Construction work on a new £7 million cycle lane scheme between Hove and Portslade is due to start in the autumn.
Brighton and Hove City Council is finalising the design and preparing to put out a tender for a contractor after tweaking some details following the latest consultation stage.
The scheme include a two-way cycle lane, new pavements and bus stops, new crossings, loading bays and disabled parking bays.
The latest changes include retaining the current location of the Tandridge Road bus stop.
The scheme is being paid for with £4.3 million of government funding, and £2.7 million from the council’s transport budget.
Cabinet member for transport Trevor Muten said: “This is a very exciting scheme which will make a huge difference to our seafront and how people travel along it.
“As we did after the public consultation last summer, we’ve listened carefully to the feedback and comments and made changes to ensure the scheme works for everyone.
“I know several residents were keen to keep the Tandridge Road bus stop where it is, and I’m pleased we’ve been able to do just that.
“The A259 Hove to Portslade Active Travel scheme is going to improve roads, pavements, accessibility, crossings, cycle lanes and public spaces in a busy and vibrant part of the city and I’m really looking forward to seeing work begin later this year.”
With the consultation stages now complete, work will continue this month on the final detailed design of the scheme.
The council will then begin the process of selecting a contractor with work likely to begin in the autumn, after the school summer holidays.
Another waste of money, the cycle lane in picture is hardly used
There are cycle number figures for this cycle lane if you care to avail yourself of the facts
Please tell us the number of cyclists that use the cycle tracks that are already in place. You MUST know but tell the enquirer that he must go and wade through council junk until, with a bit of luck, he finds what he is looking for! I wonder, do YOU actually have reliable figures for the numbers of cyclists using the tracks?
Slightly missing the point there Ken. As I’m sure you know, travel infrastructure (for car, bus, train, cycling, walking) is a system that requires connectivity to actually work. You can find numbers that show cycle route A is used xx amount, which is useful, but doesn’t actually explain why a particular element of a system is or isn’t used, or what demand would look like if the network were more complete.
Usage figures for existing, often poorly-connected infrastructure tell you very little about potential demand. London is a good example of this: cycling rates were modest for years, but as the network of properly connected, protected routes has grown, usage has increased dramatically. The infrastructure created the demand, not the other way around. A single cycle lane counted in isolation proves nothing, it’s the system as a whole that determines whether people choose to cycle. You could also look at Paris to see how a system approach has changed how people get around the city. The bottom line is, cars are great for many things, but, for most of us, are a terrible way to get around in a densely populated area. oh and while i’m here, the cost is £7m with £4m from central govt and £3m from local govt. we spend (I think) about £13billion on road in the uk, so in the great scheme of things, £7m is not excessive.
Link please for current, historic, and predicted number of cyclists on the A259?
what does ‘hardly’ mean? there are many road around me that are ‘hardly’ used, so i guess they are wasted money too?
iTs A WaSte of MoNey!!!
Very little money compared with the billions spent on roads
This was mocking of the kind of thing we see on good news like this from the car brained folks. This is as solid an investment as you can get.
Depends on the cost impact for any additional congestion and emissions from removing one lane in each direction, versus however many cyclists will actually use the route – especially in the winter months when they return to their nice warm cars.
Brings back memories of OSR cycle lane extension where only about 1% of the traffic was cyclists but they were allocated 50% of the road causing massive congestion and motorists diverting to other, longer routes, and local businesses lost custom.
When it was, thankfully, removed, normality was restored.
Obsessed cycling activist solution – tell motorists to get bikes 🙄
I hope they will also look at making some improvements for cycling on the connecting links to get onto the new cycle lane i.e at the Portslade end. I mean Station/ Boundary Rd is quite unsafe for cycling. Cycle infrastucture has to be a joined up network to get people cycling.
Well maybe cyclists should start paying for it then. They should also be registered and have mandatory insurance, lights and minimum visibility levels.
We do pay. It’s called tax.
Which car drivers contribute too.
So do motorists but they have to pay extra tax to use the roads! (and insurance)
Perhaps this will lead to enforcement action on the cyclists who use the promenade as a race track?
Now focus on the old Shoreham road. It’s as used as the seafront for commuters!
They tried that and it was a disaster.
Wasn’t a success last time with all the congestion, emissions, and impact on local businesses with few cyclists using the route.
New Church Road is flatter and links popular destinations. If the A259 really works there is no reason to repeat this mistake on a major trunk road off the A27 into Brighton and Hove.
I hope the disabled bays are going to be better thought out than the ones on Kingsway were. Getting out of a car there *right into the sodding bike lane* is an absolute nightmare for people with disabilities. The council have flat out ignored complaints from many of us time and time again over the last few years. For a city that prides itself on being so inclusive, we don’t half drop the ball a lot when it comes to accessibility!
Our Labour council’s determination to lose the next local election does them credit. i can’t even think of any cyclists who would prefer cycling on the road to the Promenade in a Seaside resort. What an utter waste of public money to delay ambulances and discriminate against those not lucky enough to have a fully-functioning body.
You don’t speak for ambulance drivers; that road is one of the easiest to blue-light down.
Do you speak for ambulance drivers when claiming it is one of the easiest to blue light? Please reference the data source as this would be the of general interest.
Regardless though, I think you are missing the point. I think more relevant point in this regard is whether this is easier or harder to transit for emergency traffic since the cycle lane was added.
