Brighton bus lane scheme backed

Radical plans to revamp Lewes Road in Brighton have been backed by residents.

In April and May Brighton and Hove City Council ran a six-week public consultation on proposals to install dedicated bus and cycle lanes on Lewes Road.

A key feature of the plan involved two-metre wide cycle lanes running north and south through the Vogue Gyratory near Sainsbury’s.

Half of the width of the current dual carriageway between the Vogue Gyratory and the A27 would be used for bus and bike lanes, leaving one lane in each direction for cars and other traffic.

About 31,000 households were asked whether they agreed with the proposals with more than 4,100 responses received.

Sixty five per cent supported the idea of better bike lanes through the Vogue gyratory.

Sixty three per cent approved of the proposed bus and bike lanes on Lewes Road.

Of these, 81 per cent wanted buses and bikes to have their own lanes, rather than a combined one.

People who opposed the ideas were mainly concerned about possible traffic jams but officials said modelling had suggested problems would be unlikely.

Council bosses claim cutting the car lanes from two to one in both directions would see a 10 per cent reduction in car trips as people turn to walking, cycling or taking the bus.

Bus use would increase by 25 per cent and bus journey times would improve by 30 per cent.

The consultation results will be reported to the council’s transport
committee on October 2.

At this meeting councillors will be asked to approve advertising formal traffic orders for the council to make the changes.

Any adverts would appear in early October, before 21 days of further public consultation.

Chairman of the committee, councillor Ian Davey, said: “The response from local people has been very clear.

"They recognise these changes would make the road safer for cyclists, encourage cycling and improve bus services. But ultimately these changes will improve things for everybody, whichever mode of transport they choose to use.”

Comments(62)

Postman_Pat says...
8:02am Fri 21 Sep 12

So 31,000 people were asked what they thought, 4,100 people responded and 65% of those were in favour.... not really a resounding vote of support.

More a support of complete apathy towards the local council, with the majority believing that the council would do this anyway.

Dealing with idiots says...
8:07am Fri 21 Sep 12

Usual thing of the Greens pretending to consult and then doing exactly as they like. Have the figures supplied been independently verified? Would not trust Charles Field and the rest of the transport department to run a Scalextric let alone a transport system that supports business and jobs in the city. Big changes comming though with by elections and at least four councillor suspensions for discrimination. Watch this space.

sky451 says...
8:14am Fri 21 Sep 12

Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.

salty_pete says...
8:26am Fri 21 Sep 12

Also the phrasing of the questions asked is aspirational ie "better" bike lanes through the gyratory and not "a bike lane that reduces the width of the road". We would all want "better" but there is no indication in these questions at the cost in loss of road width.
And this is a beauty "but officials said modelling had suggested problems would be unlikely. ". They said this about the bus lane along the A259, but the model only showed the traffic flow through the modifications, not the GINORMOUS traffic queue back to Roedean before you got there. Which is about as disengenous as it gets.

Plantpot says...
8:35am Fri 21 Sep 12

By the time that planning is so advanced a consultation is required, it's going to happen anyway.

Are there any examples of "consultations" ever preventing something going ahead?

The real outcome of this consultation is to confirm that people are apathetic and see these tick-box exercises as meaningless. The only people likely to be energised are those that feel very strongly either way, i.e. in general a small minority.

The Heretic says...
8:43am Fri 21 Sep 12

Postman_Pat wrote:
So 31,000 people were asked what they thought, 4,100 people responded and 65% of those were in favour.... not really a resounding vote of support.

More a support of complete apathy towards the local council, with the majority believing that the council would do this anyway.
After I read Postman Pat's comment, I had a look at the turnout figures for the last local election - between 32 and 47% in that bit of town.

A response rate of about 15% to a consultation isn't great. I agree that council's (all of 'em!) tend to use statistics to justify pretty much anything. Remember the Ghery debacle at the King Alfred? The way public views were ignored was utterly disgraceful, the way the public meeting was manipulated had to be seen to be believed. The whole episode led in no small part, to the downfall of that administration.

