters

11:21pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Helen Ariel says...

PaulOckenden wrote:
The only possible way they could get the "one extra minute" figure would be for the initial figure to come from during uni/school term time, and the after figure recorded when they are all on holiday.

I regularly take an extra 10mins to get from Coldean Lane to the Gyratory, and that includes bombing through the side streets north of the railway bridge.
Oh so it's you that blasts past me at 40 mph when I'm trying to get in my van in the morning! Slow down numpty before you kill someone!
[quote][p][bold]PaulOckenden[/bold] wrote: The only possible way they could get the "one extra minute" figure would be for the initial figure to come from during uni/school term time, and the after figure recorded when they are all on holiday. I regularly take an extra 10mins to get from Coldean Lane to the Gyratory, and that includes bombing through the side streets north of the railway bridge.[/p][/quote]Oh so it's you that blasts past me at 40 mph when I'm trying to get in my van in the morning! Slow down numpty before you kill someone! Helen Ariel

11:25pm Thu 12 Dec 13

SGK2000 says...

Nice new bus stops. So when are they going to connect the lights up, or has the money run out?
Nice new bus stops. So when are they going to connect the lights up, or has the money run out? SGK2000

7:08am Fri 13 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle. HJarrs

7:49am Fri 13 Dec 13

Seagull John says...

Sussex jim wrote:
I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean.
I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?
Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.
[quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean. I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?[/p][/quote]Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark. Seagull John

8:32am Fri 13 Dec 13

downbythesea says...

A success? All I noticed going to B&Q yesterday was a queue of traffic I had to join to get ONTO Lewes Road coming off the gyratory, at 2pm!

I pity the poor s0ds who have to do that journey at rush hour, I saw ONE BICYCLE using the bike lane in the time I waited!

I'm all for separating cars & bikes, but why didn't they just let buses and cars share the other 2 lanes?

Complete and utter madness, I hope the people who complain about the Greens on here, get off their backsides and vote next time, it's laziness that let this lot in (and the student vote).
A success? All I noticed going to B&Q yesterday was a queue of traffic I had to join to get ONTO Lewes Road coming off the gyratory, at 2pm! I pity the poor s0ds who have to do that journey at rush hour, I saw ONE BICYCLE using the bike lane in the time I waited! I'm all for separating cars & bikes, but why didn't they just let buses and cars share the other 2 lanes? Complete and utter madness, I hope the people who complain about the Greens on here, get off their backsides and vote next time, it's laziness that let this lot in (and the student vote). downbythesea

8:49am Fri 13 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

Seagull John wrote:
Sussex jim wrote:
I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean.
I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?
Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.
Quite a few dot use the cycle path from Brighton to Lewes, There funeral,!!!
[quote][p][bold]Seagull John[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean. I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?[/p][/quote]Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.[/p][/quote]Quite a few dot use the cycle path from Brighton to Lewes, There funeral,!!! ARMANA

11:34am Fri 13 Dec 13

ThinkBrighton says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power.

HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here.

Brighton ghetto
WHAT A BUNCH OF PRATS
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power. HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here. Brighton ghetto[/p][/quote]WHAT A BUNCH OF PRATS ThinkBrighton

11:34am Fri 13 Dec 13

ThinkBrighton says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power.

HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here.

Brighton ghetto
WHAT A BUNCH OF PRATS
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power. HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here. Brighton ghetto[/p][/quote]WHAT A BUNCH OF PRATS ThinkBrighton

11:34am Fri 13 Dec 13

ThinkBrighton says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power.

HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here.

Brighton ghetto
WHAT A BUNCH OF PRATS
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: One of the cynics who posts on another London journal site that HJ and I spend many hours spinning on, likened the result to fitting a gastric band to an obese person and then attributing success for weight loss to the person's will power. HJ, SJ, Eugenius etc and all our other posting names will be out in force to slap back any similar negativity on here. Brighton ghetto[/p][/quote]WHAT A BUNCH OF PRATS ThinkBrighton

12:47pm Fri 13 Dec 13

JHunty says...

HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it? JHunty

1:43pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Just trying to earn a crust says...

HJarrs wrote:
Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur.

