Petition to save the Hove cyclelanes!

[downfader]

http://www.gopetition.co.uk/petition/43064.html

It seems the local cycle campaign over Brighton and Hove way are trying to not just save the cyclelanes, but the local authority some £1 million (sticks little finger in corner of mouth).

 

[rich p]

The cycle lane is dreadful but to waste a £1m to remove it is a scandal.

 

[dellzeqq]

for a more rounded summary

http://www.bricycles.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=131804&Itemid=52

 

[mcshroom]

he safety issues were never addressed and there have since been a number of serious cycle and vehicle collisions as a result of the poor design, with at least one cyclist pursuing a legal case against the Council for a crash at The Drive caused by the design flaws.

I think this is a rather telling line. I would suggest this is more about the annoyance at being sued than anything to do with traffic flow.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

this is the same local campaign that oppossed them in the first place is it not

 

[661-Pete]

Blimey! This is the first I've heard of this. At first glance, I don't know what to think.

I actually went down and took photos, at the time that the lanes on The Drive first appeared. I posted them up on the forum (ACF I think it was). The design was pretty awful, we all agreed on that at the time.

I also recall having a chat with an elderly lady who came up to her garden gate when she spotted me taking piccies (she thought I was some sort of council official). She said something about having mobility problems and finding it difficult to get into a taxi now the lanes were in place. I felt some sympathy with her point of view. Who wouldn't?

So these lanes are a classic example of the 'Warrington' phenomenon: how-not-to-design-cycle-lanes.

But to rip them out out of sheer spite and malice?

Should I sign the petition?

 

[dellzeqq]

this is the same local campaign that oppossed them in the first place is it not

according the the Bricycles website it opposed the detailed design.

 

[downfader]

Blimey! This is the first I've heard of this. At first glance, I don't know what to think.

I actually went down and took photos, at the time that the lanes on The Drive first appeared. I posted them up on the forum (ACF I think it was). The design was pretty awful, we all agreed on that at the time.

I also recall having a chat with an elderly lady who came up to her garden gate when she spotted me taking piccies (she thought I was some sort of council official). She said something about having mobility problems and finding it difficult to get into a taxi now the lanes were in place. I felt some sympathy with her point of view. Who wouldn't?

So these lanes are a classic example of the 'Warrington' phenomenon: how-not-to-design-cycle-lanes.

But to rip them out out of sheer spite and malice?

Should I sign the petition?

If they're going t spend that level of money they could very well spend it on improving the existing scheme. Also as you said people like the old dear have problems with it, I have seen photos where delivery drivers have problems (and yes some have parked on the lane).

I've never used it, but I could see a time when people go down there to visit, or tourists use it.

 

[stowie]

according the the Bricycles website it opposed the detailed design.

Reading the PDF linked to the site, it seems that Bricycles supported the scheme mostly, but questioned some parts of the design and the overall value in the context of the cycling budget (£1.5M - how many cm of the M25 extension would that buy?)

I just find this kind of story so depressing. Traffic flow will increase, including HGVs and the solution is to get rid of the smallish cycle lanes? If I have seen this road corerctly, a section of it has provision for 4 lanes (2 at each side, 2 in the middle) of parking. Clearly this cannot be re-organised to assist traffic flow! And it would appear the solution to extra HGVs is to move the cyclist back onto the road with them...

I have no idea if the scheme was well thought out, or if was better to leave as cycling on road as I have never cycled on the road. But the way it is being removed seems to say it all. Has the council proposed anything for these roads to aid cycling after the removal?

 

[661-Pete]

One thing I'm struggling with, at the moment, is the concept of how this road comes to be considered a major 'strategic' route leading into Brighton/Hove, with access for HGVs paramount, and the like.

Admittedly the southern end of the road, where it becomes Grand Avenue and leads down to Queen Vic on the seafront, is fairly busy with cars, but here is the extreme northern end where it is called Shirley Drive and abuts onto Woodland Drive. I know this corner well. Note the speed hump: there are plenty more in Woodland Drive which is quite a steep hill.

Not exactly a strategic route. More of a rat run. If HGVs started using it regularly, you can be damned sure all the good citizens of Mock-Tudor Woodlands Drive, with their 4x4s, Mercs and Beemers lined up in their front drive, will be up in arms...

 

[661-Pete]

I would think, Sackville Road/Hove Street would be the 'main' route leading to the south side of Shoreham Harbour (the part with the old power station). It certainly seems like that, sometimes! But most of the traffic is probably destined for the big supermarkets, DIY stores, etc. in the area.

 

[marinyork]

I'm sadly not surprised. My council spent millions of pounds putting in a bus lane and lights system on a similar wide 'strategic road' (it is actually strategic) and then in the last year is spending large amounts of money undoing a lot of it for 'traffic flow' reasons. Again I don't think the scheme put in was great but it's totally bonkers spending all this money.

The thing I don't understand about this road in Hove is that if there are 'traffic' flow problems and it's needed for HGVs, why is there such an incredibly generous provision for car parking on both sides of the roads even though a large number of properties have driveways on the northern stretch of (the drive)! Any other council would say sorry guys, it's an A road, we're turning it into a bus lane that operates 7:30-9:30am and 4-6:30pm on one side of the road or even have one side doubled yellowed most of the way along. The other thing I don't see is why didn't they just extend the pavement out 6ft on both sides and make it a shared use path or have like in london have one side a huge segregated facility with a contraflow on one side. Seems to me the problems on this road are not the cyclists but the parking by the locals.

 

[pshore]

As an outsider I had assumed that the cycle lanes were taking up masses of space.

... but looking at the StreetView I am gobsmacked by how much space there is already for cars. The roadspace must be about 8 cars wide, with 4 of them taken with parked cars. The cycle lanes are miniscule in comparison.

 

[661-Pete]

As an outsider I had assumed that the cycle lanes were taking up masses of space.

... but looking at the StreetView I am gobsmacked by how much space there is already for cars. The roadspace must be about 8 cars wide, with 4 of them taken with parked cars. The cycle lanes are miniscule in comparison.

You are right - although it took a lot of paving to segregate the cycle lanes!

It's the widest road in Hove. A few hundred yards further south you will come across Queen Victoria serenely surveying all that is hers. Says it all really...

 

[marinyork]

As an outsider I had assumed that the cycle lanes were taking up masses of space.

... but looking at the StreetView I am gobsmacked by how much space there is already for cars. The roadspace must be about 8 cars wide, with 4 of them taken with parked cars. The cycle lanes are miniscule in comparison.

Yes, I have exactly the same thoughts and as I said most other councils would have removed a fair bit of that parking (not all of it). Just seems madness.