Brighton & Hove City Council
Transport & Sustainability Committee
4.00pm6 July 2023
Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall
Minutes
Present: Councillor Muten (Chair) Wilkinson (Deputy Chair), Davis (Opposition Spokesperson), Asaduzzaman, Bagaeen, Galvin, Loughran, Miller, Pumm and Robinson
Other Members present: Councillors
Part One
7 Procedural Business
7(a) Declarations of substitutes
7.1 There were none.
7(b) Declarations of interest
7.2 There were none.
7(c) Exclusion of press and public
7.3 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (“the Act”), the Committee considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the business to be transacted or the nature of proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100(I) of the Act).
7.4 Resolved- That the press and public not be excluded.
8 Minutes
8.1 Resolved- That the minutes of the previous meeting be approved as the correct record.
9 Chairs Communications
9.1 The Chair provided the following communications:
“I wish to welcome all members and officers to the newly formed Transport and Sustainability Committee. The former administration’s Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee was not adequate in meeting the breadth and giving proper attention to the full range of issues affecting our environment. Labour considers our environment as important, requiring two committees to ensure proper focus and scrutiny can be achieved through this committee and the City Environment, South Downs and the Sea Committee.
This committee convened on 21st June at short notice to address the need to review the A259 Fourth Avenue to Wharf Road Active Travel Scheme due to pressing contractual reasons. To remove any doubt, this was to enable a review to better the existing scheme and ensure what is delivered is safer and more accessible for active travellers and disability access along Hove seafront; with improvements for cyclists, walkers, disability access, public transport, emergency and support vehicles and those who need to travel by car or van along this busy Hove seafront route. I wish to thank this committee for supporting this review. Labour is fully committed to active travel and This decision illustrates our determination to deliver a higher standard active travel scheme, better than before. We should not deliver schemes knowing that improvements and amendments will be soon needed.
The electorate of Brighton and Hove made a clear unambiguous choice 2 months ago. This city has put its faith in a party that listens; a party with vision and a party that sets out to restore basic services and deliver sustainable travel for all its residents.
In this light, we recognise the need to ensure that the Valley Gardens Phase 3 scheme delivers for all. The crowded A23 – A259 intersection in front of Palace Pier needs to work for all constituencies with a focus on safety for all who use this junction – especially cyclists, walkers and disability access. The scheme needs to enhance public transport options to ensure throughflow of buses especially effective east – west movement between North Street and A259 east; to enable environmentally considerate routes for taxis and set out to minimise traffic congestion. There are many favourable aspects of the Valley Gardens Phase 3 plan - we need to ensure these are integral whilst being confident that what is delivered works as best practicable for all constituencies.
No transport scheme can be considered without reference to the wider transport strategy. This means a robust connected strategy for public transport, active travel, businesses and residents. This Labour administration is committed to delivering fair, equitable, accessible, low carbon sustainable integrated transport for our city that works for its residents, businesses and visitors. We recognise the urgency of the climate and biodiversity emergency in combination with the cost of living and fuel and housing crises. We must move away from regressive attitudes towards those who need to drive for work, to access services and connect communities across our city. Yes, we need to ensure public transport is accessible, affordable and meets the needs of our city and ensure active travel is attractive and safe encouraging more people to do so. Studies show that regressive “stick“ approach without “carrot” encouragement are counter-productive and proven not to give the gains for active travel. Labour recognises that studies show a combined “carrot and stick” approach to active travel is the best way to ensure uptake. We listen to the experts when it comes to policy development. By implementing real choice for our city’s transport options, we plan to encourage more residents and visitors to chose active travel, bike share, public transport and low carbon options to move around our city. We have a plan to meet the immediate need and to develop our vision that works for the 2030s and beyond.
As we mark 10 years of UNESCO designation of Brighton’s unique world recognised Biosphere; a new sustainable transport strategy that is inclusive and reflects the diversity of our amazing welcoming city is now needed. As Chair of the Transport and Sustainability Committee; I want show leadership in how we treat people. How we refer to each other. How we can respect each other as we choose to move around. As an administration, we want to give people genuine freedom of choice; encouraging and enabling positive environmental, affordable, low carbon, safe and accessible choices to travel safely around our amazing biosphere”.