I have had a quick look at the report, available below;

http://www.brighton-

hove.gov.uk/sites/br

ighton-hove.gov.uk/f

iles/Lewes%20Road%20

-%20November%202013%

20Monitoring%20Repor

t.pdf

When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this.

Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.
I have been using the Ditchling Road to get to and from my job in Chailey for the last 40 years. Maybe the dozens of extra vehicles that are using the road, since the Lewes road debacle was completed are Scotch mist but I doubt it. The jam at Old boat corner, and Fiveways have extended three fold both morning and evening.
When are your beloved green party going to admit they have mad an almighty c()ck up of the Lewes Road and do something about the areas that are now having to deal with the extra traffic? A start would be to redesign the junction at Old Boat Corner that must have been designed by a 5 year old in the first place. Or better still return the Lewes road to its quite satisfactory former self
In other words HJarrs the document you requested we read is a total work of fiction and the only suitable place for it is the computer waste bin.
I don’t know of any council have fallen because of consistently lying to the electorate but I should think Brightons Green council are rapidly heading that way. They will not be missed in 2015
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur. I have had a quick look at the report, available below; http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/sites/br ighton-hove.gov.uk/f iles/Lewes%20Road%20 -%20November%202013% 20Monitoring%20Repor t.pdf When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this. Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.[/p][/quote]I have been using the Ditchling Road to get to and from my job in Chailey for the last 40 years. Maybe the dozens of extra vehicles that are using the road, since the Lewes road debacle was completed are Scotch mist but I doubt it. The jam at Old boat corner, and Fiveways have extended three fold both morning and evening. When are your beloved green party going to admit they have mad an almighty c()ck up of the Lewes Road and do something about the areas that are now having to deal with the extra traffic? A start would be to redesign the junction at Old Boat Corner that must have been designed by a 5 year old in the first place. Or better still return the Lewes road to its quite satisfactory former self In other words HJarrs the document you requested we read is a total work of fiction and the only suitable place for it is the computer waste bin. I don’t know of any council have fallen because of consistently lying to the electorate but I should think Brightons Green council are rapidly heading that way. They will not be missed in 2015 Just trying to earn a crust

3:05pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Somethingsarejustwrong says...

ARMANA wrote:
Seagull John wrote:
Sussex jim wrote:
I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean.
I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?
Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.
Quite a few dot use the cycle path from Brighton to Lewes, There funeral,!!!
You really are a thick tvvat and actually make HJarrs seem bright
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Seagull John[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean. I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?[/p][/quote]Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.[/p][/quote]Quite a few dot use the cycle path from Brighton to Lewes, There funeral,!!![/p][/quote]You really are a thick tvvat and actually make HJarrs seem bright Somethingsarejustwrong

3:18pm Fri 13 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
[quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP! HJarrs

4:51pm Fri 13 Dec 13

thevoiceoftruth says...

HJarrs wrote:
Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur.

I have had a quick look at the report, available below;

http://www.brighton-

hove.gov.uk/sites/br

ighton-hove.gov.uk/f

iles/Lewes%20Road%20

-%20November%202013%

20Monitoring%20Repor

t.pdf

When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this.

Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.
I thought I'd take a look at the report and it left me wondering how there could be such a discrepancy between what it says and what I see with my own eyes. I tried to find out when they took the data. Apparently it was on some 'neutral days' between Oct - Nov.

