Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think


Lewes Forum New message

Cycling in Cliffe High Street

29
35
On Thu 14 Mar at 5:52pm Ferret wrote:
Just a reminder, particularly to the moron in an old car who forced me on to the pavement at about 3.30 this afternoon: Cliffe High Street is one way for cars, not for cyclists. Cyclists are allowed to cycle in both directions.
43
28
On Thu 14 Mar at 7:25pm Hello wrote:
Were you the ignorant fool I saw cycling full pelt down the centre of the road? Classic bike hoggery
25
32
On Thu 14 Mar at 11:38pm Ferret wrote:
No. I was travelling at about 10 mph, which became about 5 mph when I realised the ignorant fool in his car was not going to make room for me to get past. And the coward didn't stop when I invited him to so that we could discuss his error.
23
19
On Fri 15 Mar at 8:31am Over the bridge wrote:
Most cyclists I see in Cliffe High Street cycle on the pavement to avoid the cobbles. If fact one came down the Cliffe at 11pm last night cycling at full speed passed us on the pavement then into the road and went straight through the junction with Morris Road without stopping, still cycling at full speed then straight out the junction into South Street towards the Snowdrop. Also seen youngsters (18-20 yr old's) cycling at full speed the wrong way along Lansdowne/Friars walk, traveling much faster than cars.
45
18
On Fri 15 Mar at 8:46am bored2 wrote:
Some bike riders are idiots. Also some car drivers. Idiots are the problem, not bikes or cars. Let's not turn this into some competition
9
24
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:00am Over the bridge wrote:
It's not a competition and I agree you bad drivers, but not going full speed along a one-way Street in the apposite direction and driving down the pavement at full speed!
20
14
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:22am Ferret wrote:
This is what always happens when someone mentions cycling. people jump into the conversation with their gripes about bad cyclist behaviour. May I also remind you that in a collision between a cyclist and a motor vehicle, it is the cyclist who always comes of worst. Take care!
17
26
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:33am Ferret wrote:
P.S. I wish I had taken the car number and reported the incident to the police. If I hadn't moved onto the pavement I would have been knocked off and possibly hurt, at my age (68). Using your car to attempt to hurt someone is surely a crime.
21
19
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:33am A Person wrote:
Typically the argument is about cyclists. The brutal fact is that the moron in the old car almost certainly should not have been there because most?/a lot of the traffic driving along Cliffe High Street is doing so illegally.
18
24
On Fri 15 Mar at 12:00pm pickle wrote:
If I hadn’t moved onto the pavement, I’d have been hurt. Well done, even pigeons understand that logic. Don’t call the police, they’ll laugh at you.
19
11
On Fri 15 Mar at 3:20pm JillG wrote:
Yesterday evening c.9.30 as I bicycled (slowly and legally) out of the alley toward Railway Lane, a car coming in tried to squeeze me against the wall and hooted. I called to the driver, in a mild manner in my defence, 'It's a pedestrian zone! and bikes are allowed both ways'. I got a lot of bad language and denial that it was a pedestrian zone as he said 'It says Ahead Only' (as it does, on the road); I invited him politely to come back and look at the signs (Pedestrian Zone, bikes both ways) that he'd driven past, but just got more bad language and a repetition about the 'Ahead Only' road-marking, the driver saying that he therefore couldn't have turned aside at the entrance anyway.
The 'Ahead only' road-marking is untrue (the Council Traffic Safety officer has confirmed that vehicles at this point can turn L into the service lane, and do a U-turn to go back up Railway Lane) and confusing, and distracts drivers from seeing the signs 8 feet up the wall announcing the pedestrian zone and the facility for bikes to go both ways.
And no, most of us bicyclists don't go on the pavement, and most of us are careful and courteous. But the bad apples are always the ones talked about.
24
28
On Fri 15 Mar at 3:48pm Nevillman wrote:
I agree with the sentiment expressed by several on here that the issue of cliffe high street is the motorists and not the cyclists. The majority of cars driving along it do not stop to load or unload. They have used the car park and want to go east towards Tesco's but can't be bothered to go the long way round. Pedestrians should walk along in the middle of the road so that cars have to wait for them. This will help to slow down any speeding cyclists as well.
12
12
On Fri 15 Mar at 5:52pm Ferret wrote:
I've just put in a request to East Sussex County Council for improved signage as the current signs are clearly not seen. Repeated small signs the length of the pedestrian zone might help. I'm pretty sure my request will be ignored but maybe if everyone affected by this problem could contact them...

