A259 walking, cycling and aseasonality Improvement scheme

Traffic Regulation Order Consultation Summary August 2022

Contents

1. Summary

2. Support Comments

3. Objection Comments

4. Neutral Comment

1. Summary

In total we received 48 responses to the Traffic Regulation Order consultation. There were 13 objections, 34 comments of support and 1 general comment.

Below is all the comments in full with a summary of the theme of each comment followed by Officer recommendation. For comments of support this has been taken as a support to proceed with the project, but additional suggestions have been noted and will be included where possible in future scheme. 

Where we have received objection, this feedback has been carefully considered and a response given.

2. Support Comments

Object/Support	Comment	Key Points of Comment	Officer Recommendation
SUPPORT	This is long overdue. The demand for cycling and infrastructure in Hove increases daily, witness the oversubscription for cycle hangers. Capacity needs to be urgently increased along Kingsway to prevent conflict with pedestrians and keep residents safe when cycling longer distances. Without this addition the whole notion of a "cycling network" is called into question. With the redevelopment of Hove Lagoon area to come, there will need to me much more capacity for both cycling and walking in this area.	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Lower risk of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists  Meets objective for building a true cycling network	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	We as Living Streets B & H support the proposals for the changes being made to the A259 including the new cycle lane. The proposals described in these TROs include several very welcome changes that will make the road safer and more attractive for pedestrians including the removal of pedestrian railings. However, we do have some concerns. Firstly, we continue to have concerns about the bus boarders proposed along the route, which can often be dangerous and frightening for pedestrians unless there are adequate controls on cyclists to stop them cycling through when people are getting on and off buses. And, secondly, cycling contraflows can also be dangerous and frightening for pedestrians if they are not supported by adequate signage warning pedestrians - not just drivers - that cyclists could be approaching from the 'wrong' - or at least unexpected - direction. With those caveats, we support the proposals which should improve this section of the seafront road.	Road safety improvement More attractive street environment Removal of barriers to pedestrians    Risk of collision between pedestrians and cyclists at floating bus stops Concerns regarding cyclists moving against ‘typical’ flow of traffic	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	It's a bit hard to tell as there is no key on the plans but the cycle lane does look safe (for children and older adults, disabled people etc, who are excluded from a lot of poor quality infrastructure), as I think there are wands and so I'm broadly in support. It would be great if it could be extended: widened further and made two-way, with the existing cycle lane on the pavement removed completely (similar to the Madeira Drive scheme) as the pavement sharing lane is not great (collisions with pedestrians an ongoing concern). Please consider extending it to Portslade!! We have no safe cycle infrastructure at all. My ride home from Brighton is nice for a bit and then all the cycle lanes just disappear!	Road safety improvement Improvements for disabled people (Inclusive Access) Improvements to existing cycle lane provision Concerns over collision risk of cycle lane on pavement	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	We need to provide safe ways for people to cycle in Brighton & Hove and beyond to Shoreham/Worthing. This cycle lane should provide that link from where the existing cycle lane ends at Fourth Avenue. The cycle lane should help to reduce carbon emissions in town. The design also needs a safe way to get to the lane by bicycle from every main road and side road along Kingsway to make it accessible to all in Hove and Brighton and to ease convenience to use it.	Improvements in air quality / lower carbon emissions Meets objective for building a true cycling network Road safety improvement	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I cycle this route several times per week to access the beach and Yellowave from my home in Portslade. This proposal will have a substantial positive impact on the safety, convenience and attractiveness of cycling westbound, but also help to improve safety on the pavement cycle track when heading east, which currently is too narrow to allow cycles to pass each other comfortably - this is particularly evident for non-standard cycles (e.g. tricycles/trailers/cargo bikes). This is a busy and popular area with many points at which pedestrians are crossing, and I think the proposals will also improve safety and comfort for pedestrians. It is not clear whether and how the mandatory cycle lane will be protected from intrusion by motor vehicles parking or driving. This is a major problem with almost every cycle lane in the city and I hope that there is a strong plan to ensure that the benefits of this improved infrastructure are not lost due to lack of protection from being blocked by motor vehicles. It is clear that physical segregation is necessary to protect cyclists from the danger of motor vehicles, and to ensure that cycle lanes are kept clear to enable them to fulfill their potential. My concern is most acute between Fourth Avenue and Hove Street, where pavement driving/parking is already rife, double yellow lines are routinely ignored and loading occurs without regard to the safety of pedestrians or cyclists. Outside the leisure centre there is often complete obstruction of the pavement due to parking. This needs to be addressed effectively and physical segregation, along with robust plans for enforcement are the only way I can see this behaviour changing. Without this the cycle lane will become a dumping ground for motor vehicles and become unsafe and unusable. Please do not interpret this as a criticism or objection to the plans - they are fantastic - I just hope that the realities of how motorists treat public space is considered too in the plans for physical segregation (it needs more than paint!). I am very pleased to see, and supportive of, the improvements to Kings Esplanade, in particular the introduction of Give Way markings for road users joining from Medina Terrace/ Sussex Road, although both might be made safer with a STOP sign and line. On the plans Sussex Road does not have a Give Way triangle marking on the road, which I think might help. I have a concern that the loading bay opposite Vallance Gardens will present a hazard with vehicles crossing it to unload. If it was possible to have the cycle lane inside that bay (closer to the pavement as in other locations within the plans e.g. opposite Osborne Villas) - so that vehicles unloading do not have to cross the cycle lane - that might be better.	