What happens in Oct - Nov that has an impact on traffic? The answer is, half term. I would be interested to find out if the second survey was taken during half term when there are far fewer cars on the road.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Hardly a suprise that, despite the predictions of the moanerati, the Lewes Rd scheme is making steady progress in changing the travelling behavior of people in the city for the better and it demonstrates that rat running or cars moving to other routes (except Coombe Rd! The curse of Maxwell's Ghost) was scaremongering and has not happened. Also, other drivers in the City as 2000 fewer vehicles are now coming into the city. There now needs to be a tweaking of traffic light timings to reduce the jams when they do occur. I have had a quick look at the report, available below; http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/sites/br ighton-hove.gov.uk/f iles/Lewes%20Road%20 -%20November%202013% 20Monitoring%20Repor t.pdf When you calculate the number of people travelling down the Lewes Rd, between the study periods in 2012 and 2013, the difference is very, very small, yet there has been a significant movement to travelling by cycling, bus and taxi. Saunders Park is not the best place to pick up numbers of cyclists as many will be travelling between Falmer and Moulscomb campus', therefore under reporting, but it still shows a big improvement in cycling despite the Gyratory not yet being sorted out. I have noticed a big pick up in cycling on my side of the City in the last few months and the Lewes Rd scheme must have helped contribute to this. Now it is time to move on to the Gyratory and finish the job off. The Gyratory is quite a challenge, but it is the key to significantly increasing cycling along the Lewes Rd.[/p][/quote]I thought I'd take a look at the report and it left me wondering how there could be such a discrepancy between what it says and what I see with my own eyes. I tried to find out when they took the data. Apparently it was on some 'neutral days' between Oct - Nov. What happens in Oct - Nov that has an impact on traffic? The answer is, half term. I would be interested to find out if the second survey was taken during half term when there are far fewer cars on the road. thevoiceoftruth

6:07pm Fri 13 Dec 13

brightonian57 says...

HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
Yes people on here like Maxwell Ghost do moan a bit, but with the stupid council we have we have every right to moan, but as Earning a crust said, that document you asked us to read was blatant lies from start to finish.
Hjarrs given the choice I would rather moan than lie any day
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]Yes people on here like Maxwell Ghost do moan a bit, but with the stupid council we have we have every right to moan, but as Earning a crust said, that document you asked us to read was blatant lies from start to finish. Hjarrs given the choice I would rather moan than lie any day brightonian57

6:18pm Fri 13 Dec 13

crochet says...

Never read so much rubbish in all my life ,I travel every morning to work by car and have to leave earlier now as traffic is so bad ,and who ever thought of putting the bus stops in the road with a cycle lane behind them I just don't get it ,RUBBISH !
Never read so much rubbish in all my life ,I travel every morning to work by car and have to leave earlier now as traffic is so bad ,and who ever thought of putting the bus stops in the road with a cycle lane behind them I just don't get it ,RUBBISH ! crochet

6:21pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

I moan because I despise lies and this council is one of the worst I have come across in more than 30 years as a journalist for misrepresenting data and also attempting to dictate to people and remove the democratic process. HJarrs even tells us we are wrong to have witnessed floods on the Level or traffic queued up. He attempts to stifle any freedom of speech. It's weird and rather creepy.
The fact is traffic flow monitor wires were installed in Ditchling and Ladysmith Road at the junction with Ewehurst Road and were in place during half term and all the locals were chattering about the fact that we knew this had been done on purpose. I may well have posted a comment about it in October as I knew the council would do this.
But as other posters say, while HJarrs continues to spin lies, the public see the truth and they make utter fools of themselves. The fact is a 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys, queues of traffic on alternative routes and soon another 550 parking spaces for students at Preston Barracks. So more cars being brought into the Lewes Road, but maybe that was the idea to make space for student cars.
I moan because I despise lies and this council is one of the worst I have come across in more than 30 years as a journalist for misrepresenting data and also attempting to dictate to people and remove the democratic process. HJarrs even tells us we are wrong to have witnessed floods on the Level or traffic queued up. He attempts to stifle any freedom of speech. It's weird and rather creepy. The fact is traffic flow monitor wires were installed in Ditchling and Ladysmith Road at the junction with Ewehurst Road and were in place during half term and all the locals were chattering about the fact that we knew this had been done on purpose. I may well have posted a comment about it in October as I knew the council would do this. But as other posters say, while HJarrs continues to spin lies, the public see the truth and they make utter fools of themselves. The fact is a 40 per cent increase in taxi journeys, queues of traffic on alternative routes and soon another 550 parking spaces for students at Preston Barracks. So more cars being brought into the Lewes Road, but maybe that was the idea to make space for student cars. Maxwell's Ghost

