The scheme to site scores of bike hangars across Brighton and Hove was brought in without proper scrutiny, according to a councillor.
In the coming week, Conservative councillor Robert Nemeth plans to call for a report so that the scheme can be debated in an open and transparent manner.
Councillor Nemeth said that the scheme was set up using Brighton and Hove City Council’s budget process rather than a policy committee as would usually be the case with this sort of project.
He said that this meant that the scheme avoided “scrutiny of financial, legal and equality issues and numerous other related matters”.
He said that there had been “public frustration” and “unfavourable national press coverage” of the scheme since it started earlier this year.
And, in a motion listed for debate at a meeting of the full council on Thursday (15 December), he criticised “the lack of consultation that has taken place with residents over hangar locations”.
Councillor Nemeth’s motion follows a public question asking for the details behind the project from Laura King, of the Friends of Brighton and Hove Citizens Action Group.
She asked the council’s Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee about the legality and promotion of the process at a meeting on Tuesday 15 November.
Green councillor Steve Davis, who co-chairs the committee, sent a written reply. He said that the hangers were promoted correctly through the council, local press, police, emergency services, Road Haulage Association and Freight Transport Association.
Councillor Davis said: “Funding for the cycle hangars project was agreed at ‘budget council’ on Thursday 25 February 2021.
“This funding was subsequently included in the ‘Local Transport Plan’ programme at the Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee in March 2021 and again at the February 2022 budget council.
“The Procurement Advisory Board approved the ‘cycle hangars – supply and management / maintenance’ report on Monday 26 July 2021 and a business case for the project was signed off by the assistant director of city transport.”
The council was prompted to look into how it could provide cycle hangars after a petition was presented to councillors by Addison Road resident Mark Bason in November 2020.
The petition called for cycle hangers in the area because many people had no space in their flats to store a bike. It also followed a spate of bike thefts.
And, in October and November last year, more than 2,000 people asked for cycle hangars in their streets in response to a six-week council survey.
Officials analysed the requests to identify 100 sites for the first hangars – and, so far, 60 cycle hangars have been installed across Brighton and Hove, providing 360 spaces.
Hangar locations were published on the “traffic regulation orders” page of the council’s website. Notices were also posted in the streets near the hangar sites.
Last month, the waiting list for hangar spaces stood at 461 residents, the council said.
Councillor Nemeth’s motion is due debated at the meeting of the full council which is due to start at 4.30pm next Thursday (15 December). The meeting, at Hove Town Hall, is scheduled to be webcast on the council’s website.
This council acts like a load of Vogons.
What’s that? B&H Council implements scheme for cyclists without proper scrutiny or cosultation?
Well, who would have thought it eh?
Site one of these beyond your building line and you’ll soon know about it!
Yeah Brilliant positioning, there’s one in Queens Park Road right on a bend and slight hill, coming out of Southover Street you have to pull right out to see past it.
So the council has no money to keep toilets open, clean the streets, clear drains, supply dog poo bins, clean tags of its own property and provide a bus shelter outside the hospital but it can find loads of money to cater to the 14% of the population who want these bike hangers…
Never Normal Brighton Council.
Can we rename the “Green” party to “We Love Bicycles” party?
I would like to know how the profit shares work on this. How much is the company making? How much does it cost them to rent these bits of tarmac? And which party members are connected with the company? I hope they don’t get the tarmac for free.
Sorry my maths was way off in my previous post 2,000 is actually only 0.75% of Brighton’s population of just under 300,000…
Pandering to the whims of a minority whilst ignoring the needs of the majority indeed.
As far as cycling activists are concerned, they are the majority, and anyone that disagrees when them are the minority.
I guess they went to the Green Party school of mathematics, economics, and budgeting 😊
But that does not mean they are right, just because they are a majority.
What an excellent provision of services for people without space to store a bicycle safely. This would have helped me a lot during my life. Every council will be following suit with this obviously sensible idea.
There are about 130,000 motor vehicles registered in B&H. They all seem to have places to park. The council are installing 100 car sized bike sheds.
