We, the undersigned, request that Hastings Borough Council (HBC), in association with East Sussex County Council (ESCC), immediately cancels the plan to allow a shared cycle path to run through Alexandra Park, Hastings. 

We firmly believe that all health and safety risks have not been properly assessed and that the views of local residents have not been properly considered, in fact we think they have been ignored.

We believe that the consultations which took place at the beginning of this process as early as 2015 were biased towards the cyclists and failed to consult local disability groups to establish the effect this scheme would have on the most vulnerable. Still in relation to this point we believe that 7 years on it is wrong to refer to the views of organizations which ceased to exist 6 years ago. Organizations who were not qualified to speak on behalf of park users anyway (even though they objected to the scheme)

We believe that HBC has NOT fulfilled it's obligation to adequately advertise the details of this scheme to the general public. There are numerous notice boards within the park boundaries, none of which have any details of the shared cycle path, yet they bear details of other works, both major and minor. It's as if HBC were hiding this plan from the public.

The decision maker at ESCC (Lewes 30 miles away) visited the park in March 2022, still in winter, to look at the plan and the park and to judge its suitability. A quiet winter's day is NOT a fair day to judge such a scheme. She spoke to no park visitors, she spoke to no local disability groups.

Throughout this whole process the only views which have been taken into consideration are those of cycling groups and those groups associated with the development of the route. A totally biased assessment.

We believe, and can prove, that Hastings Borough council has failed to enforce the bylaw forbidding cycling in the park for at least 7 years and instead has left this task to the public. As a result members of the public, often elderly and disabled, have been unacceptably subject to verbal abuse and threats of physical violence. Since e-scooters have been available Hastings Borough Council  has also failed to stop these. These facts give us no confidence whatsoever that any shared path could be safely introduced, managed and monitored.

We believe that among the safety risks
1. There are multiple entrances to the upper park with steep hills. It will be IMPOSSIBLE to monitor all these entrances and cyclists will not stick to the planned route, even now they use any route they wish, unchallenged. 2 wheeled vehicles on these hills already hit 30mph+ and have no regard for safety of pedestrians.

2. Still in relation to the upper park this area has very secluded , wooded areas, an area known for regular drug dealing. There have already been violent attacks in the park. Giving the ability for a two wheeled vehicle the legal permission to approach a lone pedestrian in twilight hours or darkness is inviting muggings, robberies and sexual attacks. It gives any attacker a legal, fast escape route.

3. There are MANY sharp, blind, bends in the upper park where a cycle could easily hit a pedestrian.

4. Throughout the length of this route the path will only be 3m wide. This is 1m less than the recommended national minimum for such a route. Even then, a shared route of this width is only meant to be considered as a last resort when all other options have been thoroughly considered and investigated. In this case there is a perfectly feasible, safer route for the cyclists alone along an adjacent road , this has been dismissed through extremely lame excuses.
A 3 metre width path for 2 way pedestrian and cycle traffic in a park which is very narrow is putting pedestrians at unacceptable risk of being hit by a cycle.

5. Cycles in this park already traverse the landscape at ridiculous speeds and there is no way, even with speed limit signs, that this will change.

6. Shared cycle paths themselves are also meant to be a last resort (according to government guidance). To be considered ONLY when independent routes for cyclists alone have been discounted.  Again , as in point 4 above we do not believe research into alternative solutions for separating cyclists from pedestrians have been exhausted.

7. Remaining in the upper park the area from the peace garden to Dordrecht Way will become extremely congested and dangerous, especially taking into account the sports facilities.

8. Groups of up to 30 schoolchildren and outings of 8-10 people from mental health charities are commonplace in this park along with new mother walking groups, fitness walking groups, large family groups who like to walk together and mobility carriages who like to ride 2 abreast to talk to each other. On this proposed 3m wide path it is impossible to consider any of these groups are safe with the way people already ride, illegally, in this environment.

9. Dog walkers already have altercations with cyclists riding illegally. This will not improve. They ride too close to the dog walkers and then blame the pedestrian if they can't get past or get caught up with the animal. Anybody who walks multiple dogs will encounter considerable problems.

10. There will be no lane markings separating people from bicycles. Having them wouldn't make any difference but you have to put it into perspective that even if you had a 1m cycle lane in each direction that would only leave 1m for ALL OTHER walkers, disabled, elderly, families, runners, children, wheelchairs, dog walkers going in BOTH directions

11. In the lower park young children are particularly at risk from being hit by cycles on a path adjacent to popular lawn areas where children run around and play games all year round. There have already been some very near misses between toddlers and cyclists.

12. The shared cycle path runs directly by duck feeding areas , children only have to step back into the path of a bike.

13. The lavatories will have the shared cycle path running in front of them. Totally inconsiderate to the elderly, disabled and visually impaired who do not want to encounter cyclists.

14. It has been made IMPOSSIBLE for a blind, visually impaired, disabled , elderly person, anybody in fact to walk from one end of the park to the other without encountering bicycles. This is not only a huge accident risk but we believe it also discriminates against virtually every group except the cyclists themselves as their enjoyment of the park and indeed of life has been reduced at their expense.

15. The shared cycle route runs along the smoothest , most gentle route available through Alexandra Park. The alternative route for pedestrians who wish to avoid bicycles (still not possible as route still has to be crossed several times) runs on a more arduous rote with the steepest inclines and undulating sections. This seems blatantly discriminatory giving the fittest the easiest route whilst providing the least able with the worst path available.

There are other issues.

1. This is a grade II* listed park. There is no respect for the considerable changes which have to occur to enable this route to go ahead. There is no consideration for the environment or being green as hundreds of square metres of park need to be excavated to create new path where there is none. Lawn is lost, animal habitats lost, 200 year old trees lost, shrubs and bushes lost. It totally disrespects the listed status of this almost 150 year old park. Its construction will INCREASE CO2 emissions and in future years not make any difference whereas an independent cycle route on an adjoining road would also involve Co2 emissions on construction, but after construction Co2 emissions would be reduced as the road is notorious for traffic congestion with idling cars. The adjustments recommended would dramatically improve traffic flow reducing these emissions in years to come.

2. There is a complete disrespect for the sponsors of memorial benches situated along the whole length of this planned shared path.
The bereaved contribute £600+ for a plaque or carved dedication on a park bench. As far as possible the sponsor is permitted to choose their preferred location. This is usually a lovely quiet spot with nice scenery. This shared cycle path will result in either the benches having cycles running directly in front of them or the benches themselves will be MOVED by ESCC. This is extremely disrespectful to the deceased and insulting to the family concerned.

3. We believe that this puts the Green Flag award given to the park in doubt should this scheme be imposed against public opinion. The award assumes equality for all users of the park and we are certain that the details of this plan discriminate against the disabled and the vulnerable. Providing a new route for cyclists simply should not result in a less pleasurable experience in the park for those who need it the most

Quite simply Alexandra Park Hastings is not in anyway suitable for a shared cycle path of this nature. To go ahead would be irresponsible, discriminatory and the only people who benefit would be cyclists.

We, existing users of the park request the immediate cancellation of this plan. 

If it is not cancelled we request a public investigation into the legal and moral legitimacy of this plan and we will have to advise the Green Flag Award Group of our concerns