Conservative councillors criticise rivals over failure to back road campaign

Conservative councillors criticise rivals over failure to back road campaign

Conservative councillors criticise rivals over failure to back road campaign

First published in News
Last updated

Councillors have criticised their rivals for failing to back a new road campaign.

Brighton and Hove Conservatives have described moves by their rivals not to support a new campaign for A27 improvements as “astonishing”.

Conservative councillors put forward a motion at Thursday’s full council meeting calling on Brighton and Hove City Council to support the new road campaign which is already backed by many other local councils, MPs and business figures but failed to get sufficient support.

Environmental groups and cyclist campaigners had urged councillors prior to the meeting not to back the motion warning of the damage more road building could inflict on the South Downs National Park.

Group leader Councillor Geoffrey Theobald said of his Labour opponents: “The only reason they were able to give for voting against our motion was that ‘most of it (the A27) falls outside the area of Brighton and Hove’.

“How short-sighted and parochial can you get? Our future economic growth and prosperity depends upon modern and reliable transport links in the whole of the South East and if they can’t see that then they have serious problems.”

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:11pm Sun 20 Jul 14

whatone says...

Maybe their 'rivals' realise that it is sheer stupidity to continue to build when history has shown us that doing so will not alleviate the problems for more than a few years!

Of course the Tories receive a lot of their funding and 'bungs' from construction companies, so their reason to build is purely for their own financial benefit!
Maybe their 'rivals' realise that it is sheer stupidity to continue to build when history has shown us that doing so will not alleviate the problems for more than a few years! Of course the Tories receive a lot of their funding and 'bungs' from construction companies, so their reason to build is purely for their own financial benefit! whatone
  • Score: -9

12:44pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Warren Morgan says...

An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it?

I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?
An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it? I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it? Warren Morgan
  • Score: -8

1:57pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Quiterie says...

Warren Morgan wrote:
An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it?

I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?
All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel.

It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign.

As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up.

I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.
[quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it? I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?[/p][/quote]All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel. It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign. As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up. I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame. Quiterie
  • Score: 9

2:12pm Sun 20 Jul 14

rolivan says...

Warren Morgan the A27 is a major arterial road and has been neglected for the last 40 years at least by all parties . There is no point in having Dual Carriageways in some parts of the County and not in others . Just because it isn't in the City doesn't mean it cannot be supported by all.
Warren Morgan the A27 is a major arterial road and has been neglected for the last 40 years at least by all parties . There is no point in having Dual Carriageways in some parts of the County and not in others . Just because it isn't in the City doesn't mean it cannot be supported by all. rolivan
  • Score: 10

5:41pm Sun 20 Jul 14

GreggWallace says...

Warren Morgan wrote:
An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it?

I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?
Are you therefore suggesting Mr. Morgan that the A27 Brighton bypass was unnecessary and that we would have been much better served by keeping the A27 running along Old Shoreham Road down into Preston Circus and up Lewes Road?

Or was that a positive development perhaps? Was duelling the A23 in the 80s and 90s also possibly a positive development? Or would we have been better served by leaving that as a patchy road at best like the A27? The previous Labour government prevaricated on doing anything at all except cancelling and watering down schemes (e.g. the Polegate bypass is half built) and the Cuilfall-Beddingham was similarly tampered with (leaving it a three lane road) - yet Labour has also supported the improvement of the A1 in the North of England, but yet the A27 isn't in need?

I cannot believe for one second that any right minded (or left minded) individual would say that the A27 Brighton bypass was folly.

So why can't Worthing, Lancing, Arundel and Chichester benefit from similar improvements? Seems somewhat self centred and neglectful of the environmental and economic improvements that a better connected Sussex would bring.

If Labour was committed to public transport it would fully commit itself to renationalising the railways, but it isn't. What it would rather see is towns in West Sussex strangled by a poor road connecting major settlements. Worthing is a compact town, but with 110,000 people calling it home, it deserves better than the A27 at present.

