The ArgusBrighton Lanes car purge plans 'just the start' for city centre, Greens say (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Brighton Lanes car purge plans 'just the start' for city centre, Greens say

The Argus: The junction of Ship Street and Prince Albert Street The junction of Ship Street and Prince Albert Street

Plans to cut down on car use in Brighton's Lanes are “just the start”, according to council chiefs.

Brighton and Hove City Council has spent four years drawing up plans to make The Lanes more pedestrian-friendly, claiming it would boost trade and tourism.

Despite a government inspector throwing most of its proposal out after a £25,000 public inquiry, the local authority has pushed ahead with the scheme in East Street, Ship Street and Prince Albert Street.

Revised proposals have now been agreed by a majority of councillors on the transport committee with the promise that shutting off streets will be taken on a step-by step basis.

Council leaders claim the move means the local authority can now apply for grants of up to millions of pounds to further improve the area.

Green councillor Ian Davey said: “If we can make a start then the council has a good economic case when applying for real proper investment in this area so it can be the real credit to the city that it deserves to be.

“If we do not then it will continue as it is.”

But Labour councillor Alan Robins said: “I think it works really well as it is.”

Conservative councillor Tony Janio said: “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits.

“But having had a very large VW nearly run me over when I was doing my Christmas shopping in The Lanes I am inclined to support it.”

The first part of the plan - the closure of Ship Street and ban on HGVs after 11am - will be introduced by March.

Comments (61)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:19am Thu 16 Jan 14

rogerthefish says...

It's no the start of the end for the Green party.
It's no the start of the end for the Green party. rogerthefish
  • Score: 24

6:52am Thu 16 Jan 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Ian when are you going to help the 20 percent of kids living in poverty in this town, when are you going to sort out your disgracefully poor performance employing young people into apprenticeships, when are you going to sort out the shockingly poor performance regarding recycling, when are you going to talk openly about the absolutely stunning situation which has arisen in the housing department - see Brighton and Hove Independent News.
Come on Ian so far all your party have done is fiddled while Rome burns and the city's reputation across the world - see Tripadvisor comments - is pretty poor. We have to rely on good weather now for economic success which is a risky strategy.
Ian when are you going to help the 20 percent of kids living in poverty in this town, when are you going to sort out your disgracefully poor performance employing young people into apprenticeships, when are you going to sort out the shockingly poor performance regarding recycling, when are you going to talk openly about the absolutely stunning situation which has arisen in the housing department - see Brighton and Hove Independent News. Come on Ian so far all your party have done is fiddled while Rome burns and the city's reputation across the world - see Tripadvisor comments - is pretty poor. We have to rely on good weather now for economic success which is a risky strategy. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 89

6:52am Thu 16 Jan 14

cleggalike says...

rogerthefish wrote:
It's no the start of the end for the Green party.
Thank you Yoda
[quote][p][bold]rogerthefish[/bold] wrote: It's no the start of the end for the Green party.[/p][/quote]Thank you Yoda cleggalike
  • Score: 20

7:05am Thu 16 Jan 14

fred clause says...

So basically they are plowing ahead with a half baked scheme which just stinks of Green Car hatred what a surprise and we wonder why Brighton is sinking fast into the mire.
So basically they are plowing ahead with a half baked scheme which just stinks of Green Car hatred what a surprise and we wonder why Brighton is sinking fast into the mire. fred clause
  • Score: 60

7:41am Thu 16 Jan 14

twonk says...

All those businesses that all have to take in deliveries between 9am and 11 am. Good luck with that.
All those businesses that all have to take in deliveries between 9am and 11 am. Good luck with that. twonk
  • Score: 47

7:42am Thu 16 Jan 14

Brightonlad86 says...

I'm completely anti green etc but can't see a huge problem with this.

When I have driven through in the past it feels pedestrianised anyway. People walking up the middle of the road, crossing without looking etc.

Yes, there are far more important issues in Brighton that need addressing, but let's not moan just for the sake if it.
I'm completely anti green etc but can't see a huge problem with this. When I have driven through in the past it feels pedestrianised anyway. People walking up the middle of the road, crossing without looking etc. Yes, there are far more important issues in Brighton that need addressing, but let's not moan just for the sake if it. Brightonlad86
  • Score: -6

7:44am Thu 16 Jan 14

Brightonlad86 says...

twonk wrote:
All those businesses that all have to take in deliveries between 9am and 11 am. Good luck with that.
I'm pretty certain the 'road' will be left 'access only' to allow deliveries 24/7
[quote][p][bold]twonk[/bold] wrote: All those businesses that all have to take in deliveries between 9am and 11 am. Good luck with that.[/p][/quote]I'm pretty certain the 'road' will be left 'access only' to allow deliveries 24/7 Brightonlad86
  • Score: 8

8:24am Thu 16 Jan 14

fredflintstone1 says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Ian when are you going to help the 20 percent of kids living in poverty in this town, when are you going to sort out your disgracefully poor performance employing young people into apprenticeships, when are you going to sort out the shockingly poor performance regarding recycling, when are you going to talk openly about the absolutely stunning situation which has arisen in the housing department - see Brighton and Hove Independent News.
Come on Ian so far all your party have done is fiddled while Rome burns and the city's reputation across the world - see Tripadvisor comments - is pretty poor. We have to rely on good weather now for economic success which is a risky strategy.
You're 100% right, Maxwell's Ghost! The housing department case as reported in the B&H Independent News in particular is truly shocking. There needs to be a wide-ranging, independent enquiry into all allegations of nepotism and croneyism in the council now, as a way of helping to restore public confidence. Where does Dr Lucas stand on this? I thought she was in favour of open government??
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Ian when are you going to help the 20 percent of kids living in poverty in this town, when are you going to sort out your disgracefully poor performance employing young people into apprenticeships, when are you going to sort out the shockingly poor performance regarding recycling, when are you going to talk openly about the absolutely stunning situation which has arisen in the housing department - see Brighton and Hove Independent News. Come on Ian so far all your party have done is fiddled while Rome burns and the city's reputation across the world - see Tripadvisor comments - is pretty poor. We have to rely on good weather now for economic success which is a risky strategy.[/p][/quote]You're 100% right, Maxwell's Ghost! The housing department case as reported in the B&H Independent News in particular is truly shocking. There needs to be a wide-ranging, independent enquiry into all allegations of nepotism and croneyism in the council now, as a way of helping to restore public confidence. Where does Dr Lucas stand on this? I thought she was in favour of open government?? fredflintstone1
  • Score: 38

8:29am Thu 16 Jan 14

HJarrs says...

What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago. HJarrs
  • Score: -47

8:30am Thu 16 Jan 14

fredflintstone1 says...

Housing article. See

http://issuu.com/bri
ghton-and-hove-indep
endent/docs/123-10-j
anuary-2014
Housing article. See http://issuu.com/bri ghton-and-hove-indep endent/docs/123-10-j anuary-2014 fredflintstone1
  • Score: 6

8:53am Thu 16 Jan 14

DC Brighton says...

