Share this on:

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on email
Email

We need your help again…

Labour have announced they want the temporary cycle lanes on the Old Shoreham Road (A270) removed, and an extension scrapped. They’re calling for ‘alternative routes’ to be considered.

This is a terrible idea, for many reasons.

The council’s Environment, Transport & Sustainability (ETS) Committee will be voting on 21 July about the future of the Old Shoreham Road cycle lanes, along with improvements to the seafront and Western Road.

Labour are divided on this issue, and some are open to persuasion. We’d like you to write to ETS committee members, Labour members and your MP, to stress the importance of safe streets for cycling.

Simply copy and paste the email addresses below, then explain why it’s so important for the lanes to remain, using our six reasons below as inspiration. Include personal details about how you use the lanes. If you’re short on time, just copy and paste our six reasons.

If you know a child who uses the lanes to get to school or college, please encourage them to write – if possible, sending pictures of them cycling.

Here are six reasons why Labour need to reconsider:

  1. Without protected space, the Old Shoreham Road is too dangerous for anyone except the most intrepid to cycle along. The pop-up lanes allow children to cycle to school and college safely, and adults, including NHS employees, to get to work, thus reducing the need for car transport.
  2. The only way to make cycling mass transit, as the Government wants, is to provide safe, direct routes everywhere. You can’t go from Hove Cemetery to Hove Park via New Church Road.
  3. The pop-up lanes have been funded using money from the government’s Active Travel Fund. Successive rounds of funding are dependent upon the last round being properly invested. If the OSR lanes are cancelled, the council risks losing new funds, when it’s already strapped for cash.
  4. The Old Shoreham Road has been identified as a key cycling route for the council’s draft Local Cycling & Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). If the temporary lanes are removed, they’ll only have to be put back as a permanent scheme, which will be more costly.
  5. Traffic monitoring reports show average speeds have not decreased, meaning that the cycle lanes have not led to increased congestion. Opposition to the lanes began last spring, well before there were cars back on the roads.
  6. Labour said last year that it wanted to make an ‘evidence-based decision, based on traffic flows.’ The evidence is clear: the cycle lanes keep people safe and have no detrimental effect on traffic flows. They need to keep their promise.

 

Email addresses for ETS committee members:

Amy.Heley@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Jamie.Lloyd@brighton-hove.gov.uk, steve.davis@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Elaine.Hills@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Gary.Wilkinson@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Theresa.Fowler@brighton-hove.gov.uk, leslie.hamilton@brighton-hove.gov.uk, nancy.platts@brighton-hove.gov.uk, robert.nemeth@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Samer.Bagaeen@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Email addresses for Labour councillors (excluding ETS members):

john.allcock@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Carmen.Appich@brighton-hove.gov.uk, peter.atkinson@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Nick.Childs@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Amanda.Evans@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Amanda.Grimshaw@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Christopher.Henry@brighton-hove.gov.uk, clare.moonan@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Jackie.o’quinn@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Anne.Pissaridou@brighton-hove.gov.uk, alan.robins@brighton-hove.gov.uk, Gilliane.Williams@brighton-hove.gov.uk, daniel.yates@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Email addresses for local MPs:

Peter Kyle (Hove & Portslade) hove.portslade@parliament.uk

Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavilion) brightonoffice@parliament.uk

Lloyd Russell-Moyle (Brighton Kemptown & Peacehaven) lloyd@russell-moyle.co.uk

More to explore