10 Call Over
11 Public Involvement
(A) Petitions
1) Madeira Terrace Lift Bus Replacement Service
11.1 The Committee considered a petition signed by 294 people requesting the operation of s shuttle bus service to Madeira Terrace whilst the lift was under maintenance.
11.2 The Chair provided the following response:
“Following requests from residents officers have explored the option of running a shuttle bus service on a loop between the top and bottom of the lift through the summer season while the Madeira Terrace lift is out of action. Unfortunately, the additional £80,000 cost of running this service is unbudgeted at a time when resources are already under pressure. Over the summer, Madeira Drive gets extremely busy with traffic and cars looking for parking spaces and manoeuvring into the bays often leads to congestion and delays. This would make any service and journey along Madeira Drive extremely slow and time-consuming.
Officers have also explored the option of a diversion to the existing 52 bus service and are awaiting a response to enquiries from The Big Lemon CIC who operate the service on our behalf, however officers think this option may be problematic as the current service runs at a relatively high cost per passenger and there is a risk that significant changes could further increase operating costs and put the service at risk. The service also uses electric buses which are at the limit of their operating battery range. The Council have also made recent improvements to the service to increase passenger numbers using Bus Service Improvement Plan funding and have publicised this extensively. It will take a while for these changes to bed in and further alterations could confuse passengers”.
11.3 Resolved- That the Committee note the petition.
(2) Stanmer Street access trial
11.4 The petitioner deferred the petition.
(3) Safe road crossing – Hove Cemetery / Old Shoreham Rd
11.5 The Committee considered a petition signed by 501 people requesting a crossing on Old Shoreham Road near Hove Cemetery.
11.6 The Chair provided the following response:
“The Council receives many requests for transport infrastructure improvements across the city on a yearly basis.
To manage this demand, we have recently introduced a new assessment process called Safer Better Streets – highway infrastructure priority.
As part of this new process, requests will only be accepted via ward councillors. As your request was received via this route, by presenting your petition to the Transport and Sustainability Committee it will be included in the list for assessment.
Please note that due to the number of assessments needed from requests in previous years, requests received after 31 March 2023 may be referred to the 2024/5 financial year for assessment”.
11.7 Resolved- That the committee note the petition.
(4) Gardner Street
11.8 The Committee considered a petition signed by 32 people requesting the pedestrianisation of Gardner Street from 11am-5pm Monday to Sunday.
11.9 The Chair provided the following response:
“Thank you for your petition, The closure of Gardner Street to motorized vehicles in January followed a decision taken by the Environment, Transport and sustainability committee in November 2022.
This decision was taken after a full consultation regarding the Traffic Regulation Order had been carried out and engagement with stakeholders including businesses.
Businesses are allowed to use the full width of the footways outside their premises between 11am-5pm each day. This creates a welcoming 3m to 4m wide thoroughfare along the road for pedestrians. Officers have received several comments that the space is now more attractive to use.
Previous to the current closures, businesses were able to use the carriageway only when the road was closed at weekends. With the full width of the carriageway blocked by outside furniture the narrow pavements often became difficult to navigate, people with disabilities found the street difficult to use and would often avoid it at weekends.
As the current design (which is working well in other streets in the city) has only been active since January, Officers will continue to monitor the current Traffic regulation order and street layout with a view to reviewing the decision in the autumn”.
11.10 Resolved- That the Committee note the petition.
(B) Public Questions
(1) Parking Cards
11.11 Susan Gorman read the following question:
“Can residents and visitors buy a scratch card type pay to park card, to be used in pay to park bays? This will do away with the need for technology and can be purchased in advance and scratched off to show date, time, zone etc. This will be a more inclusive solution and can be used alongside the app and account system”.
11.12 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Scratch cards are not an available option for short term use in paid parking bays in Brighton and Hove. However, visitor parking permits for residents and their visitors within controlled parking zones are available to buy through the council website”.
