Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Councillor says workers told to call police in event of “trouble” over Brighton & Hove bike hangars

City council accused of being “inappropriate and unhelpful” towards people questioning contractors

Brighton & Hove City Council is said to be advising contractors installing bike hangars in the south coast city to call police should they be challenged by members of the public while going about their work – with the Labour councillor who raised the issue describing it as “inappropriate and unhelpful to threaten” residents raising concerns over how money is being spent.

The hangars, each able to accommodate up to six bicycles, are being rolled out across the city, with around 60 of them currently in place and a waiting list.

They have proven hugely popular with many local residents looking for somewhere to store their bikes, with all spaces allocated and a waiting list stretching into the hundreds.

However, they have met some opposition from people complaining that the hangars are an eyesore and take up car parking spaces – even though two can fit in the space occupied by one motor vehicle.

> Hove woman persuades council not to locate “unattractive” cycle hangar outside her home

The Argus reports that some local councillors have also raised concerns over a lack of full consultation before hangars were installed.

The city has been administered since 2020 by the Green Party, who have 20 of the 55 seats, which insists that there has been every opportunity for the introduction of the hangars to be debated.

At a council meeting last week, Green Party Councillor Hannah Allbrooke pointed out that the hangars had been included in the city’s local transport plan.

“We saw from the responses to the survey last year that residents really want them,” she said. “With so many people living in shared accommodation, flats or houses where storage space is at a premium, it can be so difficult for people to find spaces to store their cycles.

“The locations of those hangars are determined by where people asked for them,” she added.

At the meeting, however, opposition Labour and Conservative councillors voted for a detailed report on the bike parking units to be compiled and submitted to the council’s environment, transport and sustainability committee.

Tory councillor Robert Nemeth described the hangars as “unbeautiful objects springing up in inappropriate places” and claimed that “the council introduced the hangars without going through the usual channels – by the back door as it were.

“Those of us who serve on transport committee are well used to debating controversial issues and we do our best to scrutinise and improve any such policies before us. Financial, legal and equalities issues are all within our remit.

“But cycle hangars haven’t had a proper public airing,” he added. “There was a brief mention in the ‘budget council’ paperwork and some ‘traffic regulation order’ consultations for the most controversial placements but never a proper debate on the principle.”

The issue of council contractors being advised to contact police if people questioned what they were doing was raised following the meeting by a Labour councillor, John Allcock.

He said that residents of Cissbury Road approached workers who were installing two hangars there, when they had only been expecting one to be put in place.

According to Councillor Allcock, the contractors showed the residents an email from the council that said they should call police “if there was any trouble.”

The councillor, who maintained that his party backed the hangars in principle as part of efforts to promote active travel, said: “It’s certainly highly inappropriate and unhelpful to threaten well-meaning and responsible citizens with a call to the police when they question how council services are being implemented in their neighbourhood.

He added: “I’m very afraid that this zealot-like behaviour will only alienate citizens from engaging in the process of active travel rather than govern by consensus and win support.”

Council announces Beryl as new bike-share partner, with e-Bikes available to hire for first time

Meanwhile, the council has announced that it has awarded the contract to run its BTN BikeShare scheme, operated since its launch in 2017 by Hourbike but recently plagued by technical problems, to Beryl, which already operates a number of such schemes throughout the UK.

The current scheme is now being wound down ahead of closing on 31 December, with Beryl’s offer being launched in spring next year, reports the Argus.

Unlike the current scheme, e-bikes will be available to hire and will make up more than half of Beryl’s fleet – 468 of them, while there will be 312 push bikes.

Councillor Steve Davis, co-chair of Brighton & Hove City Council’s environment, transport and sustainability committee, said: “It’s very exciting to have a new operator on board.

“Beryl has a proven track record for delivering and operating cycle hire schemes nationwide and I can’t wait to see the new look fleet, with electric bikes, hit the streets of Brighton and Hove next year.

“Cycle hire is a fantastic way of getting around the city in an easy, active and sustainable way. BTN BikeShare is a community asset we can be very proud of as we enter a new era for the scheme.

“I’d also like to thank the current operator Hourbike for operating the scheme since its launch in 2017,” he added. “It’s thanks to their hard work, skill and dedication that BTN BikeShare has been such a success story for the city.”

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

25 comments

Avatar
jaysa | 2 years ago
6 likes

"people complaining that the hangars are an eyesore" - and streets disfigured by cars left blocking the road and on the pavements aren't an eyesore?

Avatar
wtjs replied to jaysa | 2 years ago
7 likes

and streets disfigured by cars left blocking the road and on the pavements aren't an eyesore?

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see

Avatar
David9694 replied to jaysa | 2 years ago
2 likes

Salisbury: Resident forced to dismantle 'unsightly' shed

I guess his neighbours are in favour of hangars then. Or as drivers often put it, "where am I supposed to leave it - you tell me"

https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/23199456.salisbury-resident-forc...

