An eight-month review of changes to the roads around the Old Steine has resulted in minor tweaks to the approved scheme and will still include scrapping the Aquarium roundabout, Labour said today.
The final phase of the Valley Gardens scheme, which has already seen roads reworked from The Level to Victoria Gardens, was paused at the eleventh hour after Labour won a majority in last May’s elections.
Today, it was announced minor changes will be made, mostly to give buses more space at bus stops. Finer details of the new scheme have not yet been made available.
However it appears the scheme, which also includes the creation of a new square, will now go ahead largely unchanged, with a contractor appointed in a process expected to take six months. The buiding work itself is expected to take 18 months.
It’s not clear yet whether the cost of the scheme has changed, or whether any elements have had to be scrapped to keep it within budget as building costs have continued to rise since May.
Chair of the Transport and Sustainability Committee, Councillor Trevor Muten said: “We have always been committed to delivering the final phase of the Valley Gardens improvements but had a 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.
“Given some of the ill-thought out transport schemes under the last Green administration, including the proposed Low Traffic Neighbourhood, we decided to review all transport schemes and are now satisfied that the Phase 3 design is the best possible for the city.
“It was a Labour-led administration that approved the initial design in 2018 and that secured funding for the project.
“We now have a final design which will enhance safer active travel, provide an improved transport system, and a fantastic public amenity in the heart of the city for residents and visitors. I am proud that it will be this Labour administration that delivers it.”
However, the result was met with bafflement and frustration from leader of the Green group Steve Davis, who said: “After months of silence, prevarication, and indecision from the Labour Council, it’s a relief to learn that the essential transport and public realm project, Valley Gardens Phase 3, will still go ahead as agreed under the previous Green minority council.
“The final design was approved – including by Labour Councillors at committee – in March 2023, so a tender exercise could have been carried out months ago.
“Labour must provide a better explanation for why they have seen fit to delay vital road safety improvements in the city centre. Given inflation, and with construction and building costs continuing to rise, we will keep pushing for a breakdown of the financial implications of Labour’s unnecessary delay to this shovel-ready project.”
A huge mis step by this administration. It will be very interesting to see what this now costs the local taxpayer. Initially it was about £1 million but recent estimates were around £8 million. If this is the case many will question Labour’s future cries of poverty when so much is being spent here and cheaper alternatives could of been enacted.
A cyclist “coming from the noth” “lots of mobility scooters” what are you on about,? Give us a break
Good. The roundabout is disgusting and dangerous. I think the government should send a plane over to bomb it.
Laura K
Nothing dangerous about the roundabout, never has been.
Pretty standard roundabout Laura. What an odd thing to say.
This is excellent news and long overdue. Valley Gardens 2 is wonderful but ends abruptly meaning we have to cross several lanes of traffic to get to the seafront. The roundabout is a horrible piece of infra that’s cuts off the histori town from the seafront, much better to reclaim the space for people and park land. This will be a great improvement.
You do realise you’ll still have to cross a busy road to get to the seafront? But now they’ll be 5x as much traffic and pollution caused by the traffic lights!
But on all the mock-up pictures of this there is hardly any traffic at all. This will clearly fix all the traffic problems by magic.
Valley Gardens 2 is what ?
VG2 looks like a war zone, no toilets, no bins, dangerous lay out.
You will still have to cross several lanes of traffic to get to the seafront with or without the roundabout doh.
If you make it sound like a lack of toilets is akin to war-like conditions, god forbid you go camping!
Benjamin
Come on, you know exactly what I’m on about.
The area is supposed to be somewhere pleasant for people to spend their leisure time. You know very well the area was ruined by various events hence my comment about a war zone.
There are no toilets either and very few rubbish bins.
You’re right, I was being facetious last night; I thought you were being quite dramaturgic with your description of Valley Gardens. I respectfully disagree with your assessment of the area. The area has been repaired several times after events, and is often used by people to spend their leisure time, although considering how cold it’s been this week, not so much at the moment!
Ben, (No Reply button)
I was over the top with my description so guilty as charged.
I’m aware it was repaired and yes it looks okay and yes of course some people do use it for the purpose it was designed for, but in my opinion, not in great numbers that justifies the expense and the additional congestion the road layout has caused at St Peters place.
I’ve no problem with making an area more pleasant for the benefit of us all but toilets and bins would have made it a bit more user friendly and we could argue traffic congestion has been increased needlessly.