(2) Bus Diversion
11.13 Gregg McTaggert read the following question:
“I live on Montpelier Road and am amongst those most severely impacted by the Western Road bus diversions. In correspondence with the former and current Regency Ward councillors they talk of “considering the views of stakeholders”. There seem to me five primary stakeholders – residents on the diversion, other residents, B&H buses, RJ Dance and the Council. Please provide a list of stakeholder meetings held with each group since 9 January 2023, the date the diversion started”
11.14 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question. I have noted the disruption resulting from the current construction on Western Road and have raised this with officers.
I am advised that, as the diversion is currently subject to a legal challenge, I am limited in what I can say in response at this stage; however, I do hope that buses will return to Western Road as soon as possible.
I understand officers have met with a group of residents before and since the diversion was introduced which has resulted in some changes along the diversion route. We are keen that residents are kept informed of progress and I understand update newsletters have been distributed previously. We hope to provide a further update once the legal process allows”.
11.15 Gregg McTaggert asked the following supplementary question:
“What is the council doing to monitor the contractors performance?”
11.16 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We are working closely with the contractor, and we know they are working hard, at least six days a week. We are driving forward to deliver a two-way traffic as soon as possible”.
(3) Greenways
11.17 Malcolm Spencer read the following question:
“I am a farmer in Ovingdean producing food that is eaten by residents in the city. For years, crops in one of my fields have been damaged by people who stay in their camper vans on the road called Greenways and the problem is getting worse. Please could Greenways be designated a No Overnight Camping road or something else that is enforceable with fines?”
11.18 The Chair provided the following reply:
“I will take this issue back to officers to determine if there are any options that can be taken forward in terms of enforcement of the overnight parking on the Greenways and also more generally lived in vehicles in the vicinity”
(4) Net Zero 2030
11.19 Martin Gardner read the following question:
“Will the newly formed council stay true to the existing net zero by 2030 target, and if so what SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound) targets will be put in place with clear lines of designated responsibility for the implementation of these targets in order to rapidly reduce carbon emissions over the next 4 years?”
11.20 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question
Brighton & Hove City Council is resolutely committed to making Brighton & Hove a carbon neutral city by 2030.
The council has just one climate target – to become carbon neutral by 2030. This is an extremely ambitious SMART target, which measures our greenhouse gas emissions and sits across all the council’s actions. It also involves collaboration with key partners in business, public sector organisations, and communities in the city.
This target is the responsibility of the Transport and Sustainability Committee, which will receive regular reports on progress on our action to reduce carbon emissions and adapt to our changing climate”.
(5) Climate Emergency
11.21 Martin Gardener read the following question:
“Will the council seek to provide timely and transparent information to the public in public settings (i.e. beyond on the council's own website) on the declared climate emergency, co-develop more ambitious plans with the numerous willing local community groups and collaborate with these groups to implement its carbon reduction plan, and if not why not?”
11.22 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question. The answer is yes, and we are already actively looking for opportunities to connect with communities and partners – and explore how we can collaborate as well as share what the council is doing.
The council had a stand at the Sustainability Festival in Stanmer Park in May and we are looking at sharing a unit in the Open Market to provide information and face to face contact.
We will shortly be reviewing and reporting on our 2030 Carbon Neutral Programme and welcome suggestions on how people in the city would like to access this information. We report on progress annually, and we also report annually to the independent Carbon Disclosure Project.
We are establishing a working group with community volunteers and co-ordinators to help us better support the city in taking a more collaborative approach and use the best ways to communicate.
We want to bring together individuals and organisations with different skills, expertise, ideas and understanding of our diverse community, so we can co-develop and share the expertise of everyone in the city to support climate action.
Many actions which support people with the cost of living crisis, improve public health and provide a safer and better environment, are also climate actions, so the public’s involvement will be crucial in designing solutions that work and benefit people.
We are currently reviewing the way we involve and consult with the public to enable a more strategic and co-ordinated approach across the council.
The council is directly responsible for just 1.7% of carbon emissions in the city. We recognise the council has a role in involving, communicating and bringing people together. Only by including the voices and diverse experiences of communities and businesses will we be able to scale up climate action, reduce the effects of climate change on people, and ensure everyone has a part to play in shaping future actions and projects”.
