Proposals to freeze parking permit charges for a year if residents opt for to end “light touch” parking have been described as a “bribe”.
Hanover and Elm Grove resident Wilf Nicholls was shocked to see the suggestion that if residents in the zone S area choose to keep their “light touch” parking scheme, permit prices would increase in line with other zones.
Currently, the “light touch” permits are £120 and Mr Nicholls fears that they could go up to £335 if residents disagree with Brighton and Hove City Council’s consultation proposals.
The consultation, which ends on Sunday 14 January, said that if people opted for an “outer city zone” 8am to 8pm scheme from Monday to Sunday, then current permit prices would be frozen until 2025.
Currently, parking is restricted to permit holders only from 11am to noon and 6pm to 7pm from Monday to Friday in Zone S – an area bounded by Elm Grove, Queen’s Park Road, Down Terrace and Freshfield Road.
Mr Nicholls criticised the council for holding the public consultation over the Christmas period.
It started on 11 December, even though the council’s Transport and Sustainability Committee approved going the consultation on Tuesday 3 October.
The zone S parking area was introduced in 2017 and reviewed in 2018.
Mr Nicholls said: “Lengthy costly consultation and impact assessment was undertaken with residents and businesses a few years ago, overwhelmingly supporting the current light touch scheme which works very well.
“Despite promising us the scheme would not change, the council have snuck in this proposal over the Christmas period and are proposing huge hikes in the costs.
“I have written to local councillors but none have replied. There should be an open and transparent consultation as this will have a huge impact on our area.
“The only other thing is that it will result in more cars parking here on meters.
“We do not have a capacity issue at the moment so it feels like we will be used to generate more income and soak up excess vehicles from other areas when they merge our scheme with neighbouring ones.
“The roads will likely be busier as people look for places to park. We feel there should have been a transparent impact assessment so that residents could make an informed choice.
Labour councillor Trevor Muten, who chairs the council’s Transport and Sustainability Committee, said that the consultation process covered five parking zones and involved 10,000 addresses.
He said that the five-week consultation needed to start as soon as possible to “inform” the 2024-25 budget.
Councillor Muten said: “Under the proposals permit holders in these zones would still be able to park in all resident and shared parking bays within their zones.
“But we would be able to offer greater flexibility for visitors and businesses and provide more effective use of available road space, reducing pressure on parking in neighbouring areas.”
Consultations are also under way on the council website for zone L in West Hove, zone P in Hove Park, zone U around Coombe Road and zone W around Wish Road.
The parking zone consultations close on Sunday 14 January.
Can’t say that this comes as a surprise. Typical B&H council at it again with dirty tricks. Ask the other zones how well it panned out
By its own admission, BHCC Transport Dept has lost over £1m potential parking revenue by removing parking spaces – the result of installing unwanted and poorly used cycle lanes. The Council has to now make up the deficit by hitting residents. They act against the best interests of residents and visitors
Can you give examples of these ‘unwanted and poorly used cycle lanes’, specifically where they have replaced residential parking spaces?
I have rarely seen a cyclist riding along Old Shoreham Road, between the junctions Dyke Road and The Drive
Madeira Drive. Over half the 366 parking spaces have been removed by the former Labour/Green coalition council for an unnecessary cycle lane when there already was one on the prom. Council have admitted losing £800k revenue pa from this area alone as a result and 13 local attractions have also lost half their visitor parking, multiplying this financial loss to the local economy. If you don’t think such measures devaste our city, check out our city reviews online. They go from bad to worse in terms of the number of visitors saying ‘Never again’ and ‘Avoid Brighton at all costs’
The cycle lane on Madeira Drive prom was too narrow for cyclists and forced pedestrians into a very small space on the seaward side. It was unsafe. The replacement is wider and safer for cyclists (except for the car driving in it at about 12.15 this afternoon). It gives the promenade back to pedestrians, making it safer for them too. Online reviews of anything are always bad/negative. People just love to complain.
Justin Time
Rubbish, Do you really think people don’t know the area ?
I have very good knowledge of the area dating back to the 70’s and can assure you, Madeira Drive has the widest pavement in Brighton, therefore the lane could easily have been widened. Total rubbish it was unsafe and rubbish pedestrians were forced into a very small space. There were and still is very few Cyclist that use this area.