7:01pm Fri 13 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

Somethingsarejustwro
ng
wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
Seagull John wrote:
Sussex jim wrote:
I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean.
I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?
Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.
Quite a few dot use the cycle path from Brighton to Lewes, There funeral,!!!
You really are a thick tvvat and actually make HJarrs seem bright
2 gatling gobs,
[quote][p][bold]Somethingsarejustwro ng[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Seagull John[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: I drove from Lewes to Whitehwk yesterday. Of course, I avoided Lewes Road and went the long way via Woodingdean. I had a struggle trying to pass a group of cyclists going up the hill from Falmer- then I noticed the new cycle path adjacent to the road. Why were they not using it?[/p][/quote]Cyclists are natural non conformers and lawbreakers. Their natural response is to use the road and narrow it still further for other users until they dash through red lights at every oportunity, usually in low vis clothing and no lights after dark.[/p][/quote]Quite a few dot use the cycle path from Brighton to Lewes, There funeral,!!![/p][/quote]You really are a thick tvvat and actually make HJarrs seem bright[/p][/quote]2 gatling gobs, ARMANA

7:56pm Fri 13 Dec 13

pachallis says...

HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015. pachallis

10:05pm Fri 13 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past. HJarrs

10:50pm Fri 13 Dec 13

gheese77 says...

peachesncream wrote:
gheese77 wrote:
Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.
Well, unless you were born in the 19th or early 20th century, you cannot complain about the number of vehicles passing your house - you knew what it was like before you moved there. Don't try to blame others for the mistake you made when moving to a house on a main arterial road.
I don't live on that road anymore.
Maybe a current resident can take comfort from your kind words whilst enjoying an asthma attack.
[quote][p][bold]peachesncream[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gheese77[/bold] wrote: Lewes road had (and still has) awful air quality, this is primarily from private motor vehicles. For people such as Katie Baines (whoever she is) to moan that her commute takes 15 minutes longer is selfish in the extreme. Rather than moaning she should seek alternative means of transport. One must ask how would she like 18000 + vehicles per day driving past her house in leafy hove.[/p][/quote]Well, unless you were born in the 19th or early 20th century, you cannot complain about the number of vehicles passing your house - you knew what it was like before you moved there. Don't try to blame others for the mistake you made when moving to a house on a main arterial road.[/p][/quote]I don't live on that road anymore. Maybe a current resident can take comfort from your kind words whilst enjoying an asthma attack. gheese77

11:04pm Fri 13 Dec 13

jamesbandenburg says...

"Officials also rejected any suggestion of increased rat-running in adjacent streets and significant displacement into other routes such as Ditchling Road and London Road"

Funny, because on the day the bus lane became active it was like someone had flicked a switch. A huge increase in traffic at the Hollingbury A27 junction and the traffic lights at Fiveways, presumably all people trying to avoid using Lewes Road...

I suppose their scheme has worked though, because it has dramatically affected the way I use my car. I don't use Lewes Road or Ditchling Road at all anymore. I've found a very good rat run through Patcham and Hollingbury which gets me home a lot quicker...
"Officials also rejected any suggestion of increased rat-running in adjacent streets and significant displacement into other routes such as Ditchling Road and London Road" Funny, because on the day the bus lane became active it was like someone had flicked a switch. A huge increase in traffic at the Hollingbury A27 junction and the traffic lights at Fiveways, presumably all people trying to avoid using Lewes Road... I suppose their scheme has worked though, because it has dramatically affected the way I use my car. I don't use Lewes Road or Ditchling Road at all anymore. I've found a very good rat run through Patcham and Hollingbury which gets me home a lot quicker... jamesbandenburg

6:01am Sat 14 Dec 13

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! says...

HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made.

Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc

Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant.

We are the greens
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made. Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant. We are the greens I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars!

3:50pm Sat 14 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made.

Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc

Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant.

We are the greens
WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made. Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant. We are the greens[/p][/quote]WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX ARMANA

5:53pm Sat 14 Dec 13

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! says...

ARMANA wrote:
I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made.

Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc

Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant.

We are the greens
WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX
I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it.

People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made. Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant. We are the greens[/p][/quote]WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX[/p][/quote]I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it. People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/ I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars!

10:03pm Sat 14 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made.

Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc

Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant.

We are the greens
WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX
I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it.