Road safety improvement More attractive street environment Lower risk of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists Existing cycle lane too narrow Improvement for adapted bicycles / cargo bikes Physical cycle segregation is required for safety and uptake Camper Van/General Parking Lack of Enforcement Potential risk of vehicles being temporarily stationary on the cycle lane while gaining access	Approve scheme
Support	As a regular cycle commuter between Wish Road and Brighton Palace Pier, am delighted that the proposals: 1. reduce the large number of give way points for cyclists (versus pedestrians, specifically in the west bound direction) 2. makes safe the exit/entrance from Wish Road to the cycle path (have been involved in a minor accident at this location in the past) dwg HD-BHCC-TRO/12 3. gives priority to cyclists at the blind corner south end of Medina Terrace (so many cyclists must have had near misses here including myself) dwg HD-BHCC-TRO/06 4. appears to make clear the priority for east-bound cyclists over road vehicles coming too/from Rockwater and other parallel vehicle access points to the promenade, have been witness to near misses where road vehicles assume priority even though they are not on a public carriageway. eg dwg HD-BHCC-TRO/09 5. provides wall cut backs along the right hand side of the east-bound cycle track along Kingsway to improve visibility. Cannot wait for implementation, well done BHCC	Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists Lower risk of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists Road safety improvement Priority for cyclists	Approve scheme
Support	I strongly support this extension to the Kingsway cycle lane. The existing cycle lane is excellent, makes cycling in Brighton quicker and safer for cyclists and doesn't appear to make Kingsway any more congested than it was previously. Anything that gets people out of their cars and onto their bikes must be a good thing for both the environment and personal health. The extension to Saxon Road will encourage people to cycle rather than drive wherever possible.	Improvements in air quality / lower carbon emissions Encourages cycling as a form of transport Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I strongly support the addition of improved cycle infrastructure - the city has some good bits already, but they are not connected well and more good cycle infrastructure is desperately needed. I cycle around the city to transport myself and my children, and it's easier and safer when there are good cycle lanes. It also encourages more people to cycle as they feel safer and more confident. The improvements in pedestrian access are also important to make walking as active travel easier and more pleasant. It's imperative we encourage as much active travel as possible in the city.	Encourages cycling as a form of transport Encourages walking as a form of transport Meets objective for building a true cycling network Road safety improvement More attractive street environment Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I support the new mandatory cycle lane.	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	The existing cycle lane at this location is too narrow as a two-way cycle lane and so this is an extremely welcome proposal which will greatly improve the cycling experience along the seafront, especially for non-standard cycles like the one I own. Two particular feedback points I'd like to raise: - It is very welcome that walls that jut out from along Western Lawns will be cut back. These are dangerous and are of the height that could cause serious injury if an accident occurred. Similarly for the low wall that runs adjacent to the cycle lane opposite the tennis courts should be removed. - The plastic wands which have been used on Madeira Drive are effective but their durability is an issue without frequent fixing. Please consider using something more durable as a physical separator.	Existing cycle lane too narrow Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists Improvement for adapted bicycles / cargo bikes	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I use the current cycle lanes myself and find it safe and suitably separated from traffic and pedestrians. It is very well used.	Physical cycle segregation is required for safety and uptake Existing cycle lane has high demand	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I am a Prestonville/Port Hall resident who does not drive and uses a bicycle as a mobility aid: arthritis in my feet means I cannot walk far without pain. I work as a cycling instructor for WSCC which means I cycle west out of the city on a very regularly basis. With the temporary cycle path removed on the Old Shoreham Road, the seafront route is my best option. The current narrow two-way path, next to a rough low wall and the pavement on the other side is an 'accident waiting to happen'. Widening the paths and separating east and west cycle travel will undoubtedly make it safer and easier.	