(6) Carbon Reduction
11.23 Martin Gardener read the following question:
“Has the council fully costed its carbon reduction plans, has funding for its plans been sourced and ringfenced, and will the annual Sustainability and Carbon Reduction Investment Fund (SCRIF) be spent on supporting the installation renewable energy in households struggling with the cost of living crisis or in support of persons/groups particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts, or if not what will it be spent on and why?”
11.24 The Chair provided the following reply:
“The council has not yet fully costed its carbon reduction plans. We are commissioning a study on decarbonisation pathways which will develop and cost several scenarios to achieve our 2030 carbon neutral city-wide target. This study will deliver findings and an action plan in early 2024, which will be reported to the Transport and Sustainability Committee.
Turning to the Sustainability and Carbon Reduction Investment Fund, this is now known as the Carbon Neutral Fund.
Since 2019, the Carbon Neutral Fund has invested over £21m in projects across the council supporting reduction in greenhouse gases, adapting to climate change, and enhancing our green spaces for biodiversity. At present, we are considering how the Carbon Neutral Fund may go forward in future years, and what kind of projects will be prioritised.
Helping residents to live in well-insulated, efficiently heated, healthy homes and addressing fuel poverty issues remains a key long-term objective, which is supported through the Housing Revenue Account capital programme. The current five-year programme sets out resources of £30.113m; an average investment of £6.022m per annum. This includes investment in improvements to communal and domestic heating systems as well as identifying opportunities to install energy efficient & low carbon heating systems. We are also implementing a three-year solar PV programme, with currently allocated budget of £4.32M over the 3-year period.
Our award-winning new council housing development, at Victoria Road in Portslade, features high levels of insulation, solar panels and a ground source heat pump.
We participate in a range of programmes to improve energy efficiency and bring down fuel bills for residents struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. These include our participation in wider schemes with other local authorities such as the externally funded Warmer Homes Consortium to support low-income households to improve the energy efficiency of their homes. The Council has also participated in 3 rounds of the Solar Together Scheme, a Sussex wide ‘group buying’ scheme to support residents to install solar PV on their own homes.
The Council continuously reviews funding opportunities to secure more investment for climate action in our communities and economy. For example, the Strategy, Finance and City Regeneration Committee on 22 June 2023, approved a plan for £460,000 external funding for projects supporting green travel corridors and active travel in the Shoreham Harbour area, helping to create a cleaner, greener South Portslade”.
(7) Aquarium Roundabout
11.25 Adrian Hart read the following question:
“I'm aware of course that the final phase of the Valley Gardens revamp will not happen this year. However, it would be helpful if the new administration set the BHCC record straight on the following matter: In answer to questions put to ETS on June 21st and Sept 20th, the then chair/deputy seemed to suggest that the Aquarium roundabout was the most dangerous junction in the city. Will the new administration differ from the previous one on such an assertion?”
11.26 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Road Safety and collision reduction is key to providing a safer road network for all to use. We are aware that there are proportionally a large number of collisions at the Sealife Centre Roundabout. As part of the Valley Gardens Phase 3 review we will ensure that any proposals support a reduction in collisions and make this junction safer for all”.
11.27 Adrian Hart asked the following supplementary question:
“Will the Chair agree to reexamine its calculations on the roundabouts danger and consider the consultants report warning that removing it would produce a significant increase in congestion, air pollution and damage to the local economy?”
11.28 The Chair provided the following reply:
“I set out in my communications at the start of the meeting that we are set out to review this junction as part of the Valley Gardens Phase 3 work to make sure it is delivering the option we can get for this. There has been a lot of work as you highlight to establish a fair design for this. But we do need to check this to ensure it works for all constituencies. That includes safe access and crossings for cyclists and pedestrians but it is, as you say, a very busy traffic intersection between two major A roads on our seafront so there is a call and a reasonableness to undertake a review to make sure this junction works and it is made safer through that review before we begin to implement Phase 3”.
(8) Pedal People
11.29 On behalf of the questioner, Councillor Davis read the following question:
“‘Pedal People’ use multi-seat trikes as mobility aids to enable health, wellbeing and equal access for all ages with disabilities and health challenges.
Accessible cycles are wider 3-wheelers, so suitable cycle lanes such as A259 and Valley Gardens extensions are long-awaited key additions to enable access and equality. 1 in 20 people in Brighton are disabled.