So 85% of the population affected by the Lewes Road scheme were too apathetic to respond? That's 27,000 people the coucil can turn round to and say "You had a chance to comment - too late !!", and this time, they'll be right.

ESCC got a shock when their 'preferred option' to go road-happy in Uckfield got thrown out by the public, a much larger response than the pitiful numbers here. If opposition is strong enough, they've no choice but to listen. Sit back and do nothing by all means - just don't start complaining when you don't like the outcome.

PaulOckenden says...
8:48am Fri 21 Sep 12

Ten percent reduction in cars using a fifty percent reduction in road width.

Doesn't take a maths genius, does it?

The area already has the worst pollution in Brighton. Is the crazy council going to give gas masks to those us who work or live in the area?

I mentioned in my consultation response that if this scheme went ahead I'd be moving my business (and it's jobs) outside of Brighton. Probably to Adur. I suspect that rather than registering that as a negative, they simply added it to their "reduction in journeys" total.

jonnix says...
8:50am Fri 21 Sep 12

63% of 4,100 is 2,583 that means fewer than 10% of the residents asked think that it is a good idea, the phrase lies damned lies & statistics comes to mind.

Joshiman says...
9:04am Fri 21 Sep 12

Is it true that only students and cyclists participated in this survey?
Thanks a bunch.More gridlock/traffic jams.

HJarrs says...
9:11am Fri 21 Sep 12

Good, bring it on the sooner the better as it will be disruptive to build and that period should be kept to a minimum.

My only concern is the quality of design. The highways people in the council have a pretty poor reputation. They made a complete mess of a contraflow on Windmill St due to poor signage only the other week. Here is a challange to do a good job.

Maxwell's Ghost says...
9:25am Fri 21 Sep 12

For goodness sake Sarah Booker, this is the most inaccurate headline and story I've read in days. I shall be visiting the council's website to see if this was a propoganda press release from the Green Council.
Only 4,100 people of the 31,000 surveyed actually answered the survey.
Therefore only 13 per cent of people responded to the survey.
65 per cent of that 13 per cent of the support the scheme.
That means only 2,665 people have shown support in the scheme.
That is absolutely miniscule.
Is the council seriously suggesting spending a multi-million figure on this unnecessary scheme, which will only shove traffic over the top and down through Hanover to get into Brighton, to please 2,665 people.
This is one for Private Eye.

SGK2000 says...
9:53am Fri 21 Sep 12

Living in the area, there seemed almost total opposition so I was really surprised when the survey results were announced.
Sad lesson never learned but, if you don't have your say then those that do will get their way & now the Council have followed all the processes and have a mandate to bring this in.

thucydides says...
9:54am Fri 21 Sep 12

Whilst I am no great fan of the Go-Ahead group I have to say that the current 25 and 23 bus services to the Universities are now the most frequent I have seen in over 20 years, and at £8 a week for a student saver on those routes they are also the most affordable they have been.

Hopefully the same consultants who considerably under-estimated the numbers who would want to get to the Amex Stadium by train haven't been used.

Using some of the logic in comments above, should the 1,435 households (not individuals) that responded who didn't support the proposals (that's less than 5% of those surveyed) be allowed to dictate policy to the rest of us ?

albion seagull says...
10:10am Fri 21 Sep 12

I'm putting in a freedom of information request for the responses because not one person I spoke to supported this the greens just do what they want and if needs be take this further and get it delayed this is exactly against there policy there will be traffic jams burning more fuel equaling more pollution not exactly green is it ???

Dealing with idiots says...
10:23am Fri 21 Sep 12

With you all the way Mr Seagull and for those who would also like to get at the truth your Freedom Of Information request should be sent to
Wendy.Kassamani@brig
hton-hove.gov.uk.