Existing cycle lane too narrow Road safety improvement	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	3 support responses from same resident TRO-25c-2022 - The addition of a cycling contraflow is a very welcome change to the one way street which put people off cycling directly down to the seafront. All one way streets should have cycling contraflows. TRO-25a-2022 + TRO-25b-2022 The distinction between TRO-25a,b and c are not very clear so these comments may be repeated. We are very glad to see that the council is extending essential seafront cycling facilities westbound. We support this but would also like to ensure that there are no "give way" signs or road markings de-prioritising cyclists / walkers/people wheeling and wrongly giving priority to motor vehicle movements, contrary to the Highway Code. There appears to be a "give way" for cyclists at Sussex Road/Kings Esplanade junction which should not be there. Although we are in support of the TRO, we hope that further funding will be acquired to improve the quality of the provision for people cycling and walking/wheeling. Kings Esplanade particularly would be improved if the motor vehicle parking was located on the northern kerbside or better still, removed from the area except for disabled access. Motor vehicle movements are a hazard for people in the area. We very strongly support the new cycling contraflow to be introduced in St Aubyns South and would like to see cycling contraflows on all one way streets. There is no key on the drawings and so it is unclear what the pale green strip is on the western side of Hove Street South. (Cycling UK Local Representative).	Cycling contraflows will encourage cycling	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I strongly support all of the proposals set out in TRO-25-2022. Providing safe, cycling infrastructure is so important if we are committed as a city to encouraging more forms of active travel. I regularly cycle from boundary road in either direction, whilst the dedicated lane in Brighton is wonderful, it provides stark contrast to the ride where there is no cycling provision. Making these route safer will encourage more people to use them.	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Road safety improvement Encourages cycling as a form of transport	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I use the Kingsway cycle lanes to get to work in Kemp Town. I would be grateful for a through route all of the way along the seafront and any development that leads to that is very welcome.	Meets objective for building a true cycling network Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I fully support the introductory of a mandatory cycle lane especially and my only concern is that is narrows in some places and then comes to a stop. However, having a mandatory cycle lane will be better for the local businesses and also for cyclists wishing to continue along the seafront without a detour around the leisure centre.	Benefits for local businesses Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I strongly agree with these three TROs, which are part of the same project. I cycle to get around, and the city has a long way to go when it comes to making people feel safe to cycle everywhere. Currently, if you're cycling along Kingsway, you have to make a big detour around the back of the King Alfred Centre. This route can be very windy in the winter and the cycle lane gets covered in pebbles after storms. I don't feel safe cycling along Kingsway, as there are two lanes of fast-moving traffic. I've been passed at close range cycling there, and when I challenged the driver, he told me he'd done it because I should have been cycling on the cycle lane – a block away. Ideally, there would be mandatory cycle lanes in both directions along Kingsway but this is a good step in the first direction. Installing a contraflow on St Aubyns South makes sense - there is plenty of space to allow this. LTN1/20 says that cycling contraflows should be installed on all one-way streets except where there's a safety reason not to.	Road safety improvement Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists Cycling contraflows will encourage cycling	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	Wholeheartedly support this. B&H needs a dramatic improvement in cycle infrastructure if we are going to reduce car use and stand any chance of meeting the climate challenge. The number of bollards that have been knocked over along the seafront road route show how close we are to a vehicle hitting a cyclist. The route needs to be permanently physically separated from vehicles. This will help to encourage less confident cyclists to feel safe. It probably goes without saying, but the city's cycle routes remain inadequate, both in coverage and the linkages between them. The removal of the Old Shoreham Road by Labour and the Tories did not help and it is taking too long to identify a replacement. Pleased to hear about the Wish ward Holland scheme funding though, so hopefully things are moving in the right direction.	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Improvements in air quality / lower carbon emissions Encourages cycling as a form of transport Physical cycle segregation is required for safety and uptake	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	This is an excellent cycle lane, that makes a very big difference to my daily commute from West Hove to central Brighton (and back again). Other routes along Church Road/Western Road and the Old Shoreham Road (Olive Roadto Hove Park) are very dangerous.	Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists Road safety improvement	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	The proposed permanent Kingsway cycle lane is exactly what is required and will help make that section of the seafront more pleasant for pedestrians, cyclists and local businesses. It will also contribute to our City's commitment to net zero. Please make it happen.	More attractive street environment Encourages cycling as a form of transport Encourages walking as a form of transport Benefits for local businesses Improvements in air quality / lower carbon emissions	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	Hove is in desperate need of more and better cycling infrastructure. If this proposal goes ahead it will improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians. It will enhance the appearance of the area. Approved. More safe cycling infrastructure please!	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Road safety improvement More attractive street environment	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	2x Supports from same resident. TRO-25a-2022 - The pavements are very crowded and pedestrians have to step in the road currently. TRO-25b-2022 - We need to reduce pollution and this will help.	