A major road scheme which would have created a new public square in front of the Royal Pavilion will now not begin until at least next summer.
The third phase of the Valley Gardens project, which includes replacing the Aquarium roundabout next to the Palace Pier with traffic lights, was set to begin in spring this year, with contractors in the process of being appointed in January.
But in June, Brighton and Hove News revealed the new Labour adminstration had called in the scheme for review after May’s elections.
The precise reasons for the review have not been specified.
This week, councillors were told a “forensic” review will not be complete until next year – and the council website says once that’s complete, it will take another six months before work starts.
Green Councillor Steve Davis said: “Given Labour has now had control of the council for more than six months this ‘review’ cannot be understood as anything other than a pause to a project Labour had previously voted for.
“Residents are not informed of the criteria for this so-called review, nor a timeline for its completion.
“When pressed we received no response on if they are willing to consult the Valley Gardens Forum on any potential changes.
“The longer they fail to take leadership on major projects, the more they will rack up costs – construction work is not getting any cheaper.
“After months of important consultation, and with over £6 million committed to the project by external funders, Labour’s prevarication could put the project at risk.
“Worse still, their ‘review’ is delaying vital active travel improvements that would make the area near the Palace Pier safer for all road users, particularly pedestrians.
“After the successful implementation of Phase 1 and Phase 2 brought a new park, hundreds of new trees and flowers, wider walkways, cycle lane and an event space to the city centre, Labour must urgently explain their rationale for continued delays to the final piece of a previously agreed major project.”
Trevor Muten, chair of the Transport and Sustainability Committee, said: “The review is to make absolutely sure that the plans devised by the last administration are aligned with what we, the new Labour administration, were elected to deliver and to give stakeholders another chance to comment.
“We are committed to finishing the Valley Gardens improvements, but it is our responsibility to forensically check the details in view of the amount of money that is being invested in the last phase of this important project.
“We always welcome comments on our plans at any time from all interested parties. Since the summer we have been in touch with a range of stakeholders including Brighton and Hove Buses with a meeting at their Conway Street depot and a walkabout the area. We’ve met with Bricycles, with whom I did a cycle ride in the area, too.
“We have engaged with the Valley Gardens Forum, BusWatch and the Transport Partnership; we may set up a sub-group to focus on Valley Gardens 3, if required.”
When initially floated about having another ‘public square’ then in charge Cllr Robins said it would make a great area for a Christmas Market. Really. VG3 is now 7 million more to the local taxpayer, (in fact we will be paying more than the grant). A responsible administration should be having a forensic examination of the entire scheme. A pause and re evaluation is most welcome.
I always welcome the logic of measuring twice and cut once.
You only have to look at the drawings to see how stupid the VG3 scheme was and is, in terms of city-wide transport policy.
Why direct pedestrians and cyclists straight at the busiest traffic junction in the city, when both groups might be heading elsewhere as their final destination?
(Whereas the cars, vans, and buses have no other options, but to pass through here).
The Palace Pier junction is where the A23 meets the A259, and the latter seafront ‘A road’ is the last cross-city route for commuter and tourist traffic, plus it’s a bus route. You might remember when councillor Pete West tried to install a cycle lane at the Palace Pier roundabout, and all the city traffic and buses went into immediate gridlock, so that ideology-based cycle lane was quickly removed.
This VG3 plan is based on similar fake green ideas, namely that closing roads is a good idea – and it’s ‘fake green’ because it simply creates a traffic jam whilst discouraging tourism and creating a commuting nightmare for locals.
If you decide to close or to narrow roads to discourage cars then you need to provide viable alternative routes for the displaced traffic, or better public transport, and we also need realistic park and ride schemes to welcome the tourists and day trippers.
So it’s common sense that VG3 plan needs a major rethink.
Green councillor Steve Davis should also not be given airtime in articles like these, given his completely inept ideology and his bungled financial decisions under the last administration. It’s that stupid or naive thinking that got the Greens kicked out at the last election, and we don’t need to see any repeat of their lunacy.
Well, done to Labour for having a rethink. We won’t solve climate change issues with fantasy theory or by creating traffic jams.
A logical and practical city-wide transport policy – that helps us get to work – is the more important story here, and that takes priority over any new ‘square’ at the front of the Pavilion.
Have you ever bothered to walk down there in the summer. It’s rammo with pedestrians, traffic is usually at a standstill. On a bike, it’s lethal. Granted the roundabout should stay but it’s really desperately in need of sorting out. As much as people whine on about valley gardens, it’s actually an improvement on what was there before, traffic is less jammed up and it’s actually a really decent idea having the bike lane away from the road. I would say, bikes should be fined for using the road when there is a cycle lane there, that’s really inconsiderate.
I would agree VG1 and VG2 were generally a success and a bike lane is needed to connect down on to the seafront. The Valley Gardens Forum did provide an alternative with the cycle lane coming through and down Pool Valley to connect to the seafront there, (the coaches would no longer be using it). The plan included a safer roundabout too and no loss of bus lanes, (the one was retained outside of the pavillion, (do we need another empty public square?) A far less costly scheme this may be the way to proceed.
Surely if cyclists are banned from certain roads they should get a council tax rebate for the costs of maintaining these roads that they pay for?