Avatar
mattw replied to David9694 | 2 years ago
1 like

TBF that one is very unsightly. It's a 5-6ft high shiplap shed attached to the front of a detached house running right up to the front window level.

They've admitted they "made a mistake" wrt putting it at the front.

They could have either put it round the back, or arranged to not be subject to planning enforcement - eg by making it a moveable structure attached by padlock to a ground anchor.

 

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to mattw | 2 years ago
2 likes

mattw wrote:

TBF that one is very unsightly. It's a 5-6ft high shiplap shed attached to the front of a detached house running right up to the front window level.

Guess it's in the eye of the beholder, looks fine to me. I'd sooner my neighbour had one of those than a massive panel van or motorhome parked in that drive, which he would be allowed to have there with impunity.

Avatar
jh2727 replied to David9694 | 2 years ago
1 like

David9694 wrote:

Salisbury: Resident forced to dismantle 'unsightly' shed

I guess his neighbours are in favour of hangars then. Or as drivers often put it, "where am I supposed to leave it - you tell me"

https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/23199456.salisbury-resident-forc...

Interesting that the article says 'Mr Arnold' - but a little shows it's 'Dr Arnold' (he doesn't appear to have quite been struck off - and even if he had, he'd surely still be a Dr).

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 2 years ago
5 likes

One imagines it's pretty much standing orders for council employees that if someone attempts to hinder you in your work, don't get engaged yourself but contact the police; the councillor 's attempt to portray this as "they'll send in the Gestapo if you raise any objections" merely serves to highlight the paucity of his arguments.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Rendel Harris | 2 years ago
1 like

They don't work for the council anyway !

Avatar
Car Delenda Est replied to Rendel Harris | 2 years ago
2 likes

Cllr Nemeth is the epitome of the Tory 'anti-woke' culture warrior.

Earlier this year he got in trouble for falsely claiming a local school had banned the words 'mum' and 'dad', a claim he has refused to retract despite the school correcting him and receiving threats.

Not the first time he's gotten in trouble either:

Brighton and Hove news wrote:

"The panel has only met twice since 2015, and on both occasions Councillor Nemeth was the subject of the hearing, and was found to have breached the code.

In 2017, Councillor Nemeth was found to have breached the code when he falsely accused then-council leader Warren Morgan of lying about Hove Library.

In 2020, he was again found to have breached it when he inaccurately claimed the council had “faked” rough sleeper figures.

However, there are little or no consequences for any breaches. On the last occasion, all the panel could do was ask the Conservative group leader Steve Bell to talk to Councillor Nemeth.

Before he was first elected in 2014, he came under fire for complaining on Twitter about how people committing suicide are an inconvenience to commuters.

Brighton and Hove News approached Councillor Nemeth for comment. He had not replied at the time of publication.

We also asked the local Conservative press office and group leader Councillor Steve Bell if they could clarify in which capacity Councillor Nemeth – who is not on the council’s education committee and is not a ward councillor for any of the schools – contacted headteachers, which he told parents he had done.

We asked if it is the group’s belief that children are being told they can’t say mum and dad – and whether it respects the council’s standards procedures.

They had not responded at the time of publication."

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Car Delenda Est | 2 years ago
3 likes

Car Delenda Est wrote:

Cllr Nemeth is the epitome of the Tory 'anti-woke' culture warrior. Earlier this year he got in trouble for falsely claiming a local school had banned the words 'mum' and 'dad', a claim he has refused to retract despite the school correcting him and receiving threats. Not the first time he's gotten in trouble either:

Brighton and Hove news wrote:

"The panel has only met twice since 2015, and on both occasions Councillor Nemeth was the subject of the hearing, and was found to have breached the code. In 2017, Councillor Nemeth was found to have breached the code when he falsely accused then-council leader Warren Morgan of lying about Hove Library. In 2020, he was again found to have breached it when he inaccurately claimed the council had “faked” rough sleeper figures. However, there are little or no consequences for any breaches. On the last occasion, all the panel could do was ask the Conservative group leader Steve Bell to talk to Councillor Nemeth. Before he was first elected in 2014, he came under fire for complaining on Twitter about how people committing suicide are an inconvenience to commuters. Brighton and Hove News approached Councillor Nemeth for comment. He had not replied at the time of publication. We also asked the local Conservative press office and group leader Councillor Steve Bell if they could clarify in which capacity Councillor Nemeth – who is not on the council’s education committee and is not a ward councillor for any of the schools – contacted headteachers, which he told parents he had done. We asked if it is the group’s belief that children are being told they can’t say mum and dad – and whether it respects the council’s standards procedures. They had not responded at the time of publication."

He sounds like a nasty piece of work

Avatar
Steve K replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
3 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

He sounds like a nasty piece of work

And a twat.  He definitely sounds like a twat.

Avatar
qwerty360 replied to Rendel Harris | 2 years ago
1 like

I would expect it to be standard process;

 

I could also see them having explicitly reminded workers of this because of the level of reaction that committing 'war on the motorist' by reallocating 5-10sqm to any other road user can result in (from a tiny portion of british population).