People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/
No pot to **** in, im sitting in front of £1700s worth of apple computer, for a kick off , Saturday night, thought you be out smoking your other half, Gatling Gob,
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made. Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant. We are the greens[/p][/quote]WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX[/p][/quote]I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it. People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/[/p][/quote]No pot to **** in, im sitting in front of £1700s worth of apple computer, for a kick off , Saturday night, thought you be out smoking your other half, Gatling Gob, ARMANA

5:35am Sun 15 Dec 13

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! says...

ARMANA wrote:
I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made.

Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc

Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant.

We are the greens
WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX
I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it.

People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/
No pot to **** in, im sitting in front of £1700s worth of apple computer, for a kick off , Saturday night, thought you be out smoking your other half, Gatling Gob,
Wow - armed with new information that certainly changes my views on you.

Sounds like they should have described you as a spineless recluse, without a pot to pi55 in with standard internet access.

Everyone is laughing at you ARSEMAN. Remember at this time of year you can also give, instead of just receiving. Hey ARSEMAN
[quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made. Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant. We are the greens[/p][/quote]WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX[/p][/quote]I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it. People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/[/p][/quote]No pot to **** in, im sitting in front of £1700s worth of apple computer, for a kick off , Saturday night, thought you be out smoking your other half, Gatling Gob,[/p][/quote]Wow - armed with new information that certainly changes my views on you. Sounds like they should have described you as a spineless recluse, without a pot to pi55 in with standard internet access. Everyone is laughing at you ARSEMAN. Remember at this time of year you can also give, instead of just receiving. Hey ARSEMAN I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars!

9:03am Sun 15 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
ARMANA wrote:
I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made.

Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc

Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant.

We are the greens
WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX
I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it.

People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/
No pot to **** in, im sitting in front of £1700s worth of apple computer, for a kick off , Saturday night, thought you be out smoking your other half, Gatling Gob,
Wow - armed with new information that certainly changes my views on you.

Sounds like they should have described you as a spineless recluse, without a pot to pi55 in with standard internet access.

Everyone is laughing at you ARSEMAN. Remember at this time of year you can also give, instead of just receiving. Hey ARSEMAN
Gatling Gob, !!!
[quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ARMANA[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]HJ This is by far one of the finest posts you have made. Perfectly balanced between historic, current and future spin.and written in the style of Sir Winston Churchill. We will fight them on the...etc Brilliant, just brilliant it paints a picture of success when everyone knows that the scheme has caused chaos and massive inconvenience for working car users. The other impact of squeezing all the traffic into the side roads that we are then reducing speed limits on will go on and create misery for thousands. Brilliant, just brilliant. We are the greens[/p][/quote]WOT A LOAD OF BOLXXX[/p][/quote]I am increasingly surprised that you can even manage to access this site, never mind post on it. People in the know tell me you are a spineless recluse lacking a pot to pi55 in. I find it hard to disagree/[/p][/quote]No pot to **** in, im sitting in front of £1700s worth of apple computer, for a kick off , Saturday night, thought you be out smoking your other half, Gatling Gob,[/p][/quote]Wow - armed with new information that certainly changes my views on you. Sounds like they should have described you as a spineless recluse, without a pot to pi55 in with standard internet access. Everyone is laughing at you ARSEMAN. Remember at this time of year you can also give, instead of just receiving. Hey ARSEMAN[/p][/quote]Gatling Gob, !!! ARMANA

2:37pm Sun 15 Dec 13

Ambo Guy says...

HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
So you don't know if the Greens - a political party - employ spin doctors? Seriously, how naive are you?

We could compile a book out of all of your stupid comments.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]So you don't know if the Greens - a political party - employ spin doctors? Seriously, how naive are you? We could compile a book out of all of your stupid comments. Ambo Guy

4:24pm Sun 15 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

Ambo Guy wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
pachallis wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
JHunty wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.
Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever.

If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads.

Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.
But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?
I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP!
@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote.

As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want.

Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius.

I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.
Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists.

What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin.

Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust.

Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield).

No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.
So you don't know if the Greens - a political party - employ spin doctors? Seriously, how naive are you?

