Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘brighton & hove city council’

A27 dualling could cost the city

Posted in Development, South Downs National Park, Transport, tagged , , , , , , , , on 16 July, 2014| 2 Comments »

News Release, Wednesday, 16 July, 2014

A27 dualling could cost the city

Brighton & Hove Friends of the Earth (BHFOE) is calling on Brighton & Hove City Council to reject the Conservative Notice of Motion to support the A27 Action Campaign [1] at the Full Council meeting tomorrow [2].  Apart from the fact that dualling the A27, particularly around Worthing, would be extremely costly, BHFOE does not believe it is in the interests of the city.  Also, it is sceptical that there is any evidence that it would boost economic growth.

New roads generate more traffic and that will increase congestion and pollution within the city as more people are tempted to drive along the south coast.  This would also undermine public transport and put the city’s road network under further stress while reducing the transport options for tourists visiting the city.  Much of the traffic on the A27 is local traffic and requires local transport solutions, not big new roads.

Chris Todd from BHFOE said:

“Many councillors spent years supporting the creation of the South Downs National Park.  Now they risk throwing much of that away if they support the A27 Action Campaign.  This group’s aim to see the A27 dualled along its whole length would be extremely costly economically and environmentally.  If successful, it could then lead to more roadbuilding around Brighton & Hove, and cause huge damage to the South Downs.

“Rather than going backwards we need to be moving forward with ideas and solutions fit for the 21st century.  Many of the concerns businesses have could be addressed by small online improvements, such as a new junction at Crossbush, and by measures to reduce traffic.  If as they claim traffic and congestion is so bad yet so critical to the economy it begs the questions:  Why are we doing relatively well along the south coast?  And secondly, why have local authorities, aside from Brighton & Hove, done so little to promote walking, cycling and public transport and traffic reduction measures?”

“Given the cost of doing anything around Worthing – a tunnel is like to be of the order of £2 billion – it is unlikely the A27 will be dualled any time soon.  This campaign is only raising false hope while failing to tackle the real problem of there being too much traffic.  Car journeys don’t start and end on the A27, they start and end in the towns and cities adjacent to it.  These are the places where the congestion will transfer to.  The city’s energy and efforts would be far better focussed on tackling the real issues of our day:  climate change [3], air pollution, obesity, diabetes, mental health are putting the NHS under severe strain and costing it billions.  Isn’t it about time we had some joined up thinking and started promoting healthier transport choices?”

[1]   The Conservative Notice of Motion states:  “In order further to promote business investment and economic growth in the Greater Brighton area this Council resolves to pledge its support to the newly-formed A27 Action campaign.”

[2]   BHCC’s Full Council meeting is taking place on Thursday, 17 July, 4.30pm Council Chamber, Brighton Town Hall.

[3]   The UK’s Committee for Climate Change yesterday published a report saying that we are unlikely to meet our carbon reduction targets without greater action.  Building new roads increase carbon emissions and will make this task even harder and more costly.

 

Read Full Post »

Urban fringe – Council risks making bad position worse

Posted in Development, South Downs National Park, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on 7 July, 2014| Leave a Comment »

News release issued Monday, 7 July, 2014

Council risks making a bad position worse

Urban fringe report being adopted as policy without any public scrutiny

Brighton & Hove Friends of the Earth (BHFOE) is calling on Brighton & Hove City Council to put on hold the consultation on the proposed modifications to the City Plan.  These are due to be considered at Policy & Resources Committee on Friday [1].  BHFOE believes that going ahead with the proposed modifications is premature.  The Urban Fringe Assessment Report has not been subject to any consultation or public scrutiny yet the Council appears to be adopting it as policy [2].

Instead, BHFOE would like to see a public consultation on Urban Fringe Report take place first with modifications to the City Plan coming forward after that.  It is particularly concerned about the proposed amendments to the urban fringe Policy SA4 [see note 1].

Chris Todd from BHFOE said:

“We understand that the Council is between a rock and a hard place because of Government changes to the planning system [3].  However, the proposed modifications to the City Plan will make a bad situation worse.  These changes will give developers the green light to build on any of the sites listed in the urban fringe report, even if the consultants have got their facts wrong.

“Whilst we are not saying no development anywhere, we have serious concerns about loss of green space (which is in short supply across the city) and the impact on the National Park with some of these proposals.  That’s why we need to have this report properly scrutinised now before any changes are made to the City Plan.

“We were also very surprised to see the amount of housing on major development areas fall [4].  This has led to housing being shifted from sustainable locations, where there is good access to services, to the urban fringe where there are not.  This needs reversing.

“We also need our local MPs and councillors to make strong representations to Government about the unfairness of the current planning system and the problems created by London’s distorted housing market [5].”

[1]   BHCC’s Policy & Resources Committee meets at 2pm, Friday, 11 July, 2014 in the Council Chamber at Hove Town Hall, to discuss the proposed modifications to the City Plan, which includes amending the amount of housing across the whole city, not just the urban fringe.  It is also recommending changing the policy on the urban fringe (SA4) to the following:

Development within the urban fringe will be permitted where:

a) a site has been allocated for development in a development plan document; or

b) a site (or part of a site) has been identified in the 2014 Urban Fringe Assessment Study as having potential for residential development; or

c) a countryside location can be justified;

and where it can be clearly demonstrated that:

d) the proposal has had regard to the downland landscape setting of the city;

e) all any adverse impacts of development are minimised and appropriately mitigated and/or compensated for; and

f) where appropriate, the proposal helps to achieve the policy objectives set out above.

BHFOE wants b) above deleted as it believes it is premature and will prejudice which sites will be developed before there has been any scrutiny of the Urban Fringe Assessment or before they are considered in Part 2 of the City Plan.

[2]   The Brighton & Hove Urban Fringe Assessment by consultants LUC has been produced without any stakeholder involvement nor has it been subject to public scrutiny to test whether its recommendations are sound.  For example, the South Downs National Park Authority was not involved in the production of the report, so none of the claims about possible impacts on the South Downs have been tested or assessed by the body charged with safeguarding their future.

[3]   The Government changed the planning system making it easier for developers to do what they want if an area does not have an up to date adopted Local Plan.  Unfortunately, the time given to local planning authorities to draft, consult and adopt a Local Plan were ridiculously short.  See CPRE’s website for an outline of concerns with the new planning system.

[4]   Housing numbers on major development areas is set to fall from 6,155 units to 6,010,a drop of 145 homes, the main drops being in the New England Quarter and London Road area, Hove Station and Shoreham Harbour.  See pages 8/9, Appendix 2, Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One – Proposed Modifications Schedule.

[5]   See article in Planning Resource.  This highlights the housing pressure many local planning authorities are under around London because of the failure to build enough housing in the capital.

Read Full Post »

City Plan Fails on Transport and Air Quality

Posted in Transport, tagged , , on 26 April, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Responding to the consultation on Brighton & Hove City Council’s City Plan Part 1, Brighton & Hove Friends of the Earth (BHFOE)  has said that while it is supportive of much of the plan, it is objecting to weak and ineffectual policies on transport.  Of particular concern are that the Plan does not properly protect or recognise the city centre bus corridors, nor does it propose sufficient measures to tackle air pollution.

In the Churchill Square and Brighton Centre special development area, no mention is made of the economic importance of the North St / Western Rd bus corridor with its 12,000 seats an hour passing through the area.  No mention is made of the inadequate bus shelters in Churchill Square nor that air pollution around the Clock Tower is the worst in the city. The plan also allows for more car parking in the city centre which with the extra traffic this will bring could bring the bus network to a standstill.

BHFOE have also said they would like to see Shoreham Harbour used for large scale renewable energy projects and that there should be more sports provision in the city to improve public health.  While supporting development at Toads Hole Valley, it wants to ensure that an exemplar development comes forward which respects the setting of the South Downs National Park, while maximising the number of homes built there.

Read Full Post »