The final phase of the long-planned reworking of the roads from the Pavilion to the Palace Pier will not now go ahead this year.
Brighton and Hove City Council was in the process of appointing contractors for the approved scheme in January, with construction expected to start in the spring.
Now, following May’s elections when Labour won an overall majority, the scheme is being called back in for review.
This follows the announcement that the A259 cycle lane extension from Fourth Avenue to Hove Lagoon, also due to start imminently, was being paused.
The chair of the council’s Transport and Sustainability Committee, Councillor Trevor Muten, said: “We are currently reviewing the next phase of our Valley Gardens improvement scheme and expect to bring a report to our Transport and Sustainability committee in the autumn.
“We’re keen to see whether the funding that has been committed to it can be used in ways that will bring further improvements to the look and feel of the area.
“It’s a key city centre project, and we want to make sure it offers the maximum benefit to people in our city.”
The review was slammed by Green leader Steve Davis, who warned it could cause reputational and financial damage.
“The Valley Gardens project is yet another hugely successful, popular and costed scheme that’s ready to go. It is so disappointing that Labour’s idea for progress for the city is more delay as they try to reinvent the wheel.
“It looks like there’s going to be reputational and financial damage on the line, again.
“Labour think that more changes and more delay will be worth it. But perfect is the enemy of the good; this city needs real improvement as soon as possible. The planet’s on fire, and Labour are blowing hot and cold on solutions.
“We’re disappointed, but hardly surprised. Sitting behind closed doors, seeing what threads of progress can be unravelled, seems to be par for the course for this administration. Here we go again.”
The plans include a T-junction and traffic lights to replace the Aquarium Roundabout as well as new separate cycle lanes and an outdoor events space.
They were originally approved by the Environment Transport and Sustainability in January 2022, supported by both the Greens and Labour.
At that meeting, a motion to delay the scheme in order for traffic modelling data to be published to demonstrate bus journeys would not be made longer was also voted against by both Labour and the Greens.
It will cost even more now
But if it is not needed and cancelled that will save even more money. The whole scheme has been designed by cycling activists for cyclists and no one else.
Remind us – do you drive?
Remind us – do you walk, cycle or take the bus Peter?
I see you don’t deny my claim, and I would like to see Derek, who seems to never leave the city, answer the question 🤔
As we know, the deputy Green lead of the ETS committee, who was an employee of Sustrans, setup regular meetings with pro-cycling groups to discuss plans.
Perhaps Derek doesn’t realise that you can take a balanced approach, listening and taking note of the views and needs of residents, businesses, visitors and other road users, rather than being obsessively anti-motorist as his Green friends.
But thank you for asking – I use all off those methods together with trains and planes (except cycling, as I never have the need) but prefer my ULEZ petrol car that takes me and my family, directly from A-to-B, rapidly, over almost any distance, with variable loads, in comfort, in all weathers, and without the need for special clothing.
Luckily surrounding boroughs such Worthing, Burgess Hill, Horsham, Crawley, Lewes, and Eastbourne all welcome motorists and the businesses they support.
I drive but am also passionate about cutting car use. Driving into central Brighton is something I try to avoid and I’m all for schemes that prioritise buses, pedestrians and other groups ahead of cars. We’ve got to make it easier for people to use alternative forms of transport
The scheme actually considers the needs of everyone in that area, instead of prioritising the car driver over everyone else, and I would suggest it’s your sense of entitlement to priority treatment that leads you to claim this scheme is designed by cycling “activists” – just because you can see what you consider to be “your” space given to other road users (and not just cyclists – pedestrians too).
