The ArgusImprovement work to begin on notorious junction (From The Argus)

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

Improvement work to begin on notorious junction

The Argus: Improvement work to begin on notorious junction Improvement work to begin on notorious junction

Work will begin next week on transforming a notorious junction.

Improvements to the Vogue Gyratory in Brighton will begin on Monday and are expected to last until December.

The proposed works are intended to simplify the junction.

Signals will be replaced to improve traffic flow, a two-metre wide cycle lane added going north and running inside a ‘floating’ bus stop which will be designed to accommodate bendy buses for the first time.

 

Comments (38)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:03am Sun 13 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

So the junction won't be that much different.

Why don't they simply adjust the current traffic light timings?
So the junction won't be that much different. Why don't they simply adjust the current traffic light timings? stevo!!
  • Score: 30

11:10am Sun 13 Jul 14

Phani Tikkala says...

Good luck to anyone trying to get to work, you'll need to leave an extra hour in the morning, and good luck to businesses in Brighton who will find they have even fewer customers
Good luck to anyone trying to get to work, you'll need to leave an extra hour in the morning, and good luck to businesses in Brighton who will find they have even fewer customers Phani Tikkala
  • Score: 37

11:23am Sun 13 Jul 14

NathanAdler says...

Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers! NathanAdler
  • Score: 48

11:25am Sun 13 Jul 14

Lady Smith says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
I don't know about them hating car drivers, but more bus lanes would be much more beneficial than endless cycle lanes.
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]I don't know about them hating car drivers, but more bus lanes would be much more beneficial than endless cycle lanes. Lady Smith
  • Score: 3

12:13pm Sun 13 Jul 14

makoshark says...

I'm probably totally wrong here but would it not be more practical, cheaper and dramatically more efficient to simply do away with the gyratory system and revert it to ordinary crossroads with phased traffic lights???
I'm probably totally wrong here but would it not be more practical, cheaper and dramatically more efficient to simply do away with the gyratory system and revert it to ordinary crossroads with phased traffic lights??? makoshark
  • Score: 35

1:30pm Sun 13 Jul 14

FatherTed11 says...

Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide? FatherTed11
  • Score: 39

1:59pm Sun 13 Jul 14

rolivan says...

FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
My thoughts exactly perhaps it is for the occasional rickshaw.
[quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]My thoughts exactly perhaps it is for the occasional rickshaw. rolivan
  • Score: 30

2:05pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Baffled of Brighton says...

'Improvements'... LOL
'Improvements'... LOL Baffled of Brighton
  • Score: 28

2:18pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Cilla26 says...

We have the contra flow causing hold ups at the Kings Road/ West Street junction and TOTAL gridlock on a daily basis around Brighton Station and North Road.......not enough for this council though who in their wisdom have decided to take out yet another option for those of us trying to travel West- East across the City at the same time- unbelievable!
We have the contra flow causing hold ups at the Kings Road/ West Street junction and TOTAL gridlock on a daily basis around Brighton Station and North Road.......not enough for this council though who in their wisdom have decided to take out yet another option for those of us trying to travel West- East across the City at the same time- unbelievable! Cilla26
  • Score: 26

2:24pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Another Green inspired improvement that is guaranteed to make things worse then !
Another Green inspired improvement that is guaranteed to make things worse then ! Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 26

3:43pm Sun 13 Jul 14

chrismilo says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
The pavements are quiet adequate for cyclists !
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]The pavements are quiet adequate for cyclists ! chrismilo
  • Score: 4

4:46pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
To annoy the vast majority of road users.
[quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]To annoy the vast majority of road users. Plantpot
  • Score: 20

6:31pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Bill in Hanover says...

FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
A student cyclist was killed a couple of years ago when 2 cyclists tried to pass each other near the Sussex University and one fell into the road which is the excuse the Greens used to make the lanes so wide, the fact that the original lane wasn't 2 way and one of the cyclists shouldn't have been on it seems to have been ignored, and whether the lane is 2 metres or 10 metres also seems to be irrelevant to many of the students who still insist on cycling on the pavement.
[quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]A student cyclist was killed a couple of years ago when 2 cyclists tried to pass each other near the Sussex University and one fell into the road which is the excuse the Greens used to make the lanes so wide, the fact that the original lane wasn't 2 way and one of the cyclists shouldn't have been on it seems to have been ignored, and whether the lane is 2 metres or 10 metres also seems to be irrelevant to many of the students who still insist on cycling on the pavement. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 10

6:35pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Bill in Hanover says...

Yet again the Argus gets the headlines wrong, it should read 'Alterations begin on notorious junction' not 'Improvements' although I have never personally seen an accident at the gyratory although I live very close so I also think 'notorious' is a bit of artistic licence, although I suppose it's notorious for cyclists who ignore the lights and sail right past them no matter what colour they are showing.
Yet again the Argus gets the headlines wrong, it should read 'Alterations begin on notorious junction' not 'Improvements' although I have never personally seen an accident at the gyratory although I live very close so I also think 'notorious' is a bit of artistic licence, although I suppose it's notorious for cyclists who ignore the lights and sail right past them no matter what colour they are showing. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 19

7:07pm Sun 13 Jul 14

hoveguyactually says...

makoshark wrote:
I'm probably totally wrong here but would it not be more practical, cheaper and dramatically more efficient to simply do away with the gyratory system and revert it to ordinary crossroads with phased traffic lights???
I wouldn't expect much sense to come from the Green council, regarding changes to traffic arrangements. So far they have just caused chaos throughout, and then they have the audacity to moan about congestion.

And yet again today I saw a cyclist totally ignore a cycle lane and continue, at great speed, riding along the pavement. He did not even slow down at corners with road junctions. Unfortunately this has become the norm. Great work, Greens!
[quote][p][bold]makoshark[/bold] wrote: I'm probably totally wrong here but would it not be more practical, cheaper and dramatically more efficient to simply do away with the gyratory system and revert it to ordinary crossroads with phased traffic lights???[/p][/quote]I wouldn't expect much sense to come from the Green council, regarding changes to traffic arrangements. So far they have just caused chaos throughout, and then they have the audacity to moan about congestion. And yet again today I saw a cyclist totally ignore a cycle lane and continue, at great speed, riding along the pavement. He did not even slow down at corners with road junctions. Unfortunately this has become the norm. Great work, Greens! hoveguyactually
  • Score: 12

7:48pm Sun 13 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
A student cyclist was killed a couple of years ago when 2 cyclists tried to pass each other near the Sussex University and one fell into the road which is the excuse the Greens used to make the lanes so wide, the fact that the original lane wasn't 2 way and one of the cyclists shouldn't have been on it seems to have been ignored, and whether the lane is 2 metres or 10 metres also seems to be irrelevant to many of the students who still insist on cycling on the pavement.
The original lane where the fatality occurred was two way, the incident was not the "excuse" used for the Lewes Rd scheme, which would have been done anyway, but the disgaceful condition of the cycle route was considered a contributory cause of a young woman's death. Her family were consulted for the redesign, which has resulted in vast improvement.
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]A student cyclist was killed a couple of years ago when 2 cyclists tried to pass each other near the Sussex University and one fell into the road which is the excuse the Greens used to make the lanes so wide, the fact that the original lane wasn't 2 way and one of the cyclists shouldn't have been on it seems to have been ignored, and whether the lane is 2 metres or 10 metres also seems to be irrelevant to many of the students who still insist on cycling on the pavement.[/p][/quote]The original lane where the fatality occurred was two way, the incident was not the "excuse" used for the Lewes Rd scheme, which would have been done anyway, but the disgaceful condition of the cycle route was considered a contributory cause of a young woman's death. Her family were consulted for the redesign, which has resulted in vast improvement. HJarrs
  • Score: -3

8:19pm Sun 13 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
Rubbish Nathan, very little money from council budgets is spent on cyclists, I would put it at around 0.1% of the budget (prove me wrong). Vastly more is spent in the transport budget on roads primarily for cars and for bus subsidies. What the council have been incredibly successful at is bringing in grant money for combined improvements to roads for bus passengers, pedestrians and cyclists, doing things that should have been done 20 years ago.
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]Rubbish Nathan, very little money from council budgets is spent on cyclists, I would put it at around 0.1% of the budget (prove me wrong). Vastly more is spent in the transport budget on roads primarily for cars and for bus subsidies. What the council have been incredibly successful at is bringing in grant money for combined improvements to roads for bus passengers, pedestrians and cyclists, doing things that should have been done 20 years ago. HJarrs
  • Score: -13

8:27pm Sun 13 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way.

Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available.

I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.
The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way. Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available. I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back. HJarrs
  • Score: -12

8:44pm Sun 13 Jul 14

BtnLaurence says...

Cilla26 wrote:
We have the contra flow causing hold ups at the Kings Road/ West Street junction and TOTAL gridlock on a daily basis around Brighton Station and North Road.......not enough for this council though who in their wisdom have decided to take out yet another option for those of us trying to travel West- East across the City at the same time- unbelievable!
Wait until they start larking about with Valley Gardens.
[quote][p][bold]Cilla26[/bold] wrote: We have the contra flow causing hold ups at the Kings Road/ West Street junction and TOTAL gridlock on a daily basis around Brighton Station and North Road.......not enough for this council though who in their wisdom have decided to take out yet another option for those of us trying to travel West- East across the City at the same time- unbelievable![/p][/quote]Wait until they start larking about with Valley Gardens. BtnLaurence
  • Score: 7

9:07pm Sun 13 Jul 14

ghost bus driver says...

rolivan wrote:
FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
My thoughts exactly perhaps it is for the occasional rickshaw.
Gods forbid, but maybe the TukTuks are planning a return
[quote][p][bold]rolivan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]My thoughts exactly perhaps it is for the occasional rickshaw.[/p][/quote]Gods forbid, but maybe the TukTuks are planning a return ghost bus driver
  • Score: 4

11:58pm Sun 13 Jul 14

Sheeples says...

One would of hoped the council had the sense to wait until the works had finished at upper hollingdean rd?

So we have, the Seafront, Brighton Station, Edward Street, Upper Hollingdean and the Gyratory all at the same time.

Please stop banging on about Greens, there not the majority the other clowns are just as bad.
Who voted for the 20mph.....they all did!!!!
Who resurfaced the entire seafront during the busiest and hottest summer on record?
Who started some of these lunatic cycle lanes, aka the Drive in hove?
One would of hoped the council had the sense to wait until the works had finished at upper hollingdean rd? So we have, the Seafront, Brighton Station, Edward Street, Upper Hollingdean and the Gyratory all at the same time. Please stop banging on about Greens, there not the majority the other clowns are just as bad. Who voted for the 20mph.....they all did!!!! Who resurfaced the entire seafront during the busiest and hottest summer on record? Who started some of these lunatic cycle lanes, aka the Drive in hove? Sheeples
  • Score: 6

8:33am Mon 14 Jul 14

gheese77 says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
So spending money on cycle lanes proves means that you hate car drivers ? How do you work that one out? Do you actually believe that roads should be for the exclusive use of cars ?
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]So spending money on cycle lanes proves means that you hate car drivers ? How do you work that one out? Do you actually believe that roads should be for the exclusive use of cars ? gheese77
  • Score: -5

9:06am Mon 14 Jul 14

Voice of Wisdom says...

Another complete lack of planning! Why have 2 major works running at the same time? There are 3 way lights in Upper Hollingdean Road by the council depot, which have been there since mid May. Surely they should have waited until these works had finished before starting on the Gyratory. Get through 1 bottleneck only only to hit another, organising a drink in a brewery springs to mind.
Another complete lack of planning! Why have 2 major works running at the same time? There are 3 way lights in Upper Hollingdean Road by the council depot, which have been there since mid May. Surely they should have waited until these works had finished before starting on the Gyratory. Get through 1 bottleneck only only to hit another, organising a drink in a brewery springs to mind. Voice of Wisdom
  • Score: 6

9:40am Mon 14 Jul 14

Phani Tikkala says...