Check it out here »
12
18
On Fri 15 Mar at 5:54pm janet street preacher wrote:
I hope it is ignored we’ve got enough signage along Cliffe High St, people ignore it and will still ignore it if there’s more.
15
8
On Fri 15 Mar at 7:01pm JillG wrote:
Unfortunately there's almost nothing to attach signs to along Cliffe High St, and I agree that more signs would be unsightly anyway; more important to sort out the signs at the entrance, to deal with both rat-running cars and the abuse of bicyclists - yes, I've been yelled at and forced off the road really quite a lot of times by drivers who haven't read the signs. Local groups have been asking the Council for years, but they refuse.
8
11
On Fri 15 Mar at 7:58pm Ferret wrote:
God forbid that our beautiful Cliffe High Street be spoilt by a few small signs reminding motorists not to attempt to run down cyclists. On Google Street View there appears to be a little blue sign attached to the black bollard. That's what I'm talking about. Maybe in words since the morons might not understand signs.
8
7
On Fri 15 Mar at 7:59pm Ferret wrote:
Here's the image (from 2016). I don't think the sign is still there.

9
8
On Fri 15 Mar at 8:00pm A Person wrote:
The only real signage is at the pinch point on Railway Lane. There probably does need to be a sign before then which makes it quite clear that you're approaching a pedestrian-only zone, because the current sign does not cut it. I've actually had arguments with a (Green party) friend who insisted that it's shared use. It was only when I showed her the tiny little sign at Railway Lane that she conceded that it probably isn't open to general traffic.

As several have said, this has been reported many times to ESCC. They really couldn't give a damn.
7
10
On Fri 15 Mar at 8:15pm Ferret wrote:
The sign is clear cut, but it's about 8 feet above the road. Maybe that's the problem.

12
9
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:09pm JillG wrote:
Many thanks for the photos. Here's one of the Ahead Only road-marking - wrong and misleading!
The small blue sign on the bollard in the earlier photo is a guerrilla one attached by a desperate local (I do know who but won't 'out' the innocent), who attaches small signs here sometimes, but then the authorities take them down again.
As for the un-noticeable high signs, the Council Traffic Safety officer says 'The sign in question is situated above a footway, and as such, it must be mounted at least 2.1 metres above ground level in order to avoid being struck by pedestrians. I should add that in accordance with national legislation, this type of sign must be illuminated, and therefore any proposal to move the sign is likely to require expensive works to relocate the power supply.
For the above reasons, there is limited scope for further improvements to the existing signage. I should point out that in addition to the entry signage, there are blue information signs on both sides of Court Road indicating 'Pedestrian Zone 90 yds ahead' with an arrow pointing left, which provide ample warning to drivers of the restriction.'
The blue info signs in Court Road are honestly a joke - if drivers do happen to notice them amid everything else in their view, they don't connect them with the route into Cliffe.
Aaagh, Council - listen to us.......

8
17
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:13pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Meanwhile, in downtown Aleppo....
13
13
On Fri 15 Mar at 9:18pm JillG wrote:
I get you, @Green Sleeves, and I've worked in Syria. But perhaps we can do something here meanwhile.
11
13
On Fri 15 Mar at 10:51pm Hyena wrote:
Meanwhile, in downtown Caracas ....
13
13
On Fri 15 Mar at 11:13pm Ferret wrote:
Just because there are terrible conditions in other parts of our sad world, we shouldn't try to improve our own little corner? And I doubt that either of the troubled souls who mention Aleppo and Caracas actually give a damn about them.
7
10
On Sat 16 Mar at 9:30am Rumpole wrote:
Do you not have a helmet camera?. Might be worth the expense in the event of another incident. I have them on my car and it is amazing how sheepish the aggressors, wether they be cyclists, drivers or pedestrians become when you point it out.
8
10
On Sat 16 Mar at 11:30am Bert wrote:
No wonder the councils run out of money, having to deal with this on a daily basis !
6
9
On Sat 16 Mar at 1:40pm Ferret wrote:
@Bert How much do a couple of small signs cost? There are funds available for improving cycling infrastructure. Councils run out of money because of government cuts, not because they do their jobs.
7
6
On Sat 16 Mar at 3:44pm Bert wrote:
It's not the cost of the signs, it's the constant barrage at them.


9 posts left

Your response


You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool

terms


 

Snowdrop Stairs 113:142
Snowdrop Stairs

It's hard to decide who is the funniest on here: 'Chicken Licken' Cool Hand Luke or 'Street Fighting Man' Sensible. more
QUOTE OF THE MOMENT
Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among the people.
John Adams