Or, to put it another way, at last a scheme that isn’t designed by motoring activists for motorists and no one else
And in case you’re wondering, yes I do drive (and own a car)
I do not have a car I walk everywhere I can or take the bus. (Had to use taxis for 2 years when in a wheelchair) I would NOT have appreciated a load of polluting traffic along the coast road if the roundabout was scrapped . Terrible plan by arrogant zealots with no proper consultation or environmental impact survey
A reasonable point however if we also promote safe, inclusive, sustainable and healthy alternative travel options then the congestion will reduce, emissions will reduce, we get closer to net zero, the public health improves. Doing nothing and just hoping NHS waiting lists get shorter, or the climate emergency magically disappears, is not an option
Designed for the benefit of cyclists to the detriment of all others. As a pedestrian and bus user working in Circus Street, I detested Valley Gardens. Everyone is sick to death of the cycle zealotry that has been shown by this council over the last few years. Well done to Sustrans and Bricycles for getting rid of the previous council. Pressure groups don’t win you votes and sensible people don’t want their fantasies.
The alternative is designed for the benefit of car drivers to the detriment of all others. Clearly a balance needs to be struck however if we also promote safe, inclusive, sustainable and healthy alternative travel options then the congestion will reduce, emissions will reduce, we get closer to net zero, the public health improves. Doing nothing and just hoping NHS waiting lists get shorter, or the climate emergency magically disappears, is not an option
So how come the Greens only involved pro-cycling anti-motorist activists in the design of VG3 and no one representing businesses, residents, and other road users (except possibly bus companies)?
Unlike 99% of roads which are designed for motorised vehicles and no one else. Clearly a balance needs to be struck however if we also promote safe, inclusive, sustainable and healthy alternative travel options then the congestion will reduce, emissions will reduce, we get closer to net zero, the public health improves. Doing nothing and just hoping NHS waiting lists get shorter, or the climate emergency magically disappears, is not an option
Yep, so a solution to the problem is not to make pollution worse with bad road design.
Round abouts have been long proven to reduce congestion and thus pollution.
The logistical solution to less cars in the city is a proper park and ride linked with a proper mass transit system, something we do not have….
Other cities have long proven this is the way to reduce pollution in cities. Banging on about people using cars instead of bikes will not solve any problems as believe it not some people need to drive, be it business, health workers, disabled, deliveries, out of town workers, night workers, it’s an endless list. Granted there are a fare few baby boomers who could easily walk or cycle, but targeting the rest of the population and annoying people does not solve any of the problems, indeed it makes it worse for all and you then end up with less buy in from the population.
One thing we need to stop is the whole net zero. We don’t have a climate emergency. Electric cars are making the whole environment worse and roads worse. Stop bowing down to the elite.
We don’t have a climate emergency? What are your sources?
Roads are designed for all road users to share. There is a booklet entitled “The Highway Code” which explains how to do this 😊
We drive my husband is disabled… he cannot walk far and cannot use buses due to his back issues. But Brighton don’t want to support those that need it
Hear hear.
I’m surprised that Cllr. Davis, the driving instructor, is critical to ensuring good value for money. In retort to Cllr. Davis’ “But perfect is the enemy of the good” I have a maxim as well I’d like to share with him that perhaps he would benefit to reflect upon.
“Measure twice, and cut once.”
If he sits in traffic he still gets paid
I knew this was going to happen after they trashed the good improvements that were planned for and funded for the A259, they voted for them and then trashed the scheme. Now they are delaying this brilliant project AGAIN. They did it last time they were in administration and delayed it for 2 years – at huge cost. Why is the Brighton and Hove Labour group so against urban improvement schemes that they repeatedly vote for and then scrap at the last minute? This is so disappointing. I am an older cyclist and I get around the city on a bike but it is getting harder due to the traffic and schemes like this would have made it much easier for people like me and children and anyone that choses not to drive. This was not in the Labour manifesto – I voted for them but I wouldn’t have if I new they would destroy all of these wonderful projects that were in the pipeline, funded and ready to go.
Actually this was already 5 million over initial costs and rising.
I feel the same Martin. Really disappointed in Labour so far. At best they’re adding years of delay to schemes that had been consulted, agreed, funded and were ready to go. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good as one of my old bosses used to say
You cyclist’s don’t contribute anything so stop whinging.
‘reputational damage’. Yep, Cllr Davis, that’s what you and your fellow ex Green councillors managed to do to your party, both locally and nationally.
Well done!