Both schemes included excellent increased provision for disabled parking, public transport and safer cycle routes for disabled people and the wider community, including carers.
Will you give us your commitment to reverting to the original, funded plan when these revisions return unfeasible?”
11.30 The Chair provided the following reply:
“This Council is fully committed to deliver its vision, to create a ‘Fairer city, a Sustainable Future’.
To achieve this vision, an inclusive accessible transport system is absolutely key. The Council’s very own City Transport’s Service Plan identifies the importance of inclusive design and infrastructure to improve access to all parts of the city and council services.
Any revisions of the cycle lanes on the A259 or elsewhere in the city will be compliant with accessibly guidelines and will be subject to Equalities Impact Assessments”.
11.31 Councillor Davis asked the following supplementary question:
“Do you think that the new scheme will be as well consulted upon and will meet with all the stakeholders we met before and will still fit into the timeframe you’ve given for implementation?”
11.32 The Chair provided the following reply:
“The review of the existing scheme is to build upon the consultation to date which supports the case for an active travel scheme on Hove A259 and elsewhere in the city. The aim of the review is to improve and better the scheme as it stands to enhance that bi-directional cycle route and to avoid the particular re-routing of the eastbound cycle route”.
(9) School Streets
11.33 Michael Letton read the following question:
“Given the number of active travel schemes that the current administration has paused for revision, would the committee support a revision of the Westdene school streets scheme given the large impact it is having on the community 7 days a week, 365 days a year?”
11.34 The Chair provided the following reply:
“The Westdene Primary School Streets scheme is currently in place under an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO). ETROs act as statutory consultation periods in which schemes are monitored and changes can be made to live schemes.
At present, this safety improvement scheme has received overwhelming support from members of the public, including residents and parents and carers and continues to be supported by the school.
A revision to the in-situ scheme is not currently considered to be required however this scheme will be presented to a future Transport and Sustainability Committee later this year, where Councillors will duly consider all feedback received from the ETRO process and decide whether to make the scheme permanent”.
(10) Cycle Lanes
11.35 Cicely Lloyd read the following question:
“The Brighton Multicultural Women’s Cycle Club (aka The BMWs) has been meeting in Preston Park Velodrome for 2 years. Our members find negotiating traffic in Brighton the biggest barrier to cycling around the city. Good cycle lanes we do have, like Valley Gardens and Madeira Drive, do not sufficiently link up to form a network. We were excited by the plans for new funded (and consulted on) cycle lanes for London Road, Valley Gardens Phase 3 and the A259 in Hove. Please can you explain why you have abruptly stopped the implementation process without consulting key stakeholders like us?”
11.36 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We are fully supportive of Active Travel and understand the importance of ensuring a joined-up walking and cycling network. We have not stopped these schemes; rather committed to review to improve. As a new administration we are undertaking a review of some of the schemes such as Valley Gardens Phase 3 and the A259 Fourth Avenue to Wharf Road cycle lanes in Hove to ensure that they provide the best solution for all users of the transport network. This demonstrates our commitment to robust, sustainable, integrated, equitable, accessible active travel in our city that works for all”.
11.37 Cicely Lloyd asked the following supplementary question:
“Why have you not consulted?”
11.38 The Chair provided the following reply:
“In the development of schemes there is a robust consultation process. This Administration have paused to see if it was possible to make the scheme better. There will be an opportunity for consultation within that process and we are reviewing, not stopping the scheme”.
(11) Valley Gardens
11.39 Duncan Blinkhorn read the following question:
“Decent cycle lanes are crucial for enabling more people to travel actively. Valley Gardens is a fantastic example. However, with phase 3 still not started, the cycle lane stops abruptly, making getting to the seafront incredibly difficult. Progress has shockingly been stopped by this administration, in spite of Labour councillors having repeatedly voted for the plans.
This repeats a previous Labour administration’s ‘review’ which delayed Phase Two by two years, at huge expense, and jeopardising safety.
How can the administration justify delaying and adding unnecessary expense to this excellent, funded plan that so urgently needs to be completed?”