I write this as a Labour voter of old. The problem with party politics is that as you identified Mr. Morgan is the subject is made toxic by the need for politicians and councillors to muddy the water with their own feuds rather than considering the sensible economic and environmental gains to be made by investing in our infrastructure.
[quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it? I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?[/p][/quote]Are you therefore suggesting Mr. Morgan that the A27 Brighton bypass was unnecessary and that we would have been much better served by keeping the A27 running along Old Shoreham Road down into Preston Circus and up Lewes Road? Or was that a positive development perhaps? Was duelling the A23 in the 80s and 90s also possibly a positive development? Or would we have been better served by leaving that as a patchy road at best like the A27? The previous Labour government prevaricated on doing anything at all except cancelling and watering down schemes (e.g. the Polegate bypass is half built) and the Cuilfall-Beddingham was similarly tampered with (leaving it a three lane road) - yet Labour has also supported the improvement of the A1 in the North of England, but yet the A27 isn't in need? I cannot believe for one second that any right minded (or left minded) individual would say that the A27 Brighton bypass was folly. So why can't Worthing, Lancing, Arundel and Chichester benefit from similar improvements? Seems somewhat self centred and neglectful of the environmental and economic improvements that a better connected Sussex would bring. If Labour was committed to public transport it would fully commit itself to renationalising the railways, but it isn't. What it would rather see is towns in West Sussex strangled by a poor road connecting major settlements. Worthing is a compact town, but with 110,000 people calling it home, it deserves better than the A27 at present. I write this as a Labour voter of old. The problem with party politics is that as you identified Mr. Morgan is the subject is made toxic by the need for politicians and councillors to muddy the water with their own feuds rather than considering the sensible economic and environmental gains to be made by investing in our infrastructure. GreggWallace
  • Score: 16

5:50pm Sun 20 Jul 14

GreggWallace says...

Oh and one other thing, why is it that decent roads and decent public transport are seen as mutually exclusive in this country. We should be working to make both better and more efficient. Germany for example manages this extremely well.
Oh and one other thing, why is it that decent roads and decent public transport are seen as mutually exclusive in this country. We should be working to make both better and more efficient. Germany for example manages this extremely well. GreggWallace
  • Score: 20

8:43pm Sun 20 Jul 14

nosolution says...

Quiterie wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it?

I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?
All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel.

It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign.

As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up.

I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.
The trouble is that we all want everything we can get without weighing up the consequences. Yes it would be nice to have a clean run west to Chichester and beyond however the present A27 run s through the middle of multi billion pound housing approved by these councillors forebears some years ago. The much vaunted alternative is to carve a slice through the Internationally important South downs now a National park again voted by our friendly neighbourhood councillors albeit more recently. So they wanted a National park then with all it's protection against development onslaught because it brought popularity but not now they want a road through it.
In any case the Brighton bypass was intended primarily to relieve congestion in Brighton etc. Not to become a link in some perverse sort of Hampshire to Kent trans county motorway envisaged by a few.
The massive housing developments in the county seen in the past 15 years of 200,000 plus all have on average a car each. No matter how many roads we build there will always be congestion in this the most crowded country in Europe...
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it? I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?[/p][/quote]All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel. It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign. As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up. I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.[/p][/quote]The trouble is that we all want everything we can get without weighing up the consequences. Yes it would be nice to have a clean run west to Chichester and beyond however the present A27 run s through the middle of multi billion pound housing approved by these councillors forebears some years ago. The much vaunted alternative is to carve a slice through the Internationally important South downs now a National park again voted by our friendly neighbourhood councillors albeit more recently. So they wanted a National park then with all it's protection against development onslaught because it brought popularity but not now they want a road through it. In any case the Brighton bypass was intended primarily to relieve congestion in Brighton etc. Not to become a link in some perverse sort of Hampshire to Kent trans county motorway envisaged by a few. The massive housing developments in the county seen in the past 15 years of 200,000 plus all have on average a car each. No matter how many roads we build there will always be congestion in this the most crowded country in Europe... nosolution
  • Score: 2

9:35pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Petaluma says...

nosolution wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it?

I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?
All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel.

It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign.

As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up.

