The new Labour team running Brighton and Hove City Council said that it would come up fresh designs for the A259 seafront cycle lane in Hove.
Labour said: “The proposed redesign will seek to deliver both a two-way cycle lane and will keep current traffic lanes.
“The proposed redesign of the route between Fourth Avenue and Hove Lagoon, and the reasons for it, will be examined at a special meeting of Brighton and Hove’s transport committee tomorrow (Wednesday 21 June).
“The new Labour administration has asked officers to review and redesign the scheme, previously approved by the former Green council, particularly to look at ways to improve the road space for all users including pedestrians and cyclists and to allow cycles, people and cars to safely share the seafront.”
“The redesign will address three key concerns. Firstly, where possible the cycle lanes in both east and west directions should be next to each other and not separated by footpaths, in line with national standards.
“Secondly, that the scheme keeps traffic flowing.
“Thirdly, that the cycle lane ‘loop’ around King Alfred is removed in favour of a continuous two-way cycle lane along the seafront road.”
Councillor Trevor Muten, who chairs the council’s Transport and Sustainability Committee, said: “We are today announcing exciting new proposals for a redesign of the planned active travel scheme for Hove seafront to allow for a continuous two-way cycle lane while maintaining a two-way vehicle lane.
“Cycle lanes are hugely important to our city and are a crucial part of our travel and sustainability plan. We have to get them right. Most importantly, they must be safe and accessible for cyclists and pedestrians.
“And we must remember that our seafront is an arterial route into and across our city for motorists, including those visiting the hospital, especially because we keep other city centre routes clear of all traffic except taxis and buses.
“We need a better transport system that works for everybody, however they choose to travel.
“Cycling, walking and driving along Hove seafront must be safe for all. Providing safe cycle routes encourages more people to cycle.
“Good traffic flow along main roads avoids cars on smaller roads and avoids congestion. Accessible pavements, distinct from cycle routes, make walking safer.
“Two lanes for vehicles in both directions means good access for buses and car-users including our disabled residents, the elderly and those with mobility issues.
“A two-way cycle lane separate from the pavement avoids putting pedestrians amongst cyclists and avoids having cyclists along the prom in front of Medina Terrace.
“These common-sense improvements within the space available on the A259 in Hove will be better, safer, more accessible and more enjoyable for all.”
Council leader Bella Sankey said: “Our announcement today has the potential to be a win-win-win for pedestrians, cyclists and road users.
“We passionately believe in promoting walking and cycling in Brighton and Hove and delivering the highest quality, permanent, active travel infrastructure.”
Councillor Sankey added: “We are also committed to retaining and maintaining key arterial roads for buses and motorists and we believe that our city deserves all of these things.
“We want our proposed redesign to serve all residents and make our beautiful and iconic seafront safer, fairer and more accessible to all.
“Should our plan be approved by the committee tomorrow we’ll be engaging with our residents to ensure the best possible redesign for Brighton and Hove.
“Delivering a better-quality transport infrastructure for the seafront will necessarily incur greater costs.
“The current scheme is part-funded by the government’s Active Travel Fund and once we have redesigned this scheme we will allocate further funding, including from the Local Transport Plan capital budget and other potential sources.
“We have brought forward this special meeting in a truncated timeframe in order to ensure we can pause construction on the current redesign, if necessary, in a timely manner, and before incurring costs.
“We value public involvement in transport policy and will ensure that there is meaningful consultation on the proposed redesign should the committee approve the recommendation.”
Be great if they could include measures to encourage cyclists to actually stop at the many predestrian crossings. I’ve seen too many near misses where cylists just plough through thinking they have the right of way over pedestrians crossing the road and onto the pavement cycle path. Just this weekend a middle aged cyclist shoutiing at foreign students, like they’re supposed to stand in the road until he passed!
A good news story, the previous planned scheme had floating bus stops and was criticised at consultation by the bus company because it would delay services. Labour seem to be listening and trying to make what was a pretty shoddy design far better and work for all users. Valley Gardens phase 3 next and save us all a small fortune!
Thank heavens someone is prepared to reverse the greens ill thought out vanity project, set up with the cycling activists,with the exclusion of pedestrians and road users. Far to many people have been struck and abused by the lycra clad cyclists who treat the seafront like a racetrack.
VG 3 will now cost the local taxpayer £6m. How is this justifiable in the current economic climate? It needs to be pulled. Stuff Green ideology and zealotry – think of ordinary residents
Thank heavens someone is prepared to reverse the greens ill thought out vanity project, set up with the cycling activists,with the exclusion of pedestrians and road users. Far to many people have been struck and abused by the lycra clad cyclists who treat the seafront like a racetrack.
This was voted for by Labour Councillors just months ago. It was funded through central government spending. Labour are now cancelling the project, without consulting anyone and putting the funding at risk.