Whether or not this is a good idea, is it really very important? No.

I agree with the majority of posters here: B&H council, please find something more important to spend our money on instead of wasting it on peripheral matters.

And if the Greens think that pedestrianising the Lanes will help tourism and retail expenditure, perhaps they should look at their general anti-car stance (congested roads, exorbitant parking fees etc.) first. If nobody comes here it really doesn't matter if you let people walk freely or not.
Whether or not this is a good idea, is it really very important? No. I agree with the majority of posters here: B&H council, please find something more important to spend our money on instead of wasting it on peripheral matters. And if the Greens think that pedestrianising the Lanes will help tourism and retail expenditure, perhaps they should look at their general anti-car stance (congested roads, exorbitant parking fees etc.) first. If nobody comes here it really doesn't matter if you let people walk freely or not. DC Brighton
  • Score: 42

9:11am Thu 16 Jan 14

clubrob6 says...

How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year. clubrob6
  • Score: 27

9:23am Thu 16 Jan 14

The Prophet of Doom says...

Seems like the Goofy Greens "started" ages ago.

What a shower they are.
Seems like the Goofy Greens "started" ages ago. What a shower they are. The Prophet of Doom
  • Score: 13

9:24am Thu 16 Jan 14

peterthomas says...

HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
What nonsense - if you walk in the middle of the road expect to encounter a car!!?? There are private car parks in the heart of the Lanes that need to be accessed - pedestrians as well as drivers need to use common sense, and walking in the middle of the road doesn't seem too bright? And as for "the pavements aren't wide enough".......round of applause for comedy!!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]What nonsense - if you walk in the middle of the road expect to encounter a car!!?? There are private car parks in the heart of the Lanes that need to be accessed - pedestrians as well as drivers need to use common sense, and walking in the middle of the road doesn't seem too bright? And as for "the pavements aren't wide enough".......round of applause for comedy!! peterthomas
  • Score: 24

9:40am Thu 16 Jan 14

Brighton Living says...

What a waste of money, like normal..........
What a waste of money, like normal.......... Brighton Living
  • Score: 24

9:56am Thu 16 Jan 14

s_james says...

The same story appeared in the Argus earlier in the week but reported in a much more balanced way www.theargus.co.uk/n
ews/10935239.New_pla
ns_to_make_historic_
Lanes_area_in_Bright
on_car_free/.

This one is laughable in its negativity
The same story appeared in the Argus earlier in the week but reported in a much more balanced way www.theargus.co.uk/n ews/10935239.New_pla ns_to_make_historic_ Lanes_area_in_Bright on_car_free/. This one is laughable in its negativity s_james
  • Score: 6

9:56am Thu 16 Jan 14

cynic_the says...

HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]DO NOT FEED THE TROLL cynic_the
  • Score: 7

10:09am Thu 16 Jan 14

ThinkBrighton says...

The race is on.
The greens have got just over a year to really screw this city up!
Will they? They'll have a good try at it.
The race is on. The greens have got just over a year to really screw this city up! Will they? They'll have a good try at it. ThinkBrighton
  • Score: 15

10:21am Thu 16 Jan 14

Dan Yack says...

"Conservative councillor Tony Janio said: “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits."

is it me or does this make no sense?
"Conservative councillor Tony Janio said: “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits." is it me or does this make no sense? Dan Yack
  • Score: 14

10:23am Thu 16 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
If as you say the area is not a major destination for cars why spend money on solving a problem that doesn't exist ? Instead spend it on problems that do - re-surfacing the disgrace that is the road along the East side of St Peters Church would be a start.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]If as you say the area is not a major destination for cars why spend money on solving a problem that doesn't exist ? Instead spend it on problems that do - re-surfacing the disgrace that is the road along the East side of St Peters Church would be a start. Fight_Back
  • Score: 24

10:31am Thu 16 Jan 14

Roger31 says...

Did Tony Janio really say " “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits."? It may be good fun quoting self contradictory remarks made by a councillor but it's not good reporting. A good journalist should find out what an interviewee really means or not bother quoting him at all. Or perhaps there's just a "don't" missing in front of "think it could be done in bits". Come on Argus, make sense!
Did Tony Janio really say " “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits."? It may be good fun quoting self contradictory remarks made by a councillor but it's not good reporting. A good journalist should find out what an interviewee really means or not bother quoting him at all. Or perhaps there's just a "don't" missing in front of "think it could be done in bits". Come on Argus, make sense! Roger31
  • Score: 10

10:33am Thu 16 Jan 14

heartthrob says...

oh for goodness sake.

North Lane, largely car free - works well

Lanes - international tourist attraction, lessened by cars driving through

Just get on with it. The area will improve and nobody needs to use these roads anyway
oh for goodness sake. North Lane, largely car free - works well Lanes - international tourist attraction, lessened by cars driving through Just get on with it. The area will improve and nobody needs to use these roads anyway heartthrob
  • Score: -21

10:38am Thu 16 Jan 14

brighton bluenose says...

clubrob6 wrote:
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
Same old tedious out of touch whinging!
If you read the ******* story properly you would see that this scheme was initially mooted FOUR YEARS ago ie before the Greens were anywhere near power!
This development will be good for both locals and tourists too and if you can't see that you are even more of a numpty than the impression you generally give!!
[quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.[/p][/quote]Same old tedious out of touch whinging! If you read the ******* story properly you would see that this scheme was initially mooted FOUR YEARS ago ie before the Greens were anywhere near power! This development will be good for both locals and tourists too and if you can't see that you are even more of a numpty than the impression you generally give!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -25

10:39am Thu 16 Jan 14

madzukun88 says...

HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking!

I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them.

My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars.

I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking! I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them. My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars. I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked. madzukun88
  • Score: 17

10:42am Thu 16 Jan 14

brighton bluenose says...

Roger31 wrote:
Did Tony Janio really say " “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits."? It may be good fun quoting self contradictory remarks made by a councillor but it's not good reporting. A good journalist should find out what an interviewee really means or not bother quoting him at all. Or perhaps there's just a "don't" missing in front of "think it could be done in bits". Come on Argus, make sense!
Perhaps this just demonstrates the intellect of some of our elected representatives?!!
[quote][p][bold]Roger31[/bold] wrote: Did Tony Janio really say " “I do not like to see this piecemeal approach taken. I'm not a big fan of this scheme and think it could be done in bits."? It may be good fun quoting self contradictory remarks made by a councillor but it's not good reporting. A good journalist should find out what an interviewee really means or not bother quoting him at all. Or perhaps there's just a "don't" missing in front of "think it could be done in bits". Come on Argus, make sense![/p][/quote]Perhaps this just demonstrates the intellect of some of our elected representatives?!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 6

10:45am Thu 16 Jan 14

Zorniza says...

Should this not be 'the laines'?
Should this not be 'the laines'? Zorniza
  • Score: -11

10:56am Thu 16 Jan 14

brighton bluenose says...

madzukun88 wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking!

I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them.

My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars.