Lower risk of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists Improvements in air quality / lower carbon emissions	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I support the cycle lane because cycle lanes are important in encouraging people to cycle. Making St Aubyns two way for cyclists is an obvious thing to do	Encourages cycling as a form of transport Cycling contraflows will encourage cycling	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I strongly support this TRO. In particular I hugely welcome the new cycle lane creating a much more direct east west route. The current lane west of hove Street is very narrow and often very busy - it can get very difficult especially when riding with children and causes conflict with pedestrians. By increasing capacity it will make a huge difference to this part of the lane. I will use this lane with my family very regularly.	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Lower risk of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists Existing cycle lane too narrow Faster journeys / less interruptions in journeys for cyclists Existing cycle lane has high demand	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	Safer, clearer and better cycle routes are long overdue in Brighton and Hove. This TRO goes some way to enshrining a safer cycling route in a small part of the city. Working in a school, I am disappointed that I cannot promote cycling to school with a clear conscience because it is too dangerous here. I look forward to a better network of cycle routes generally. The proposed permanent route is a route I use on a daily basis and it has definitely improved conditions and safety for cyclists, cars and pedestrians.	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Road safety improvement Encourages cycling as a form of transport	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I regularly use the existing cycle way instead of using my car - I've enjoyed the exercise and reducing my fuel costs!	Health benefits of cycling Cycling is a cheaper form of transport	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	2x Supports from same resident - TRO-25b-2022 - Any improvement in accessibility to cycling in the city is welcomed and should be prioritised. TRO-25c-2022 - Same response	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Encourages cycling as a form of transport	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	Anything that helps people to cycle safely and helps restrict traffic speed gets my support. Bring back the OSR cycle lane!	Encourages cycling as a form of transport Traffic calming measure	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	2x Supports from same resident - both Supports statements include same text - I cycle along the seafront a lot, and I think it'd be good to have cycle lanes going in both directions provided the	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	2x Supports from same resident - TRO-25b-2022 - Cycling Lane - very much in favour of retaining this TRO-25c-2022 - Cycle Lane - very much in favour	Increasing demand for cycling infrastructure Existing cycle lane has high demand	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	BADGE are pleased to have been given an opportunity to have working meetings with Project Manager James Hammond where we were able to view and comment on the designs as they were developed. We are pleased to see the overall increase in disabled bays, and that following our suggestions, additional bays were added into the design at the popular Hove Lagoon destination. We are also pleased to see bays provided on the north side of the road, that are away from the cycle lane as the parallel parking bays that open into the cycle lane continue to present difficult and for some danger. It can be difficult to fully imagine how the bays will look in situ, but we are pleased that concerns about space to the rear of parking spaces to allow for drop ramps and safe manoeuvres have been included. We remain concerned about the boarding arrangements around the bus stops and would suggest that a physical mock up might help to explain the method and allay concerns or indeed confirm them. We also recognise that elders with Blue Badges may need more parking close to the Bowls Club. We feel that providing an accessible route in and out of the King Alfred car park may also help with this, and it's something that's been requested. We are also pleased that parking has been retained on the south/prom side of the road at the Esplanade which is such a popular spot for families and elders who are able to enjoy the vibrancy of the prom more easily from these parking and vantage points. As this stretch becomes more popular with the redevelopment of the Kingsway, accessible parking will be vital to ensuring inclusive access to this stretch. BADGE remains committed to advocating for Blue Badge holders parking and access and are available for continued consultation as this plan materialises. We all acknowledge that continuous working is far more effective and stress reducing - and achieves better end results.	Improvements for disabled people (Inclusive Access) Road safety improvement Increased provision of disabled parking bays Boarding concerns at floating bus stops	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	3x Supports from same resident TRO-25b-2022 - It will encourage more cycling and help slow traffic which at the moment is dangerously fast, with so many pedestrians crossing to go to the beach. TRO-25c-2022 - It will make cycling safer and more popular. TRO-25a-2022 - It will mean wider pavements and fewer pedestrians having to step into the road to get past each other.	Road safety improvement More attractive street environment Removal of barriers to pedestrians Encourages cycling as a form of transport Encourages walking as a form of transport Traffic calming measure	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	3x Supports from same resident TRO 25b-2022 - This TRO will make cycling much safer and will encourage more people to cycle rather than drive. TRO 25c-2022 - At the moment, there is confusion where the cycle lane meets the road junction beyond Moroccos when heading West to East. I have seen a couple of accidents. I think that this proposal will make it much safer for cyclists and both cyclists and car users will have a better understanding about who has right of way. TRO-25a-2022 - The restriction to the loading areas will make it much safer for cyclists.	Priority for cyclists Encourages cycling as a form of transport Physical cycle segregation is required for safety and uptake Road safety improvement	Approve scheme
SUPPORT	I love cycling.	Encourages cycling as a form of transport	Approve scheme