Read again, (and read the meeting papers), there will still be a cycle lane, there will be no risk to the funding – they intend to make some common sensical changes so we don’t have bike lane, pedestrians, bike lane, bus boarders, buses emptying into the bike lane etc. Utter lunacy in the original design.
Tired young man.
Incorrect, this scheme was approved in principle last July so hardly just months ago. At that time the scheme was £13million, it is now £16M.
The funding is only 9.5 million, meaning 6.5 has to be found from other sources including council taxes.
Perhaps you were too tired to read the article because it doesn’t say anywhere that the project is being cancelled only that it is being redesigned.
What do you want a consultation on a redesign for, we don’t know what that will be yet and remember this has already been passed and is a scaling down exercise to save COUNCIL TAX money.
I for one am shocked to see Labour slow down work on cycle lanes again!
What happened to the concern that their was no money left- this design was supported by Labour councillors just months ago? And what a depressing ‘vision’ for the city- four lanes of traffic on the seafront for ever?? Get some ambition.
Tired young man,
I for one am pleased labour have decided to redesign this project. The original scheme was flawed with too many dangerous risks to Disabled, Cyclist, pedestrians, bus passengers and other road users.
The scheme was passed last July in principle, that doesn’t mean it was set in stone. With every project there will always need to be some changes made for any number of reasons.
If you hadn’t noticed, there isn’t four lanes of traffic, only one lane up to the King Alfred, hence between West Street and the KA there’s heavy traffic that is great for the environment.
Can we please have an end to that adjective “iconic”. It’s as bad as hearing “the jewel in the crown”. Make it fresh.
Wow all credit to the photographer who managed to capture 4 cyclist using this lane at the same time.
Must be a wildlife photographer who is prepared to wait days to get the perfect photo.
Made me giggle. And so true!
While reviewing cycle lane design, how about looking to improve the route from Preston Circus to Preston Park.
It is a nightmare for cyclists and pedestrians alike.
Finally a bit of common sense.
It would be good if they moved the railings on the stretch between west pier and palace pier so that the cycle lane is away from the pedestrians who randomly walk into the cycle lane with zero regards for themselves or others.
There is no reason everyone, pedestrians, cyclists and cars can’t all benefit from this very wide road being improved as currently it’s a total shambles of Hodge podge design by anti car lobby groups.
Personally when I cycle I prefer not to ride next to 1000 idling engines, which is the current set up. Not only is it bad for pollution, it’s dreadful for our economy
This lane needs more crossings traffic lights road signs and markings all of which the cyclists can totally ignore just like they do on the roads . Also riding at night with no lights wearing dark clothes
Floating bus stops are accidents waiting to happen..and as Green councillor Steve Davis us a driving instructor I am baffled at how he supported these???
Why is it that when a discussion gets heated exaggeration creeps in? As a driver and cyclist who uses both forms of transport for business, I am qualified cycling instructor who is well aware of the need for both drivers and cyclists to obey road traffic laws as well as the Highway Code, I find it objectionable that the implication is made that all cyclists do not abide by the regulations but only drivers do.
When I have taken people to task for this they might grudgingly apologise but I can assure you that my observation is that more drivers infringe regulations than cyclists.
When I mentioned this to a driver that was ranting about a cyclist not abiding by the Highway Code I pointed out to him that was driving with his front fog lights on when there was no reduced visibility so he was not following the Regulations himself.
He stormed off most probably convinced that as a driver he was right!
I won’t mention the model of the car that he was driving as drivers of this brand of car seem to think that they can do as they like!
You do know that cars built after 2011 have to have daytime running lights don’t you?
In European Union countries, all cars and vans manufactured after 2011 must come equipped with daytime running lights. This law was extended to include trucks and buses in 2012. According to EU regulations, daytime running lights must be separate from fog lights or headlights.
For sure, we are out of Europe now. But my own vehicle has daytime running lights which cannot be switched off.
I too love to cycle as well as driving for work. I’m shocked at how few cyclists even give basic hand signals nowadays, and so it’s difficult to know what your average cyclist on the road will do next. What happened to the Cycling Proficiency Test that we all once took?
Unfortunately, that’s a tu quoque argument.
Subjectively, as an advanced driver myself, I often observed cyclists without correct safety gear, switching between road and pavement, running red lights, and generally putting themselves into dangerous positions. In my experience, a cyclist who follows the highway code is an exception to the rule, and I will always assume they will do something that endangers them until proven correct.
Is this just a ploy to scrap the pedestrian and cycle improvements? Seems odd after so much consultation the new administration is trying to reverse it now. If it doesn’t happen I’d be seriously worried that this could be the death knell which would be a real missed opportunity. I thought the plans looked wonderful and would benefit the majority. Then again, from my perspective the fewer cars driving in the city the better, and I am a driver (as well as pedestrian and cyclist)