Well, as predicted, real time traffic information has the lewes road approach to the vogue in the worst congestion category today - "stationary"
Well, as predicted, real time traffic information has the lewes road approach to the vogue in the worst congestion category today - "stationary" Phani Tikkala
  • Score: 3

10:06am Mon 14 Jul 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Bill in Hanover and HJarrs. The inquest documents are available for public scrutiny.
The young lady died on an official cycle route. It had been designed and created for cyclists as a two way route. The young lady was travelling in one direction and another cyclist in the other. The route is narrow and the cyclists clipped each other as they passed and the lady sadly wobbled off the cycle lane and into the road where she collided with a van. The cause of death was the poor design of the route. There had already been calls for the route to have a barrier along the road side.
Many cycle lanes which allow two way travel are unsafe as not all cyclists keep left and also some handlebars are now almost 100cm wide with the path only two metres wide. Take a look on cycling websites and handlebar sizes.
Sit on the sea front and watch cyclists, many male road bikers, who hurtle along the lane taking up a central position in the lane forcing other cyclists off the lane, others ride with the head down listening to music with headphones on meandering across the whole lane.
The Sustrans route along the A259 has seen many serious cycling accidents as it is too narrow for two way cycling traffic. Some stretches have now been ripped out and become mixed use allowing cycling but removing the dedicated two way narrow cycling route so cyclists now have to ride slowly along the wider route between pedestrians while commuting cyclist tend to now use the roads which are still safer when riding at speed.
The seafront route in Brighton has already seen a number of serious accidents this year alone.
Bill in Hanover and HJarrs. The inquest documents are available for public scrutiny. The young lady died on an official cycle route. It had been designed and created for cyclists as a two way route. The young lady was travelling in one direction and another cyclist in the other. The route is narrow and the cyclists clipped each other as they passed and the lady sadly wobbled off the cycle lane and into the road where she collided with a van. The cause of death was the poor design of the route. There had already been calls for the route to have a barrier along the road side. Many cycle lanes which allow two way travel are unsafe as not all cyclists keep left and also some handlebars are now almost 100cm wide with the path only two metres wide. Take a look on cycling websites and handlebar sizes. Sit on the sea front and watch cyclists, many male road bikers, who hurtle along the lane taking up a central position in the lane forcing other cyclists off the lane, others ride with the head down listening to music with headphones on meandering across the whole lane. The Sustrans route along the A259 has seen many serious cycling accidents as it is too narrow for two way cycling traffic. Some stretches have now been ripped out and become mixed use allowing cycling but removing the dedicated two way narrow cycling route so cyclists now have to ride slowly along the wider route between pedestrians while commuting cyclist tend to now use the roads which are still safer when riding at speed. The seafront route in Brighton has already seen a number of serious accidents this year alone. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 0

11:48am Mon 14 Jul 14

theargusissoinformative says...

NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
'They hate car drivers'. A bit strong. I don't mean to teach you how to suck eggs, but cars give out carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming. The Green Party were elected in Brighton and Hove to go for such things with a limited local mandate; the fact that you seem to think that they hate you personally does seem to be a figment of your imagination, which you repeat quite often on here.

There is another issue; local authorities are now responsible for public health promotion, so more cycling and pedestrian provision and little less for cars would appear to hit the spot. In case you think this is all about Brighton and Hove, I gather that the City of London might be going for things a bit more substantial than Brighton and Hove
[quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]'They hate car drivers'. A bit strong. I don't mean to teach you how to suck eggs, but cars give out carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming. The Green Party were elected in Brighton and Hove to go for such things with a limited local mandate; the fact that you seem to think that they hate you personally does seem to be a figment of your imagination, which you repeat quite often on here. There is another issue; local authorities are now responsible for public health promotion, so more cycling and pedestrian provision and little less for cars would appear to hit the spot. In case you think this is all about Brighton and Hove, I gather that the City of London might be going for things a bit more substantial than Brighton and Hove theargusissoinformative
  • Score: -10

12:05pm Mon 14 Jul 14

TheJasperCo says...

FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
To accommodate the cyclists' egos.
[quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]To accommodate the cyclists' egos. TheJasperCo
  • Score: 9

2:04pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Mark63 says...

The obsession continues! The Greens think we are living in the 19th Century! More unwanted road works, while the real roadworks that are needed - making smooth fast routes in and out of town, are completely ignored! Not long now and we can vote them all out to the job centre...
The obsession continues! The Greens think we are living in the 19th Century! More unwanted road works, while the real roadworks that are needed - making smooth fast routes in and out of town, are completely ignored! Not long now and we can vote them all out to the job centre... Mark63
  • Score: 8

5:47pm Mon 14 Jul 14

76robmac says...

Shop and drive to Crawley or Eastbourne much better
Shop and drive to Crawley or Eastbourne much better 76robmac
  • Score: 3

5:57pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Rule-No.5 says...

FatherTed11 wrote:
Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?
For safety.

Try cycling - you'll work it out pretty quickly.
[quote][p][bold]FatherTed11[/bold] wrote: Why does a cycle lane need to be 2 metres wide?[/p][/quote]For safety. Try cycling - you'll work it out pretty quickly. Rule-No.5
  • Score: 0

6:04pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Rule-No.5 says...

theargusissoinformat
ive
wrote:
NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
'They hate car drivers'. A bit strong. I don't mean to teach you how to suck eggs, but cars give out carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming. The Green Party were elected in Brighton and Hove to go for such things with a limited local mandate; the fact that you seem to think that they hate you personally does seem to be a figment of your imagination, which you repeat quite often on here.

There is another issue; local authorities are now responsible for public health promotion, so more cycling and pedestrian provision and little less for cars would appear to hit the spot. In case you think this is all about Brighton and Hove, I gather that the City of London might be going for things a bit more substantial than Brighton and Hove
And many other cities across the country too. In fact central government are encouraging local councils to make these changes.

Really like your post Theargusissoinformat
ive - well put!
[quote][p][bold]theargusissoinformat ive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]'They hate car drivers'. A bit strong. I don't mean to teach you how to suck eggs, but cars give out carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming. The Green Party were elected in Brighton and Hove to go for such things with a limited local mandate; the fact that you seem to think that they hate you personally does seem to be a figment of your imagination, which you repeat quite often on here. There is another issue; local authorities are now responsible for public health promotion, so more cycling and pedestrian provision and little less for cars would appear to hit the spot. In case you think this is all about Brighton and Hove, I gather that the City of London might be going for things a bit more substantial than Brighton and Hove[/p][/quote]And many other cities across the country too. In fact central government are encouraging local councils to make these changes. Really like your post Theargusissoinformat ive - well put! Rule-No.5
  • Score: -8

6:11pm Mon 14 Jul 14

charlie smirke says...

HJarrs wrote:
The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way.

Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available.

I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.
I WISH YOU WOULD JUST "GO AWAY" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way. Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available. I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.[/p][/quote]I WISH YOU WOULD JUST "GO AWAY" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! charlie smirke
  • Score: 4

6:21pm Mon 14 Jul 14

jamesbandenburg says...

I like the sign that says 'Use alternative routes' - if anyone could suggest another way from Caledonian Road up to the A27 without going through the Gyratory I'd be very grateful...

Also isn't it about time the council found a more efficient construction firm to use? So, they're resurfacing the road, building a new bus stop and widening the pavement a bit and installing some new traffic lights. Why is this taking 'months' as opposed to 'days'? Elsewhere in the developed world construction teams seem capable of building an 8-lane elevated highway over a long weekend and yet today the only sign of any activity I saw at the Gyratory was someone pointing at the railings holding a spanner...
I like the sign that says 'Use alternative routes' - if anyone could suggest another way from Caledonian Road up to the A27 without going through the Gyratory I'd be very grateful... Also isn't it about time the council found a more efficient construction firm to use? So, they're resurfacing the road, building a new bus stop and widening the pavement a bit and installing some new traffic lights. Why is this taking 'months' as opposed to 'days'? Elsewhere in the developed world construction teams seem capable of building an 8-lane elevated highway over a long weekend and yet today the only sign of any activity I saw at the Gyratory was someone pointing at the railings holding a spanner... jamesbandenburg
  • Score: 10

6:34pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Bill in Hanover says...

charlie smirke wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way.

Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available.

I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.
I WISH YOU WOULD JUST "GO AWAY" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I live close to the gyratory and when I'm walking I don't have any problem whatsoever as there are pedestrian lights at every junction, when I'm cycling I just have to steer a straight line when passing Sainsburys to be perfectly safe unlike the many cyclists who try to weave in and out of different lanes to get past the junction a few seconds earlier, and as the traffic is usually stationary or crawling along at 2mph through the junction I don't usually have a problem, although when I'm on my bike and waiting at the lights I usually keep as close to the kerb as possible so I don't cause inconvenience to the idiot cyclists who think that stopping at red lights is optional.
[quote][p][bold]charlie smirke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way. Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available. I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.[/p][/quote]I WISH YOU WOULD JUST "GO AWAY" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]I live close to the gyratory and when I'm walking I don't have any problem whatsoever as there are pedestrian lights at every junction, when I'm cycling I just have to steer a straight line when passing Sainsburys to be perfectly safe unlike the many cyclists who try to weave in and out of different lanes to get past the junction a few seconds earlier, and as the traffic is usually stationary or crawling along at 2mph through the junction I don't usually have a problem, although when I'm on my bike and waiting at the lights I usually keep as close to the kerb as possible so I don't cause inconvenience to the idiot cyclists who think that stopping at red lights is optional. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 8

6:44pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Bill in Hanover says...

theargusissoinformat
ive
wrote:
NathanAdler wrote:
Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists?

It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers!
'They hate car drivers'. A bit strong. I don't mean to teach you how to suck eggs, but cars give out carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming. The Green Party were elected in Brighton and Hove to go for such things with a limited local mandate; the fact that you seem to think that they hate you personally does seem to be a figment of your imagination, which you repeat quite often on here.

There is another issue; local authorities are now responsible for public health promotion, so more cycling and pedestrian provision and little less for cars would appear to hit the spot. In case you think this is all about Brighton and Hove, I gather that the City of London might be going for things a bit more substantial than Brighton and Hove
The Green party got in on a protest vote against both Labour and the Tories who'd been in office for too long, and as for the Green Party being 'green' how come one of their first projects was to hack down 7 acres of woodland around Wild park, thankfully they'd only defoliated 2 acres when they were advised that what they were doing was actually illegal and they stopped. Local Councils are also responsible for meeting recycling targets but under the Greens, Brighton has drifted further away from the recycling target than when under a Labour/Tory Council. p.s. I've always believed in the old adage 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating' and as everything the Green Party does is to the detriment of car drivers, parking fees increased by 300%, introducing residents parking schemes wherever they can, introducing a 20 mph limit on throughways as well as side roads and cutting 2 lane roads to one lane to cater for cyclists (20 cyclists a day on average use the Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes) shows that the Greens DO hate cars, or if they don't hate them then they just see them as a cash cow.
[quote][p][bold]theargusissoinformat ive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NathanAdler[/bold] wrote: Why do we keep spending so much money on cyclists? It just further proves the point that the Greens are a party of hate. They hate car drivers![/p][/quote]'They hate car drivers'. A bit strong. I don't mean to teach you how to suck eggs, but cars give out carbon dioxide, which contributes to global warming. The Green Party were elected in Brighton and Hove to go for such things with a limited local mandate; the fact that you seem to think that they hate you personally does seem to be a figment of your imagination, which you repeat quite often on here. There is another issue; local authorities are now responsible for public health promotion, so more cycling and pedestrian provision and little less for cars would appear to hit the spot. In case you think this is all about Brighton and Hove, I gather that the City of London might be going for things a bit more substantial than Brighton and Hove[/p][/quote]The Green party got in on a protest vote against both Labour and the Tories who'd been in office for too long, and as for the Green Party being 'green' how come one of their first projects was to hack down 7 acres of woodland around Wild park, thankfully they'd only defoliated 2 acres when they were advised that what they were doing was actually illegal and they stopped. Local Councils are also responsible for meeting recycling targets but under the Greens, Brighton has drifted further away from the recycling target than when under a Labour/Tory Council. p.s. I've always believed in the old adage 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating' and as everything the Green Party does is to the detriment of car drivers, parking fees increased by 300%, introducing residents parking schemes wherever they can, introducing a 20 mph limit on throughways as well as side roads and cutting 2 lane roads to one lane to cater for cyclists (20 cyclists a day on average use the Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes) shows that the Greens DO hate cars, or if they don't hate them then they just see them as a cash cow. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 9