3. Objection Comments

Object	I have major concerns that the addition of the outside seating 'parklet' will cause undue increase in noise and additional antisocial behaviour which will impact my enjoyment of my home. The beach, benches and proximity of the restaurant make this area a lovely and thriving small oasis on the seafront. However, we do frequently suffer from antisocial behaviour, often long into the evenings during pleasant weather. The shelter across from the southern end of Medina Terrace attracts many late-night inconsiderate groups often playing very loud music, shouting etc. This regularly impacts my and those in surrounding flats' enjoyment of our balconies and often the noise penetrates our glazing impacting our internal living space. I am very anxious of this parklet being merely meters away from my lounge and balcony. I feel very strongly that the addition of this it will encourage more undesired behaviour and I know it's not possible for the council or the police to enforce any kind of appropriate use. Therefore we will be left, as residents, to just endure the behaviour that will come with the installation. The proposed location of this parklet in the existing parking bays will mean the noise just from normal intended use will also impact my living space. Many of the dwellings in these buildings have their bedrooms south facing and all have their living rooms facing the road/sea and therefore our rights to a relatively peaceful existence in an area we take care and pride in will be compromised to benefit transient visitors who do not often have due regard for the surroundings and one business which I’m sure is not threatened from continuing to thrive without the existence of outside seating (when the benches and beach provide many areas to consume food purchased from them, all further away from the residential areas). I also have concerns around the use of this area for the consumption of food purchased nearby but not officially part of these permitted premises and therefore the litter and general upkeep will not be viewed as their responsibilities. The wording of previous publications about the scheme included the line “more public space outside businesses (eg for seating)”. This lead me to believe that the addition of this parklet is indeed intended to benefit just one business under the guise of adding social amenity. To my knowledge this is not being proposed to be maintained by Marrocco’s. If this were to be treated as an outside space of a licenced premises there would be rules attached to its use to ensure impacts to local residents is minimised, such as pub gardens and outdoor seating at cafes. There are many benches in this immediate area and the shelters which are incredibly well used as well as the lawns to both the east and west of this island of buildings between Medina Terrace and St Aubyn’s South. The addition of this parklet is not essential to the amenity value of the area. A place to hide the commercial bins on the seafront opposite Marrocco’s would however be welcome and increase visual amenity. I support the rest of the application for these improvements to our seafront in Hove for a wide range of visitors and residents.	Proposed Parklet is unnecessary Proposed Parklet could cause litter / anti-social behaviour concerns Proposed Parklet could negatively impact local residents Concerns over maintenance provision for the proposed Parklet	when consulting with the Police regarding the placement of the Parklet police officers did not raise any concerns about the proposed location. The situation shall be monitored by Council Office and the location shall be reconsidered should issues arise.  The area will be keep clean by Marroccos who we will enter into an agreement to maintain and keep the parklet clean.   Officers to continue to monitor the installation and make amendments should this be needed.
Object	Where the camper vans currently park on the seafront alongside the KIng Alfred is going to be made disabled parking only. The camper vans will be looking to park long term elsewhere. The car parking spaces along Kings Esplanade from Medina to Sussex are being made 4hr spaces, but the spaces in front of Bath Court are still all day spaces, so it is probable that camper vans will end up outside Bath Court which is unhelpful for visitors wanting short term access to the beach and is totally undesirable for the residents of Bath Court to have camper vans parking long term outside of this residential area. The spaces in front of Bath Court should be max 4hr spaces too in order to avoid camper vans taking over this area and the parking is properly and regularly policed.	Negative impact of displacement of camper van parking to other parts of the seafront Car Parking should be limited to a max stay	Disabled users of the area have requested that disabled parking not be restricted to a max use in order to not restrict disabled vehicle users accessing the seafront.  Any illegal use of these bays will need to be reported to the enforcement team. No changes are recommended
Object	There is already an existing cycle lane on the pavement which is rarely used and sufficient for the number of users. The current cycle lane has caused huge traffic jams which is increasing pollution and travel times for all across the city	Existing cycle lanes along the payment were adequate Increased pollution due to traffic congestion Increased journey times / delays due to traffic congestion	by offering residents a safe and sustainable alternative to the motorcar such as improved and protected spaces to cycle we can improve sustainability in the city. This helps to create a  modal shift from motor vehicles to sustainable options such as walking and cycling. This is required in order to meet local and national targets to become carbon neutral. No alterations are recommended.