Joshiman says...
10:28am Fri 21 Sep 12

More likely that the survey was engineered and only students and cyclists were involved.Something similar happened years ago when the KA survey was allegedly dodgy to say the least.Locals werent asked to be involved in the survey.
Anyhow more gridlock/traffic jams.The Green Council is not practicing what it preaches.Pollution,p
ollution.pollution.A
ngry motorists.Where will it end,

SGK2000 says...
10:41am Fri 21 Sep 12

The survey was not only posted to 31,000 households but was also on the BHCC website so anybody could take part and it didn't take long to do.

I am really surprised by the result but also saddened that so many were against it but seemingly couldn't be bothered to take the time to register their views.

mdj747 says...
10:55am Fri 21 Sep 12

I,m a resident ,,,,and voted against the Lewes Road reduction, have you ever seen Buses queueing along the Lewes road north The Avenue ,the "bus lane" isnt needed ,BUT the Gyratory is a mess a causes backlog's sort that (if you can).
Turn the traffic lights off and watch the traffic dissapear !

Dealing with idiots says...
11:03am Fri 21 Sep 12

One thing that would be nice is if the cyclists who use the Vogue gyratory would actually signal when they change lane. Put your hand out, don't presume that other road users can read your mind while you are listening to music and using your mobile phone.

SGK2000 says...
11:07am Fri 21 Sep 12

Gyratory improvements were less controversial.

The Argus story article also does not mention the bus stop plans were some become islands with cycle lanes running behind them, but who am I to spoil the fun?

RickH says...
11:17am Fri 21 Sep 12

sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer! And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
As a later poster indicates, the cost of a weekly student saver is £8 per week - that's way cheaper than running a car in just insurance and vehicle excise duty alone, let alone fuel.

blossom121 says...
11:25am Fri 21 Sep 12

sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
Is a 2.50 day saver not cheap enough.Or a weeks saver for a tenner.

blossom121 says...
11:26am Fri 21 Sep 12

blossom121 wrote:
sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
Is a 2.50 day saver not cheap enough.Or a weeks saver for a tenner.
Sorry that should be eight quid for weekly saver

Dealing with idiots says...
11:50am Fri 21 Sep 12

blossom121 wrote:
blossom121 wrote:
sky451 wrote: Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer! And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
Is a 2.50 day saver not cheap enough.Or a weeks saver for a tenner.
Sorry that should be eight quid for weekly saver
Thank you Mr French.

Maxwell's Ghost says...
12:08pm Fri 21 Sep 12

As the survey was available online and was not restricted to one vote, one could suggest that those in favour voted multiple times as most of the Greens on here are rabid and will do asbolutely anything in their power to drive a JCV through communities as long as it meets their own needs.
One could also say that those against the plan could also do the same, but as few people reponded and few people opposed it would suggest that it was the supporters who used the survey as a tool.
The fact is that in my street we are going to campaign for a no entry sign into the road at one end as lorries are already using our 20mph residential street as a cut through on match days to avoid the traffic on the Lewes Road.
Let's send it all down through Hanover.

NickBtn says...
12:18pm Fri 21 Sep 12

it's a pity that the response rate was so low giving the appearance of support. There were a lot of other comments made during consultation (eg. dangers of turn right and so cut into bus lanes, need for cross hatch at gyratory) etc, be interesting if any of these are listened too...

Or perhaps such apathy is down to the realization that this was going to happen whatever. Be interesting just how much is reversed when greens leave

One useful quote above to help...

"People who opposed the ideas were mainly concerned about possible traffic jams but officials said modelling had suggested problems would be unlikely"

When these jams occur and pollution increases it will help give evidence for an expensive revision.....

Lewesroadresident says...
12:25pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Joshiman wrote:
More likely that the survey was engineered and only students and cyclists were involved.Something similar happened years ago when the KA survey was allegedly dodgy to say the least.Locals werent asked to be involved in the survey. Anyhow more gridlock/traffic jams.The Green Council is not practicing what it preaches.Pollution,p ollution.pollution.A ngry motorists.Where will it end,
Hold on, the survey was available for anyone to complete online, and was sent to 31,000 houses! The response was pitiful, but what iss planned was so widely advertised that if you are against it and you didn't complete a survey then you have only yourself to blame! I was against it, and I'm a cyclist.