Whose talking about banning cyclists from roads? A nonsense statement
“I would say, bikes should be fined for using the road when there is a cycle lane there,”
Imo an investigation into the entire Western Road, upper North Street, Montpellier road debacles needs investigating and not in a “well for sure learn from this for next time” way. Administrative Malfeasance being an included outcome is a route to individual civil servants and departments being held to account in the courts rather than the normal whitewashing done internally.
Whilst we’ve not seen the paperwork it is unimaginable that the correct, legally required, checks and balances were carried out and done so in the manner things like this require. And that’s before we look into why exactly a ‘zero penalty, non-binding completion’ basis was used for such a major impact and at such cost.
Many moons ago whilst working for BG then TransCo there were reams of paperwork, site inspections, impact assessments, risk analysis and clearly defined reports on how and when any road or sidewalk we wanted to dig up would be returned to as ‘pre works commencement state’ that was 20 years ago I’d say and I can’t imagine the processes and requirements have thinned out. I can say without hesitation that either the person carrying out those things was not even remotely qualified to do so or, imho, they were ticked off by someone who never left their desk. And do you think those sewer and property feeder pipes that southern water had to dig out a semi collapsed road, close it for months and replace and repair was done out of their pocket. The hell it was. Theres a very large bill sat on a desk somewhere which we as rate payers are on the hook for.
Heads need to roll and in the legal system not the councils self absolvement way.
As for this sh*t show. Those culpable, still in place or moved on should be told their time is coming after coz we’re done with incompetence that impacts us all for multi year timeframes and those guilty of such just getting a pass
Well said. I notice there is hardly a single report remaining on the BHCC website with a Council Officer’s name on it. Are they ashamed of their work that they aren’t willing to put their name to it? How is a report valid without? Ditto business plans. Where are they? Genuine chamber debates and valid public consultations are unheard of too nowadays.
All we are seeing is taxation without representation, negligence and actual downright criminality from our town hall.
Why wouldn’t a city council which keeps making noises about being in crisis and possibly going bankrupt put a new and unnecessary public square and city-clogging road scheme on hold?
To proceed with this vanity project would be tantamount to criminal financial misconduct in public office when what BHCC needs to do is put itself in emergency measures and prioritise the delivery of our statutory goods, services and general upkeep of the city. And pull the plug on the ruinous i360 before it can lose our city any more money.
It seems as if the i360 is going to be allowed to be the financial death of Brighton and Hove.
Its all government funded including the i360 which is a government loan that has to be paid back
I think you need to look at how much is actually ‘government funding’, and then how much that ‘free funding’ commits the council to add, in additional ££££funding.
And then, when inflationary costs take over, you need to see how the council is forced to spend even more, with no additional help from the government. The VG3 plans are now unaffordable, but were also wrong in the first place, and purely born out of the chase for extra funding.
The system is rubbish, just as these plans, drawn out simply to get that initial extra funding, are also rubbish.
With extra funding as the carrot, the plans drawn out by the inept Greens, were simply chasing their ‘close-any-roads’ vision for the city, and nothing is actually added to help people get to work or to encourage visitors to a city still reliant on a tourist economy.
Turning an Art Deco bus stop into a cafe does nothing to help people move about the city efficiently. And where are the replacement bus stop shelters? Where do I get the number 1 bus service, to get home, and why does this journey now take even longer?
What we residents care about is 1) getting to work or crossing the city efficiently by whatever means available, and then 2) We might also like some lovely new green spaces which deal with the lack of maintenance issues, and which don’t interrupt the free flow of public transport or commuter traffic.
VG3 makes point 1) substantially worse.
For sure, if you are sat at home on a private income, or carefree as a parent-funded student, or on a pension, then you might not appreciate point 1).
If you look at any planning from famous pedestrianised and cycle friendly cities – like Amsterdam – you’ll find they also have inner ring roads for traffic, underground commuter railways, tram systems, and rapid transit bus services. Plus Amsterdam has a canal network. Brighton and Hove, in comparison, has a limited, privatised, and expensive and slow bus service, no park and ride areas, plus the city roads are generally too narrow to create separate cycle lanes.
Has the (green at the time) council actually signed the VG3 contracts with the contractor? Back in January they said they’d be signed “within 2 months” – i.e. just before the greens were kicked out in May….
it has not gone out to tender yet because the plans are being changed
I’m keeping out of this one, except to say that as it looks nothing is going to be done for at least a year, that the area is going to continue to decline rapidly. The only improvements we see is when Labour/ Greens get a grant from central government.
Because that is how central government fund LAs. Councils have to bid for the money and not every council gets funding , meanwhile and any plans are put on hold while bids are made. It costs them time and money and is a waste of time and a waste of money
This Labour council is just absolutely set on not doing anything to make Brighton better
Honestly what is the difference between what they are doing here and what the tories are doing to the country
All I’m going to say is leave the old steine as it is but for heavens sake just resurface the roads and more desperately castle square up to the mini roundabout! Been like that for years!
Come on, get on with it. We demand more pedestrian spaces and safer roads to cycle on.
Sounds great until you realise thus plan is costing the local taxpayer almost 8 million and that is on top of the LEP grant. We need to be doing better in tough financial times
We need safer and more sustainable roads to ensure we have a future.
Delaybour council at it again..