Money earmarked for the final phase of the Valley Gardens project should go towards road maintenance and community services instead, according to two independent councillors.
The Brighton and Hove Independents plan to include their suggestion in an amendment to the council’s budget which is due to be set by councillors tomorrow (Thursday 22 February).
Independent councillor Bridget Fishleigh said that the scheme relied on £5 million of borrowing and that money would be better spent on community services which face cuts.
The £13 million Valley Gardens Phase 3 scheme is also being funded with £6 million from the government through the Coast to Capital (C2C) Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and £1.8 million from the council’s capital budget.
Councillor Fishleigh wants the scheme – sometimes known as VG3 – to be completed using just the £6 million government funding, with the council’s £1.8 million to be spent on road maintenance and filling potholes.
She said: “I understand why provision for cyclists, like myself, should be integral to improving the city centre.
“The area can be difficult to navigate by bike and, yes, it needs a spruce up – but not at the cost of destroying livelihoods, baking in increased congestion and increasing risks for pedestrians.
“My house also needs redecorating – but I’m not going to knock it down and rebuild it to a rubbish plan just because someone offers to pay half of the cost.
“Some facts about this scheme that need to be on the record, for the public to understand and remember for the future.
“The council’s own external transport consultants have said that VG3 will increase congestion and pollution.
“The bus company and BusWatch user group have said that it will delay and lengthen bus journeys.”
Councillor Fishleigh quoted BusWatch saying that Valley Gardens Phase 3 is “the worst possible scheme for buses and both current and potential passengers in Brighton for half a century”.
The council’s chief finance officer Nigel Manvell said: “The proposal to stop the existing design of Valley Gardens Phase 3 would result in a ‘funding withdrawal notice’ and the potential return £6 million ‘Local Growth Funding’ received from C2C LEP with no assurance this funding would be reallocated to a revised scheme.
“However, the LEP has indicated informally to third parties that it is open to negotiations as it recognises that building costs have escalated and travel patterns changed.”
The £5 million would not be borrowed without the scheme saving the council money in the long term.
The annual budget council meeting is due to start at 4.30pm tomorrow (Thursday 22 February) at Hove Town Hall. The meeting is scheduled to be webcast on the council’s website.
The £5m borrowing cant be spent on providing council services
Incorrect. The Council are constantly moving money around and calling it ‘recoding’. I know a former council accounts manager who tells me it was daily practice and was done across all departments to balance the books.
That’s cash management Barry which isn’t the same as revenue and capital budgets.
Spot on Cllr Fishleigh. How is it not a health and safety requirement to prioritise basic road repairs which could cause accidents and deaths – especially to ‘vulnerable’ cyclists? No one wants VG3 except some rogue council officers in the pockets of sustrans and bricycles who need to be sacked if they think it is their job to impose economy-wrecking, anti-resident, ideology by trying to force us to have what we don’t want and will wreck our livelihoods.
Yet votes in council committee and full council meetings show its councillors taking the decisions on this.
very good.
Bridgette once again showing that she doesn’t really understand council budgets. Perhaps she could organise the underused Saltdean Lido paying back the £2.5 mil BHCC spent on its refurbishment
Wrong. The article clearly says that Cllr fishleigh wants the £5m to not be borrowed for VG3 saving the council £££ in interest.
She always brings out her back of a fag packet budget this time of year thank goodness there’s only one of her and she can be easily ignored.
Hmm, people who don’t know what they are talking about. Saltdean Lido underused? It hasn’t even opened to the public yet, renovations will be completed very shortly.
its open every weekend in the winter
If you look at how much was invested and compare with visitor numbers then it doesn’t look like a good investment.
Why, in the name of God, has cllr Muten pushed this thru when he knows it will cost the local taxpayer AND the scheme will cause more congestion and pollution, as reported by the Council’s own consultants?
The answer to your question is he doesn’t give a damn, It’s not his money.
You shovel the money around – it’s been done many times before. So, for example, if something is a government grant that has to be spent on a specific project, you take the chunk of money that isn’t the grant and use it elsewhere.
Thanks for the story, Sarah and B&H News. Just a quick comment. Our amendment had to be approved as workable by BHCC’s CFO. This is what we are proposing:
1. Stop the implementation of the current design of Valley Gardens phase 3 and work with the C2C LEP Investment Committee, or its successor body, with the aim of achieving a scheme design that can be delivered with the £6 million grant from the LEP only.