The strip between Palace Pier and Westwards is much narrower and extensively more busier so you’re talking total dogs nuts.
Online reviews often give both negative and positive results dependant on what side of the fence the poster sits with a view who opt for middle ground.
What does come up very often, are the obvious comments that don’t match the reality, a comment like yours for instance.
Lets sort this out for you. MD had been scheduled to be made ONE WAY under the VG3 scheme, not the lame, safety B/S you’ve tried selling. Covid conveniently gave the council an excuse to get it done now.
Have a nice day.
Very few cyclists use the Kingsway cycle lane going west – you will see them on the original cycle lane going in this direction. The new lane has removed parking and made parking/cycling/walking more dangerous for all concerned. It has also created traffic jams and thus caused more pollution.Also , the Greens lied about consulting disabled groups before installing it .
All in all – a complete waste of time and money
Kingsway cycle lane was paid for out of central government funds. It works really well, as a) the original cycle lane is too narrow for bi-directional travel and b) it is increasingly well used. Some parking has been replaced but a substantial amount retained. As a pedestrian, cyclist and driver along this route, I feel safer in all modes of travel and it has not impacted my journey time. Today there were dozens of cyclists using the westbound route in the short time I was there.
It has been proven many times in the past that the Greens have a habit for distorting the truth.
As was proved in May, people simply don’t believe their lies anymore.
I’m sorry Justin, but this just isn’t true. The cycle path between King Alfred and the lagoon is the same width as the original one which you claim (without evidence) as ‘too narrow for bidirectional use’ and is used – bidirectionally – day in day out without issue.
More B/S.
Justin Time.
The poster quoted parking revenue, but as you want to go there.
Normal visitor bays, Madeira Drive, A259, Black rock, London Road Co-Op, various bays across the city replaced by cycle sheds to name just a few.
Residents bays, various across the city replaced by cycle sheds.
Cycle lanes, Madeira Drive, no evidence to show road space was required when there’s the widest pavement in Brighton was available, no evidence cyclist use the pavement or cycle lane in any great numbers.
A259 second lane. No evidence that numbers warrant a second lane between i360 and Hove Grand Avenue. (Even with two lanes, cyclist still use main carriageways, going so slow causing congestion and pollution btw.)
Old Shoreham Rd, evidence showed an actual decrease in cycle use after the lane went in. This lane wasn’t wanted by the majority of people including some cyclist. (Incidentally, wasn’t there a serious injury to a small child due to a cyclist using the pavement and not the cycle lane when it was installed.)
Falmer-Woodingdean, not seen much cycle use in this area.
Ditchling road, not seen many using dedicated cycle path but plenty dangerously using this fast twisty main road.
That will do for the moment.
You cannot count money you do not yet have !
But J, that is how the entirety of the global markets work. Take all the world’s money, and pay off the world’s debt, you’d still have an overwhelming amount of debt remaining.
Bribery and coercion in a public consultation is not compliant with the Nolan Principles of Public Life all public bodies are supposed to abide by and should be subject to a Standards complaint. http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-of-public-life/the-7-principles-of-public-life–2
http://www.gov.uk/complain-about-your-council
Weasel words from Labour’s Councillor Muten pretending they are doing residents a favour by hiking up residential parking permits two-fold.
There is no problem in Hanover and Elm Grove which residents have asked him to take this action on, supposing he’s working for us as a public servant in any way, and his consultation is a sham,
I wish the council would close Maderia Drive fully to traffic and turn it into a pedestrian and cycle only zone. Would massively improve the area and improve the prospect of the arches being restored, which are currently totally blocked by being behind a car park.
What’s that noise?!
Oh, it’s a barrel being scraped
Bob Hope and No hope of that. Madeira Drive is the Transport Department’s best earner and that loss of revenue would severly hit budgets for active travel, road improvements and free bus passes. Not going to happen.
I’m with you on this. When it was closed during lockdown, it was the first time we were able to cycle as a family with two small children along the seafront to the Marina from where we lived in the Hove lawns area.
Lots of the whingers here don’t live in the local area, are constantly vowing “never to visit Brighton again”, yet linger around these articles like a bad smell.
Cycle lanes were already in existence. Why didn’t you use them?