I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.
Well the obvious solution is to ban cars through the suggested hours then it will be stress free for both pedestrians AND drivers - SIMPLES!!!
[quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking! I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them. My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars. I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.[/p][/quote]Well the obvious solution is to ban cars through the suggested hours then it will be stress free for both pedestrians AND drivers - SIMPLES!!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -14

11:18am Thu 16 Jan 14

madzukun88 says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
madzukun88 wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking!

I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them.

My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars.

I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.
Well the obvious solution is to ban cars through the suggested hours then it will be stress free for both pedestrians AND drivers - SIMPLES!!!
The obvious solution is for people walking around in brighton to have more common sense. Even more simples!
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking! I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them. My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars. I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.[/p][/quote]Well the obvious solution is to ban cars through the suggested hours then it will be stress free for both pedestrians AND drivers - SIMPLES!!![/p][/quote]The obvious solution is for people walking around in brighton to have more common sense. Even more simples! madzukun88
  • Score: 19

11:44am Thu 16 Jan 14

rolivan says...

How about a "Dance in Edburton"
How about a "Dance in Edburton" rolivan
  • Score: 0

11:48am Thu 16 Jan 14

whatevernext2013 says...

and the story goes ,THERE ONCE WAS A PLACE CALLED BRIGHTON IT WAS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE IN AND TRAVEL TO ,BUT NOW ITS A DIRTY LITTLE HOLE RUINED BY THE greens, the people of this once great city are waiting there time to slay the DIRTY green slime roll on 2015
and the story goes ,THERE ONCE WAS A PLACE CALLED BRIGHTON IT WAS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE IN AND TRAVEL TO ,BUT NOW ITS A DIRTY LITTLE HOLE RUINED BY THE greens, the people of this once great city are waiting there time to slay the DIRTY green slime roll on 2015 whatevernext2013
  • Score: 16

12:09pm Thu 16 Jan 14

MuammarQaddafi says...

I hope that pedestrianisation helps the Lanes of Brighton; I know it killed Burgess Hill town centre, whose pedestrianised portion now hosts little but empty storefronts, charity shops, and nail bars, and becomes a free-range chav area every night promptly at 17:00. It's not the nature of the town, because, interestingly, a block or two up Church Road, businesses are still going. Hmm ...
I hope that pedestrianisation helps the Lanes of Brighton; I know it killed Burgess Hill town centre, whose pedestrianised portion now hosts little but empty storefronts, charity shops, and nail bars, and becomes a free-range chav area every night promptly at 17:00. It's not the nature of the town, because, interestingly, a block or two up Church Road, businesses are still going. Hmm ... MuammarQaddafi
  • Score: 11

12:36pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

I have an idea that will save the Coucil hundreds of thousands if not millions, if this scheme is to improve pedestrian safety and prevent cars at peak times, just shut the area off with bollards during whatever times they wish. There you go problem solved, and perhaps the money can be used for something more important than vanity.
I have an idea that will save the Coucil hundreds of thousands if not millions, if this scheme is to improve pedestrian safety and prevent cars at peak times, just shut the area off with bollards during whatever times they wish. There you go problem solved, and perhaps the money can be used for something more important than vanity. Brighton1000
  • Score: 3

1:13pm Thu 16 Jan 14

hurdygurdy says...

madzukun88 wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking!

I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them.

My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars.

I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.
CULTURE CHANGE REQUIRED?
Driving through these tiny narrow lanes to visit friends, do shopping etc. Are these really valid reasons for the average driver to drive a 1 tonne lump of metal through town centre areas that are busy with pedestrians? Seems very risky to me. Whilst in legal terms there is no issue, it still seems somewhat selfish and unnecessary. I’m sure that for the majority of motorists these journeys could be made in one of many alternative ways that do not congest the roads and that pose less of a risk. Pedestrianizing areas like these is a sensible idea, from a safety perspective as well as an aesthetic perspective. Keep the cars out, find another way.
As for parking, there is clearly an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you own a car and live in central Brighton you will always have trouble and should expect this. No-one is to blame for this other than the car owners. The only solution is to reduce the number of cars, increasing on road parking is not possible. Do most people who live in central B&H actually need the luxury of owning their own car? Maybe join a car club or hire a car when really required.
[quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking! I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them. My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars. I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.[/p][/quote]CULTURE CHANGE REQUIRED? Driving through these tiny narrow lanes to visit friends, do shopping etc. Are these really valid reasons for the average driver to drive a 1 tonne lump of metal through town centre areas that are busy with pedestrians? Seems very risky to me. Whilst in legal terms there is no issue, it still seems somewhat selfish and unnecessary. I’m sure that for the majority of motorists these journeys could be made in one of many alternative ways that do not congest the roads and that pose less of a risk. Pedestrianizing areas like these is a sensible idea, from a safety perspective as well as an aesthetic perspective. Keep the cars out, find another way. As for parking, there is clearly an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you own a car and live in central Brighton you will always have trouble and should expect this. No-one is to blame for this other than the car owners. The only solution is to reduce the number of cars, increasing on road parking is not possible. Do most people who live in central B&H actually need the luxury of owning their own car? Maybe join a car club or hire a car when really required. hurdygurdy
  • Score: -11

1:25pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Jim Davis says...

Meanwhile in Hamburg....

http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/world/
europe/auto-ban-how-
hamburg-is-taking-ca
rs-off-the-road-9062
461.html

Please do try and keep up with the 21st century Brighton :)

PS The scheme for the Lanes was voted through by Conservatives and Greens. Labour, I assume, didn't want to lose that 'Chained to Thatcher' vote or whatever that group is called.
Meanwhile in Hamburg.... http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/world/ europe/auto-ban-how- hamburg-is-taking-ca rs-off-the-road-9062 461.html Please do try and keep up with the 21st century Brighton :) PS The scheme for the Lanes was voted through by Conservatives and Greens. Labour, I assume, didn't want to lose that 'Chained to Thatcher' vote or whatever that group is called. Jim Davis
  • Score: -1

2:02pm Thu 16 Jan 14

DC Brighton says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
Same old tedious out of touch whinging!
If you read the ******* story properly you would see that this scheme was initially mooted FOUR YEARS ago ie before the Greens were anywhere near power!
This development will be good for both locals and tourists too and if you can't see that you are even more of a numpty than the impression you generally give!!
I think it is you who misses the point. You should think very carefully before calling people "numpty".

Four years ago it may have made sense because four years ago you could drive into Brighton more easily by car. Since this shower got in, you can't. So why bother wasting money on this? That is the point being made here. You think this development will be "good for both locals and tourists". I'm sure most locals could think of many, many projects that would be far more deserving than this (see above). As for tourists...I doubt they'd notice the difference - the majority of the Lanes ARE ALREADY pedestrianised. I'll stop short of referring to you as a numpty.
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.[/p][/quote]Same old tedious out of touch whinging! If you read the ******* story properly you would see that this scheme was initially mooted FOUR YEARS ago ie before the Greens were anywhere near power! This development will be good for both locals and tourists too and if you can't see that you are even more of a numpty than the impression you generally give!![/p][/quote]I think it is you who misses the point. You should think very carefully before calling people "numpty". Four years ago it may have made sense because four years ago you could drive into Brighton more easily by car. Since this shower got in, you can't. So why bother wasting money on this? That is the point being made here. You think this development will be "good for both locals and tourists". I'm sure most locals could think of many, many projects that would be far more deserving than this (see above). As for tourists...I doubt they'd notice the difference - the majority of the Lanes ARE ALREADY pedestrianised. I'll stop short of referring to you as a numpty. DC Brighton
  • Score: 11

2:14pm Thu 16 Jan 14

madzukun88 says...

hurdygurdy wrote:
madzukun88 wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking!