11.40 The Chair provided the following reply:
“We are fully committed to the Valley Gardens Phase 3 scheme which is a key scheme in the heart of the city. Our review will ensure that the scheme provides the absolute best value for money and provides maximum benefit for all users and is safe. Returning to schemes to amend after construction is more costly than getting it right once. This is too important not to review and improve before implementation”
11.41 Duncan Blinkhorn asked the following supplementary question:
“Can you sympathise with those that are trying and wanting to get around the city by bike who have been waiting in great anticipation for so many years now only to see implementation rolled back again?”
11.42 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Labour is absolutely committed to Valley Gardens, we put forward the scheme and we’re very supportive of the developments to date”.
(12) A23
11.43 Andy Keetch read the following question:
“The previous administration won £3million to deliver two Active Travel schemes, the A259 and the A23. Labour voted in favour of both schemes but you have now halted the A259 which would have also greatly enhanced disability access in the area. This was NOT in your manifesto and will certainly mean the withdrawal of funding from Active travel England. You have not yet indicated the fate of the consulted on and finalised plans for the A23. Can you confirm that you will not seek to redesign, scrap or delay the plans to improve cycling and access on the A23?”
11.44 The Chair provided the following reply:
“I have already said in previous responses we are committed to Active Travel and understand the importance of key schemes such as the A259 Active Travel Scheme we plan to review the designs and bring back a better scheme which will work harder to deliver the benefits for active travel and ensure it’s a scheme that delivers accessibility for disabled users.
We will directly communicate our support of active travel schemes and our ambition to deliver a high-quality walking and cycling networks to the Department for Transport and Active Travel England. Our focus at the moment is the critical redesign of the A259 with demonstrable improvement that provide better use of the space available and cycle lanes more in line with Active Travel Fund’s standards; safer interface with pedestrians and keep scope for future enhancement of the A259 as a potential bus route through keeping two lanes on the highway in both directions. These amendments to the existing design will be brought back to this Committee”.
(C) Deputations
(1) Car Free Developments Further traffic calming measures requested for Franklin Road
11.45 The Committee considered a deputation requesting traffic calming measures on Franklin Road.
11.46 The Chair provided the following response:
“Franklin Road already has substantial traffic calming in the form of road humps that are nationally accepted to be the best form of traffic calming and are proven to lower speeds.
This traffic calming was installed many years ago, presumably as there must have been a number of collisions in the area, and this would appear to have worked as in the past three years there have only been two injury causing collisions in the area.
None of these were caused by excessive speed. With only very limited budgets available to us we currently concentrate spending this little money on places where a number of injury causing collisions are occurring and presently the council are prioritising junctions where there have been at least six collisions; with other junctions under review”.
11.47 Councillor Davis moved a motion to request an officer report.
11.48 Councillor Bagaeen formally seconded the motion.
11.49 Officers explained that this particular area could be reviewed under the Better Streets Programme.
11.50 Councillor Davis withdrew the motion.
11.51 Resolved- That the Committee note the deputation.
12 Items referred from Council
(A) Petitions
(1) Improve the Bus Service to Bevendean
12.1 The Committee considered a petition referred from Full Council requesting improved bus services to the Bevendean area.
12.2 The Chair provided the following response:
The 48 bus is a commercial bus service operated by Brighton and Hove Buses (BHB) and as such the Council has no direct control over its frequency or operations, however we work with all local bus operators as part of a successful Enhanced Bus Partnership to improve bus services in the city. I requested officers to contact Brighton & Hove Buses and they have given the following response to our enquiry.
“Like most bus operators across the UK, we have been suffering with a shortage of drivers which has unfortunately affected the service provided. We apologise for this. The situation has improved recently following a successful recruitment campaign and the service operation has been much better over the past few months with over 99% of the scheduled journeys on route 48 operating. We will continue to monitor usage on route 48 and will review the frequency if the demand can justify it and we can resource it. There would be no point in increasing the frequency of the timetable if we were unable to operate the additional journeys. Our current priority is to ensure a high quality of operation of the current level of service. We had planned to replace the oldest vehicles on this route and others in the city back in 2021 but the disruption and uncertainty caused by Covid unfortunately meant that new bus orders had to be delayed. We now have new buses on order which will enable the oldest buses in our fleet to be retired very early next year.”