 

See LTN's being doused in oil, rammed out the way with construction equipment, drivers on footway etc) as well as available 'weapons' - A *bleep* cyclist complaining about road infra has a d-lock to hit the workmen with at worst; The equivilent *bleep* driver has a 2+ Ton vehicle to ram them with, so any escalation is liable to be extremely serious...

Avatar
Rome73 | 2 years ago
8 likes

in a few months once the hangars are installed and people realise  they do not mean the end of civilisation - but actually enhance an area, and people are accustomed to them, things will quieten down. The council have just got to hold their nerve.  Cycle parking was, according to the article, included in the the city's Transport Plan. This is a public document so Cllrs and public could have scrutinised it. That is how policy is delivered - through plans, scrutiny of plans, local elections and consultation. Residents can react by voting for an anti cycle hangar party - not by challenging contractors. 

Avatar
Secret_squirrel replied to Rome73 | 2 years ago
8 likes

I think this is less about holding their nerve and more about the opposition councillors using the opportunity to score cheap points againsts the greens.

Just petty local politics.

Avatar
Oldfatgit | 2 years ago
4 likes

We all know that there is 'asking... and 'asking".

Does said politician get upset about the signs in shop windows, dentists, GP surgeries, all council buildings that the public have access to, that essentially say 'speak to us nicely, or we'll call the Police.'
Isn't that even enshrined in law following CoVid?
What's the difference - are these guys installing the units supposed to just take abuse? Should they not have the same degree of protection that a receptionist in a town hall (or what ever they are called nowadays)?

Avatar
chrisonabike | 2 years ago
5 likes

As usual in politics, it's heartwarming to see how bitter enemies can jump into bed with each other - if only to spite a third party.  Or in this case the "encouragement" given to active travel by the two main Westminster parties is entirely dependent on how they think the popular wind's blowing on that day.

Not that the others are better.  While the SNP has at least got a 10% active travel budget target through exactly what this is spent on remains to be seen.  It might go to buses or even "green" electric cars if the electorate gets restive.  They didn't back "20s plenty" either.

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... | 2 years ago
5 likes

Probably more an indictment on the possible lows in behaviour expected from a dismal sub-section of entitled motorists.

Avatar
wtjs | 2 years ago
2 likes

an email from the council that said they should call police “if there was any trouble”

Ho! Ho! Ho! It would be long after Christmas before there was any response by police to anti-cyclist aggression

Avatar
eburtthebike | 2 years ago
5 likes

"Tory councillor Robert Nemeth described the hangars as “unbeautiful objects springing up in inappropriate places” and claimed that “the council introduced the hangars without going through the usual channels – by the back door as it were.

“Those of us who serve on transport committee are well used to debating controversial issues and we do our best to scrutinise and improve any such policies before us."

I wonder if the good councillor finds all motor vehicles beautiful and appropriately parked, and was the decision to use vast areas of public space to store them debated by the transport committee?

No?  Well STFU about the cycle hangars then.

I can imagine some of the anti-cycling residents getting very wound up about the hangars and becomming aggressive to the people putting them in, whose job it is most definitely not to defend them or to explain council policies; that's what councillors are for.

Avatar
Sussexcyclist replied to eburtthebike | 2 years ago
5 likes

Cllr Robert Nemeth has claimed to be a "keen cyclist" but opposes cycle infrastructure in Brighton & Hove at every opportunity, preferring to get a photo of himself looking concerned in the local rag. Labour just gained the other seat in his ward by a landslide, so likely he'll be out of a job in May's local elections. 

Avatar
mattw replied to eburtthebike | 2 years ago
0 likes

Councillor Robert Nemeth appears remarkably like a puppet of Grant Shapps standing on a beer crate.

Avatar
Secret_squirrel replied to mattw | 2 years ago
1 like

mattw wrote:

Councillor Robert Nemeth appears remarkably like a puppet of Grant Shapps standing on a beer crate.

Bear in mind that inside most MP's and Minister's there's one of these guys who thinks they've "made it" which causes them to doubledown on the obnoxiousness.

Avatar
brooksby | 2 years ago
9 likes

Quote:

The councillor, who maintained that his party backed the hangars in principle as part of efforts to promote active travel, said: “It’s certainly highly inappropriate and unhelpful to threaten well-meaning and responsible citizens with a call to the police when they question how council services are being implemented in their neighbourhood.

Surely it is also highly inappropriate and unhelpful for 'well-meaning and responsible citizens' to start taking it up with the minimum wage blokes contracted to put the hangars in place...?

Avatar
ktache replied to brooksby | 2 years ago
2 likes

Contacting the forces of law n order is not the greatest of threatening threats, is it now?

Avatar
Sriracha replied to brooksby | 2 years ago
3 likes

Nominative determinism. Allcock is deliberately morphing call police “if there was any trouble” into the wholely different call to the police when they question how council services are being implemented in their neighbourhood. These are two entirely different scenarios.

Latest Comments