I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them.

My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars.

I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.
CULTURE CHANGE REQUIRED?
Driving through these tiny narrow lanes to visit friends, do shopping etc. Are these really valid reasons for the average driver to drive a 1 tonne lump of metal through town centre areas that are busy with pedestrians? Seems very risky to me. Whilst in legal terms there is no issue, it still seems somewhat selfish and unnecessary. I’m sure that for the majority of motorists these journeys could be made in one of many alternative ways that do not congest the roads and that pose less of a risk. Pedestrianizing areas like these is a sensible idea, from a safety perspective as well as an aesthetic perspective. Keep the cars out, find another way.
As for parking, there is clearly an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you own a car and live in central Brighton you will always have trouble and should expect this. No-one is to blame for this other than the car owners. The only solution is to reduce the number of cars, increasing on road parking is not possible. Do most people who live in central B&H actually need the luxury of owning their own car? Maybe join a car club or hire a car when really required.
Most people do, yes, because a lot of them work outside of the Brighton area, and paying the ridiculous charges for trains to get to work every day just isn't a financially good choice. I live in portslade, and as much as I would like to take the bus into town to see friends and shop when I do come, the buses are generally over crowded, delayed, slow and again, the prices are going up every year.

I like how you brush over something though. You know, pedestrians having common sense. It's all well and good saying car owners only have themselves to blame, but if you walk into the middle of a road (especially as a lot of the roads in the south laines have awkward corners and blind spots) you should at least have the common sense to realise that a car is probably going to appear at some point.

Every argument has two sides. You say it's selfish for car owners to drive around the laines. I think it's selfish for pedestrians to expect that cars wont use those roads, especially when there are car parks in those laines and deliveries constantly being made to those shops so they can continue their business. If it does become a no vehicle zone, what are all the shops going to do down those laines who rely on deliveries every day to keep their business going? I don't see them or the delivery men being happy to haul heavy crates for even longer distances just because shoppers aren't happy about cars.

It might be a good idea, it might not, either way it's going to cost a lot of money and I think that money could be put to much better use instead of just appeasing those stupid enough to walk out in front of moving vehicle.
[quote][p][bold]hurdygurdy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking! I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them. My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars. I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.[/p][/quote]CULTURE CHANGE REQUIRED? Driving through these tiny narrow lanes to visit friends, do shopping etc. Are these really valid reasons for the average driver to drive a 1 tonne lump of metal through town centre areas that are busy with pedestrians? Seems very risky to me. Whilst in legal terms there is no issue, it still seems somewhat selfish and unnecessary. I’m sure that for the majority of motorists these journeys could be made in one of many alternative ways that do not congest the roads and that pose less of a risk. Pedestrianizing areas like these is a sensible idea, from a safety perspective as well as an aesthetic perspective. Keep the cars out, find another way. As for parking, there is clearly an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you own a car and live in central Brighton you will always have trouble and should expect this. No-one is to blame for this other than the car owners. The only solution is to reduce the number of cars, increasing on road parking is not possible. Do most people who live in central B&H actually need the luxury of owning their own car? Maybe join a car club or hire a car when really required.[/p][/quote]Most people do, yes, because a lot of them work outside of the Brighton area, and paying the ridiculous charges for trains to get to work every day just isn't a financially good choice. I live in portslade, and as much as I would like to take the bus into town to see friends and shop when I do come, the buses are generally over crowded, delayed, slow and again, the prices are going up every year. I like how you brush over something though. You know, pedestrians having common sense. It's all well and good saying car owners only have themselves to blame, but if you walk into the middle of a road (especially as a lot of the roads in the south laines have awkward corners and blind spots) you should at least have the common sense to realise that a car is probably going to appear at some point. Every argument has two sides. You say it's selfish for car owners to drive around the laines. I think it's selfish for pedestrians to expect that cars wont use those roads, especially when there are car parks in those laines and deliveries constantly being made to those shops so they can continue their business. If it does become a no vehicle zone, what are all the shops going to do down those laines who rely on deliveries every day to keep their business going? I don't see them or the delivery men being happy to haul heavy crates for even longer distances just because shoppers aren't happy about cars. It might be a good idea, it might not, either way it's going to cost a lot of money and I think that money could be put to much better use instead of just appeasing those stupid enough to walk out in front of moving vehicle. madzukun88
  • Score: 10

2:23pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Plantpot says...

Brighton1000 wrote:
I have an idea that will save the Coucil hundreds of thousands if not millions, if this scheme is to improve pedestrian safety and prevent cars at peak times, just shut the area off with bollards during whatever times they wish. There you go problem solved, and perhaps the money can be used for something more important than vanity.
The bollards scheme works very well in the historic heart of Durham, and no doubt other, more enlightened places than Brighton and Hove.
[quote][p][bold]Brighton1000[/bold] wrote: I have an idea that will save the Coucil hundreds of thousands if not millions, if this scheme is to improve pedestrian safety and prevent cars at peak times, just shut the area off with bollards during whatever times they wish. There you go problem solved, and perhaps the money can be used for something more important than vanity.[/p][/quote]The bollards scheme works very well in the historic heart of Durham, and no doubt other, more enlightened places than Brighton and Hove. Plantpot
  • Score: 4

2:24pm Thu 16 Jan 14

DC Brighton says...

madzukun88 wrote:
hurdygurdy wrote:
madzukun88 wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking!

I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them.

My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars.

I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.
CULTURE CHANGE REQUIRED?
Driving through these tiny narrow lanes to visit friends, do shopping etc. Are these really valid reasons for the average driver to drive a 1 tonne lump of metal through town centre areas that are busy with pedestrians? Seems very risky to me. Whilst in legal terms there is no issue, it still seems somewhat selfish and unnecessary. I’m sure that for the majority of motorists these journeys could be made in one of many alternative ways that do not congest the roads and that pose less of a risk. Pedestrianizing areas like these is a sensible idea, from a safety perspective as well as an aesthetic perspective. Keep the cars out, find another way.
As for parking, there is clearly an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you own a car and live in central Brighton you will always have trouble and should expect this. No-one is to blame for this other than the car owners. The only solution is to reduce the number of cars, increasing on road parking is not possible. Do most people who live in central B&H actually need the luxury of owning their own car? Maybe join a car club or hire a car when really required.
Most people do, yes, because a lot of them work outside of the Brighton area, and paying the ridiculous charges for trains to get to work every day just isn't a financially good choice. I live in portslade, and as much as I would like to take the bus into town to see friends and shop when I do come, the buses are generally over crowded, delayed, slow and again, the prices are going up every year.