I can speak professionally as someone qualified to drive under blue light conditions, yes. Difficulty aside then, I find it highly unlikely to be delayed by the new layout, rather, removing the roundabout and creating traffic light control points actually reduces the risk when taking exemptions.
This is not really central to the discussion but to follow up:
Ok so as a qualified blue light driver you have an informed perspective which is noted. However, the discussion is not about the removal of a roundabout and replacement with traffic signals, and what that means for emergency vehicles.
The question was about the loss of a westbound carriageway to a cycle lane and whether or not this makes it harder for emergency vehicles to transit. You may consider the impact minimal but I find it extremely unlikely it has improved things as there is clearly more congestion and less space for vehicles to move out the way.
Oh, absolutely, two lanes would be easier for displacement!
Single lane traffic causing long delays, but someone with brains creates yet another cycle lane. Take your time, go down to the seafront and count how many actually use it. Can we ask Labour to close the door on the way out ?
I am a cyclist and a car driver… I dont think the cycle lane should start from the Brighton end in the road until hove lawns as the queues of traffic filtering into one lane is too much.. Its often a stand still with cars and trucks belching out smoke and pollution, theres no traffic flow, it doesn’t work… As a cyclist i know we can cope with sharing both ways on the pavement cycle lane until hove lawns.. As s car driver i am burning fuel stop starting and as a resident of this area i find walking around in this pollution all the time completely unhealthy. It completely defeats the object of clean air.. It makes dangerous polluting congestion…
Great news! This is a heavily used cycle commute route, it will reduce the number of cars on the road leading to less air pollution and less traffic for the remaining road users. Win win 🤗
Except, as illustrated by the cycle lane experiment in OSR, your comments are complete fabrication.
What consultation? I didn’t receive any notification as a resident.
How many residents participated?
What questions were they were asked?
How may voted in favour of the scheme as a result?
It’s not a valid consultation if it didn’t follow the Gunning principles. For me it didn’t as I didn’t even know about it.
Once again, you have not been paying attention since 2022, it seems. There have been multiple.
https://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/city-regeneration/major-developments/king-alfred-development/engagement-and-consultation-king-alfred-development
I think that is a link to a consultation on the King Alfred development not the cycle lanes.
This is the right link – https://yourvoice.brighton-hove.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/a259-hove-to-portslade-active-travel-scheme/1
Whoops, my mistake!
When is some money going to be spent on improving the horrendously cracked and broken pavements that are the norm in Brighton? Yet again the tiny majority receive preference over the majority. In response to some of the questions above I walked along the coast road from Hove lawns to the bottom of West Street this morning and saw less than a dozen cyclists using the double width cycle lane – waste of taxpayer’s money.
I walked along the coast road from Hove lawns to the bottom of West Street on Sunday and saw more than several dozen cyclists using the double-width cycle lane, so therefore, by your logic and my subjective opinion, it’s a good use of taxpayer money?
Please could you come clean on :
1. Who is your employer?
2. What department do you work for?
3. What is your job title?
I’m afraid I do not intend to doxx myself.
Subjectively – from my apartment overlooking the cycle lane I would say it is very lightly utilised. What I don’t really understand is why between Hove lawns to Brighton Grand Hotel the existing cycle way on the pavement isn’t adequate or could not be modified to make it slightly wider if required?
I’d like to see up-to date data on cycle lane usage, I have looked so please share a link if you have it.
I don’t mind using the westbound cycle lane on the street with traffic and ‘dooring’ risks but when cycling with my wife and children they much prefer to be on the eastbound paved section and I agree. And, i am not alone in this, you often see people cycling westbound on the pavement cycle way which is technically one way eastbound, I can only assume this is because it is safer.
I am pro-cycle lanes but also pro local business and the benefits that come with enabling cars and traffic to move freely. In the case of the sea front which is a key arterial route for traffic in and out of the city, and considering the available space on the pavement and promenade, I just don’t think this loss of a carriageway makes sense.
Honestly, I agree with that. The existing cycle lane on the superwide coast road pavement seems more than adequate.
Benjamin’s (franks)“I saw several dozen cyclists on Sunday” reply is peak Brighton debate logic 😂
At this rate we’ll have official transport policy decided by whoever happened to take a stroll that morning.
“I saw 12 cyclists.”
“Well *I* saw 48.”
Case closed then, lads — get the Treasury on the phone.
The funniest bit is acting like one random walk is hard statistical evidence either way. By that standard I once saw three seagulls fighting over chips, so clearly Brighton’s top transport priority should be gull infrastructure.
🤖🤖🤖
Great news. Looking forward to this opening. It’s a pain having to go round the front of King Alfred’s and the lane west of King Alfred’s is far too narrow for cyclists going both ways. Big improvement.
Completely ignorant to the wants of the people which actually live in the city. I can’t imagine a single person has asked for this. Please deal with the rising homelessness, filthy streets and assist with funding local schools, doctors and social projects. A third seafront cycle lane isn’t what the city needs. Painfully ignorant
I use cycles lane daily. Nothing wrong with it. Perhaps fill potholes instead
Millions spent on this scheme doesnt make sense .Millions spent on Valley gardens doesnt make sense.Millions spent on improving all our roads would make perfect sense.Priorities are all wrong.
I love riding my bicycle
I wonder if the company currently doing the slip road extensions along the A27 just past Falmer will get this contract?
They’ve done such a marvellous job there, hardly a hold up or delay at all!😉