7:39pm Mon 14 Jul 14

DCCCCCC says...

76robmac wrote:
Shop and drive to Crawley or Eastbourne much better
I do this all the time now. I wouldn't dream of going into Brighton town centre anymore.
[quote][p][bold]76robmac[/bold] wrote: Shop and drive to Crawley or Eastbourne much better[/p][/quote]I do this all the time now. I wouldn't dream of going into Brighton town centre anymore. DCCCCCC
  • Score: 6

2:05pm Tue 15 Jul 14

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit says...

As a pedestrian can I just say that the Vogue Gyratory is fine as it is (was). Good pavements, good crossing points, and given it's nature no boy-racers whizzing round it.

I can't comment on how it will affect bus users, cyclists or motorists (and this time I didn't get sent a consultation document), but I'll be interested to see how it becomes better for us walkers. I think saying "it'll make things better for pedestrians" is just one of those things that gets trotted out.
As a pedestrian can I just say that the Vogue Gyratory is fine as it is (was). Good pavements, good crossing points, and given it's nature no boy-racers whizzing round it. I can't comment on how it will affect bus users, cyclists or motorists (and this time I didn't get sent a consultation document), but I'll be interested to see how it becomes better for us walkers. I think saying "it'll make things better for pedestrians" is just one of those things that gets trotted out. Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit
  • Score: 5

3:27pm Tue 15 Jul 14

her professional says...

HJarrs wrote:
The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way.

Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available.

I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.
All true. I worked adjacent to the Gyratory for a number of years, and it failed on all counts, whatever your mode of transport. Trying to cross the road as a pedestrian from, say, Bear Road across to Sainsburys took forever, involving crossing numerous lanes of traffic. Negotiating the thing by car or bike was also horrendous, and the pollution levels were chronic a lot of the time.
Incidentally, note to those who continually bang on about cyclists and red lights (yes there are far too many who ignore them), try standing at the bottom of Coombe Road and count the cars coming down onto the Lewes Road who cross at red - you would get to hundreds in a matter of hours. (Likewise Sackville/Old Shoreham Road/Neville Road, particularly the right turn phase).
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: The usual negative comments from the usual suspects, who are too set in their ways to change and who would leave us permanently with a poor major junction if they had their way. Anyone who has driven, ridden or walked through the Vogue Gyratory will know what a disaster it is currently. It's suits nobody and it deters cyclists and pedestrians in particular. It should never have been built as it is and the reworking looks to be the most reasonable solution that we can expect within the budget available. I am looking forward to the usual moaning Argus articles as the work progresses as our local paper continues its proud tradition of holding the city back.[/p][/quote]All true. I worked adjacent to the Gyratory for a number of years, and it failed on all counts, whatever your mode of transport. Trying to cross the road as a pedestrian from, say, Bear Road across to Sainsburys took forever, involving crossing numerous lanes of traffic. Negotiating the thing by car or bike was also horrendous, and the pollution levels were chronic a lot of the time. Incidentally, note to those who continually bang on about cyclists and red lights (yes there are far too many who ignore them), try standing at the bottom of Coombe Road and count the cars coming down onto the Lewes Road who cross at red - you would get to hundreds in a matter of hours. (Likewise Sackville/Old Shoreham Road/Neville Road, particularly the right turn phase). her professional
  • Score: 1
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

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