I like how you brush over something though. You know, pedestrians having common sense. It's all well and good saying car owners only have themselves to blame, but if you walk into the middle of a road (especially as a lot of the roads in the south laines have awkward corners and blind spots) you should at least have the common sense to realise that a car is probably going to appear at some point.

Every argument has two sides. You say it's selfish for car owners to drive around the laines. I think it's selfish for pedestrians to expect that cars wont use those roads, especially when there are car parks in those laines and deliveries constantly being made to those shops so they can continue their business. If it does become a no vehicle zone, what are all the shops going to do down those laines who rely on deliveries every day to keep their business going? I don't see them or the delivery men being happy to haul heavy crates for even longer distances just because shoppers aren't happy about cars.

It might be a good idea, it might not, either way it's going to cost a lot of money and I think that money could be put to much better use instead of just appeasing those stupid enough to walk out in front of moving vehicle.
Hear hear!

You could argue the toss about this all day.

The real issue is that the council is wasting money on things which appear to be Green (but which are probably not) in order to gain headlines, rather than spending the budget on things which the city really needs. Things which may not have a nice media-friendly Green agenda....
[quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hurdygurdy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]The cars are a pain in the butt for shoppers? I have driven around Brighton April 2013 to get to and from work, friends houses, shopping etc. There would be a lot less accidents if pedestrians looked before they cross! I go by the new 20mph speed limit, but it doesn't solve the accident problems because pedestrians still insist on staring at their phones or at the pretty shop displays while they're walking into the road. Driving down the south laines I have to constantly stop-start-sound the horn because people just don't look and I find it ridiculous that drivers get the blame all the time. The worst area is at the clock tower. There are traffic lights and pedestrian crossings that will tell you when it is safe to cross and when it isn't. Countless times I have started driving down towards west street and had to emergency stop because of people just walking straight into the road without even looking! I know the pavements in the laines are quite narrow and I understand some people need to walk in the roads. But it would be a lot easier for everyone involved if pedestrians were actually aware of their surroundings and aware that if they walk in the road, there is a high chance of a car being behind them. My final point is parking. Parking is hard enough to find in Brighton, even if you have a residents permit. So I do genuinely feel bad for the people who live in these small areas and are now going to struggle even harder to find a place to park their cars. I repeat my main point- there would be less traffic accidents in Brighton if people actually used common sense and looked before they walked.[/p][/quote]CULTURE CHANGE REQUIRED? Driving through these tiny narrow lanes to visit friends, do shopping etc. Are these really valid reasons for the average driver to drive a 1 tonne lump of metal through town centre areas that are busy with pedestrians? Seems very risky to me. Whilst in legal terms there is no issue, it still seems somewhat selfish and unnecessary. I’m sure that for the majority of motorists these journeys could be made in one of many alternative ways that do not congest the roads and that pose less of a risk. Pedestrianizing areas like these is a sensible idea, from a safety perspective as well as an aesthetic perspective. Keep the cars out, find another way. As for parking, there is clearly an issue, but the fact of the matter is if you own a car and live in central Brighton you will always have trouble and should expect this. No-one is to blame for this other than the car owners. The only solution is to reduce the number of cars, increasing on road parking is not possible. Do most people who live in central B&H actually need the luxury of owning their own car? Maybe join a car club or hire a car when really required.[/p][/quote]Most people do, yes, because a lot of them work outside of the Brighton area, and paying the ridiculous charges for trains to get to work every day just isn't a financially good choice. I live in portslade, and as much as I would like to take the bus into town to see friends and shop when I do come, the buses are generally over crowded, delayed, slow and again, the prices are going up every year. I like how you brush over something though. You know, pedestrians having common sense. It's all well and good saying car owners only have themselves to blame, but if you walk into the middle of a road (especially as a lot of the roads in the south laines have awkward corners and blind spots) you should at least have the common sense to realise that a car is probably going to appear at some point. Every argument has two sides. You say it's selfish for car owners to drive around the laines. I think it's selfish for pedestrians to expect that cars wont use those roads, especially when there are car parks in those laines and deliveries constantly being made to those shops so they can continue their business. If it does become a no vehicle zone, what are all the shops going to do down those laines who rely on deliveries every day to keep their business going? I don't see them or the delivery men being happy to haul heavy crates for even longer distances just because shoppers aren't happy about cars. It might be a good idea, it might not, either way it's going to cost a lot of money and I think that money could be put to much better use instead of just appeasing those stupid enough to walk out in front of moving vehicle.[/p][/quote]Hear hear! You could argue the toss about this all day. The real issue is that the council is wasting money on things which appear to be Green (but which are probably not) in order to gain headlines, rather than spending the budget on things which the city really needs. Things which may not have a nice media-friendly Green agenda.... DC Brighton
  • Score: 15

2:30pm Thu 16 Jan 14

MuammarQaddafi says...

'To boost trade and tourism' via pedestrianisation of the Lanes is one of those ideas that seems to make sense on paper. Saying it makes you feel good, like saying 'Enhance the Council's revenues by raising taxes again.' It appears simple, effective, and logical. The problem is that it simply doesn't solve the problem. Plans to make the Lanes "more pedestrian-friendly" don't take into account the fact that the Lanes are already "pedestrian-friendly
," unless by that term you mean "vehicle-exclusive." People walk freely down the streets already, much more than in many other places like Birmingham, Liverpool, and Teesside. If trade and tourism are down, then Brighton needs to draw customers from other cities, and it's not going to do that by making transportation more difficult.
'To boost trade and tourism' via pedestrianisation of the Lanes is one of those ideas that seems to make sense on paper. Saying it makes you feel good, like saying 'Enhance the Council's revenues by raising taxes again.' It appears simple, effective, and logical. The problem is that it simply doesn't solve the problem. Plans to make the Lanes "more pedestrian-friendly" don't take into account the fact that the Lanes are already "pedestrian-friendly ," unless by that term you mean "vehicle-exclusive." People walk freely down the streets already, much more than in many other places like Birmingham, Liverpool, and Teesside. If trade and tourism are down, then Brighton needs to draw customers from other cities, and it's not going to do that by making transportation more difficult. MuammarQaddafi
  • Score: 8

4:40pm Thu 16 Jan 14

brighton bluenose says...

DC Brighton wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
Same old tedious out of touch whinging!
If you read the ******* story properly you would see that this scheme was initially mooted FOUR YEARS ago ie before the Greens were anywhere near power!
This development will be good for both locals and tourists too and if you can't see that you are even more of a numpty than the impression you generally give!!
I think it is you who misses the point. You should think very carefully before calling people "numpty".