Judging from his comments here, he’s clearly a pork pie short of a picnic
Councillor Steve Davis and his fellow Greens have a great reputation already – for sitting in echo-chambers with like-minded activists, being arrogant, ignoring the needs of residents, businesses, and the local economy, and treating anyone who disagrees with them with utter contempt.
Doesn’t this charmless hypocritical driving instructor realise that this is why Greens were decimated in the recent elections?
The expected cost to the local taxpayer was almost 7 million and that is on top of the grant. What will get, a roundabout removed a majority want kept, a glorified cycle lane and a few trees, (oh and more revenue lost through reduction in parking spaces). Well done Labour a sensible pause.
Except that’s not the case they are making
Absolutely. At least money won’t be literally thrown away for a few freeloader cyclist’s.
I think that a lot of us have probably boggled at the projects of the previous Green administration. I am no longer fit enough to get over that way, but the last time I did, during a brief respite from Covid restrictions, to meet a friend who had come down by coach from elsewhere to meet me for lunch, it took me longer, as a pedestrian, to negotiate my way safely round the then mind-boggling traffic system around Old Steine and the Palace Pier than it did to to get to the bus stop in East Brighton and get a bus down to Old.Steine. Cllr Davis’s dual positions as a driving instructor on the one hand and a Green zealot on the other are totally incompatible and he should go.
This project, part 3 was agreed under the previous LABOUR administration. They all voted for it and defended it then, they just don’t seem capable of sticking with what they claim they believe in. The last time they delayed Valley Gardens part 2, the delay last two years and was very costly. Now, the completed sections of Valley Gardens are lovely, flowers bursting out, people sitting having picnics, a safe and secure bike lane – I often see disabled cyclists (like me) using the lane as it is so safe and smooth. Sadly the lanes stops abruptly, making the onward journey to the sea complicated and dangerous. Why any political group would want to stop such a wonderful project is beyond me.
Nurse!
Agreed as part of the secret Labour-Green coalition agreement (AKA Memorandum of Understanding) where Greens set the environmental strategy and Labour acted as tame puppies supporting everything they wanted.
Please stop trying to rewrite history to protect your loathsome Green friends.
And for any denialists https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2020/12/03/greens-and-labours-coalition-deal-revealed/
100% agree. The seafront is a great place to cycle but then trying to get onto the (also great) Lewes Road cycle path is very tricky and feels quite dangerous in some sections and must put people off from cycling
What about making it smooth and less dangerous for dissabled drivers? Moreover dissabled people being driven.
VG3 needs to be pulled completely. Davis told us the roundabout was one of the most dangerous in the UK and that its replacement wouldn’t cause more congestion. The neck! The man is inhabiting a twilight Green parallel universe.
Agreed!
I’ve nearly been ploughed into by motorists, looking everywhere but where they’re going, countless times on the roundabout.
No amount of consultations will change the fact it’s a deathtrap.
Is it? One Daily Mirror article is not really proof nor should it have been claimed as evidence. 50,000 journeys a day, that’s 18 million a year and incidents are ridiculously low. Deathtrap, claptrap I’d say.
What a complete load of b0ll0cks! Please stop lying. The Greens got pummeled at the last election because they lied and cheated so much
Some stats on car related casualities and fatalities….
https://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2022/06/29/road-casualties-rise-in-brighton-and-hove/
Far too many in my view. Actually one is too many. These numbers are shocking
It will if you stop cycling which is a antiquated way of getting around.
Even more wasted money from the council will they ever learn????
Thank F for some sanity at last! Let’s hope they scrap the ludicrous idea of replacing the aquarium roundabout with a T junction which would have channelled ALL the traffic along the coast road to Duke’s Mound and back along Marine Drive causing huge inconvenience and pollution! The so called Greens had refused to do do an environmental impact survey of this aspect. Anyone who knew about this objected but they made sure to keep it quiet! I only knew because I happened to turn on Latest TV and a taxi driver was demonstrating what this would be like. Pleased these arrogant fools have been ousted.
Or perhaps fewer people would have chosen to use the car thereby cutting emissions? Or taken the A27? I’m a driver but driving into central Brighton is something I try to avoid. I’m all for schemes that prioritise buses, pedestrians and other groups ahead of cars.