I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.
The trouble is that we all want everything we can get without weighing up the consequences. Yes it would be nice to have a clean run west to Chichester and beyond however the present A27 run s through the middle of multi billion pound housing approved by these councillors forebears some years ago. The much vaunted alternative is to carve a slice through the Internationally important South downs now a National park again voted by our friendly neighbourhood councillors albeit more recently. So they wanted a National park then with all it's protection against development onslaught because it brought popularity but not now they want a road through it.
In any case the Brighton bypass was intended primarily to relieve congestion in Brighton etc. Not to become a link in some perverse sort of Hampshire to Kent trans county motorway envisaged by a few.
The massive housing developments in the county seen in the past 15 years of 200,000 plus all have on average a car each. No matter how many roads we build there will always be congestion in this the most crowded country in Europe...
"No solution " either chooses to ignore or knows not of the blueprint from nearly 40 years ago to create a Folkestone to Honiton Trunk Road as an alternative to the M20/M25/M3 or M4 motorway system. The A31/M27/A27 dualled from Bournemouth all the way through to Arundel and the A27 from Lancing through to Beddingham have hugely helped east-west traffic flow and relieved much urban congestion. It is the current bottlenecks - from Dorchester westwards, around Arundel and Worthing/Lancing and then from Beddingham to Polegate and eastwards thereafter that are hugely disruptive and wasteful of people's time. Successive Governments/Town Councils have fought shy of seizing the initiative and getting on with it, and the sooner such a link is completed - and it could be sensitively having regard to National Parks, existing housing and AONBs - whatever the Luddites say, the better.
[quote][p][bold]nosolution[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it? I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?[/p][/quote]All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel. It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign. As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up. I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.[/p][/quote]The trouble is that we all want everything we can get without weighing up the consequences. Yes it would be nice to have a clean run west to Chichester and beyond however the present A27 run s through the middle of multi billion pound housing approved by these councillors forebears some years ago. The much vaunted alternative is to carve a slice through the Internationally important South downs now a National park again voted by our friendly neighbourhood councillors albeit more recently. So they wanted a National park then with all it's protection against development onslaught because it brought popularity but not now they want a road through it. In any case the Brighton bypass was intended primarily to relieve congestion in Brighton etc. Not to become a link in some perverse sort of Hampshire to Kent trans county motorway envisaged by a few. The massive housing developments in the county seen in the past 15 years of 200,000 plus all have on average a car each. No matter how many roads we build there will always be congestion in this the most crowded country in Europe...[/p][/quote]"No solution " either chooses to ignore or knows not of the blueprint from nearly 40 years ago to create a Folkestone to Honiton Trunk Road as an alternative to the M20/M25/M3 or M4 motorway system. The A31/M27/A27 dualled from Bournemouth all the way through to Arundel and the A27 from Lancing through to Beddingham have hugely helped east-west traffic flow and relieved much urban congestion. It is the current bottlenecks - from Dorchester westwards, around Arundel and Worthing/Lancing and then from Beddingham to Polegate and eastwards thereafter that are hugely disruptive and wasteful of people's time. Successive Governments/Town Councils have fought shy of seizing the initiative and getting on with it, and the sooner such a link is completed - and it could be sensitively having regard to National Parks, existing housing and AONBs - whatever the Luddites say, the better. Petaluma
  • Score: 1

9:47pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Quiterie says...

Just because 'there will always be congestion' doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to reduce it.

The South Downs National Parks Authority have recently given permission for the building of a traveller site on their land. I assume they won't have a problem with this.
Just because 'there will always be congestion' doesn't mean we shouldn't attempt to reduce it. The South Downs National Parks Authority have recently given permission for the building of a traveller site on their land. I assume they won't have a problem with this. Quiterie
  • Score: 0

10:41pm Sun 20 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

How much of our gorgeous countryside must we concrete and tarmac over for people jus to save a few minutes?

Increasing road space and traffic levels long since stopped making economic sense. B&H's economy has made great strides in recent years despite falling car ownership in the city (and being constantly told that parking charges, cycle and bus lanes would leave the city a ghost town). Rather, excess traffic is throttling the coast and no end of bypasses will change this. Time to design out travelling so much or move to public transport.
How much of our gorgeous countryside must we concrete and tarmac over for people jus to save a few minutes? Increasing road space and traffic levels long since stopped making economic sense. B&H's economy has made great strides in recent years despite falling car ownership in the city (and being constantly told that parking charges, cycle and bus lanes would leave the city a ghost town). Rather, excess traffic is throttling the coast and no end of bypasses will change this. Time to design out travelling so much or move to public transport. HJarrs
  • Score: 7

11:29pm Sun 20 Jul 14

nosolution says...

Petaluma wrote:
nosolution wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it?

I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?
All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel.

It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign.

As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up.