Four years ago it may have made sense because four years ago you could drive into Brighton more easily by car. Since this shower got in, you can't. So why bother wasting money on this? That is the point being made here. You think this development will be "good for both locals and tourists". I'm sure most locals could think of many, many projects that would be far more deserving than this (see above). As for tourists...I doubt they'd notice the difference - the majority of the Lanes ARE ALREADY pedestrianised. I'll stop short of referring to you as a numpty.
Are you for real??!!!!
There is no logic in your comment - you are trying to say that as there was more traffic four years ago this scheme might have been a good idea but now there is less traffic it isn't a good idea??!!!
What has the traffic then and now got to do with pedestrianisation of the Lanes?!
The majority (66%?) have the good sense to come into the city centre by transport means other than the motor car - what real benefit is there driving into Ship Street, Middle Street or the bottom bit of East Street when, if you do need to drive, you can park beneath the town hall, in Church Street, in Regency Square or North Road or a bit further out and walk in?
It's pretty obvious that making this area car-free during the alloted times will make it a much more pleasant experience for everyone and I find it difficult to see why anyone could really be against it!!
[quote][p][bold]DC Brighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.[/p][/quote]Same old tedious out of touch whinging! If you read the ******* story properly you would see that this scheme was initially mooted FOUR YEARS ago ie before the Greens were anywhere near power! This development will be good for both locals and tourists too and if you can't see that you are even more of a numpty than the impression you generally give!![/p][/quote]I think it is you who misses the point. You should think very carefully before calling people "numpty". Four years ago it may have made sense because four years ago you could drive into Brighton more easily by car. Since this shower got in, you can't. So why bother wasting money on this? That is the point being made here. You think this development will be "good for both locals and tourists". I'm sure most locals could think of many, many projects that would be far more deserving than this (see above). As for tourists...I doubt they'd notice the difference - the majority of the Lanes ARE ALREADY pedestrianised. I'll stop short of referring to you as a numpty.[/p][/quote]Are you for real??!!!! There is no logic in your comment - you are trying to say that as there was more traffic four years ago this scheme might have been a good idea but now there is less traffic it isn't a good idea??!!! What has the traffic then and now got to do with pedestrianisation of the Lanes?! The majority (66%?) have the good sense to come into the city centre by transport means other than the motor car - what real benefit is there driving into Ship Street, Middle Street or the bottom bit of East Street when, if you do need to drive, you can park beneath the town hall, in Church Street, in Regency Square or North Road or a bit further out and walk in? It's pretty obvious that making this area car-free during the alloted times will make it a much more pleasant experience for everyone and I find it difficult to see why anyone could really be against it!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: -7

5:31pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

http://www.brightona



ndhovenews.org/2014/



01/16/labour-tables-



formal-vote-of-no-co



nfidence-in-brighton



-and-hoves-ruling-gr



eens/26722?utm_sourc



e=twitterfeed&ut


m_me
dium=twitter
http://www.brightona ndhovenews.org/2014/ 01/16/labour-tables- formal-vote-of-no-co nfidence-in-brighton -and-hoves-ruling-gr eens/26722?utm_sourc e=twitterfeed&ut m_me dium=twitter Brighton1000
  • Score: 2

5:56pm Thu 16 Jan 14

scuba1 says...

Brightonlad86 wrote:
I'm completely anti green etc but can't see a huge problem with this.

When I have driven through in the past it feels pedestrianised anyway. People walking up the middle of the road, crossing without looking etc.

Yes, there are far more important issues in Brighton that need addressing, but let's not moan just for the sake if it.
There are definitely far more important issues which is why people are moaning !!!
[quote][p][bold]Brightonlad86[/bold] wrote: I'm completely anti green etc but can't see a huge problem with this. When I have driven through in the past it feels pedestrianised anyway. People walking up the middle of the road, crossing without looking etc. Yes, there are far more important issues in Brighton that need addressing, but let's not moan just for the sake if it.[/p][/quote]There are definitely far more important issues which is why people are moaning !!! scuba1
  • Score: 6

6:58pm Thu 16 Jan 14

revelstoke says...

I live in Canada and was over in the UK for Christmas. I intended to visit Brighton as I have always done, but once I saw the cost of parking I took my family to Chichester and Worthing where I had enough money left after parking to buy some presents! I think it is a very tough time for any business and to have customers like me taking my trade elsewhere because of Council policy must be really hard. Make the town friendly to all visitors and cut those parking charges!
I live in Canada and was over in the UK for Christmas. I intended to visit Brighton as I have always done, but once I saw the cost of parking I took my family to Chichester and Worthing where I had enough money left after parking to buy some presents! I think it is a very tough time for any business and to have customers like me taking my trade elsewhere because of Council policy must be really hard. Make the town friendly to all visitors and cut those parking charges! revelstoke
  • Score: 8

7:09pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

revelstoke wrote:
I live in Canada and was over in the UK for Christmas. I intended to visit Brighton as I have always done, but once I saw the cost of parking I took my family to Chichester and Worthing where I had enough money left after parking to buy some presents! I think it is a very tough time for any business and to have customers like me taking my trade elsewhere because of Council policy must be really hard. Make the town friendly to all visitors and cut those parking charges!
thankyou, a genuine insight into how our city is being ruined. lets hope the vote of no confidence goes through and fast
[quote][p][bold]revelstoke[/bold] wrote: I live in Canada and was over in the UK for Christmas. I intended to visit Brighton as I have always done, but once I saw the cost of parking I took my family to Chichester and Worthing where I had enough money left after parking to buy some presents! I think it is a very tough time for any business and to have customers like me taking my trade elsewhere because of Council policy must be really hard. Make the town friendly to all visitors and cut those parking charges![/p][/quote]thankyou, a genuine insight into how our city is being ruined. lets hope the vote of no confidence goes through and fast Brighton1000
  • Score: 9

8:46pm Thu 16 Jan 14

getThisCoalitionOut says...

cynic_the wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
LOL I don't - I see that idiots pen name and immediately ignore the whole post and give it a negative!
[quote][p][bold]cynic_the[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]DO NOT FEED THE TROLL[/p][/quote]LOL I don't - I see that idiots pen name and immediately ignore the whole post and give it a negative! getThisCoalitionOut
  • Score: 2

8:48pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Seagull John says...

Just to be clear. Greens or not, there are no South Laines, South Lanes or North Lanes. I thank you.
Just to be clear. Greens or not, there are no South Laines, South Lanes or North Lanes. I thank you. Seagull John
  • Score: 4

9:04pm Thu 16 Jan 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

getThisCoalitionOut wrote:
cynic_the wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
LOL I don't - I see that idiots pen name and immediately ignore the whole post and give it a negative!
Ha, ha! Me too. "The moanerati" - he's like a deranged, brainwashed member of a cult. But I do wonder if he doesn't even support the Greens and it's all a cunning master plan.
[quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cynic_the[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]DO NOT FEED THE TROLL[/p][/quote]LOL I don't - I see that idiots pen name and immediately ignore the whole post and give it a negative![/p][/quote]Ha, ha! Me too. "The moanerati" - he's like a deranged, brainwashed member of a cult. But I do wonder if he doesn't even support the Greens and it's all a cunning master plan. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 3

9:30pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

thevoiceoftruth wrote:
getThisCoalitionOut wrote:
cynic_the wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout.

