These questions have come either directly to me from residents who’ve read my leaflet or via local press. Some are specific to the ward, some are citywide questions.
Transportation:
Question to Adrian Hart #1: “You mention ‘constant tinkering’ with roads and I assume you mean the LTN here? I’m neither for or against it and I also don’t want to see “tinkering” – there are far too many cars coming into Brighton and feel a big overhaul is needed rather than tinkering – particularly making public transport a much better option for locals and visitors alike. What are your plans for transport in this area?
My answer: When B&H Independents talk about the constant tinkering with roads we refer to various of the ill-considered plans that have received considerable public opposition. The city has been through transport turmoil under the Greens and Labour eg COVID bike lanes, clumsily introduced under Labour and blamed on Greens. We need a period of calm to assess where the pinch points and problems are. No more plans until this is done!
[Clumsy interventions: Since 2019, the main cycle routes implemented have been on the A259 – Palace Pier to Fourth Avenue and on Madeira Drive with an estimated annual loss of £640,000 parking income combined].
The proposed (and temporarily withdrawn) Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) for part of our area is one of the ‘tinkering’ issues I have in mind. The proposals triggered an extraordinary reaction from residents and businesses which united large numbers of in-principle supporters of traffic reduction (the views are well described on the ‘Improve or Stop’ FB group). In my own neighbourhood of Carlton Hill residents (including Green voters) were unanimous in their opposition. One resident echoed many when saying “this makes no sense at all, blocking north bound traffic up Carlton Hill puts more traffic on Edward St, and having to circle the area to find parking will only add to the congestion and pollution…”.
As I say on the front of my leaflet, this council must – absolutely must – listen to this opposition. The opposition is so evidently pro reducing traffic but sadly the Green administration is tin-eared and seemingly indifferent preferring a bludgeon like approach irrespective of the cost to lives and livelihoods. I fully agree with Labour candidates Tristram and Chandni’s call for lowering car use via park and ride schemes (though the practicalities of these are proving hard) and low emission public transport. [See my position on the ULEZ policy here].
But the other glaring example of bad transport policy (tinkering doesn’t quite cover it!) is the plans now underway to remove the Aquarium roundabout. Even the consultants appointed to the scheme (known as Valley Gardens Phase 3) warned their council clients that replacing the roundabout with traffic lights will create excessive congestion (they call it ‘journey disbenefits’). The off-the-record explanation Green councillors put forward when we corner them on this is that by making life miserable for vehicle users will cause unnecessary car use to fall away (they call it ‘traffic evaporation’). Yet, for every car journey that ‘evaporates’, more delivery vans and busses will take their place. Buses will resort to diesel back-up engines as they shunt through stop-start congestion (and there’ll be more PM 2.5 emissions from braking).
Our council have lied to the public about the roundabout, declaring it (without evidence) as one of the most dangerous junctions in Britain (see my Question to ETS Sept 20th 2022; see minutes p5). Independents would do everything to stop this scheme but emphasise that we (like most objectors) are FOR the overall revamp of Valley Gardens as a car-reduced, people/cycling-friendly area.
Brighton & Hove Independents would:
• Review Valley Gardens phase 3. This is the controversial part of the overall project which will see the roundabout by the pier replaced with traffic lights and will create more traffic congestion. Estimated cost: £13m of which £1.5m is BHCC money, £5m is a loan and 6 million is a grant.
• Introduce Shuttle buses from train station to i360, pier and Black Rock.
• Stop all projects and take a holistic view of the whole city as tinkering in one area most had unintended consequences elsewhere
• Review usage of all existing bike lanes – and plans for future ones.
• Introduce shuttle service from the train station to i360 and Madeira Drive.
• Park & Ride. So far this has never happened as political parties can’t find suitable locations. We have two location suggestions that have never been discussed: Building additional levels on car parks at Hollingbury and at M&S/Tesco retail park in Shoreham. We will also discuss with South Downs National Park where they might accept one to the north of the city. Fast non-stopping buses are key to the success of park and ride.
• It is vital that we listen to the groups that represent less able people in the city. They have repeatedly been ignored by political parties and BHCC officers (the pedestrianisation of Gardner Street is a case in point).
Housing.
Question to Adrian Hart #2: “I wasn’t aware the gasworks site was even up for development- that is good news. Can you share a link to the alternative, low-rise, resident proposal you mention? This site does however seem ideally suited to high density housing – it has good transport links, close to two supermarkets, close to the hospital, easy walking to the seafront and into Brighton, straight onto the A259 if cars are needed. There is no reason why high density housing can’t also be people friendly“.