If i am cycling from from the north, the bike lane stops, abruptly and then I have to dismount and cross the road to re-join the carriageway. The new layout will mean the cycleway (which is also used by a lot of people on mobility scooters) will continue to the seafront and that is why the project needs to be completed.
A cyclist “coming from the noth” “lots of mobility scooters” what are you on about,? Give us a break
What he means is the completion of the project aims to provide a continuous and safer route for cyclists and mobility scooter users, ensuring that they can travel from the north to the seafront without disruptions in the bike lane.
When you say lots I assume you mean 1 or 2
I agree that it is dumb that the current bike lane comes to a sudden halt. But the objection to this new scheme is that there is no reason to direct the next section of the north/south Valley Gardens bike route straight at the Palace Pier Junction – which is the already the busiest for cross-city motorised traffic.
This VG3 design seems to assume every cyclist wants to head to the Palace Pier or to Madeira Drive, when in fact we cyclists may have many other city centre or seafront destinations.
So why create this new combined bottle neck for bikes, cars, buses, taxis, and pedestrians? This doesn’t need to be the case, and is an obvious act of self harm for all visitors, shoppers, tradespeople, and for commuters in the city.
I get the idea that the new Labour-run council know this is a mistake, but that current budget limitations don’t allow them to backtrack on the VG3 design at this late stage.
The only change Labour have brought in seems to be some lay-bys for the bus stops, which at least mean the traffic continues to flow when the buses stop to take on passengers.
This seems to be a minor change from the ‘fake green’ approach – where the ousted Greens seemed determined to slow all city traffic to a standstill, regardless of the frustration caused to residents or of the economic consequences.
It’s also important to remember that most people don’t cycle when it’s windy or raining, or when it’s winter, or at night time. (So that’s most of the time then, if we are being honest.) The new design also fails to take on board the trend towards electric bikes, and the increased use of electric scooters.
If we then look at a pragmatic allocation of limited but shared road space, then I personally be more in favour of faster bus routes and extra bus lanes. That would be the least selfish option.
This new VG3 design is much more of a fudge, over influenced by pressure groups already operating within the council blinkered bubble.
Big institutions continue double down on dogma, and to make these sort of determined mistakes – just like we’ve seen in the 20-year Post Office scandal.
So basically cyclists are second class road system users? Where would you like to route them to?
Ivan Pope
Yes second rate behind pedestrians, so get in line and accept you can’t have everything you want, learn to share.
£6 million from a grant and £6.84 million from the local taxpayer. If Labour claim they cannot balance a budget next year this is going to look like a very, very poor decision.
The roundabout works brilliantly. This is very disappointing. What a waste of money, wherever the money is coming from.
I think its ridiculous to scrap the roundabout at an astonishing cost,and the length of time its going to take plus the fact history tells us it will go over budget as did the town hall ( hove) under Mr morgan( any relation to the PIRATE,,blackbeard,, who plundered?? This labour council has the financial acumen of an omeba ,not hardly a brain cell among them,I can only hope they have thought out a plan for emergency services such as ambulances that have to take the best route to the Sussex county hospital from outside to the west of the region, and us STUPID COUNCIL TAX PAYERS WILL BE ASKED TO STUMP UP FOR IT, £ MILLIONS OF POUNDS ,WOULD BE BETTER SPENT ON SOCIAL CARE, AND ACCOMMODATION, OOPS
Must point out that Captain Sir Henry Morgan was not Blackbeard, that was Edward Teach.
I love that is the bit you want to challenge him on.
It’s funny, though
Judging by the Conservatives bringing the country to its’ knees, they seem like experts!
Anyone know what an omeba is? I think I want one.
Brilliant news. That whole area is an absolute skid mark on this city. It’s an embarrassment.
Yes, there will be the dinosaurs and gobshitey van men who think it’s their god given right to barge their way around cities in stinking ill kept Transits at the expense of everyone else, but that will pass. They’ll get used to it (or die off) eventually, new routes will be made and business will carry on perfectly well thank you very much and the world will not fall off it’s axis.
People will look back in 10-15 years time and point and laugh at old pictures of ‘the roundabout’ and shake their heads that people ever thought it was a good thing.
People are rightly reclaiming cities and their spaces for y’know – people. The car had a good turn, but now it’s our turn again.
And I yes, I drive.
And walk, and cycle, and get the bus.
It really is that simple.
Those gobshitey men and women are the ones bringing your goods and groceries you order to your door!