The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
LOL I don't - I see that idiots pen name and immediately ignore the whole post and give it a negative!
Ha, ha! Me too. "The moanerati" - he's like a deranged, brainwashed member of a cult. But I do wonder if he doesn't even support the Greens and it's all a cunning master plan.
The guy has mental health issues, we shoulnt make fun
[quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]getThisCoalitionOut[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cynic_the[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: What a lot of twaddle the moanerati spout. The area is not a major destination for cars, but the few that do head down that way are a pain in the butt for shoppers in an area where the pavements are not wide enough to accommodate pedestrians on a busy day in an area that encourages meandering from shop to shop. Once more, this is something that should have been done years ago.[/p][/quote]DO NOT FEED THE TROLL[/p][/quote]LOL I don't - I see that idiots pen name and immediately ignore the whole post and give it a negative![/p][/quote]Ha, ha! Me too. "The moanerati" - he's like a deranged, brainwashed member of a cult. But I do wonder if he doesn't even support the Greens and it's all a cunning master plan.[/p][/quote]The guy has mental health issues, we shoulnt make fun Brighton1000
  • Score: 3

10:19pm Thu 16 Jan 14

happy1972 says...

Brighton1000 wrote:
http://www.brightona




ndhovenews.org/2014/




01/16/labour-tables-




formal-vote-of-no-co




nfidence-in-brighton




-and-hoves-ruling-gr




eens/26722?utm_sourc




e=twitterfeed&ut



m_me
dium=twitter
Agree with the vote of no confidence, council tax is already too high without further increases to fund vanity projects which lead to more pain and misery for Brighton and Hove residents. I only wish we had more control of how our money is spent rather than handing it over to see it squandered. Perhaps we should be given the opportunity to vote on potential projects where our money may be spent, or maybe split the budget according to who you voted for that way the green supporters could give to their charity and we could invest elsewhere...
[quote][p][bold]Brighton1000[/bold] wrote: http://www.brightona ndhovenews.org/2014/ 01/16/labour-tables- formal-vote-of-no-co nfidence-in-brighton -and-hoves-ruling-gr eens/26722?utm_sourc e=twitterfeed&ut m_me dium=twitter[/p][/quote]Agree with the vote of no confidence, council tax is already too high without further increases to fund vanity projects which lead to more pain and misery for Brighton and Hove residents. I only wish we had more control of how our money is spent rather than handing it over to see it squandered. Perhaps we should be given the opportunity to vote on potential projects where our money may be spent, or maybe split the budget according to who you voted for that way the green supporters could give to their charity and we could invest elsewhere... happy1972
  • Score: 5

5:30am Fri 17 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

clubrob6 wrote:
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
What about the trains that bring thousands of people into town daily and the station that is currently being renovated?
[quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.[/p][/quote]What about the trains that bring thousands of people into town daily and the station that is currently being renovated? Gribbet
  • Score: -3

6:51am Fri 17 Jan 14

madzukun88 says...

Gribbet wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
What about the trains that bring thousands of people into town daily and the station that is currently being renovated?
If the trains run long enough without delays or cancellations...

As much as it would be nice to be able to make places car free and encourage the entire world to stop using their own personal vehicles, it just wont happen. Why? Because in its current state, public transport is unreliable, poorly maintained and expensive. You've also got to think about peoples views on the comfort side of things as well. If i had a choice between driving my own car (meaning I don't have to stop for other passengers, I'll get myself to the exact location I need, I wont be stuck to a set route and I wont have to wait for ages, especially if one bus is full and wont stop), or choosing public transport (constant stops, delays, full buses/trains with nowhere to sit or stand, expensive fares and possible cancellations), I think most people would rather stick to cars
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.[/p][/quote]What about the trains that bring thousands of people into town daily and the station that is currently being renovated?[/p][/quote]If the trains run long enough without delays or cancellations... As much as it would be nice to be able to make places car free and encourage the entire world to stop using their own personal vehicles, it just wont happen. Why? Because in its current state, public transport is unreliable, poorly maintained and expensive. You've also got to think about peoples views on the comfort side of things as well. If i had a choice between driving my own car (meaning I don't have to stop for other passengers, I'll get myself to the exact location I need, I wont be stuck to a set route and I wont have to wait for ages, especially if one bus is full and wont stop), or choosing public transport (constant stops, delays, full buses/trains with nowhere to sit or stand, expensive fares and possible cancellations), I think most people would rather stick to cars madzukun88
  • Score: 3

9:41am Fri 17 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

madzukun88 wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
clubrob6 wrote:
How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.
What about the trains that bring thousands of people into town daily and the station that is currently being renovated?
If the trains run long enough without delays or cancellations...

As much as it would be nice to be able to make places car free and encourage the entire world to stop using their own personal vehicles, it just wont happen. Why? Because in its current state, public transport is unreliable, poorly maintained and expensive. You've also got to think about peoples views on the comfort side of things as well. If i had a choice between driving my own car (meaning I don't have to stop for other passengers, I'll get myself to the exact location I need, I wont be stuck to a set route and I wont have to wait for ages, especially if one bus is full and wont stop), or choosing public transport (constant stops, delays, full buses/trains with nowhere to sit or stand, expensive fares and possible cancellations), I think most people would rather stick to cars
My point really is that the car obsessives always complain as if car transport is the only way that tourists and consumers can enter the town from outside. They always conveniently forget that the trains bring thousands of people into Brighton every day, spending their money to keep local businesses running.

You've also just presented a fantasy image of the experience of driving a car.

The reality of driving a car in this densely populated country is traffic jams (caused by too many people driving their cars) stopping at traffic lights all the time, thousands of pounds spent on petrol, servicing, VED and MOT, monotonous boredom, frustration, anger, rage, extreme danger, and unlearning human traits such as empathy and courtesy.

Comfort wise, on the train you can read a book, or newspaper, or ipad, take in your surroundings rather than having to stare at white lines and other cars, you can sleep and even enjoy a beer if you want to.