panda_electrical says...
12:30pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Having spent the last couple of years rearranging my business not to serve Brighton (due to the unavailability of trade permits and restrictions in waiting times in many areas), and not driving into Brighton (or going into Brighton) I shouldn’t be impacted by this. However given the council is missing its air quality targets in some areas like the Vogue Gyratory it would seem possibly prudent to consider opening up these transit bus lanes to commercial vehicles to get them in and out of Brighton as quickly as possible. Less time lorries are running at idle in traffic jams less pollution.
As for the traffic models if they were as good as the A259 modelling; which was based on a false pretence of widening the road; they may be wildly inaccurate.

SGK2000 says...
12:39pm Fri 21 Sep 12

"People who opposed the ideas were mainly concerned about possible traffic jams but officials said modelling had suggested problems would be unlikely"

When these jams occur and pollution increases it will help give evidence for an expensive revision..."

It won't be a simple repainting of white lines. The associated works will take a full 12 months and cost a fortune so unlikely to be reversed at the next change of office

Maybe some cars should drive around slowly to block it down to one lane and thus show the effect...

Tailgaters Anonymous says...
1:07pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Strange conclusion that this proposal will lead to 10% of motorists taking to buses or cycling. One assumes they will be able to park their cars either side of the Vogue Gyratory and then nothing will be able to move either North, South, East or West.
Brainless planning for a dangerous agglomeration of road users!

NickBtn says...
1:08pm Fri 21 Sep 12

panda_electrical wrote:
Having spent the last couple of years rearranging my business not to serve Brighton (due to the unavailability of trade permits and restrictions in waiting times in many areas), and not driving into Brighton (or going into Brighton) I shouldn’t be impacted by this. However given the council is missing its air quality targets in some areas like the Vogue Gyratory it would seem possibly prudent to consider opening up these transit bus lanes to commercial vehicles to get them in and out of Brighton as quickly as possible. Less time lorries are running at idle in traffic jams less pollution.
As for the traffic models if they were as good as the A259 modelling; which was based on a false pretence of widening the road; they may be wildly inaccurate.
It's a great pity that you've had to stop working in Brighton

To add to your point - hundreds of lorries each week travel in and out of the recycling centre at Hollingdean from the rest of Sussex. Until now they have been able to travel along dual carriageway into and out of Brighton and reasonably smoothly around gyratory.

That will stop with these "improvements". These are large polluting vehicles which will be waiting with the cars both on the dual carriageways and around the new bottleneck gyratory.... This will increase time (and so costs) for all council tax payers across Sussex as well as pollution for Brighton. One bit of the council working with the other?!

Maxwell's Ghost says...
1:12pm Fri 21 Sep 12

It is not true that the concerns were just about traffic jams.
Currently, whenever there is an incident on the Lewes Road or during big match days, particularly midweek, the Lewes Road comes to a standstill.
Huge amounts of traffic then go 'over the top' from the A27 down through the Falmer Road and down Coombe Road/Bear Road and Hanover to avoid the busy stretch to get access to Brighton.
Any local will tell you this. It is utter chaos in residential streets.
That is what will happen every day when only one lane operates. It will purely push traffic through short cuts.
Also along the Bevendean stretch of the Lewes Road, there are dozens of right turns which will ALL have to have filter lights installed because anyone sat in the outside lane trying to turn right will never be able to cross a single stream of traffic in the opposite direction and all those vehicles sat behind a right turning vehicle will have to wait in a queue. As a cyclist who uses this route, I raised this as a serious issue with the council as I will never be able to move from the inside bike lane, across the inside bus lane, into the outside vehicle lane to turn right, crossing the outisde lane of constant traffic, the inside bus lane and bike lane. I already do this in ruch hour and it is easier with two lanes of traffic as it's spread out and you get gaps to carry out the move, but with the new plan, the only benefit will be for cyclists visiting the unis in the week.
Locals or anyone using the housing estates are screwed.

salty_pete says...
1:32pm Fri 21 Sep 12

The other issue here is what to spend the money on that is generated by all the parking fees. This money is ring fenced and can only be used on "sustainable transport solutions". So there is a whole army of traffic engineers that have to justify being there; hence grandiose traffic schemes. If all the parking fees were reduced, causing the wholesale redundancy of these engineers, we could kill two birds with one stone. The road traffic shemes in Brighton ar a perfect illustration of Parkinsons Law.

graham_Seagull says...
1:35pm Fri 21 Sep 12

If it wasnt for the other parties sitting on their hands for the last 20 years merrily watching the traffic increase to gridlock proportions we wouldnt be in this mess.

