On 14 Oct 2014 at 11:02am Tour de Malling wrote:
"Safety concerns for new Lewes to Ringmer cycle path"
How do forum users feel about the cycle path?
Check it out here »
On 14 Oct 2014 at 11:32am Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
It would have been much better to widen the road for cars
On 14 Oct 2014 at 11:39am cultural tumour wrote:
How wide is your car?!
On 14 Oct 2014 at 12:45pm A motorist wrote:
Keeping cars and cyclists apart makes some sense, but having the extension end pretty much on top of the busy junction seems a little short sighted. However, in the absence of a dedicated cycleway along the A26 down into town (from Earwig Corner) then I guess its the best they can do.
On 14 Oct 2014 at 2:08pm ESCC draughtsman wrote:
How dare you question our right to do as we wish with your roads and taxes
On 14 Oct 2014 at 2:33pm Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
Go up and down the hill to/from Ringmer a number of times each and every day and see a cyclist once in a blue moon.
Reduces the chances of mowing down one of the lycra clad loons no end and this waste of money on a cycle lane will only make things more difficult
On 14 Oct 2014 at 2:47pm cultural tumour wrote:
Maybe more "lycra clad loons" would use this route if it was safer?
On 14 Oct 2014 at 3:31pm Still A motorist wrote:
CT - maybe not, given the extension it tips them back onto a busy B-road just at the point it joins an even busier A-road, which doesn't have a dedicated cycle lane, let alone a cycle path seperated from the main carriageway. In the absence of a footpath on the southern side of earwig hill the lycra-clad brigade then have to cross earwig hill very close to a busy junction, and then also cross the A26 near teh same busy junction to get safely onto the minor roads/footpaths that will take them into Lewes via the Brooks area.
Still JC above will have a chance to try to pick them off as they pop out of the Lewes end of the extension right into the busy Earwig corner traffic :-).
No doubt after a few cyclists are knowked down around earwig corner ESCC will runa risk assessment, and decide to install a cyclist crossing, complete with cyclist demand-controlled traffic lights, further adding to the Earwig Corner bottle-neck at peak times...
On 14 Oct 2014 at 3:39pm Easy rider wrote:
Coming down Mill Rd on a bike is easy because of those things on the handlebars called brakes. I have been doing it with my son for years without a problem. Come on people - I know change is hard but cycling between Ringmer and Lewes is no great threat to anyone!
On 14 Oct 2014 at 4:18pm Spokey dokey wrote:
I don’t understand why car drivers feel so threatened by provision being made for cyclists. Surely if things are made easier for the cyclists, the roads will be easier for drivers too?
At the end of the day we are all human. Can’t we be a bit more considerate towards other life style choices?
On 14 Oct 2014 at 4:58pm ar10642 wrote:
Given the space constraints at Earwig Corner, going along Mill Road looks like the best they could do. You can then go straight on down Church Road and join the existing cycle path along the river, avoiding cycling along the A26 entirely. The point about the steep hill being dangerous is a bit silly as there are countless steep hills in Sussex and that's what brakes are for.
On 14 Oct 2014 at 5:03pm Jermey Clarkson wrote:
I was threatened by a cyclist only last week.
He shook his fist at me before pulling down his very tight fitting lycra trousers things and showing me his bottom, in what I have since been informed is "mooning."
On 14 Oct 2014 at 6:46pm Golden Sunbeam 2 speed wrote:
He was showing you his bottom bracket , you cranky petrol head.
On 14 Oct 2014 at 7:15pm Fairmeadow wrote:
At the end of the new cyclepath cyclists can choose whether to go over the hill via Mill Road, or round it via Earwig Corner and the A26. Should they choose the latter, they will be sharing the main road only in the 30 mph zone (do you know what that is Jeremy?). Their choice.
The only problem with Mill Road is that it isn't wide enough to have cars parked all along one side, and then have a car pass a cyclist on the rest. I imagine residents are worried that some safety assessment will pop up to decree double yellows along both sides of the road, leaving them nowhere to park. East Sussex wouldn't ever do anything like that, would they? We can trust them to look after everyone's interests.
On 14 Oct 2014 at 8:49pm Metatron wrote:
If its used as often as the cycle path that runs along the side of the A27 it will be money well wasted.