2. Redirect the £1.813m planned resources dedicated to this scheme from the Local Transport Plan Grant, net of repayment of expended Local Growth Fund Grant, to maintaining existing roads and filling potholes.
3. Redirect the planned financing costs of the £5 million borrowing earmarked to support this scheme from 2025/26 onwards to help fund vital community services that are under threat.
4. Redirect the £20,000 S106 contribution to a project near the development from which this money was derived.
Very sensible! Why has Muten decided to burden the taxpayer and implement a scheme that the Council’s own advisors say will cause congestion and pollution,when he is quoted as saying he wants to keep city traffic moving?
Beats me. I can only assume that a few key players are emotionally invested in this to the point that they are blind to reason.
I hope that we can budget the cost of reversing this at a later date when sense prevails.
That’ll be the head of the transport department, Mark Prior
Yes the rumours are swirlling that Mark and his transport team will not let this go and effectively lent on Labour to push this through saying it will affect future funding etc etc. Labour should have been brave enough to ask for a better plan and understand the problems the crrent design has.
Yes, well said Bridget and thank you Sarah for this article.
From the ‘use it or lose’ budget argument BHCC/Cllr Muten favours (and from comments under the SBL piece) it looks like the point on consultants findings and the Buswatch quote (“the worst possible scheme for buses and both current and potential passengers in Brighton for half a century”) still wont cut it with proponants of what amounts to a reckless ‘may as well finish what we started’ viewpoint. VG3 is not just the worst scheme in 50 years – we might add that its devastating impact will felt for another 50 as visitors to this once thriving area east of Old Steine are told the story of council hubris and deception, The council knew what would happen but carried on anyway.
This gets my vote A sensible approach 👍
Surely if a £6M initiative was feasible/likely to be effective, that’s what would be on the table. Doing it half-arsed may just mean deferring future costs required to fix the snags.
VG1 & VG2 are working well (though, I’d be inclined to add a yellow hatched box alongside the St Peter’s church).
Crack on cllr Muten!
So called independents, Tories in sheeps clothing.
Here is a thing…
The council’s own study suggests that the overall travel time for general traffic in the morning will be 48s quicker, and in the evening will be 116s slower. For buses this will be 42s quicker, and in the evening will be 68s quicker.
There has been no study on the impact of noise or air pollution (of course). Pedestrian safety will improve (but they don’t say how much by or how) and road safety will get worse (but they don’t say how much by or how).
This is a piece of amateurish nonsense which probably has more secretive contracts with peoples friends…
Spend the money on things that will make a difference! My street is riddled with potholes and we have addicts shooting up and selling crack and meth in doorways…and the police have never responded to any residents complaint in five years.
I know we need to fund some corporate welfare (preferably with companies who avoid taxes) but can we think about residents just a little bit?
Cllr Fishleigh talking sense again. I will look very poor on Labour after spending £7 million on this if a) the finances are worse next financial year and b) the projected worsening congestion occurs.
VG3 is already known as ‘Muten’s Folly’, but it is the bosses in the Transport Dept who are pushing it!
During covid there was a very shortlived bike lane put in on the a259 just to the east of tge aquarium rouabout. This had to be ripped out after about 2 weeks due to the chaos it caused with congestion and delays to the bus network to the east of Brighton. This was at a time when most people were still working from home and car use was much less.
Why has no one learnt from recentived experience.
This will cause no end of headaches for those who live to the east of the pier.
Join Valley Gardens Past Present and Future on Facebook
17 years after it was proposed, 11 years after funding was secured and 7 years after it was due to be completed, here’s councillor Fishleigh with information from Buswatch demanding VG3 be stopped and designed to her specifications.
Have to correct you Jon. Cllr Fishleigh was elected in May 2019 and immediately became a central part of the Valley Gardens Forum (VGF). VGF was formed from local residents, community groups, shopkeepers, cab drivers and varierty of others horrified at the flaw in ‘Phase 3’. Cllr Fishleigh sought answers from transport execs, Labour (and then Green) leaders again and again but answers were continually deflected. Instead BHCC engaged in a misinformation campaign, which propogated the myth of the Palace Pier (aka ‘Aquarium’) roundabout being the city’s ‘most dangerous’ junction.
Processing over 18 million vehicals a year, the roundabout is one of the safest junctions. Certainly it can be improved but replacement with traffic lights will, according to the councils OWN expert traffic consultants, cause unspecified years of congestion. Cllr Fishleigh, as with all the campaigners of VGF, are not new to this subject and have scrutinised it in detail (unlike you Jon).