Brighton and Hove, which has been a Cycling Demonstration Town* since 2005 been criticised for plans to tear up a section of cycle lane on one of the busiest routes in to the city. Brighton and Hove Friends of the Earth (BHFOE) are objecting to the plan to remove part of a southbound cycle lane in Lewes Road, Brighton. The cycle lane would be replaced with pavement, extending out into the road with a pelican crossing as part of a council Safer Routes to School scheme. The crossing would be added to Lewes Road just before the junction to Hartington Road. “The new proposals are totally unacceptable and I don’t think we can take the loss of these cycle facilities lying down,” said Chris Todd of BHFOE. “This will force cyclists out of what was the cycle lane into the main stream of traffic with little warning and then squeeze them through an inadequate road width. I believe that this is unacceptable and should be strongly resisted.
“The proposed traffic orders go against local, regional and national transport, health and sustainability policies,” said Chris Todd. “They go against strategies to increase cycling and physical activity, and to reduce reliance on cars and to reduce air pollution and carbon emissions.
“Brighton has to do a lot to prove to its commitment to cyclists. I hope that common sense will prevail but to have even submitted these plans is outrageous and unbelievable.”
Local cycle commuter Gregg Virostek who uses the Lewes Road cycle lane was even more vocal. “The Lewes Road cycle path is a disaster! There is absolutely no continuity of design from the Seafront to the Universities. The council should put everything they have earmarked for cycling in Brighton into designing and building a dedicated and segregated cycle path from the Universities to the Seafront. "I understand why some cyclists feel the need to ride agressively along this route, it is a dangerous and disorganised cycle path with little or no signage and only about 80cm wide. The uneven road surface is littered with grates, cracks and slicks of oil and chemicals. Buses are constantly having to pull out infront of cyclists or waiting for them to clear the slip into the bus stop.
"It’s almost as if the council is trying to discourage cycling to the nearly 50,000 students in this area (not to mention all the support staff at the many locations).” he told road.cc. And the criticism doesn’t end there. National transport charity Sustrans is also not impressed with the council’s plan. Speaking to road.cc a Sustrans spokesman said: “We do support FOE on this and we objected to the Traffic Regulation Order because we believe it is a poorly designed scheme and the public consultation has been inadequate. Lewes Road is an important route for Brighton which should have a continuous cycle lane. This could be put in place alongside a safe route to school for children.” (Sustrans has its own Safe Routes to School initiative not to be confused with Brighton’s Safer Routes to Schools). The City Council is currently looking again at the scheme with the aim of finding a solution that balances the interests of cyclists and users of the local school. Brighton and Hove, which share a single city council, have had government-conferred Cycling Demonstration Town status since 2005, allowing them to develop cycle freeways and amenities. Now they have been selected (together) as one of 12 English cycling towns and cities to receive increased funding for the promotion of cycling from 2009 to 2011. The total amount available is projected to be £100m with £47m coming from Cycling England and the rest made up in matched funding. Brighton and Hove will be in line for a sizeable chunk. Brighton and Hove Council is also seeking to be the first city to be designated as a Biosphere Reserve by Unesco and later this week hosts a conference on sustainability. * Yes, we know Brighton and Hove is a city, but for Cycling England funding purposes it’s a town.
- News

Outrage at cycling demo town’s plans to rip up cycle lane

Add as a preferred source on Google
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@DrG82 is a liar. First off, who here said they got everything right? "I wouldn’t say that the Welsh government got everything right." The article contains commentary saying they didn't get everything right. I suppose saying something obviously true sets you up to lie later... "They applied the speed limit changes uniformly, without considering exceptions" You are a liar. The Welsh Government guidance contained rules that would allow councils to exempt roads from 20mph. As an example, much of my route into town stayed at 30 and 40mph because my council bothered to apply the exemptions. I particularly enjoyed your unsupported claim of "This has been a massive waste of money". The article states "collisions involving all road users on 20mph and 30mph are down 37 per cent, with casualties dropping by 35 per cent". I'd say a one-off cost of changing road signs for a permanent 1/3rd reduction in collisions is gonna save the taxpayer a chunk of healthcare costs and owners and businesses a chunk of money not fixing car bodywork. Nothing but contempt for you. Take your lies elsewhere.
With so many people using and looking at mobie phones whilst driving and other distractions, may I suggest you always wear Hi viz and stay at home.
The design of the "car" has played a role in this. SUVs and what the Americans call "trucks" are exempt from the pedestrian safety regulations which apply to passenger cars. Had the victim been hit by a car designed in the past twenty years he would have been "scooped" onto the bonnet and either over the roof or off to one side. Still a serious injury risk and potentially fatal but they have the benefit of those passive safety systems to improve their chances. With vehicles with such a high bonnet line as this Volvo has what tends to happen is the person bounces off the bonnet and falls on the road in front of the vehicle where they're then run over. This has happened time and time again and is becoming more of an issue as the numbers of vehicles exempt from the safety standards grows.
@Accessibility for all Reducing the speeds wouldn't have helped in this case as the driver was reported doing 65 in a 40 zone on the approach to the junction, his driving described by the witnesses as erratic and evidently had no intention to stop to give way even though he had been warned by the passenger who apparently shouted "bike" three times just before the collision. He would have likely flown through that junction even if it was traffic light controlled with a red light for him at the time. In my own experience the entire area i.e. east of Lymm towards Warburton and along Dunham Road all the way up to Altrincham and past into Hale Barns, all those wealthy, posh settlements around Manchester Airport are best avoided by road cyclists. A disproportionally high number of psycho drivers must for some reason live in that area because every single time I went there on my road bike in the past, I either got harassed myself or witnessed proper dickhead driving - speeding, close passes, overtaking into oncoming traffic or round a blind bend, accelerating towards pedestrians already crossing the road, you name it. I gave up road cycling in that area years ago and only use the local TPT these days.
In respect of the murder charge: based on him hitting Mr Mullins and making no attempt to help him (this killing him), how would the case compare to a hit and run driver who seriously injures or kills a cyclist, knowingly, and flees the scene without helping? Would this make the cut for a murder charge? Or is there something very different going on here that I’m missing? Genuinely curious because I don’t recall there being a murder charge before for this kind of thing unless it was premeditated. In fact, in my experience most cases like this seem to go the opposite way - where the driver can merely say the sun was in their eyes and get away with a slap on the hands.
@Rendel Harris...and there was me dishing out the praise!
@polainm He must also be an already hardened criminal. It wasn't mentioned during the court proceedings to avoid influencing the jurors and ensuring he had a fair trial, but he had been released from prison shortly before this incident and was couch surfing at his cousin's house days before. Just look at his face, he's only 35, but looks older than his victim who was 56. Must have spent half his adult life in prison.
@jaymack They did offer him manslaughter though but he declined to plead guilty. Without wanting to seem curmudgeonly, yes great that they preferred the most serious charges but hard to see how they could have done differently considering that Richardson got out of the car, saw Mr Mullins was stuck underneath and then got back in and carried on. That clearly moved it above anything that falls under death by dangerous driving.
@thrawed Agree - the UK winters are utterly grim; grey, wet & windy. Not the type of weather you really want to go out and ride. Everything get covered in filth, and takes time to clean it after a ride. Oh for colder, drier & crisper days which can be enjoyable to be out in.
@ymm In my view, lax sentencing of dangerous drivers, especially where cyclists are involved, makes the judge, jury and CPS complicit in UK driver culture. This driver is a sociopath.