On 14 Oct 2014 at 10:16pm Bradley Wiggins wrote:
I live in Ringmer, and I used to cycle into Lewes for work. I had to give up because I felt unsafe and intimidated by the amount of heavy traffic. I'm really pleased that they've finally started on the path, and will definitely start using it once it's completed. I'm surprised you haven't seen anyone cycling on this stretch of road Jeremy Clarkson, I see cyclists all the time. I'm sure walkers will use it too, because the existing path is in a shocking condition.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 12:05am Ed Can Do wrote:
I drive out to Ringmer and back 6 days a week and I can barely remember a day I did't have to pass a cyclist so I'm all in favour of the extension. I try to pass on the other side of the road if possible but a lot of drivers don't and it's a wonder more cyclists aren't hurt on that road. Yes cyclists will have to rejoin just before Earwig corner but they can go up to Mill Road or if there's no car parked there they can skip over the corner on that bit on the left.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 12:12am PC Growler wrote:
Can someone tell me what the point of creating cycle paths is when the lycra clad brigade refuse to use them?
Motorists pay road tax to pay for these paths (thus getting cyclist off the road for mutual safety). Why can't cyclists refusing to use the designated paths be prosecuted?
On 15 Oct 2014 at 7:21am Driver wrote:
I seem to recall from my days of learning to drive that the blue sign depicting a cyclist meant that is was compulsory for cyclists to use the cycle track, and not the adjacent road.
I feel a few token prosecution are long overdue.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 9:15am ar10642 wrote:
Driver, in order to get prosecutions you'd have to change the law. The highway code states "Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.". The blue cycling sign means that only cyclists (and pedestrians) can use the cycleway, not that they must use it instead of the road.
See rule 63 on link below:
Check it out here »
On 15 Oct 2014 at 9:18am Si Klist wrote:
PC Growler - I see many children and their parents cycling to school every day who aren't clad in lycra. Surely the point of creating this kind of cycle path/route is to allow potential cyclists for whom cycling along the busy A26 would be unsafe to take an alternative route for the relatively short trip into Lewes/Ringmer?
Driver - there is no obligation for cycles to use cycle paths marked with a blue sign/white bike
On 15 Oct 2014 at 9:30am ar10642 wrote:
PC Growler, while some of the newer paths they've done are quite good (Beddingham to Firle springs to mind), a lot are very poorly designed, much slower and sometimes more dangerous than using the road. The half arsed way we do them in this country compared to somewhere like Belgium or Holland means you'll see cyclists using the road instead. Have a look at the link below for some examples, would you want to use these?
Check it out here »
On 15 Oct 2014 at 9:52am Spokey dokey wrote:
@ar10642 that website cracked me up! Thanks for that. Am I right in thinking most cyclists are also drivers? I hate the way the media (Argus is particularly bad) divides people into one camp or the other. As a driver I can appreciate the cyclists needs and as a cyclist I can appreciate drivers needs. Let us all just be friends...
On 15 Oct 2014 at 9:56am Mavis wrote:
get real people the council loves wasting money on Faddy schemes that appear politically and socially correct, remember it's not their money, it's ours, so they do what they fancy. Then they claim they can't provide real services that people depend on.
They are also wasting money on a 20 mph zone scheme on roads and estates in Lewes where it is nigh on impossible to go faster and where there have been zero reports of any accidents, speeding, or other speed related incidents. What do they care about the deficit ?
On 15 Oct 2014 at 10:16am Maybe there is a clue in wrote:
The name ? Push Bike . Get off the bloody thing and walk with it - where it`s dodgy to cycle. You`ll get more compo if you`re a pedestrian hit by a car
On 15 Oct 2014 at 11:23am MotoristCyclistPedestria wrote:
Hello
From the Highway Code: "Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory"
The Cycling Proficiency documentation states that fast cyclists should use the road rather than shared use tracks (and advise a speed limit of 12mph).
The Ringmer path is shared use (pedestrians and cyclists).
I don't get why motorists (and I am one) complain so much about these fairly small schemes. Towns and cities are still designed with the car driver (not even the pedestrian) in mind. Look at how traffic spoils Lewes town centre. Cars make getting places easier, but they also make them bloody unpleasant when you get there.
Cycling should be encouraged, and it will save the country huge amounts of money. It's about the healthiest way to get about. Look at the amount of obesity in Holland or Denmark where people cycle - and then look around you in Sussex. Obesity is going to present huge costs to the NHS over the next few decades, which means huge costs to the taxpayer, motorists included. If we could raise the number of people cycling, it would benefit all of us, even those who don't own a bike.