My answer: You are absolutely right that there is no reason why high density housing cannot also be people-friendly. I’m involved with the Brighton Society and my colleague Jeremy Mustoe has written extensively about the opportunity for low-rise, high density housing the Gasworks site offers. However the overdevelopment contained in proposals put forward by Berkley for the Gasworks site are truly dreadful. I agree with the detailed case put forward by Mustoe and the Coalition of residents and amenity groups. You can read about this via various articles on the Brighton Society website, notably this one.
Another must-read article by Jeremy Mustoe exposes the shocking amount of obfuscation by council planning officials.
I’ve been asked a housing question by many residents over the last few years. In essence the question is why is are city planners allowing developments containing new homes that virtually no-one in housing need can afford. The question comes from people (including whole families) trapped inside over-priced, insecure from no-notice eviction and often dilapidated rented accommodation. But also people luck enough to have housing security but are saddened that their children or grandchildren will seemingly never be able to one day live in the city in which they were born. Add this to the obvious issue of homelessness and it feels like the over-riding question of what is the housing “crisis” and how can it ever be solved needs an answer. I’m no expert but this week, after a long time puzzling it through, I’ve attempted an answer in my essay Housing Held Hostage. You can read it here.
Resident questions assembled by Sarah Booker-Lewis (Local Democracy Reporter) for publication in B&H News/Argus:
1 Why do you want to be a councillor?
I am proud to be part of a new movement of independents. As your Independent Councillor, free from the control of national party machines, I will exclusively focus on constituents and the task of restoring good governance to Brighton and Hove. If elected I had hope to raise at committee level neighbourhood concerns built up over recent years. The housing crisis is one: We have residents in private accommodation facing exorbitant rents and young people unable to live in the city in which they were born. It is a national scandal. BHCC should be on the forefront of demanding change.
2 Why do you want to stand in this ward?
I have lived on Carlton Hill for 20 years. In 2018, alongside many local residents, I opposed the ‘Edward Street Quarter’ overdevelopment. Despite the lack of affordable housing, Labour, Green and Tory Councillors ensured the scheme was approved. In 2019, I helped establish Amex Area Neighbourhood Forum which secured the lease for our thriving White Street Community Garden on Edward Street (local ward councillors had told us it wasn’t possible). I stood as an Independent for Queens Park in 2019. I remain convinced that our Green, Labour and Tory ward councillors fail electors by prioritising the needs of party.
3 What are the key issues specific to this ward?
The council need to get back to basics and provide efficient, well-run services for the ward. Removing the Aquarium roundabout will cause congestion and air pollution in our area, as will plans for an LTN. Local businesses and residents will suffer but too often their objections are ignored. Lets have ward councillors who listen to residents. Like so much of the city, the ward looks dirty and run down. The proliferation of spray-can tagging, the failure to deal with drug dealing, overflowing bins, proliferating weeds symbolises a ‘no-one cares/no-one’s in charge’ environment and will simply invoke more of the same.
(Above) The proposed LTN (back on the table soon)
4 What will you do to make the area safer for people with protected characteristics (eg, LGB, trans, non-binary and intersex)?
Residents repeatedly raised safety issues with police/local councillors. I’ll endeavour to demand improved public safety for everyone; better street lighting, ‘bobby’s on the beat’, action on assaults. In September, we attended a rally and were horrified that police stood by watching women being verbally abused by mobs of masked men. Drowned out by chants of ‘No TERFs on our Turf’, women held firm as they attempted to address the rally despite smoke bombs thrown at them. Holding gender critical beliefs is a protected characteristic, yet our council leaders seem to agree with the ‘No TERFS…’ chant. It’s called misogyny. Shameful.
5 Too many drivers ignore double yellow lines, creating a parking free-for-all. How will you deal with this?
I’d seek to assess the extent of this problem in our ward and find out why enforcement officers are not tackling this (though it’s right to allow delivery drivers a few minutes to go about their work). We need more (not less) parking spaces and charge residents, visitors, commercial vehicles less. No spaces mean care workers and other services forced to risk parking on yellow lines. Flagrant yellow line abuses ignored by enforcement flag up a general failure at council level that relates to the topic of question (6) on tagger vandals identified to council officers who take no action.
6 What will you do to reduce vandalism and graffiti?
Along with fellow residents, I’ve taken action on one prolific tagger who promotes his brand both on social media and the walls, post-boxes and shopfronts he vandalises. The council/local media discovered this tagger hiding in plain sight only when @BHIndies pointed it out. Our investigation uncovered the extraordinary indifference of council/police enforcement. They seem to tolerate talentless ‘tagging’ while bluntly threatening shopkeepers with penalties if tags are not removed. Independent councillors will expose this failure, relentlessly demanding competent and coordinated police/council action. So abjectly let down by our salaried officials, businesses and residents have organised citywide community resistance (www.brat.org.uk).