Fact is we're at a point where the use of the private car has to be discouraged otherwise the pollution levels along that corridor into town will remain above EU safe limits.
Therfore the only option available is to disuade traffic and attempt to force a percentage of those drivers onto the buses or to cycle.
We can't complain about this - we've had a right old merry time driving where and when we wanted and now we all consider it our absolute right to drive wherever or whenever we want, we're shocked to find out that we really can't.

So now we've got ourselves to blame for getting into this position, we really cant moan when someone is left handing the can and has to do something about it.

davyboy says...
1:38pm Fri 21 Sep 12

sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
but the buses are cheaper than driving! and extremely frequent, so why take a car? it is all very well having separate lanes for buses and cyclists, but you have to stop other road users blocking them.

Maxwell's Ghost says...
2:08pm Fri 21 Sep 12

But graham the Lewes Road is only gridlocked when one lane in each direction is blocked ie a traffic accicdent

HJarrs says...
2:31pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
As the survey was available online and was not restricted to one vote, one could suggest that those in favour voted multiple times as most of the Greens on here are rabid and will do asbolutely anything in their power to drive a JCV through communities as long as it meets their own needs. One could also say that those against the plan could also do the same, but as few people reponded and few people opposed it would suggest that it was the supporters who used the survey as a tool. The fact is that in my street we are going to campaign for a no entry sign into the road at one end as lorries are already using our 20mph residential street as a cut through on match days to avoid the traffic on the Lewes Road. Let's send it all down through Hanover.
Rabid green equals being one of 31000 housholds that received a questionaire who could be bothered to fill in a post paid form and wander to a post box to post it. Of course, if it is so outragous your Labour and Tory parties will be voting against it?

The reality is that most people didn't feel strongly either way.

Maxwell's Ghost says...
2:44pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Well when the cars come down through Hanover as a short cut you better phone your comrades and have words HJarrs as it wont be hoardes of cyclists getting over excited about the new lane as we wont be able to turn right.

mdj747 says...
2:56pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Will be a sad day, when its implemented ,especially If you run a shop or operate any other business in the area ,,,unless of course you start up as a windscreen cleaner £1 a go ,,or selling the Argus to the queue's of traffic @.65p.

albion seagull says...
3:53pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Freedom of information request submitted. Lets see what people responses said shall we.

Maxwell's Ghost says...
4:37pm Fri 21 Sep 12

How much is the spend on this project Argus?
How much spend per head for the 2,600 who wrote supporting it?

jamesbandenburg says...
6:32pm Fri 21 Sep 12

SGK2000 wrote:
"People who opposed the ideas were mainly concerned about possible traffic jams but officials said modelling had suggested problems would be unlikely"

When these jams occur and pollution increases it will help give evidence for an expensive revision..."

It won't be a simple repainting of white lines. The associated works will take a full 12 months and cost a fortune so unlikely to be reversed at the next change of office

Maybe some cars should drive around slowly to block it down to one lane and thus show the effect...
They already do that - witness the road-sweeping vehicle that is quite often deployed during the morning rush hour, moves so slowly it's in danger of being overtaken by continental drift and effectively accounts to a moving lane closure. And when 12 empty Number 25 bendy buses crawl into the other lane to get past it at once, it does rather slow the traffic down a bit.