You mean the ones who pick up everything from depots north of the A27 and then have a choice of routes into east or west Brighton that go nowhere near the seafront roundabout?
Wow, glad you know the daily routines of every single delivery.
I wasn’t aware delivery vehicle drivers had a choice, I thought they followed programmed delivery routes and times, but maybe I was wrong.
“New routes will be made”.
How do I get from Kemptown to Hove? Which route do you advise?
As an electrician I already have to charge more to Brighton residents due to the mess caused by the parking. This will make it very hard to get to jobs across town if the coast road is turned into a stationary mess of traffic.
Which you claim off your tax bill as expenses.
Benjamin
The point here is he charging the likes of you and me more.
…unnecessarily, since those expenses he claims are still offset by allowable expenses whilst using the same reasoning to justify charging more to his customers. Respectfully, the scenario he poses increases his profits.
The point is it will take a lot longer to get to a location and I’ll have to go through more traffic congested part of town. Taking longer to get to a job means I can cover less people in the day. Or just pick a job elsewhere. The hassle of taking a job within the city is frustrating. The council does not seem to want to help local tradespeople like myself. Just more and more steps to make the job harder and push up costs. Costs I have to pass on to the clients.
As to the odd accusations – I am none of those people you claim I am. I’m just a guy trying to earn a living by fixing your problems.
Benjamin
It’s not a profit, if he’s paid £5.00 that’s -£5.00 before he starts. Not rocket science, thought you were a bit more savvy than this.
Not really how tax works if talking personal income tax.
Not sure you quite understand how self employment works, or how charges increase as obstacles are put in the way of everyday business. The ‘scenario’ does not increase his profits, it increases his charges, which makes his business less competitive. It also increases the costs that you will pay if you need his services.
Are you that Kemptown electrician who regularly drives along St George’s road at about 40mph and gives the finger to any of us residents who have the gall to protest at you?
Might be the Vauxhall 4×4 which regularly used to do 50-60mph up Elm Grove at 6am. Might have been stopped by now though. Such an idiot that guy
I am quite sure that like the Greens, they’re determined to cause as much congestion as possible so as to have yet another excuse of bringing in more lovely jubbly extra taxes by clibbering the motorist (as per usual) as (thanks to the Conservative Party), there’s no money left in the kitty for councils to keep services running, when we’re paying the highest level of taxation EVER, with absolutely nothing to show for it, except clobbering the motorist being the only way left now for raising the funds needed to stay solvent as the Conservative Government has cash starved them for approaching years!
Excellent news, the changes are much needed, I look forward to being able to cycle safely all the way to the seafront.
Great news. Really happy to hear this.
Happy that this scheme will induce more congestion and pollution as BHCC have already admitted. Wow.
If it doesn’t dissuade people from driving, then I’ll happily vote for a ULEZ scheme.
Anon
It won’t dissuade people from driving, it’s a main coastal route where there’s limited alternatives available for people’s travel needs.
I have no doubt you’d vote for a ULEZ, another ‘green’ voter I guess.
They should use that money instead for resurfacing our dreadful roads!
Is someone paying these councillors (any party!) to bankrupt the city? Because it sure looks like it. Coming up with different schemes to splash enormous amounts of money (some even borrowed) for no really good reason.
There is a reason why that roundabout is there. It allows traffic to flow in the most efficient way. But I guess a traffic light system is much better because a red light is much safer to ignore for a cyclist/pedestrian than actual physical traffic…
There are already traffic lights both sides of the roundabout, not sure what difference traffic lights are going to make to traffic lights?
Ivan
Actually there’s a set of pedestrian controlled lights at every exit road, so what difference would standard lights make.
The key word here is ‘pedestrian controlled’, they stay green until activated, allowing the traffic to continue their journeys. Standard lights will be stop traffic and delay progress and cause congestion at this very busy main through route.
Dunno if you noticed but already traffic stops traffic, plus the existing traffic lights cause traffic to back up. But pedestrians have to go the long way around to get to lights on either side of the roundabout. I’m sure a traffic light controlled junction can work perfectly.
The bit you’ve failed to understand is that the current arrangement allows the traffic to keep flowing around the roundabout while the off-set pedestrian lights only stop one feed of traffic onto the junction. These current set-back crossings allow the traffic to continue to flow around the roundabout itself, by simply staggering the pedestrian crossing demand.
Under the new arrangement, all traffic stops when pedestrians use any one of the crossings, or indeed for just one pedestrian, so the new junction inevitably slows traffic flow and at peak times creates an unnecessary traffic gridlock.