Could it be that is you who doesn’t live in the local area?
‘Anon’ ..really?
Where do you live now?
Anon. Your knowledge of Brighton and Hove is laughable if you didn’t know there was already a 2-way cycle long along the prom before BHCC tried to close Madeira Drive for spurious reasons using lockdown as an excuse. Now go back to your Milton Keynes local media or wherever you really live.
Where does Anon say they didn’t know about the old cycle lane? They just said the new cycle lane made them feel able to cycle as a family. I remember the old cycle lane on the pavement too. It was dangerous for everyone.
Why don’t you engage with the arguments instead of arrogantly slagging off those who disagree with you?
Anon
Another one who lacks knowledge of the local area, utter rubbish you were unable to cycle to the Marina from Hove. Cyclist, including families have been doing so for 5 decades that I know of.
Stop dreaming and post sensible facts that don’t make you look foolish.
It would kill of any remaining business on Madeira drive. Not to mention stop the revenue of events (as every event closure is revenue for council (that goes into 5 figures depending on numbers)
Any real evidence that Madeira Drive businesses rely on the parking there for trade ?
Events are licenced separately.
Plenty of permenant businesses such as Brighton Pier and the Acquarium rely on that parking and are economically disadvantaged by its removal.
“But we would be able to offer greater flexibility for visitors and businesses and provide more effective use of available road space, reducing pressure on parking in neighbouring areas.”
I live in one of these areas off Coombe Road. Most of the day the parking is fairly empty and available. That is far more flexible that whacking up our fees and making it impossible for friends and traders to park.
We all know the “freeze” would only be for one year and then it would be up to full price.
I want to know how many councillors actually live in properties where they have this tax. Or are they lucky enough to have off road parking?
Coombe Road Resident, telling lies in public office like; “But we would be able to offer greater flexibility for visitors and businesses and provide more effective use of available road space, reducing pressure on parking in neighbouring areas.”is malefeasance in public office and Coucillors need to be held to account for this.
Dirty tricks they just do what they want greedy council don’t care about resident’s just making money people won’t be able to live here and drive to expensive cheaper to live in London this council needs a good sort out it’s full of crooks
I live in Shoreham and have tried twice to install and use the pay by phone app recommended by Brighton council. The first time it would not recognise the parking zone codes for fiveways when visiting a shop or the zone behind London road by the multistorey car park so I ended up deleting it. I have tried to install it again but it won’t even register my car, throwing up an error. There must already be so many people who wish to use some of the services offered by Brighton shops but are giving up because of this useless app and the attitude of the council over parking issues, I think they are losing far more revenue than just from lost parking spaces.
It’s not a lawful BHCC parking scheme if a. they make it difficult or impossible to pay ie by requiring drivers to have special equipment and a stable signal to pay and b. there is no tariff displayed. Enjoy your free parking.
Oh Barry, you probably shouldn’t be advising people. Especially with your track record of accuracy.
It is 100% money making scheme, and they have the audacity to up it to 7 days a week, my wife loves visits from our daughter, and if it is not voted down she will have to pay on weekends
Or travel to the area via public transport.
Lets be frank residents would be mad to vote to abolish these light touch zones, generally they work well and the bribe of a one year price freeze just means they would get a huge hike in the second year.
More dirty tricks from our acquisitive council
I live in zone P and am also under the council’s plans to change parking!
I, along with the majority of residents in our part of the zone, do not want to change to comply with the council!!
As a small community, we all worked hard to join the zone which eventually freed us from the nightmare parking we had to put up with which included vehicles parked for months on end – some with people living in them for weeks on end!
I have my sons every other week and rarely have the car I share with my ex. When I do, it’s mostly the weekend and can manage the occasional evenings between 5 and 6, by moving it to Coombe Road. If it’s moved 8-8, I’ll have to get a permit for a fortune even for occasional use, on Mafeking Road which is rarely even half filled with cars. There is zero need for a hard parking scheme in this area and most annoyed that the results of the consultation appear to have been completely ignored.
A very personal perspective perhaps, but thre ate.many crossovers with others who shared their views to be totally ignored.
Doesn’t the proposed change include increased number of Pay & Display places that you could use instead of buying a permit ?
Vote for independent councillors.
Vote for accountability not dogma.