Object	This causes terrible delays on a congested seafront. Restricts Fire Brigade, Ambulance, Taxi, delivery vehicles and creates more pollution by having all those stationary cars unable to move. Also restricts people with disabled vehicles. It has a detrimental effects on visitors and business which bring in the money we need. Bicycles do not contribute anything. I remember the disaster of Old Shoreham Road that had to be reversed	Increased journey times / delays due to traffic congestion Impact on emergency service vehicle response times Bicycles and cycle lanes do not contribute to the city Negative impact on disabled vehicle access	Emergency services fast response managers have said they have not seen a reduction in response times due to the introduction of any cycle lanes. As part of these plans significant additional disabled motor vehicle parking, as well as disabled cycle parking and improved disabled pedestrian access. no alterations are recommended.
Object	I would like the existing extra cycle lane would be retained. I do not understand the terminology so do not know if my wish is supported or opposed by the proposal. Please take whatever action is necessary for my feedback to be counted.	Existing cycle lanes along the payment were adequate	Existing lane around the King Esplanade will be retain in the current plans. no changes recommended
Object	2x Objections from same resident TRO-25c-2022 To install a cycle lane contrary to the flow of the traffic is both unnecessary and frankly nonsensical. There is already access from Kingsway to the cycle lane going eastwards on Kings Esplanade from Medina Terrace and Sussex Road. Also, to have the cycle lane next to where are cars are parked is a recipe for disaster with people opening car doors into the cycle lane causing either the cyclist to have to swerve into oncoming traffic, or being knocked of his/her bike. Further, if a cyclist takes even a slightly wide turn onto Kings Esplanade he/she is likely to be facing an oncoming vehicle. For these reasons mainly I object to this proposal. TRO-25a-2022 I wish to object to the proposed parklet. This is wholly unnecessary and the space would best be utilised for further car parking particularly as spaces will be lost under the proposals as a whole. This is for unnecessary additional seating which will clearly be colonised by and only benefit Marrocco’s but will make another focal point for gathering which leads to mess, noise and general anti-social behaviour, particularly at night when people are trying to sleep. This is already an issue which we have to deal with regularly. There are already 10 benches plus the shelter in the small stretch between Medina Terrace and St. Aubyns South so any further seating surely cannot be justified. Ideally this section of Kings Esplanade should be access only for the residents, Marrocco’s, deliveries and disabled. This would alleviate the ridiculous volume of traffic and parking issues and I would be grateful if this could be considered, if not immediately then in the near future as the situation will only get worse.	Negative impact on road safety Reduction in resident only parking Proposed Parklet is unnecessary Proposed Parklet could cause litter / anti-social behaviour concerns	it is not clear where the objector is suggesting the cycle lane is counter to the flow of traffic from their first objection.  It is worth outlining there is already an existing contra flow cycle lane along the Kings Esplanade.  We will also be introducing a contra flow to St Aubyns south. Contra flow cycle lanes are commonly used and improve access for cyclist.  no alterations are recommended.
Object	The plan is to prevent camper vans parking outside the back of the King Alfred but the plans for the car spaces along the western end of Kings Esplanade would allow them to park there all day. In effect, they will be parked there for several days at a time because while not allowed it is not policed either! Camper vans parked opposite flats will be a nuisance to the residents and also cause problems for cars looking to park along the road to visit the beach. Those car spaces should be limited to 4 hours like the ones at the eastern end of Kings Esplanade	Negative impact of displacement of camper van parking to other parts of the seafront Camper Van Parking Lack of Enforcement Car Parking should be limited to a max stay	Disabled users of the area have requested that disabled parking not be restricted to a max use in order to not restrict disabled vehicle users accessing the seafront.  Any illegal use of these bays will need to be reported to the enforcement team. No changes are recommended
Object	At the moment it is almost impossible to find parking in or around Hove Place when my wife or I return from work after 5pm. Invariably we end up parking one or two streets away from our house, which is a great inconvenience. Then new cycle lane scheme along Kingsway will further reduce the number of resident parking places available to us and therefore exacerbate this situation. We would therefore request that this be mitigated somehow within the scheme, e.g. by replacing an equivalent number of shared resident/visitor bays in Hove Place/Osborne Villas/Medina Villas with resident-only spaces. Moreover, some of the existing shared bays are 11-hour duration, which attracts cars/vans to the area and is presumably against the council's policy to reduce the number of cars visiting the city. There are also a number of motorcycle bays that are never used (or at least haven't been for the 7+ years that we have lived here) that could be converted. Thank you for your considering this request.	Reduction in resident only parking Motorcycle bays are redundant in the area Car Parking should be limited to a max stay	All efforts are made by officers to not reduce the number of parking provisions when designing a scheme. This is not aways possible. while there has been a reduction in residents only parking bay this has only been done where it was required to ensure safety.  No changes are recommended