I know at least four or five people who cycle from Ringmer to the station every morning and evening, by the way. That means there must be many more.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 11:37am BitOfHistory wrote:
Roads in towns were sometimes well surfaced. Poor areas were cobbled; upmarket areas were covered in granite setts (what many localities call cobbles). Pretty much every other road was left unsurfaced and would be the colour of the local stone. Many 19th century authors waxed lyrical about the varied and beautiful colours of British roads.
Cyclists' organisations, such as Cyclists' Touring Club in the UK and League of American Wheelmen (LAW) in the US, lobbied county surveyors and politicians to build better roads. The US Good Roads movement, set up by LAW, was highly influential. LAW once had the then US president turn up at its annual general meeting.
The CTC individual in charge of the UK version of the Good Roads movement, William Rees Jeffreys, organised asphalt trials before cars became common. He took the reins of the Roads Improvement Association (RIA) in 1890, while working for the CTC.
He later became an arch motorist and the RIA morphed into a motoring organisation. Rees Jeffreys called for motorways in Britain 50 years prior to their introduction. But he never forgot his roots. In a 1949 book, Rees Jeffreys – described by former prime minister David Lloyd George as "the greatest authority on roads in the United Kingdom and one of the greatest in the whole world" – wrote that cyclists paved the way, as it were, for motorists. Without the efforts of cyclists, he said, motorists would not have had as many roads to drive on. Lots of other authors in the early days of motoring said the same but this debt owed to cyclists by motorists is long forgotten.
The CTC created the RIA in 1885 and, in 1886, organised the first ever Roads Conference in Britain. With patronage – and cash – from aristocrats and royals, the CTC published influential pamphlets on road design and how to create better road surfaces. In some areas, county surveyors took this on board (some were CTC members) and started to improve their local roads.
Even though it was started and paid for by cyclists, the RIA stressed from its foundation that it was lobbying for better roads to be used by all, not just cyclists.
By the early 1900s most British motorists had forgotten about the debt they owed to prehistoric track builders, the Romans, turnpike trusts, John McAdam, Thomas Telford and bicyclists. Before even one road had been built with motorcars in mind (this wasn't to happen until the 1930s), motorists assumed the mantle of overlords of the road.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 11:46am pedestriancyclistdriver wrote:
That's well said MCP. Sadly we are a generation behind most of northern Europe in provision for cyclists - possibly because of the sort of attitudes expressed by many on this forum. It is not only healthier it is wonderfully convenient; but many will not take it up if they have to share roads with the quantity of traffic we see in Lewes. This sort of path is welcome but, if it does not take people into the town centre, it will not be used as often as it could.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 11:49am Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
@MotoristCyclistPedestria - no it doesn't
@BitOfHistory - thank you for curing my insomnia within a paragraph. You must be riveting at dinner parties
On 15 Oct 2014 at 12:51pm cultural tumour wrote:
Jeremy Clarkson, why do you have to be so horrible? Peace and love..
On 15 Oct 2014 at 1:51pm Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
cultural tumour - who do have to have such a horrible screen name.
Is it some sort of leftie joke?
On 15 Oct 2014 at 2:35pm wrote:
While it's wit of the highest order to call yourself Jeremy Clarkson.
(I know, I'll go on the Lewes forum and have a go at cyclists. What shall I call myself? Oh I know... Jeremy Clarkson. I bet no-one's thought of that before. It'll bring the house down. God, I'm so f**king original).
I don't know why you assume all cyclists are lefties. A lot of cyclists I know from sportives etc are ardent Tory voters.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 3:05pm Hammond`s organ wrote:
He may be small , but I am BIG
On 15 Oct 2014 at 3:09pm Jeremy Clarkson wrote:
I'd say it's witless of the highest order to call yourself nothing.
Po faced lycra clad loon
On 15 Oct 2014 at 4:18pm Nobody wrote:
Piss poor excuse for a wind-up merchant.
On 15 Oct 2014 at 4:26pm Somebody wrote:
LOL
On 17 Oct 2014 at 10:53am Not a Mamil wrote:
Generalisation I know, but "lycra clad loons" tend to go by road, not cycle paths, as they are faster and better paved and wearing lycra usually suggests you want to go quick. "Normal, average, people who want to get from A-B" (I include myself in this group) use cycle paths, and you might not see us because we're hidden away from the road by trees, grass, etc.