Lets face it motoring is sold on a massive lie, a bit like the old cigarette advertising. We don't have the long winding alpine passes or empty desert roads of the tv ads. Instead we have suburbs, charmless motorways, rain and outdated one-way systems.
[quote][p][bold]madzukun88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]clubrob6[/bold] wrote: How will it promote tourism? the greens are against transport that brings tourists here,high parking charges and the pool valley coach station is rundown with no facilities such as basic toilet needs.The greens are on there way out I found it a act of vandalism when they spent a fortune filling in bowling greens around the city that were only underused as the council did not open facilities to hire bowls,which gave them an excuse to fill them in at great expece and in some cases plant wild flowers on them.In fact the greens are ANTI tourism they did not open the council run tourist attractions like the mini golf course on hove seafront last year.[/p][/quote]What about the trains that bring thousands of people into town daily and the station that is currently being renovated?[/p][/quote]If the trains run long enough without delays or cancellations... As much as it would be nice to be able to make places car free and encourage the entire world to stop using their own personal vehicles, it just wont happen. Why? Because in its current state, public transport is unreliable, poorly maintained and expensive. You've also got to think about peoples views on the comfort side of things as well. If i had a choice between driving my own car (meaning I don't have to stop for other passengers, I'll get myself to the exact location I need, I wont be stuck to a set route and I wont have to wait for ages, especially if one bus is full and wont stop), or choosing public transport (constant stops, delays, full buses/trains with nowhere to sit or stand, expensive fares and possible cancellations), I think most people would rather stick to cars[/p][/quote]My point really is that the car obsessives always complain as if car transport is the only way that tourists and consumers can enter the town from outside. They always conveniently forget that the trains bring thousands of people into Brighton every day, spending their money to keep local businesses running. You've also just presented a fantasy image of the experience of driving a car. The reality of driving a car in this densely populated country is traffic jams (caused by too many people driving their cars) stopping at traffic lights all the time, thousands of pounds spent on petrol, servicing, VED and MOT, monotonous boredom, frustration, anger, rage, extreme danger, and unlearning human traits such as empathy and courtesy. Comfort wise, on the train you can read a book, or newspaper, or ipad, take in your surroundings rather than having to stare at white lines and other cars, you can sleep and even enjoy a beer if you want to. Lets face it motoring is sold on a massive lie, a bit like the old cigarette advertising. We don't have the long winding alpine passes or empty desert roads of the tv ads. Instead we have suburbs, charmless motorways, rain and outdated one-way systems. Gribbet
  • Score: -1

12:25pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Mark63 says...

Its all very well adding even more restrictions on the roads in the town (its not a city - not the way its being returned to the 19th century).... but you have to provide alternative routes for people - not just restrict them! Why is the priority ALWAYS anti car ?! Change the record!
Its all very well adding even more restrictions on the roads in the town (its not a city - not the way its being returned to the 19th century).... but you have to provide alternative routes for people - not just restrict them! Why is the priority ALWAYS anti car ?! Change the record! Mark63
  • Score: 3

12:33pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Jim Davis says...

Mark63 wrote:
Its all very well adding even more restrictions on the roads in the town (its not a city - not the way its being returned to the 19th century).... but you have to provide alternative routes for people - not just restrict them! Why is the priority ALWAYS anti car ?! Change the record!
It's because priority has ALWAYS been the car for the past 70 years. It's a record that desperately needs to be changed.
And, again, here's what's happening in more enlightened places such as Hamburg
http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/world/
europe/auto-ban-how-
hamburg-is-taking-ca
rs-off-the-road-9062
461.html
...or New York, or Paris or Amsterdam or Seville or Portland.....
[quote][p][bold]Mark63[/bold] wrote: Its all very well adding even more restrictions on the roads in the town (its not a city - not the way its being returned to the 19th century).... but you have to provide alternative routes for people - not just restrict them! Why is the priority ALWAYS anti car ?! Change the record![/p][/quote]It's because priority has ALWAYS been the car for the past 70 years. It's a record that desperately needs to be changed. And, again, here's what's happening in more enlightened places such as Hamburg http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/world/ europe/auto-ban-how- hamburg-is-taking-ca rs-off-the-road-9062 461.html ...or New York, or Paris or Amsterdam or Seville or Portland..... Jim Davis
  • Score: -3

1:46pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Jim Davis wrote:
Mark63 wrote:
Its all very well adding even more restrictions on the roads in the town (its not a city - not the way its being returned to the 19th century).... but you have to provide alternative routes for people - not just restrict them! Why is the priority ALWAYS anti car ?! Change the record!
It's because priority has ALWAYS been the car for the past 70 years. It's a record that desperately needs to be changed.
And, again, here's what's happening in more enlightened places such as Hamburg
http://www.independe

nt.co.uk/news/world/

europe/auto-ban-how-

hamburg-is-taking-ca

rs-off-the-road-9062

461.html
...or New York, or Paris or Amsterdam or Seville or Portland.....
or Rome
[quote][p][bold]Jim Davis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mark63[/bold] wrote: Its all very well adding even more restrictions on the roads in the town (its not a city - not the way its being returned to the 19th century).... but you have to provide alternative routes for people - not just restrict them! Why is the priority ALWAYS anti car ?! Change the record![/p][/quote]It's because priority has ALWAYS been the car for the past 70 years. It's a record that desperately needs to be changed. And, again, here's what's happening in more enlightened places such as Hamburg http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/world/ europe/auto-ban-how- hamburg-is-taking-ca rs-off-the-road-9062 461.html ...or New York, or Paris or Amsterdam or Seville or Portland.....[/p][/quote]or Rome Gribbet
  • Score: -3

3:48pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

http://www.bennettgr
iffin.co.uk/blog/cyc
lists-on-pavements/
http://www.bennettgr iffin.co.uk/blog/cyc lists-on-pavements/ Brighton1000
  • Score: 2

6:38pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Valerie Paynter says...

As long as they allow taxis to continue to take passengers into the Lanes I think it is good. Otherwise it is surely not DDA compliant.
As long as they allow taxis to continue to take passengers into the Lanes I think it is good. Otherwise it is surely not DDA compliant. Valerie Paynter
  • Score: 0

6:43pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Valerie Paynter says...

Not enough to ban cars. They must also ban bicycles and motorbikes (unless delivering to a shop or residence).
Not enough to ban cars. They must also ban bicycles and motorbikes (unless delivering to a shop or residence). Valerie Paynter
  • Score: 0

7:14pm Fri 17 Jan 14

NDL says...

No Cars. No people. No business. No Economy. No Jobs. Hoorah just imagine all the trees we are saving in the Amazon!
No Cars. No people. No business. No Economy. No Jobs. Hoorah just imagine all the trees we are saving in the Amazon! NDL
  • Score: 6

2:15am Sat 18 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Brighton1000 wrote:
http://www.bennettgr

iffin.co.uk/blog/cyc

lists-on-pavements/
Spamming to the max
[quote][p][bold]Brighton1000[/bold] wrote: http://www.bennettgr iffin.co.uk/blog/cyc lists-on-pavements/[/p][/quote]Spamming to the max Gribbet
  • Score: 0

8:41pm Mon 20 Jan 14

posthuman says...

Unless your disabled or you need the vehicle for strictly work reasons only, then this makes utter sense.
I have driven into the Lanes for work reasons only, and it still amazes me that one still can continue to do so in such densely populated pedestrian shopping area.
I mean why would want to drive anyway there in the 1st¿ place. Why?
When I am on foot, there's alway some motorist pinging it around without any care other than to intimidate his/her way through in some self-righteous type attitude.
Unless your disabled or you need the vehicle for strictly work reasons only, then this makes utter sense. I have driven into the Lanes for work reasons only, and it still amazes me that one still can continue to do so in such densely populated pedestrian shopping area. I mean why would want to drive anyway there in the 1st¿ place. Why? When I am on foot, there's alway some motorist pinging it around without any care other than to intimidate his/her way through in some self-righteous type attitude. posthuman
  • Score: 0

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