It’s unfortunate that your reply after my earlier comment wouldn’t allow me to respond there, so I’ll add that reply here: I certainly do not think of cyclists as ‘second class’, as I am one myself.
I’d simply suggest the Valley Gardens cycle lane should arrive at the seafront away from the main Palace Pier junction, either via Pool Valley or East Street, and that’s the safer and cleaner air option, keeping cyclists away from the motorised traffic. Once on the seafront there is already an east/west cycle route, giving access to various sections of the beach or seafront businesses.
My comment was really about creating a sensible road layout that works for all forms of transport and for pedestrians, and which keeps commuter traffic and public transport moving – like we see in all grown up cities.
The seafront A259 is the last cross city route for vehicles – in my case for the van I use to transport the five 20kg tool boxes I need for work. I live in Hove and frequently work in Kemp town and sometimes it feels like the council are erecting a ‘Berlin Wall’ between the east and west sides of the city.
You say ‘Under the new arrangement, all traffic stops when pedestrians use any one of the crossings, or indeed for just one pedestrian’ but you don’t know that is true and it seems most unlikely. Show me a traffic light that stops the moment a pedestrian presses the button? I’m sure the lights will be programmed to keep traffic flowing as far as possible and cyclists will be waiting along with everyone else when the lights are not in their favour.
As for your other point about a different route to the seafront, sure, I don’t mind, but how would cyclists cross the road there? By traffic lights?
Ivan,
I’m not sure if you’ve noticed, Pedestrians don’t usually cross the road using the roundabout, they use the official crossings. I can’t imagine, that when the roundabout has gone, people with use the T Junction to cross the road, be safer in my opinion to use the official crossing as they do now.
To use crossings as a reason to remove a roundabout is a very lame and weak minded one when the scene will mean exactly the same where crossings are concerned.
Must try harder.
What a stupid decision, glad i did not vote for them or the greens! Somehow they claim to listen (which the greens did not) but obviously don’t care about voters. This is a huge waste of money that will just make brighton less attractive and drive tourists away. As others have said there will be some major questions if this council claims they are under funded when they can afford such an expensive white elephant. Once the damage is done it will be too expensive to put right and there are no viable alternative routes – yet another nail in the coffin for Brighton. Shows labour and greens are all the same 🙁
Drive tourists away? This makes the seafront more pleasant and accessible for people wandering around the city. Most of the time that tourists spend here they are on foot.
Traffic lights will mean huge tailbacks and pollution.
Tailbacks equal stationary traffic which equal fines for running your engine, and having the affront to sit in your evil car in the first place……🤣
David Philpot.
The law states unless waiting in a queue of traffic.
But I wouldn’t be surprised if the dim CEO think every one is parked.
There are already two sets of traffic lights, one either side of the roundabout. What difference will traffic lights make?
I am beyond caring about the negative effect on commerce and tourism. However where is the cash coming from ? All we hear is hard luck stories and finger pointing in either direction, and hints of section 114 notices (bankruptcy) .
This project will have a great impact on tourism and the local economy – it will give us a world class public space linking the pavilion estate to the seafront, will create easier and more inviting pedestrian access from the Lanes to St James St and will boost the St James St economy by placing a fine new public park and visitor attraction on its doorstep, rather than the chaotic traffic canyon we currently need to negotiate.
Wholly a good thing for the city.
It will give us a world class space filled with nose to tail traffic that will be queuing back to the church. You can’t just hope all the cars will disappear. To get from the Laines to St James Street you’ll need to cross the road. Just now there will be an increase of fumes as cars will be stuck at the lights.
But then you would already have had to walk down North Street, full of buses that are stuck in queues because they can’t pull in at bus stops after the Greens redesigned that section to make it some of the most polluted road in the country. The fun of “progress”.
That was a bit too sensible for the comments section of a Brighton newspaper but of course, you are correct. The majority of people in this city are decent, open minded and clever enough to know that bike lanes do not cause pollution and local businesses will not collapse if the local environment is made more pleasant for people on foot. Most decent people do not comment in these papers so a visitor to the city reading theses comments could be forgiven for thinking that Brighton is populated by reactionary, motor obsessed reactionaries who see the world only through the lens of driving and think that congestion is caused by a tiny amount of bike lanes and is nothing to do with the huge increase in number and size of motor vehicles. Valley gardens is funded by the local Enterprise partnership and the improvement’s to date are wonderful but are meaningless unless the project is finished. Why the administration delayed for eight months is beyond me but at least it is happening.