We could compile a book out of all of your stupid comments.
Hear Hear, well said, Ambo Guy, !!!
[quote][p][bold]Ambo Guy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The issue wasn't about parking it was about reducing pollution and vehicle flows. Taxi use up 40 per cent so the biggest increase in traffic movement has been cars on the route and that hasn't calculated the increase in traffic on other routes so the picture isn't complete. So while you may call us moaners, we are actually seekers of fact in a more strategic way but you aren't a strategic thinker HJarrs and neither is your party. 40 per cent increase in taxis in such a short space of time. Shocking.[/p][/quote]Yep. You are a moaner. I can't recall you making a positive post ever. If you read the report you will find no noticeable difference in the study period for traffic volumes travelling along Falmer or Ditchling Roads. Bus use up car use down and best of all for you as a keep cyclist, cycling is up and more to come when the Gyratory is completed. As I say, steady progress and as people get used to the changes, more people will use the bus or cycle.[/p][/quote]But what right do public servants and an unpopular council have to force people to change their behaviour simply because they disapprove of it?[/p][/quote]I know it is inconvenient to your argument but this scheme like all the others the moanerati complain about had ALL party support and a positive consultation result. If you don't like it then you better vote UKIP![/p][/quote]@HJarrs - glad to see you spinning again. The transport committee is controlled by the greens. They have 50% of the seats and the chairman is one of these and has the casting vote. As such the greens (another term for immature!) can force through any mad-cap scheme involving sustainable transport that they want. Saying that ALL parties support a plan is being slightly economical with the truth - just what we have come to expect from you and Eugenius. I'm sorry, as a green spin doctor you are no longer an asset to the party - no one trusts anything you say anymore. So keep up the good work and we all look forward to May 2015.[/p][/quote]Thank you for the promotion to Green Party Spin Doctor, though I don't think the Green Party would agree with you. I don't even know if such a position exists. What you moanerati hate is a dissenting voice to the anti-Green narrative. All I do is voice my opinion and take examples from the Labour Argus to demonstrate that for example, far from being a ghost town, B&H is outperforming much of the rest of the country for jobs growth and development (I hope that this also translates into wages growth as they are too low). Unemployment falling, today alone, developments worth £94 million where confirmed. Education in the city is improving against a background of terrible government policies. There have been far fewer service cuts due to slashed government grants than any other comparable authority you care to name, budgets have been balanced and big efficiencies realised. You can read it all in the Labour Argus, no need to spin. Now we find, unsuprisingly, that transport schemes such as the Lewes Rd and 20mph zone 1 are having a positive impact. The Lewes Rd scheme has only been operating for a three months but already 1750 fewer cars per day, bus usage up by around 3000 a day and cycling up by around 300 a day (past Saunders Park - in my opinion under reporting cycling as trips between the Moulsecoomb University campus and Falmer / Lewes are not counted), bus and cyclists being the majority users of Lewes Rd before the scheme. There is some congestion at times and there should be some tweaking to sort this out, but there is a clear and positive change happening. We are only 3 months in and travel habits take a long time to adjust. Over the coming years, I expect a further fall in vehicle traffic along the Lewes Rd and further increases in bus and cycle travel (and the train figures have not been published yet; a mode of transport that provides an decent option for many of those commuting from further afield). No doubt the Labour Argus will continue to play up the controversy of the Lewes Rd (and any other) scheme, but by the next election the second battle of Lewes Rd will be in the dim and distant past.[/p][/quote]So you don't know if the Greens - a political party - employ spin doctors? Seriously, how naive are you? We could compile a book out of all of your stupid comments.[/p][/quote]Hear Hear, well said, Ambo Guy, !!! ARMANA

6:42pm Sun 15 Dec 13

Oooh err says...

So is it a success or not? I kind of got lost amongst all the name calling and rhetoric.
So is it a success or not? I kind of got lost amongst all the name calling and rhetoric. Oooh err

7:02pm Sun 15 Dec 13

Anna Phylactic says...

Yes, a success in the same way that Kim Jong Un's cabinet reshuffle is a success.
Yes, a success in the same way that Kim Jong Un's cabinet reshuffle is a success. Anna Phylactic

9:34pm Sun 15 Dec 13

JHunty says...