That’s along the lines of if we send refugees to Rwanda they’ll stop coming here! Some car journeys will always be necessary eg deliveries, taxis (I spent over 2 years in a wheelchair and was obliged to use them), transporting luggage etc. Excellent work by Labour so far – roll on the GE!
Of course some car journeys will always be necessary however by creating safe, inclusive, sustainable and healthy alternative travel options total numbers of unnecessary journeys would reduce significantly
Absolutely.
The scheme was never supported by residents, stakeholders and businesses. Consultations never happened and council officers had no working understanding of the area. The area needs regeneration but not the scheme that was bulldozed through blindly. Let’s hope for something better that works for the city.
False. The first full public consultation was undertaken in April 2012, and there were multiple subsequent consultations.
Yes your right a consultation that had 63% wanting to retain the roundabout – and yet totally ignored. So a faux consultation
That figure (63%) doesn’t not appear in the April 2012 consultation so I have no idea what you are talking about. Here are some actual statistics from the consultation:
Respondents in favour of :
less traffic (73%)
less vehicle noise (71%)
easier pedestrian access to the Gardens (70%)
a safer (from traffic) environment (66%)
That’s a pretty clear anti-car mandate.
Because it’s made up.
As per the recent election results, only 7% of people agree with you Gary, so I don’t understand how you can claim to speak for the majority of residents, stakeholders, and businesses.
143 respondees. That’s a clear mandate?
2012? No that was the initial consultation for the entire scheme try the 2018 one which specifically mentions the removal of the roundabout – 63% to keep. Yet more Green gaslighting.
Paul Temple I’ll assume that you are referring to question 9d Palace Pier junction from the 2018 Appendix E Stage 2 Consultation Report (BHCC), as this is the only mention of the junction in that consultation. It gave respondents a choice of 1 of 3 proposals:
1. Against removing the roundabout/ keep it as it is / it will increase journey times – 50%
2. In favour of the roundabout changing to a junction – 31%
3. Want north-south cycle – 19%
So no, 63% of resident’s weren’t in favour in keeping the junction, stop making up figures. I’ll assume that you are ignorant rather than wilfully misleading.
Not sure what Paul is referring too but that 2018 consultation comment section is interesting – the top 3 comments are negative with 52, 43 and 23 comments against removal or worried about the impact. Yet only 17 say it was an improvement for cyclists and only 13 in favour of removing. Not sure how you are working those percentages but they look flawed.
Hi Judy’s the most recent 2018 report published in Jan 2019. Phase 3 report, page 30. Against removal 168, in favour of the new T junction 103, (I may have been a percent out). On page 31 against scheme 101, in favour 74. Its interesting to see business was overwhelmingly against the T junction. Also in the report a huge amount worried about the proposed cycle lane in conflict with pedestrians and no priority for buses.
Consultation results don’t change the fact that roundabout is a deathtrap for cyclists and unfit for purpose.
Never had a problem with cycling round it every day I just follow the highway code.
I wouldn’t say it’s a death trap but when I cycle round it I feel very vulnerable and don’t enjoy it one bit. It does feel risky
I would like to be able to cycle as a family into Brighton and along the seafront. We can get pretty far from Patcham into town. But then it all just stops at the bottom of Edward Street and there’s no route from there onto the seafront cycle lanes without cycling in traffic.
VG3 provides a simple route for cyclists (the experienced and inexperienced; kids and adults; daytrippers on Beryl bikes), pedestrians, wheelchair users etc directly from the gardens, onto the promenade, via a single set of lights. Currently, all need to to head 100 yards round the corners along the A259 and negotiate two sets of lights to cross onto the promenade.
It’s crazy that this is so contentious, just asking car users to share a bit more of the road.
Hear hear
There should be a like button!
Not sure what Labour are playing at, pausing this scheme. It seemed ok to me, but it does need joined up thinking here. Once the scheme does go ahead we don’t want it trashed again by unsuitable events. I always said never vote Green or Labour so think we’ve got what the voters wanted, {not me} Hove seafront delayed and scaled back, i wonder what chance Madeira Terraces have this autumn. I watch with interest.