I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.
The trouble is that we all want everything we can get without weighing up the consequences. Yes it would be nice to have a clean run west to Chichester and beyond however the present A27 run s through the middle of multi billion pound housing approved by these councillors forebears some years ago. The much vaunted alternative is to carve a slice through the Internationally important South downs now a National park again voted by our friendly neighbourhood councillors albeit more recently. So they wanted a National park then with all it's protection against development onslaught because it brought popularity but not now they want a road through it.
In any case the Brighton bypass was intended primarily to relieve congestion in Brighton etc. Not to become a link in some perverse sort of Hampshire to Kent trans county motorway envisaged by a few.
The massive housing developments in the county seen in the past 15 years of 200,000 plus all have on average a car each. No matter how many roads we build there will always be congestion in this the most crowded country in Europe...
"No solution " either chooses to ignore or knows not of the blueprint from nearly 40 years ago to create a Folkestone to Honiton Trunk Road as an alternative to the M20/M25/M3 or M4 motorway system. The A31/M27/A27 dualled from Bournemouth all the way through to Arundel and the A27 from Lancing through to Beddingham have hugely helped east-west traffic flow and relieved much urban congestion. It is the current bottlenecks - from Dorchester westwards, around Arundel and Worthing/Lancing and then from Beddingham to Polegate and eastwards thereafter that are hugely disruptive and wasteful of people's time. Successive Governments/Town Councils have fought shy of seizing the initiative and getting on with it, and the sooner such a link is completed - and it could be sensitively having regard to National Parks, existing housing and AONBs - whatever the Luddites say, the better.
I mention the the folly of the fantasycist idea of the Folkestone to Honiton trunk road in line 13. Also, forcibly evicting people from their homes, demolishing their houses, digging up and tarmaccing a National park or AONB isn't ,by any stretch of the wildest if imaginations, 'having sensitive regard '. What you have suggested is cruel, brutal and futile expansionism.
[quote][p][bold]Petaluma[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nosolution[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: An uncosted, unfunded and unspecified plan to build a dual carriageway through the National Park, backed by Tory MPs up for re-election in under 300 day's time? Why wouldn't we support it? I'd ask the Conservatives, would this be a private toll road charging people to use it?[/p][/quote]All you were being asked Warren was to support the general principle of improving the A27 which anyone who has driven it will know is a complete nightmare around Lancing, Worthing & Arundel. It has been identified as one of the 6 problem hotspots nationwide by the Government who are making £24 billion available to tackle problems just like this one. Shame on you Warren for not backing the campaign. As for the Greens, they back the i360 tower, which by the Council's own figures will attract 66% of visitors by car and yet they vote against improving the road infrastructure which will enable those visitors to get here. You couldn't make it up. I expect this kind intellectually bankrupt behaviour from the Greens, but Labour should be above this kind of petty party politics. Warren and his mates clearly don't have the best interests of Brighton and Hove residents at heart. And that's a shame.[/p][/quote]The trouble is that we all want everything we can get without weighing up the consequences. Yes it would be nice to have a clean run west to Chichester and beyond however the present A27 run s through the middle of multi billion pound housing approved by these councillors forebears some years ago. The much vaunted alternative is to carve a slice through the Internationally important South downs now a National park again voted by our friendly neighbourhood councillors albeit more recently. So they wanted a National park then with all it's protection against development onslaught because it brought popularity but not now they want a road through it. In any case the Brighton bypass was intended primarily to relieve congestion in Brighton etc. Not to become a link in some perverse sort of Hampshire to Kent trans county motorway envisaged by a few. The massive housing developments in the county seen in the past 15 years of 200,000 plus all have on average a car each. No matter how many roads we build there will always be congestion in this the most crowded country in Europe...[/p][/quote]"No solution " either chooses to ignore or knows not of the blueprint from nearly 40 years ago to create a Folkestone to Honiton Trunk Road as an alternative to the M20/M25/M3 or M4 motorway system. The A31/M27/A27 dualled from Bournemouth all the way through to Arundel and the A27 from Lancing through to Beddingham have hugely helped east-west traffic flow and relieved much urban congestion. It is the current bottlenecks - from Dorchester westwards, around Arundel and Worthing/Lancing and then from Beddingham to Polegate and eastwards thereafter that are hugely disruptive and wasteful of people's time. Successive Governments/Town Councils have fought shy of seizing the initiative and getting on with it, and the sooner such a link is completed - and it could be sensitively having regard to National Parks, existing housing and AONBs - whatever the Luddites say, the better.[/p][/quote]I mention the the folly of the fantasycist idea of the Folkestone to Honiton trunk road in line 13. Also, forcibly evicting people from their homes, demolishing their houses, digging up and tarmaccing a National park or AONB isn't ,by any stretch of the wildest if imaginations, 'having sensitive regard '. What you have suggested is cruel, brutal and futile expansionism. nosolution
  • Score: 2