Object	I am objecting, once again, to the introduction of a cycle lane from the end of Hove Lawns to the junction with Hove Street on the grounds of significantly increased pollution due to increased traffic congestion, and on the grounds of safety, primarily that of cyclists, due to the 13 left hand turns cars can, and will, be making through this extremely short stretch of cycle lane. This concern regarding safety has now been exacerbated by the new introduction in TRO 25c 2022 of a new cycle way against the flow of one way traffic down St. Aubyn's South and the introduction on that road of car parking spaces on the eastern side of the road. This means cars exiting from Bath Court and 133 Kingsway will have no clear view of cyclists riding directly towards them. The junction of St. Aybuns South with the A259 is also going to become an accident blackspot due to compromised sight lines.	Increased pollution due to traffic congestion Negative impact on road safety Potential risk of collision with vehicles crossing the cycle lane to enter/exist roads and delivery locations south of Kingsway Concerns regarding cyclists moving against ‘typical’ flow of traffic	There are only three left turn hooks along the stretch from Forth Avenue to Hove Street.  Each left turn will be raised to reduce any conflict.  Many cycle lanes run to the left of general vehicle lanes. Vehicle drivers are responsible giving way to cyclist.  this was not raised as a concern in the independent Road Safety Audit. no change is recommended.
Object	The plan is to prevent camper vans parking outside the back of the King Alfred but the plans for the car spaces along the western end of Kings Esplanade would allow them to park there all day. In effect, they will be parked there for several days at a time. I realise that is not allowed but it is not policed either! That will be a nuisance to the residents and also cause problems for cars looking to park along the road to visit the beach. Those car spaces should be limited to 4 hours like the ones at the eastern end of Kings Esplanade	Negative impact of displacement of camper van parking to other parts of the seafront Camper Van Parking Lack of Enforcement Car Parking should be limited to a max stay	Disabled users of the area have requested that disabled parking not be restricted to a max use in order to not restrict disabled vehicle users accessing the seafront.  Any illegal use of these bays will need to be reported to the enforcement team. No changes are recommended
Object	The plan to prevent camper vans parking outside the back of the King Alfred but effectively they will simply move to the western end of Kings Esplanade allowing them to park there all day. In practice, they already park there for several days at a time with minimal enforcement by the Council. All car spaces should be limited to 4 hours like the ones at the eastern end of Kings Esplanade . I'm a cyclist and the recent cycle lanes along Kingsway are a complete waste of money and road space. The existing cycle lanes along the pavement were more than adequate and any changes are more wated cost, effort and road space.	Negative impact of displacement of camper van parking to other parts of the seafront Camper Van Parking Lack of Enforcement Car Parking should be limited to a max stay Cycle Lanes are a waste of money Cycle Lanes are ineffective use of road space Existing cycle lanes along the payment were adequate	Disabled users of the area have requested that disabled parking not be restricted to a max use in order to not restrict disabled vehicle users accessing the seafront.  Any illegal use of these bays will need to be reported to the enforcement team. No changes are recommended.
OBJECT	The plan is to prevent camper vans parking outside the back of the King Alfred but the plans for the car spaces along the western end of Kings Esplanade would allow them to park there all day. In effect, they will be parked there for several days at a time. I realise that is not allowed but it is not policed either! That will be a nuisance to the residents and also cause problems for cars looking to park along the road to visit the beach. Those car spaces should be limited to 4 hours like the ones at the eastern end of Kings Esplanade. There is no logic to having it any different to the eastern end	Negative impact of displacement of camper van parking to other parts of the seafront Camper Van Parking Lack of Enforcement Car Parking should be limited to a max stay	Disabled users of the area have requested that disabled parking not be restricted to a max use in order to not restrict disabled vehicle users accessing the seafront.  Any illegal use of these bays will need to be reported to the enforcement team. No changes are recommended.
OBJ3ECT	I strongly object to what is proposed on st aubyns road south a 2xway cycle lane right past the electric gates off bath court and st aubyns car park this is madness as car going in the car park will be right across the cycle lane while the gates-are opening and we also have removal lorries and big city clean lorrys in and out to collect rubbish etc totaly iresponcelbly this is. And at the end of the road were car turn up st aubyns road south from the esplanade will be a accident waiting to happen	Potential risk of collision with vehicles crossing the cycle lane to enter/exist roads and delivery locations south of Kingsway Potential risk of vehicles being temporarily stationary on the cycle lane while gaining access Impact on refuse collection vehicles ease of access / collision risk	cyclists heading south along the new contra flow will have right of way over vehicles turning right.  Vehicles will also be facing north to give clear line of sight for on coming cyclist. Therefore this is not considered a concern. no change recommended.