Someone pass me a bucket, your smug elitism is making me feel ickky
M,
Most thinkers, know that the many road and parking restrictions put in place have caused congestion in many parts of the city, if or not cycle lanes have been installed is irrelevant it’s the loss of road space with the same amount of traffic that is part of the problem.
Those who care about the city and want to make changes will make every effort to make their views and opinions known, highlighting the various problems and pointing out various flaws.
You dribble on yet fail to come up with alternatives that would work for the majority.
You waffle on about congestion and pollution and want it reduced, yet you want to support a scheme that will increase it.
The fund lenders and the DfT have already quoted this scheme as being poor value for money with no benefits and BHCC have already told us will cause delays.
VG2 has done nothing to reduce congestion or pollution, it has increased risks, and delayed buses even more, making them unattractive and people revert to their car.
Why was there a delay, one would have thought that was obvious. In every single project tabled by the ‘greens’, the scheme needed additional works to make them work a bit better. That’s the trouble with some people, lets get it done yesterday and worry about the problems they will cause afterwards.
Labour have made a few tweaks here and there.
Who in their right mind puts a cycle lane through a tree, well the ‘greens’ as it happened if you saw the shambles of their plan.
I guess, Labour have some people with brains who checked the plans for any more brain dead and obvious mistakes.
Where do you get the evidence that it will improve the Tourist economy/ Brighton’s very own Tourism Alliance which includes the Pier, Aquarium, hotels etc are all against the scheme because they like the consultants beleive the removal of the roundabout will impact traffic flow greatly, (especially from the east of the city). You can have a great open space, you can run a cycle lane to the seafront via Pool Valley, (now not used) and still retain the roundabout, (even designing a safer one like Seven Dials). Labour took 8 months to do NOTHING when they could have improved this plan. £6.84 million from the local taxpayer is a poor look when you are pleading poverty and this does not feel like a priority.
The Tourist alliance is wrong o this. They are not the voice of the city, they represent a handful of big corporations seeking to maximise their profit regardless of their impact on neighbours.
This thing about traffic flow you mention – just not true. This claim cherry picks from the reports and offered out of context distortion.
Do you really think that our prime tourist spaces should be dominated by chaotic motor traffic? This view is out of step with reality – look at successful cities across the world and see how exactly this approach of taming and restricting private car use is saving their historic centres and tourist economies.
Yes – this scheme will still need to cope with congestion, but the traffic chaos will be calmed and pedestrians and cyclist will have alternatives and not be forced to negotiate the noise and danger it presents.
Conan the Fruitarian
The various tourists boards have expert knowledge of the trends in this city. They have the numbers at hand whereas you have no expertise in the field. Quite ironic that this City experienced in the region of 11m visitors per year yet ‘Green’ traffic improvement schemes have seen tourist numbers and visits to attractions dropping off rapid to around 9m pre covid.
Do you think, providing better transport networks that are cheap, reliable and work for the majority would be a start.
This scheme will only make the situation worse, like it has at VG2, have you seen the chaos at St Peter’s place where every converges, improved, my back side.
The Tourism Alliance is wrong? What is your evidence to support this? Venues like the Pier, Aquarium and many Hotels have been on the seafront for over a century being succesful and viable and have a wealth of knowledge. How will removing the roundabout improve traffic flow? How will it make travel from the east easier? I wouldn’t call the current system chaotic. It works. Could you make the crossings better – of course. Could you make the roundabout safer – of course. But removing it for a junction makes little sense when 50,000 journies a day will be potentially impacted.
The roundabout could be aesthetically improved, but the concept works!
Next week Labour will be complaining about a shortfall in the budget. We will remember squandering taxpayers monies on a vanity project.
The concept of a roundabout? Is that really the level you want to pitch at? I thought you were better than that, especially since you usually produce some excellent insights. You do yourself a disservice with ad hominems.
I have been taking elderly and disabled people from Hove to the RoyalSussex for over 10 years
1st the cycle lane causing idling stationery traffic to belch noxious fumes into the lungs of the few cyclists using it . Now traffic lights and more idling vehicles, more noxious fumes
I told a Green Party rep that I would not vote Green I agree with their aims but they don’t use their common sense
Now we have Labour wasting taxpayers money without using their common sense
Don’t even get.me started on the I360
This is bizarre.
