Back To The Drawing Board For Hove Seafront Cycle Lane Plans

Councillors have backed calling a halt to work on a new cycle lane on Hove seafront even though opposition councillors raised concerns about funding.

Greens and Conservatives voted against the pause and wanted the proposed cycle lane plans kept as they are.

The reviewed scheme between Fourth Avenue and Hove Lagoon will cost more money, according to an official report, with the proposals described by the opposition as “champagne dreams on light ale money”.

Detailed proposals did not go before a special meeting of Brighton and Hove City Council’s Transport and Sustainability Committee at Hove Town Hall today (Wednesday 21 June).

Instead, the committee was asked to consider a review for a potential redesign of the scheme with a “bi-directional” cycle lane which would keep two lanes of motor traffic in both directions along the A259.

The proposals would also keep the cycle lane going straight along Kingsway rather than loopping behind the King Alfred.

Labour councillor Trevor Muten, who chairs the committee, said that it was necessary to call the meeting at short notice to prevent the council from losing money by keeping contractors “on hold”.

After concerns raised by campaigners before the meeting, Councillor Muten said that Labour councillors wanted to get the cycle lane right first time rather than spend more money making adjustments in the future.

Councillor Muten said:

“I want to reassure those people who are fearful that we’re going to scrap this (cycle lane) by this move, that is not our intention.

“Councillor Sankey, the leader of the Labour group, is absolutely committed to this. She is passionate to see it delivered, as I am. The reason we want to take this back to review is we want it better.

“We want a win-win-win for cyclists, pedestrians and drivers to use that space in the best possible way. We are not interested in doing less.

“That is my concern about the existing scheme. Why accept less when you can deliver better.”

Green councillor Steve Davis, a former chair of the old Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee, was concerned about the lack of public input before the meeting.

The report to councillors was made public less than 24 hours before the meeting.

Councillor Davis was responsible for steering the project when the Greens led the council and said that he was conscious of the increased cost of a “bi-directional cycle lane”. It was previously ruled out as too expensive.

Councillor Davis said:

“I will challenge you (Labour) on your mandate to do this because it wasn’t in your manifesto. This has severe financial ramifications for the city.

“We were in a minority administration. Your party had just as much input into the planning, consultation and design of this as we did.

“I don’t want this to fail. I want safe cycling infrastructure for the city. But it feels at the moment you have champagne dreams and light ale money. We do not have the money to fund this.”

Councillor Davis was also concerned that any changes made to the scheme would put government funding at risk. The council lost more than £300,000 in Active Travel Fund money after the Old Shoreham Road cycle lane was removed, he said.

Conservative councillor Samer Bagaeen questioned whether it was worth risking millions of pounds for a bi-directional cycle lane which is “not absolutely essential” when Labour had expressed concerns about budget overspending.

He said:

“When Labour first put forward a seafront cycle lane, it went all the way through to the Sea Life roundabout and that changed with an additional cost.

“When we agreed on the final TRO (traffic regulation order) for Madeira Drive, that had changed and additional costs were incurred.

“The existing seafront lane outside the Holiday Inn had additional turning points put into it when it was agreed in the final report.

“All these cycle lanes that have come in have been subject to some tweaking or another. They are not set in stone.”

Councillors were told that the cost of ending the current contracts had not been finalised but could be negotiated because the contractor had a “framework agreement” with the council and was its principal contractor.

Labour councillor Birgit Miller said that all councillors were blamed when they were seen to be wasting money.

She said:

“All parties would be crucified, not just Labour and the Greens, if we go ahead with a scheme that is not sustainable and needs to be changed and amended in less than 10 years.

“We’re still being criticised as a council for having okayed the i360 (loan) on the doorstep – and that wasn’t Labour councillors.”

The eight Labour members of the committee voted for the pause and a review. Councillors Bagaeen and Davis voted against and for the A259 cycle line to progress as it is.

The report will also go to a meeting of the full council for debate and noting on Thursday 20 July.