Are you suggesting the Conservatives would have got this scheme done? Genuinely interested
There was a plan for five lanes of traffic on the east side which for anyone with common sense was an abomination!
‘The Valley Gardens project is yet another hugely successful, popular and costed scheme that’s ready to go. ‘
More piffle from cllr Davis. Does he actually believe his own lies?
My heart bleeds for Steve Davis. He’s spent the last couple of years lying and deceiving residents. Now Karma pays him a visit!
If you look at Labour’s record over the years they don’t build anything.
The Greens are criticised for the I360, seafront bike lanes , seven dials roundabout , the Level cafe skate park etc etc
Labour dither, Tories wither, Green deliver
Labour voted for this and the cycle lanes when the Greens forwarded it. Now Labour are in administration they pull it. All the £ that was allocated from Local Enterprise for Valley Gardens and Active Travel England for the cycle lanes will be lost. What a shame.
Yes there was initially money from the LEP for VG3 based on a very, very loose business case, which only cost the taxpayer a £1 million. Now with a cost of £6 million for us all the business case is absolutely shot. Is £6 million (and rising), a very responsible sum to be spending for literally a removal of a roundabout, (that works already), a cycle lane and a few trees. Labour can clearly see this is not responsible.
How do you suggest we hit our net zero targets? How are we going to cut car traffic in our city?
How was VG3 intending to address net zero targets unless your claiming the design was so poor and congestion would be so bad drivers would not use it, (although according to the council journey’s would not be delayed by the T Junction). Valley Gardens was awarded LEP money on a business case and that certainly was not around traffic reduction. Spending over £6 million on this is just illogical in the current financial climate.
By moving us towards a car free city centre by creating safe, inclusive, sustainable and healthy alternative travel options
Do you want visiting trade? If so stop bleating on a out cycle lanes. Cycle lanes are no longer the in thing as many councils have realised. Why on this gods green earth should tax payers pay for cycle lanes?. Theres no return revenue and moreover there’s increased risk of pedestrians being injured by cycling numskulls.
Except that’s not the case they are making
That will be exactly the case they will be making and you may not be aware but the LEP is not an active travel fund this is based on awards against a business case, I think you are slightly confused.
It’s true, I don’t know how the LEP gets allocated/approved. Can you help?
The LEP or Local Enterprise Partnership is a quango that awards money in order to improve an area in order for local economic growth. The initial application made little mention of any cycle lane but was about improving traffic flow and green areas etc. I think a major flaw with Phase 3 is that it has become so cycle lane centric and that really wasn’t the intention of the original scheme, (yes a cycle lane is needed but the design is awful).
Thanks Nathan
Really depressing. How are we going to meet out net zero targets when schemes that have been consulted, agreed and funded get pulled at the eleventh hour? We have to cut traffic in the city. We have to encourage more people to walk, take the bus, cycle etc. It may not be perfect but it’s better than another two year delay, if it even happens at all. Labour are a profound disappointment. Already wish I hadn’t voted for them
After they helped cancel the OSR cycle lane for achieving it’s stated goals, and went after every cycle hangar they could find, this really shouldn’t have come as a surprise.
Labour loves car dependency.
We are bitter aren’t we?
Your Green chums got trounced. Why do you think that was?
I voted Labour. I want the Tories out and wanted to send a message nationally. I can’t speak for everyone else though my suspicion is that the Labour votes are primarily anti-Tory – people don’t want to risk letting them in by splitting the anti-Tory vote. I do accept some locals were also disenchanted with the Green party. It’s also like a pendulum though. Other local election results saw huge gains for the Greens.
More generally, are you in favour of schemes that reduce the amount of motorised traffic and make it easier for people to walk, take the bus, cycle, take a taxi?
Again, do you want visiting revenue?. Nobody is going to cycle to the area apart from tour de France wanna be types and they don’t spend money. You want people from allover and that means vehicles. So any money allocated should be on traffic flow not cycle maniacs.