Councillor Nemeth making all this drama over about 0.08% fewer places to park his cars
I think it’s important we keep an eye on the truth here – and it’s far too easy to launch into the cyclist versus motorist debate. Many of us cycle when possible and use a car when necessary.
In my case, I need a small van for work and my annual permit to park it in my zone is £175 but with no guarantee of a space near where I live. I do understand when people get annoyed about the available spaces being reduced further.
Bike ownership is not cost-free either. I have to carry my bike up two flights of stairs to store it in my flat, and I have had two bikes stolen in broad daylight when they were locked up on the street. My neighbour moved into our building and locked his bike up on the corner of our road, using the hoops provided, but his bike was gone the next day when he went to ride to work.
So the truth is that bike ownership is not easy in this city, and in theory the bike hangars are a good idea.
What is under scrutiny here is how much this new scheme is costing, and who benefits from that.
We know that it costs the cyclist about a £1 per day to store one bike in the hangars plus a £35 deposit. The hangars are provided by a private company who get that cash, presumably in return for administering the scheme.
What we want to know is how much the council had to pay up to get the hangars installed? Where did that money came from? And what is the cost to the taxpayer in terms of the scheme set up costs and the loss of car parking revenue? Will the council get any long term financial benefit from the scheme, or is it another they will need to continually subsidise, as they have to do with the recently-failed bike share scheme?
A further discussion might be about how we can find money for such schemes when the council constantly pleads poverty – and when our streets are not weeded, the city’s infrastructure is not properly maintained, and when public toilets are being closed.
In my view, it seems like the cycle lobbying groups have undue influence within the town hall, leading the council to lose sight of their more basic civic responsibilities.
My apologies for the typo above. Bike storage in the hangars is £1 per week, plus the £35 deposit.
I always enjoy your balanced views, Billy – and you take the time to explain the issues. Thank you. — Personally, I would probably have a nervous breakdown if I lived in a ground floor or LGF flat and a bike hangar was installed directly outside – a depressing view and a permanent loss of light (cars have windows so they don’t block the light so much). However, I don’t have to worry about a bike being nicked, because I can’t physically ride one. It would be really good – if there was any space available – if people were allowed to build bike sheds at the *side* of buildings where possible – but I do appreciate space is at a premium. In the meantime, as usual, we have the Utopians pitted against Everyday residents. The actual root cause of this particular issue: an epidemic of bike thefts. How do we solve it? Lock the thieves in the bike hangers. That is a joke obviously, but seriously, I hope the council is acting properly and not doing anything untoward. I don’t think it’s a bad thing to check that correct procedures are being followed. It would be far worse if nothing was ever questioned.
IF more people are to be encouraged to cycle, because cycling is healthy, produces zero emissions, reduces congestion, and so on, then people must be given an opportunity to store their bikes. The council provides car parking on streets for cars. What on earth is actually wrong with providing shelters on the streets for bikes? A few bad decisions may have been made on where the hangars should be placed, but Nemeth is just attacking cyclists again. Just like he did with the Old Shoreham Road cycle lane.
Charlatan
This council has told us it has X amount of millions of pounds of overspending.
This council has cut some services due to funding problems, unable to address helping difficult families, unable to address the need to help with better bus provision, even stolen monies back from disabled children.
People are struggling to heat and eat, living from day to day, we have un collected rubbish and recycling, toilets are closed, the streets are filthy, weeds growing around us, artists displaying their talents on a daily basis and the list is endless.
This council has taken tax payers money from toilet refurbishment, not to help the needy, but to help fun a vanity project. This council has taken another loan, to help fun the same project, Hove.
This council has taken council tax money to purchase yet more bike sheds, yes users will need to pay before you state that, however, the money taken out the pot wont be replaced for about 16 years.
The Old Shoreham Road cycle lane fiasco, it was PROVEN by various sources that it was used less when installed, so stop throwing your toys out the pram and accept things don’t always work out how we want them.
Great comment you make ‘attacking cyclists again’ That’s just your one sided bias opinion.
It is my opinion, that this council as a whole are attacking the residents of the city with these non priority schemes that seem to be for the benefit of the few.