Exhibit 2 was seen during the London-Brighton Bike Ride, when it was impossible to turn right off Lewes Road into The Avenue, or any of the other non-controlled turnings in fact. The same thing will happen - if all the traffic is forced into one lane, the breaks in the traffic caused by the traffic lights up at the turning into Moulsecoomb by the viaduct will disappear. I can only assume that the queue to turn right into Bevendean will start somewhere near Southwick...

Maxwell's Ghost says...
7:26pm Fri 21 Sep 12

The council will have no choice but to install right filter lights for all right turns in both directions at a huge cost.
Also most cyclists will just cycle over the pedestrian crossings and along pavements to avoid the right turns on the road.
Silly idea. There is nothing wrong with the Bevendean stretch of lewes road only near elm grove and the shops.
No one will listen though. No Greens live out here and the three Labour councillors don't either and haven't been since since canvassing for seats. A waste of three seats.

Lala Land says...
8:28pm Fri 21 Sep 12

As a resident of Coldean, I completed the survey, totally against the plans for the stretch between the gyratory and Coldean Lane. Reducing the road to a single lane will create more chaos than there is now. Travelling into Brighton during evening rush hour at present is ridiculous, traffic can sometimes be backed up past the turning for The Avenue - what will it be like when there is just one lane? And suggesting that there will be an increased uptake for public transport? What planet does our council live on? The 3 estates served by the Lewes Road house a lot of families with young children and getting a bus rather than taking the car isn't the most attractive of options on a wet and windy October morning!! Its such a shame that there was a poor response rate, but I'm with many others who believe these plans were going to go ahead anyway, consultation or not.

mdj747 says...
8:44pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Lala Land wrote:
As a resident of Coldean, I completed the survey, totally against the plans for the stretch between the gyratory and Coldean Lane. Reducing the road to a single lane will create more chaos than there is now. Travelling into Brighton during evening rush hour at present is ridiculous, traffic can sometimes be backed up past the turning for The Avenue - what will it be like when there is just one lane? And suggesting that there will be an increased uptake for public transport? What planet does our council live on? The 3 estates served by the Lewes Road house a lot of families with young children and getting a bus rather than taking the car isn't the most attractive of options on a wet and windy October morning!! Its such a shame that there was a poor response rate, but I'm with many others who believe these plans were going to go ahead anyway, consultation or not.
Second that ,,,

Hard times says...
9:08pm Fri 21 Sep 12

Fantastic. A great day for common sense.

In this day and age there is no reason the great fat british public should be able to freely pollute our communities.

I say ban private vehicle use throughout the city centre unless you need a vehicle for deliveries for business.

Dealing with idiots says...
4:31pm Sat 22 Sep 12

Hard times wrote:
Fantastic. A great day for common sense. In this day and age there is no reason the great fat british public should be able to freely pollute our communities. I say ban private vehicle use throughout the city centre unless you need a vehicle for deliveries for business.
Thank you Mr Stalin.

upsidedowntuctuc says...
6:52pm Sat 22 Sep 12

Nice one Hard Times totally destroy the City and turn it back inot a town again!
The questions were loaded and the only way to show as a no vote was to be totally against bus or cycle lanes anywhere.
Total waste of time and money that could be better spent improving public services or evenhousing!

Dealing with idiots says...
12:02am Sun 23 Sep 12

Who is up for some civil insurection when they start to put these daft lanes in?

sdhgfhfuyt says...
12:57am Sun 23 Sep 12

influenced by another of Roger French's kick backs no doubt. What a joke.

Somethingsarejustwrong says...
2:16pm Sun 23 Sep 12

Hard times wrote:
Fantastic. A great day for common sense.

In this day and age there is no reason the great fat british public should be able to freely pollute our communities.

I say ban private vehicle use throughout the city centre unless you need a vehicle for deliveries for business.
Ridiculous comment.

I agree that fat people shouldn't be allowed to drive when walking would assist in making them healthier and reduce the burden on the NHS paid for through working people's taxes.