4. Neutral Comments

Comment

Dear Parking Team / Transport Projects / James (cc Matt) Thank you for sharing the proposals for the A259 from Fourth Avenue to Saxon Rd. Please take this as the response from the BTNBikeShare operator Hourbike. We very much welcome the proposals and consider they will make a significant contribution to encouraging people to try cycling in the city. There is currently a BTN BikeShare hub on the south side of the King Alfred car park on the promenade, just west of the shelter (drawing 5). The operations team needs to access the hub for servicing and redistribution. This is currently done by parking in the bays adjacent to the hub. As these are to be made disabled bays, this will no longer be possible. Consequently servicing the hub will be very difficult, if not impossible without parking illegally. We request that a loading bay is included here to facilitate access to the hub. The bay should be as close as possible to the hub. It may be possible to adjust the hub position to match the loading space subject to consents. A new BTNBikeShare hub is proposed on the north side of the King Alfred (drawing4). There seems to be a gap between map 3 and 4 so it's difficult to see the proposed hub location precisely and what's on the east side. Whilst we welcome the additional hub and consider outside the leisure centre entrance to be a logical and potentially popular location we are again concerned about servicing the hub. The hub is some distance from the nearest loading bay. Our suggestions are: swap the loading bay and disabled bay to bring the loading closer to the hub. Moving the hub west towards the loading bay, possibly on the western side of the crossing if there is room. I hope these comments are helpful. We will be very happy to engage in further discussion to get to the best outcome possible.

Encourages cycling as a form of transport Negative impact on the bike share operations due to location changes of loading bays

This comment has now been withdrawn.  In response an additional TRO will be drawn up to provide a loading bay for the BikeHire Station.