Labour Argus? Make your mind up half the time you call it the daily mail, half the time you call it Labour. The issue of whether the scheme has all party support.has all ready been dealt with above. However even if it did the question of why elected and unelected officials feel it is routinely acceptable to force certain behaviours on those they serve remains unanswered. Perhaps there is a clue in your contemptuous use of the word moanerati to describe anyone who dares disagree with you. Contempt for others and a high handed assumption that you know best seem to be things you have in common with those that came up with this scheme. As for dissenting voices, the greens themselves are split with some of the most vociferous and acid criticisms of local green policy coming from within the Green Party. Read The Guardian article with Ben Duncan and Jason Kitkat at each other's throats again and Caroline trying to distance herself from the unpopularity of the green councils policies. Far more trenchant criticism of the green council than you will ever read in The Argus comes from the greens themselves.
Labour Argus? Make your mind up half the time you call it the daily mail, half the time you call it Labour. The issue of whether the scheme has all party support.has all ready been dealt with above. However even if it did the question of why elected and unelected officials feel it is routinely acceptable to force certain behaviours on those they serve remains unanswered. Perhaps there is a clue in your contemptuous use of the word moanerati to describe anyone who dares disagree with you. Contempt for others and a high handed assumption that you know best seem to be things you have in common with those that came up with this scheme. As for dissenting voices, the greens themselves are split with some of the most vociferous and acid criticisms of local green policy coming from within the Green Party. Read The Guardian article with Ben Duncan and Jason Kitkat at each other's throats again and Caroline trying to distance herself from the unpopularity of the green councils policies. Far more trenchant criticism of the green council than you will ever read in The Argus comes from the greens themselves. JHunty

6:30pm Mon 16 Dec 13

ARMANA says...

JHunty wrote:
Labour Argus? Make your mind up half the time you call it the daily mail, half the time you call it Labour. The issue of whether the scheme has all party support.has all ready been dealt with above. However even if it did the question of why elected and unelected officials feel it is routinely acceptable to force certain behaviours on those they serve remains unanswered. Perhaps there is a clue in your contemptuous use of the word moanerati to describe anyone who dares disagree with you. Contempt for others and a high handed assumption that you know best seem to be things you have in common with those that came up with this scheme. As for dissenting voices, the greens themselves are split with some of the most vociferous and acid criticisms of local green policy coming from within the Green Party. Read The Guardian article with Ben Duncan and Jason Kitkat at each other's throats again and Caroline trying to distance herself from the unpopularity of the green councils policies. Far more trenchant criticism of the green council than you will ever read in The Argus comes from the greens themselves.
Roll on June 2015, We can all have a street party, when the Green monster is voted out, ;)
[quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: Labour Argus? Make your mind up half the time you call it the daily mail, half the time you call it Labour. The issue of whether the scheme has all party support.has all ready been dealt with above. However even if it did the question of why elected and unelected officials feel it is routinely acceptable to force certain behaviours on those they serve remains unanswered. Perhaps there is a clue in your contemptuous use of the word moanerati to describe anyone who dares disagree with you. Contempt for others and a high handed assumption that you know best seem to be things you have in common with those that came up with this scheme. As for dissenting voices, the greens themselves are split with some of the most vociferous and acid criticisms of local green policy coming from within the Green Party. Read The Guardian article with Ben Duncan and Jason Kitkat at each other's throats again and Caroline trying to distance herself from the unpopularity of the green councils policies. Far more trenchant criticism of the green council than you will ever read in The Argus comes from the greens themselves.[/p][/quote]Roll on June 2015, We can all have a street party, when the Green monster is voted out, ;) ARMANA

10:06pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

JHunty wrote:
Labour Argus? Make your mind up half the time you call it the daily mail, half the time you call it Labour. The issue of whether the scheme has all party support.has all ready been dealt with above. However even if it did the question of why elected and unelected officials feel it is routinely acceptable to force certain behaviours on those they serve remains unanswered. Perhaps there is a clue in your contemptuous use of the word moanerati to describe anyone who dares disagree with you. Contempt for others and a high handed assumption that you know best seem to be things you have in common with those that came up with this scheme. As for dissenting voices, the greens themselves are split with some of the most vociferous and acid criticisms of local green policy coming from within the Green Party. Read The Guardian article with Ben Duncan and Jason Kitkat at each other's throats again and Caroline trying to distance herself from the unpopularity of the green councils policies. Far more trenchant criticism of the green council than you will ever read in The Argus comes from the greens themselves.
Yes, H Jarrs does seem to have some sort of schizophrenic tendencies over political standing.