12.3 Resolved- That the Committee note the petition.
13 Member Involvement
(B) Written Questions
(1) Speed Cameras
13.1 Councillor Fishleigh read the following question:
“How much does it cost to install and maintain a speed camera, and what advice would you give to residents who would like to see more of these on roads where traffic routinely breaks the speed limits?”
13.2 The Chair provided the following reply:
“The Sussex Safer Roads Partnership operate speed cameras on behalf of Sussex Police so this question should be directed to them at www.sussexsaferroads.gov.uk who will be able to advise”.
(2) Parking meters
13.3 Councillor Fishleigh read the following question:
“How will people who don’t have mobile phones be able to use parking meters in the city?”
13.4 The Chair provided the following reply:
“The parking meters are no longer operational. If you do not have a mobile phone, you can pay for parking by cash or card at any shop in the city with the PayPoint sign. You’ll need the parking location number which is on signage and the vehicles registration number. There are over 150 shops with PayPoint in Brighton & Hove. The PayPoint vendor locations are linked on the Council’s website and each vendor is encouraged to put up clear signage”.
13.5 Councillor Fishleigh asked the following supplementary question:
“There are three pay for parking outlets in Rottingdean and none of the nearby shops have a Paypoint outlet so please will you suspend paid for parking until that is rectified?”
13.6 On behalf of the Chair, officers agreed to contact Councillor Fishleigh directly.
(3) Pedestrian Crossing
13.7 Councillor McNair was unable to attend the meeting so a response was sent in writing.
(4) Excessive Cycle Speeds
13.8 Councillor Earthey read the following question:
“What steps can be taken to enforce the speed limit along the undercliff between the Marina and Saltdean to stop cyclists travelling at excessive speeds, and endangering pedestrians?”
13.9 The Chair provided the following reply:
“The Undercliff Walk is used by pedestrians and cyclists, and we hope people consider and respect each other’s safety. This is especially true during busy periods like on weekends and during good weather.
There are signs from the Marina to Saltdean including certain areas where cyclists are asked to dismount such as the Ovingdean Café. This is for everyone’s safety. We want everyone to enjoy the Undercliff Walk and we ask they do so responsibly in a way that doesn’t put others at risk of harm.
Officers have recently reviewed the signage and agree that the ramps at Saltdean require some enhancement. In addition to this, officers will support Sussex Police with three planned action days at various locations on the undercliff in July to remind cyclists of their responsibilities. Enforcement is a police matter, and all incidents should be reported to Sussex Police”.
(5) Excessive e-scooter speeds
13.10 Councillor Earthey read the following question:
“What steps can be taken to prevent e-scooters from speeding along the same undercliff and endangering pedestrian?”
13.11 The Chair provided the following reply:
“All E-scooters are currently illegal on the public highway (footway and carriageway) in the city. Brighton & Hove is a not taking part in the current Dept for Transport authorised trials for hire fleets in England which have been running since November 2020 and are due to be reviewed in May 2024.
Privately owned E-scooters are legal for use on private land in the UK with the landowners’ consent. The undercliff is not public highway but is council land, and in this case a byelaw permitting e-scooter use in this area would require committee approval. Enforcement is a matter for Sussex Police who are seizing E-scooters and imposing fines in campaigns across Sussex when resources allow. Three action days are planned by police in July, and Council officers will support these events”.
(6) Signage
13.12 Councillor Earthey read the following question:
“Is it possible to put very clear signage up at either end of the Undercliff to encourage cyclists who wish to travel from the Marina to Saltdean and beyond to use the cliff-top cycle path as the preferred through-route?”
13.13 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Officers are currently reviewing the signage along the undercliff.
This will focus on encouraging those using the undercliff, including cyclists, to be aware of others and use the space accordingly.
It is important that any additional signage is targeted for it to be effective. Too much signage can be counter-productive. Both the cliff top and undercliff paths provide important routes for different cyclists and officers have advised that signing one route over the other is unlikely to be an effective solution. We are however looking at ways to increase awareness and reduce speeds”
13.14 Councillor Earthey asked the following supplementary question:
“Can you improve the signage as it is currently set against the cliff rather than in view”
13.15 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Officers will look at that as part of the review that is underway”.