Much of the traffic that uses this road is through traffic, i.e. commuters in and out of town. Commuters typically equals tax payers and its the tax payers that should have been consulted, including local tax payers of course. People not contributing fully to council tax and or claiming benefits shouldn't have a vote on these types of issues at all!

ruberducker says...
11:08am Mon 24 Sep 12

i am told the abulance station in elm grove is going to move next to southern water...so that was planed well with traffic at a standstill..it will be quicker to get a pizza delivered,than get any help,let's see the outcry when a a bike rider gets squashes at the qyratory and the abulance is stuck in the traffic jam.

Old Ladys Gin says...
4:44pm Mon 24 Sep 12

davyboy wrote:
sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
but the buses are cheaper than driving! and extremely frequent, so why take a car? it is all very well having separate lanes for buses and cyclists, but you have to stop other road users blocking them.
Why take a car?
Because by and large in a car I only have to put up with my only effluent; not the unwashed, dandruff ridden, and unwashed you get on most buses in the city.

Old Ladys Gin says...
4:45pm Mon 24 Sep 12

davyboy wrote:
sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
but the buses are cheaper than driving! and extremely frequent, so why take a car? it is all very well having separate lanes for buses and cyclists, but you have to stop other road users blocking them.
Why take a car?
Because by and large in a car I only have to put up with my only effluent; not the unwashed, dandruff ridden, and unwashed you get on most buses in the city.

Seagull John says...
9:08pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Just as an aside, traffic management wise, I was enjoying the free flowing traffic in my car along York Place yesterday and thinking it made a nice change. Then when I arrived at the Cheapside junction, the traffic lights were out of order. Just goes to show that the traffic management/lights are a cause of the pollution causing delays rather than helping the traffic flow.

sdhgfhfuyt says...
11:57pm Tue 25 Sep 12

Any chance of the Argus reporting on the incestuous relationship between the traffic planning team at NCP (now NSL) contracted by the council, and effectively being paid by Brighton and Hove bus company to increase access for buses which have no-one on them?

D5 says...
12:33pm Wed 26 Sep 12

sky451 wrote:
Until the buses to the universities are cheaper than driving, no matter how hard they make it to drive, students will still take the cheaper option. I know I would have when I was still studying up at Falmer!

And I agree, the council were going to plough this through whatever the response from residents.
sky it costs 2.50 all day long and well into the night from the uni to town back to uni to town etc etc -thats cheaper than a uni pint..check out the bendys this week -TEMMING with students.

Joshiman says...
12:50pm Wed 26 Sep 12

How can a small city have so many problems with traffic jams,gridlock,hundre
ds of out of sequence traffic lights,Too many bus and cycle lanes for a city this size.One lane in and out of Brighton.Its crazy.I cant think of any other city in the uk with these sort of problems.Common sense is never used.Traffic shouldnt be an issue.Incidently on the A259 saw a bus pulling over from the bus lane to the single car lane because the driver wanted to avoid the traffic lights being on red.Crazy mixed up world.

bluemonday says...
7:25am Thu 27 Sep 12

sdhgfhfuyt wrote:
Any chance of the Argus reporting on the incestuous relationship between the traffic planning team at NCP (now NSL) contracted by the council, and effectively being paid by Brighton and Hove bus company to increase access for buses which have no-one on them?
could you possibly cut and paste your proof of this as it's the 2nd accusation you've made,look forward to reading it.

OldSchoolYoungster says...
9:21am Thu 27 Sep 12

Having travelled along the A259 and Old Shoreham Road and witnessed the chaos in traffic, single lanes would work if there was a cut off time for when they stopped operating as single lanes and become dual lanes? Why not operate single lanes from say 10:00am to 17:00pm at the height of bus frequency and then from 17:00pm to 10:00am operate them as dual lanes? It means the motorists travelling to and from work have the opportunity to get to work and home without waiting in queues.

Skidrow says...
9:58am Thu 27 Sep 12

I don't want to get a bus and I don't want to ride a f'in pushbike. I know hanover residents get a lot of the blame on here for voting green so increased congestion for them as a result of this half *rsed scheme seems quite poetic.

Fairfax Sakes says...
2:43pm Thu 27 Sep 12

whoever invented bikes should be shot.

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