Only a few short months ago our Labour administration attracted widespread praise for suspending this vanity project none of us asked for, spaffing £13m of public money, only £7.8m of which came from central government – the remainder to come from US.
Now they announce they are going ahead with VG3???
You’d have thought they’d have at least waited until the South Portslade by-election was over before announcing.
Why are Labour committing political suicide like this?
What happened to the council bankruptsy threat and how can VG3 be more important than running our city and keeping community schools open? Many parents would welcome smaller class sizes for a while but BHCC went straight for the nuclear option with no site visits and no meaningful consultation or consent.
You’re straw-manning I’m afraid Barry, this was always a suspension of VG3, not a cancellation of the project. This is why it is important to have a clear understanding of the situation before accidentally creating misrepresentations.
I often cycle and walk into the city, plus I’m a regular bus user, but I also have to use a van for work, and with all those hats on I think this is a stupid scheme.
I look forward to the area being remodelled, but see no reason why new cycle lanes and pedestrian routes have to be directed straight at the busiest road junction in the city. This creates a stressful pinch point junction which actually benefits nobody.
The seafront A259 is the last remaining vehicle route across the city, and removing the roundabout is the dumbest idea when no alternative route is being provided for essential traffic.
This new junction will create an obvious log jam of traffic in the city centre, slowing up all public transport even further. This will be like running a bath in your refurbished bathroom, but with the plughole glued shut.
We know there’s no money for proper transport solutions – like a cross city tram route – but why is there no seafront bus service, running from Hove Lagoon to Brighton Marina? And if we want to reduce private cars coming into the city, then where are the park and ride schemes?
The voice of reason. There are so many options better than ramming everyone down this narrow funnel. Park and ride. Trams. Bloody horse and cart . Anything. Anyway, it’s deserted except for a few months in the spring and summer. Not useful for the people who actually live here
I will add that hopefully this will also prompt them to initiate or re route one two buses so that there is a direct run from east to west.
I must admit that it’s always baffled me as to why there is not even one route that does this. The trawl through town and particularly the Churchill Sq stop is ball achingly tedious when you just want to get to either Hove or Kemptown.
Most people don’t want to go all the way Hove-Kemptown. Routes go through town to pick up and drop off passengers. It really is that simple. Even the established routes (say the 5 or the 49) would be unprofitable if the bus magically skipped the town centre somehow.
There’s also the issue that North Street is overcrowded and too narrow for buses to safely pass one another, so routes are getting clipped at the Steine. Remember when the 25 used to go all the way to Palmeira?
Chipnicker
On the contrary, I remember operating a Seafront service from Brighton Marina all the way to King Alfred, it was a a 8 or 17 if I remember correctly but I also recall there being a 24 East Sussex tour that all served Pier To King Alfred and were never well used and withdrawn. And the 700 used to follow the direct route along the front until diverted up Grand Avenue, again lack of use part of the reason. It boils down to the saying, ‘use it or lose it’.
Note that, since those days, the seafront businesses have multiplied and now have a year-round trading calendar.
Any seafront bus time table, could also be adjusted to respond to seasonal or daily demand.
The current bus network seems to assume everyone is heading to or from Churchill square – a place I personally haven’t shopped in for ten years.
Billy+Short
B&H I note have sent their City Sight Seeing bus along that way, think it turns just before the KA, a source informs me it isn’t that popular.
B&H also have a 77 that runs along to Preston Street
A special service 7i or something ran down from the Station to the i360 but again withdrawn for lack of use.
Well, wherever happens pedestrians will, as usual, come out bottom. The pavements will still be race tracks for pedal/e-cyclists e-scooter riders; we’ll still be walking next to long lines of slowly moving/stuck traffic breathing in fumes (I like the absence of the huge tailback that this scheme will certainly engender in the artists impression) and, apparently, there will be no shelter from the elements whilst waiting for a bus!
There are no bike lanes in this picture.
Right behind the buses. With a bit of pause and it appears again just as you would ride north and leave the picture to the right.
So the bike lane is off the road to the right of the road? This connects directly to the current bike lanes along the Level? And are we looking down towards the war memorial and the pier? (I’m a bit confused!).
Ivan,
The current lane connects the level and VG in theory. It will continue from VG on the path in front of the Pavilion all the way to the seafront, nothing confusing about that.
Sure, it’s me that’s confused, not the cycle lane!
Ivan
To be honest, I’m not surprise you’re confused.