6:54am Mon 21 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

HJarrs wrote:
How much of our gorgeous countryside must we concrete and tarmac over for people jus to save a few minutes?

Increasing road space and traffic levels long since stopped making economic sense. B&H's economy has made great strides in recent years despite falling car ownership in the city (and being constantly told that parking charges, cycle and bus lanes would leave the city a ghost town). Rather, excess traffic is throttling the coast and no end of bypasses will change this. Time to design out travelling so much or move to public transport.
I presume you campaigned against the American Express "Community" Stadium?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: How much of our gorgeous countryside must we concrete and tarmac over for people jus to save a few minutes? Increasing road space and traffic levels long since stopped making economic sense. B&H's economy has made great strides in recent years despite falling car ownership in the city (and being constantly told that parking charges, cycle and bus lanes would leave the city a ghost town). Rather, excess traffic is throttling the coast and no end of bypasses will change this. Time to design out travelling so much or move to public transport.[/p][/quote]I presume you campaigned against the American Express "Community" Stadium? Plantpot
  • Score: -2

7:43am Mon 21 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

The stadium is built. This article is about new, expensive road space that will denigrate parts of Sussex, generate yet more traffic and do little for the economy.
The stadium is built. This article is about new, expensive road space that will denigrate parts of Sussex, generate yet more traffic and do little for the economy. HJarrs
  • Score: 1

2:50pm Mon 21 Jul 14

Craig_Futurists says...

Widening the road is just another short term fix to a ongoing problem, by the time it is completed plans will have been drawn up to widen and improve it for the addition traffic again.
The most congested times are obviously when commuters are travelling and people are very reluctant to give up their cars and why should they, personal transport is convenient and easier than current mass transport especially if you live in the suburbs.

The fact is most people will not be told to something unless they get something out of it, however give them an incentive and most people will be happy to do it.
Business should be encouraged to have employee carpooling schemes, free parking for example, hybrid and electric cars should also be encouraged with incentives which will help with the CO2 admission goals.
Lessening the amount of traffic is a better solution that creating more road that will increase the maintenance cost on an already stretched thin budget.
Widening the road is just another short term fix to a ongoing problem, by the time it is completed plans will have been drawn up to widen and improve it for the addition traffic again. The most congested times are obviously when commuters are travelling and people are very reluctant to give up their cars and why should they, personal transport is convenient and easier than current mass transport especially if you live in the suburbs. The fact is most people will not be told to something unless they get something out of it, however give them an incentive and most people will be happy to do it. Business should be encouraged to have employee carpooling schemes, free parking for example, hybrid and electric cars should also be encouraged with incentives which will help with the CO2 admission goals. Lessening the amount of traffic is a better solution that creating more road that will increase the maintenance cost on an already stretched thin budget. Craig_Futurists
  • Score: 4

7:12pm Mon 21 Jul 14

wexler53 says...

How much of our gorgeous countryside must we concrete and tarmac over for people jus to save a few minutes?

Increasing road space and traffic levels long since stopped making economic sense. B&H's economy has made great strides in recent years despite falling car ownership in the city (and being constantly told that parking charges, cycle and bus lanes would leave the city a ghost town). Rather, excess traffic is throttling the coast and no end of bypasses will change this. Time to design out travelling so much or move to public transport.

Complete twaddle from a narrow minded green zealot...
How much of our gorgeous countryside must we concrete and tarmac over for people jus to save a few minutes? Increasing road space and traffic levels long since stopped making economic sense. B&H's economy has made great strides in recent years despite falling car ownership in the city (and being constantly told that parking charges, cycle and bus lanes would leave the city a ghost town). Rather, excess traffic is throttling the coast and no end of bypasses will change this. Time to design out travelling so much or move to public transport. Complete twaddle from a narrow minded green zealot... wexler53
  • Score: -3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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