(7) Signage
13.16 Councillor Earthey read the following question:
“Is it possible to erect no-cycling signs and barriers at the three cafes (Ovingdean Café, Molly’s, and The Whitecliffs Café) to protect the food/drink queuing and seating areas from cycles and e-scooters?”
13.17 The Chair provided the following reply:
“As per my previous reply, officers are currently reviewing the signage and barriers along the undercliff to identify where additional or replacement signage may be useful”.
(8) Wardens
13.18 Councillor Earthey read the following question:
“Can BHCC offer occasional patrols from cycle or undercliff ‘wardens’ at peak times to enforce restrictions (we have litter wardens, but no 4-year old child ever got put in hospital by the dropping of litter)”.
13.19 The Chair provided the following reply:
Seafront Officers patrol the Undercliff every morning and will always ask cyclists to dismount if they are cycling in an area where cycling is not permitted. These patrols will be increased during the school summer holidays when a member of the Seafront Team will be based in The Deans on a quad bike during the day. There main focus will be on water safety and supporting the lifeguards but they will speak to cyclists if they observe any unsafe activity”.
(9) A259
13.20 Councillor Davis read the following question:
“Can the Chair update the committee on the progress of the A259 report and give a cost to date on the contractors fees?”
13.21 The Chair provided the following reply:
“Thank you for your question on the A259 Cycle and Pedestrian Improvement scheme. Officers are liaising with Contractors regarding the termination of the Construction Contract the financial implications have not yet been determined but will be reported back to this Committee once we have this alongside proposals to implement a redesigned bidirectional cycle facility and improved pedestrian access along the seafront”.
14 Constitutional Matters: Transport & Sustainability Committee
Resolved-
1) That the committee’s terms of reference, as set out in Appendix 1 to this report, be noted; and
2) That the committee agrees to establish an Urgency Sub-Committee consisting of the Chair of the Committee and two other Members (nominated in accordance with the scheme for the allocation of seats for committees), to exercise its powers in relation to matters of urgency, on which it is necessary to make a decision before the next ordinary meeting of the Committee.
15 Cycle Hangars - Review and Recommendations for Future Management
Resolved-
1) That Committee agrees to note the report and existing installation programme to complete the Cycle Hangar Scheme.
2) That Committee agrees for officers to negotiate a further two-year contract to enable a full financial evaluation and preparation of a Business Case to enable determination of alternative delivery models. See section 4 for further details.
3) That Members agree for a further report to come back to this Committee updating on progress with the scheme and with full details of any further financial implications and proposals for going forward.
16 Rottingdean High Street AQMA project
16.1 The Committee considered a report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture that sought approval to temporarily remove the planter placed in the southbound carriageway of Rottingdean High Street north of its junction with Park Road once a 4-week period of monitoring traffic diversions on Steyning Road was completed.
16.2 Councillors Davis and Wilkinson asked questions and contributed to the debate.
16.3 Resolved-
1) That the Committee delegates authority to officers to remove and store the planter following a four-week period of traffic counts on Steyning Road ending on 22 July 2023.
2) That the Committee delegates authority to officers to conduct a follow up four-week traffic count on Steyning Road beginning on Monday 04 September 2023.
3) That the Committee delegates authority to officers to decide whether the planter will be reinstated based on air quality and traffic counter results.
17 Parking Scheme Update Report
Resolved-
1) That the Committee having taken account of all duly made representations and comments, agrees there will be no change to the days and times of operation in Zone U (Coombe Road area).
2) That the Committee having taken account of all duly made representations and comments, agrees to proceed to the next stage of the detailed design for the Southall Avenue. This will consist of a consultation to join the existing light touch parking scheme Zone U (Coombe Road area).
18 School Streets - ETROs
Resolved-
1) That the Committee, having taken account of all duly made comments and representations, as detailed at Appendix 1, agrees that the provisions of ETRO-27-2022 (Downs Junior School) is to be made permanent.
19 Items referred for Full Council
19.1 No items were referred to Full Council for information.
The meeting concluded at 6.15pm
|
Signed
|
Chair |
||
|
Dated this |
day of |
|
|