I put it down to the fact that Greens generally fight like rats in a sack and consequently they seem remarkably confused over their own beliefs (if they actually have any which they probably don't being a party of protest). Consequently their knowledge or interest of anyone else's beliefs or opinions is non existent.

As for the "word" ? moaneraiti it seems to be the product of a typically immature, pretentious, smug and condescending mind which cannot accept it is not always right on every single thing - Oh look I have just described your typical Green supporter / councillor / MP if the last 3 years or so are anything to go by !
[quote][p][bold]JHunty[/bold] wrote: Labour Argus? Make your mind up half the time you call it the daily mail, half the time you call it Labour. The issue of whether the scheme has all party support.has all ready been dealt with above. However even if it did the question of why elected and unelected officials feel it is routinely acceptable to force certain behaviours on those they serve remains unanswered. Perhaps there is a clue in your contemptuous use of the word moanerati to describe anyone who dares disagree with you. Contempt for others and a high handed assumption that you know best seem to be things you have in common with those that came up with this scheme. As for dissenting voices, the greens themselves are split with some of the most vociferous and acid criticisms of local green policy coming from within the Green Party. Read The Guardian article with Ben Duncan and Jason Kitkat at each other's throats again and Caroline trying to distance herself from the unpopularity of the green councils policies. Far more trenchant criticism of the green council than you will ever read in The Argus comes from the greens themselves.[/p][/quote]Yes, H Jarrs does seem to have some sort of schizophrenic tendencies over political standing. I put it down to the fact that Greens generally fight like rats in a sack and consequently they seem remarkably confused over their own beliefs (if they actually have any which they probably don't being a party of protest). Consequently their knowledge or interest of anyone else's beliefs or opinions is non existent. As for the "word" ? moaneraiti it seems to be the product of a typically immature, pretentious, smug and condescending mind which cannot accept it is not always right on every single thing - Oh look I have just described your typical Green supporter / councillor / MP if the last 3 years or so are anything to go by ! Idontbelieveit1948

10:36pm Mon 16 Dec 13

bn2dave says...

I cannot believe anyone has the audacity or stupidity to try and leverage such obviously unrepresentative statistics. Lewes Rd is a disaster area and the traffic system idealism is bloody dangerous due to it being couter-intuitive. These people are cynical liars and should be crushed out of existence during the next election.
The comment about the road surface is also very true - extremely dangerous for bikes - why was that not dealt with?
So angry with these lying fools and the right on clowns that support them.
I cannot believe anyone has the audacity or stupidity to try and leverage such obviously unrepresentative statistics. Lewes Rd is a disaster area and the traffic system idealism is bloody dangerous due to it being couter-intuitive. These people are cynical liars and should be crushed out of existence during the next election. The comment about the road surface is also very true - extremely dangerous for bikes - why was that not dealt with? So angry with these lying fools and the right on clowns that support them. bn2dave

1:39pm Tue 17 Dec 13

alex.c.parr says...

It has only improved because people are avoiding Lewes Road. I drive from Regency Square to Coombe Road and back everyday and I go through Kemp town, and down Bear Road, completely avoiding the whole of that area. Sometimes it can take 20 mins to clear Coombe Road due to the congestion Lewes Road is causing.
It has only improved because people are avoiding Lewes Road. I drive from Regency Square to Coombe Road and back everyday and I go through Kemp town, and down Bear Road, completely avoiding the whole of that area. Sometimes it can take 20 mins to clear Coombe Road due to the congestion Lewes Road is causing. alex.c.parr

7:48am Fri 20 Dec 13

Gribbet says...

One point the petrol junkies never contemplate is that oil is a finite resource and there won't be a lot of it coming out of the ground in about 10-15 years time, what there is will be pricey. It's good that we're forking out for alternative transport infrastructure asap.
One point the petrol junkies never contemplate is that oil is a finite resource and there won't be a lot of it coming out of the ground in about 10-15 years time, what there is will be pricey. It's good that we're forking out for alternative transport infrastructure asap. Gribbet

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree