Appendix 4

Stakeholder Feedback






It is noted that it is proposed to retain the existing pedestrian guard rail (PGR), which we would fully support. Some of the PGR at this location may require some maintenance as it was noted that some sections are showing signs of age/wear.

The PGR is to be replaced and will follow the alignment of the new kerb lines. In addition, any PGR at this location which is showing signs of age/wear will be considered for replacement.


The general condition of the carriageway is relatively poor, in particular at the crossing point on Albert Road

Series 700 drawings and specification will be prepared as part of the next phase of detailed design package highlighting the road pavement proposals. The proposal is to resurface the junction within the scheme extents.


A number of traffic signs at this location are fixed to PGRs and must be retained. Some may require maintenance/replacement given the age of the signs (reflectivity may have diminished etc.)

All signage within the scheme extents will be investigated and provided during the detailed design stage.


Northern side, to the west of Albert Road - query over adequate footway width to allow pedestrians to wait safely. It has been noted that there are a number of large concrete 'bollards' outside of the Carlisle Pub which reduces available space, particularly for those with pushchairs or using wheelchairs/mobility scooters. It would seem that these 'bollards' are potentially within the bounds of the public highway

The concrete bollards within the tactile paved area will be removed and replaced with upright reflective bollards of suitable material to prevent injury.


No lighting specified on the plan - ensure area is adequately illuminated

Street lighting design will be undertaken as part of the detailed design stage.



I can't foresee any issues for ecology and therefore have no comments to make.



I recall this scheme was called into question by the Conservation Officer from HBC.

The Hastings Conservation Officer expressed a view during a site visit that he would prefer funding for this scheme to be used elsewhere in Hastings however the proposal is welcomed by other stakeholders and provides enhanced facilities for pedestrians thereby helping to encourage more sustainable travel.


If, however, the project is to go ahead in some fashion I would also like to look at the way that the two Eastbound lanes on the seafront before reaching Harold Road effectively move down to one lane between Albert Road and the roundabout. It would be useful to have the left lane as a left filter only (into Albert Road) and widen the whole length of pavement outside the former Argos to prevent the current situation where there are sometimes two lanes of traffic queuing to get onto the roundabout, which can only cope with a single lane going around it.

From the traffic modelling that has been undertaken, running a single lane eastbound on a 96 second cycle time will significantly affect traffic flows and is not recommended. With a 96 second cycle time, the junction will be overcapacity in the following peaks:

•             2028 PM, which will be slightly overcapacity, with Albert Road being the most overcapacity.

•             2040 AM, which will be significantly overcapacity, with Denmark Place Eastbound performing the worst.

•             2040 Interpeak, which will be significantly overcapacity, with Albert Road performing the worst.

•             2040 PM which will be significantly overcapacity, with Denmark Place Westbound performing the worst.


Slightly overcapacity means traffic will typically have to wait for the second green to clear the junction. Significantly overcapacity means traffic will typically have to wait for several greens to clear the junction. Queues lengths on Albert Road would extend back to Castle Hill Road and the Pelham Fountain roundabout in the PM peak in 2028 and all peaks by 2040.


Can I see a study of how the introduction of signalised pedestrian crossings will be phased and what the modelled impact will be on traffic queues up Albert Road, as these are already problematic at the junction with Castle Hill.

The modelling for the design as currently shown predicts that the maximum queue lengths on Albert Road will typically be shorter than the Do Nothing, particularly in the PM peak which will have queues lengths about two thirds of the base.  However maximum queue lengths will still extend back to the Castle Hill junction in all peak periods, but the duration the queue extends back to the Castle Hill will likely be less than in the do nothing, meaning traffic from Castle Hill should find it easier to enter onto Albert Road.


Can I also ask if it is permissible for delivery drivers serving McDonalds to use the loading bay outside the old Argos? we are trying to find suitable alternatives to their current practice of parking in wellington Place.

The loading bay is currently open to all vehicles.


But why not have both crossings as zebra crossings? Why make the active travellers, the sort of travellers you want, wait instead of the motorists?

The change will eventually have to be complete - why invest in half the change of road use priority instead of the complete change?

The combination of zebra crossing with a signalised junction will not be permissible with the safe operation of the junction. The safest crossing type for this junction would be the introduction of a pedestrian phase within the signalised junction which will hold the traffic for pedestrians to cross the carriageway. Zebra crossings should be located away from conflict points which will give drivers an adequate opportunity to appreciate the existence of a crossing and to brake safely.


Guard rails are awful. They are ugly and they restrict and corral active travellers for the benefit of motorised travellers. A high curb might be one thing to prevent motorised vehicles from mounting the pavement but a barrier mainly and unfairly constrains the pavement users.

Historically, guardrail has existed around this junction which has restricted customers of the adjacent pub straying into the carriageway by mistake and other pedestrians crossing into the middle of this busy junction. The removal of the guardrail may lead to an increase in conflict between pedestrians and vehicles particularly at peak times when large crowds are gathered outside the pub and will direct pedestrians to a safe crossing location.  There was a specific recommendation within the Road Safety Audit to retain the guard railing.


Make sure also that the reflective bollards aren’t hideous. If the criteria for choosing the bollard aesthetic is only about alerting a motorist driving at 30mph they’ll actually be less effective than beautiful bollards which make the place look like a well-loved seaside resort that motorists must be respectful of.

The type of street furniture and footway surfacing will be discussed with HBC Conservation officer and ESCC Highways and maintenance department to source a product which fits in with the surrounding area.


Can the proposed ‘footway paving to match existing’ be followed through over the crossings so that the active travellers have the continuous flow of surface rather than the motorists?

It is a signalised junction where priority is given to pedestrians and motorists at separate signal phases and as such having a continuous footway across the carriageway will give pedestrians the impression that they always have right of way over motorists.  However, as part of the Town Deal proposals that HBC and other partners are working on, colourful crossings which reflect the ethos or theme of that bid could be considered as part of that work and be retrofitted subject to design, accessibility and safety considerations.


And finally, the old ugly yellow grid box is still there. It would only take the same paint in a different pattern to transform the atmosphere of the place and for the Highways Authority to be seen to be doing something brave and exciting towards the spirit of Gear Change. You could even run a small competition for a legible but appropriate-to-seaside design.

Yellow box junctions are indicated by criss-cross yellow lines painted on the carriageway which are usually found at the junction of two or more roads. The yellow box keeps the junction clear for through-traffic to avoid traffic congestion. Legally, the purpose of a yellow box marking is to mark an area of carriageway conveying the prohibition that a person must not cause a vehicle to enter the box junction so that the vehicle has to stop within the box junction due to the presence of stationary vehicles. A vehicle waiting to turn right at a junction between two or more roads may stop within the box junction for so long as it is prevented from completing the right turn by oncoming vehicles or other vehicles which are stationary whilst waiting to complete a right turn. By keeping the junction moving, pollution and delays to both pedestrians and motorists can be reduced.


If not a zebra crossing then at least lights that stop traffic pretty instantly for pedestrians. It’s motorised traffic that should wait, not active travellers.






The traffic signals are set for a 96 second cycle which is generally considered acceptable for pedestrians.


Keep the pub drinkers safe with planters for barriers rather than rails. Shield the pavement users from the poisonous blight of the cars and change the atmosphere of the place.


Noted. The type of street furniture to be implemented will be considered during the detailed design stage of the scheme.


Any procurement of street furniture should be made through the eyes of pedestrians and cyclists.....not so harsh, not so neon, greener and nicer than just warning signs for drivers at speed.




Colourful crossings will be brilliant.


As part of the Town Deal proposals that HBC and other partners are working on, colourful crossings which reflect the ethos or theme of that bid could be considered as part of that work and be retrofitted subject to design, accessibility and safety considerations.


I know the function of yellow box junctions...the challenge is to retain the box and its legibility to drivers at the same time as softening the car dominant aesthetics of the seafront



We support any relevant work to improve the unsatisfactory road crossing to the East side of this junction and make it a straight across crossing.

Even more valuable will be the new crossing on the West side but we would strongly argue that this must be set up to include cyclists.

This will then become a more direct means of connecting the Seafront to the Town Centre for cyclists who can use Pelham Street, which should then be marked with cycle stencils.

It goes without saying that the removal of the restriction to cycling through the pedestrian precinct is long overdue and a marked and signed cycle route through it, making use of the service roads and a separate lined cycle way across the pavement either side of the Harold Place crossing should be adopted.

We would have liked to see the funding for Town Centre junction improvements, and other capital program work, include the construction of the long overdue Seafront to Station Plaza Cycle route and cycle access to the pedestrian precinct.

The scope of this particular scheme is to improve pedestrian connectivity between the seafront and town centre. This involves converting the staggered crossing to non-staggered and providing formal crossing facilities over Albert Road. 

At this time there are no cycle routes proposed between the seafront and the town centre however the junction has been designed in such a way that the crossings can easily be converted to toucans at a later date (4.0m wide crossing widths have been provided). 


The provision of cycle routes to the town centre and through the pedestrianised area will be a separate piece of work.