Labour have immediately proven themselves more incompetent than we dared dream possible. Last week it was delaying the Lagoon works to see if ring fenced active travel funding can be spent on building extra car lanes and now they’re literally just wasting money to figure out if they can save a little bit of what’s left.
Just get it built as designed already, lives are depending on it.
Agree.
Designed by idiots kowtowing to the selfish cycling cult, and the outsiders they recruit to help gridlock and pollute our city.
Confused. How does making it easier to drive increase pollution? Schemes that make alternative forms of transport easier will reduce car usage and therefore reduce pollution. The climate emergency is real and we all need to do what we can to curb emissions. Also with two thirds of the population now obese, active travel will reduce demand on the NHS which, as you probably noticed, is on its knees
One of the cult, talking through their rear end as usual. As for the “climate emergency” gridlocking and polluting the city isn’t going to help solve that, is it?
I’m a driver, pedestrian, bus user and cyclist, so no axe to grind. I an only repeat the point you ignored…Schemes that make alternative forms of transport easier will reduce car usage and therefore reduce pollution. This has been proven time and time again
Why use the word “cult”? Have you never been on a bicycle? At the very least you must know people who sometimes cycle as a way of travelling from A to B. It’s this othering that is so unhelpful. We’re all road users, we’re all pedestrians, we’re all concerned about making our city less congested and polluted, and more safe and pleasant. These discussions are an opportunity to understand other perspectives and to respectfully share viewpoints
You are obviously not very bright, and extremely triggered, so I’m guessing you must be one of the green councillors that lost their seat last time, or maybe the fool from Shoreham. If you can’t see that replacing a free flowing roundabout with gridlocking traffic lights I’m not going to indulge you.
I think he spelt it wrong
I’m a local resident, live near King Alfred, not a member of any political party, voted Labour at the local elections. I don’t agree that replacing a free flowing roundabout automatically results in gridlock. I am in favour of schemes that encourage people to walk, take the bus, cycle instead of driving. Back to my original point, schemes that make alternative forms of transport easier will reduce car usage and therefore reduce. That’s a good thing, right?
Well said.
So much for Labour’s “Green” credentials. This is sickening.
Scrapping this scheme is incredibly dangerous. As a grandparent of young cyclists I am distraut. Please, Labour Council reconsider and don’t be petty, by simply trashing things done by the Green Council. Red and Green should unite and fight harm perpetrated to the planet by vehicle emissions and Tory governments.
As a grandparent you should advise that your grandchildren do not endanger there lives through cycling. God how would you feel if something terrible happened whilst riding around on antiquated bicycles.
I loved the new VG cycle scheme all the way to the Pavillion but after there it just halts and you are left to the mercies of confusing pedestrian crossings with traffic lights and busses coming at you from every angle. I cycled again to the seafront today from Patcham but decided to go through North Laine and the Lanes as it felt safer (traffic goes slower) but i missed the lovely cycle track. I had no idea there was such enmity between Greens and Labour in this lovely town. I hope something can be sorted for the end link in this lovely venture……
Are the new cycle track VG3 and the roundabout by the pier mutually exclusive? Couldn`t a new plan be drawn up that satisfies both parties (car/cycle) . Seeing it as a battle between interest groups doesn`t really help. Sure the car drivers have had the upper hand since the combustion engine was invented, but how many drivers need to get out of their cars and move to shed a few pounds?
No and as I detailed above there was a very sensible plan that sent the cycle lane through Pool Valley down to the seafront, (Pool Valley will no longer be used by coaches).
However many are missing the point here the money from the LEP is NOT an active travel fund and Labour would be well within the remit to re look at the scheme. Plus the £6 million plus from the taxpayer is unjustifiable at the moment
Not any with brains. If people want to lose pounds they can diet. Theres no need to endanger your life on a ridiculous cycle fgs. Wake up its 2023 not 1923.
Peter,
Have you any more on that Lab-Green pact?
I’ve puzzled why whenever I pointed out problems in VGP3, 2030 Carbon Neutral, Greenways Emergency Bus Lane, A259 Congestion or MRN … it seemed always to be a Green (or a linked official) who got back to me … did Lab do a Pontius Pilate on Transport & Climate?
Rob