Southampton council called 'insane' as Portswood Broadway approved

The plan to pedestrianise part of the broadway to make it ‘greener and more vibrant’ has been the centre of huge debate since it came out in 2020.

More than three years of consultations, protests and record-breaking petitions came to a head on Tuesday when the council’s cabinet voted it in.

Protesters were stationed with banners outside the Civic Centre and the city council chamber was packed.

Due to the number of residents wishing to object, it was the longest cabinet meeting of the municipal year, but it ended with cries of ‘are you insane?’

Portswood Broadway plans (Image: Southampton City Council)

The scheme

The concrete plan now is to start the scheme as a part-time pilot, building a bus gate towards the end of 2024 and blocking the road off to cars between 7am to 10am every morning and 4pm to 7pm every afternoon.

The council will then review the scheme after six months to see if it should become permanent and full-time.

The council says that the scheme is ‘supported’ - there was a 60 per cent agreement rate in the public consultation which gathered the views of more than 1,000 people.

However, there was a 3,000-strong ‘SAY NO’ petition, garnering 10 times that of the ‘SAY YES’ petition.

Portswood Broadway. (Image: Newsquest)

Residents make themselves heard

Loraine Barter said her concerns centred around the confusion the closure could bring to motorists, despite not being one herself.

She said: “How will sat-navs cope with the changes in time at the Broadway when it is alright to go through the Broadway in the car sometimes but not at other times?

“(There will be) confusion about the closing and opening times people coming into Southampton who do not live here or do not know the rules.

"(They) will be confused and if there are transgressors who come through the gate at the wrong times do you know if the police or the council have enough personnel to follow up any transgressor?

“I feel the whole scheme is a complete no-no in every manner and a complete and utter waste of public money.”

Trader Karen Edwards said the pilot still has the power to ruin local businesses in that time.

She said: “Local businesses were overwhelmingly against the scheme and that it would have a negative impact on the local economy if it goes ahead.

“It would result in the demise of the district centre.

“It may be a trial, but businesses can go out of business in that time. This is people’s livelihoods that the council is playing with – what would be their compensation?”

Paul Beard’s concerns lay with the removal of the disabled bays outside Boots.

He said: “There are two very active disability bays at the moment we are being urged by the Government to think of of ‘pharmacy first’ and not always go running to the GP so the amount of people going to be using ‘pharmacy first’ are going to increase and yet the bays are going to disappear.

“The only offering that has been made to date is that ‘we will make some improvement in Westbridge car park’ that is absolutely nonsensical.

"Put bays there if you wish but they are not going to save the problem of the loss of the two bays outside of boots.

“If people are on their mobility scooters they’ll have to (travel) up Westbridge Road. Often it is quite crowded with substance abusers.”

“The council talks about inclusivity. The council talks about ‘you said, we listened’ but I do not believe yet that this issue has been properly addressed and it is a serious issue.”

Alistair Cook decided to go all out on accusing the council of not listening.

He said: “It is so clear that the vast majority of people living here do not want this scheme.

“The council is supposed to listen.

“We have a huge problem with our Government in general (and) we are losing faith.

“One of the problems is that we don’t feel we are being listened to and this is a classic case.

“I don’t think any of us could care less about (the scheme). We have got street lights not on making us feel unsafe. We have got potholes. The battle I had to go through with the council to get proper social care and (the council did) everything they could to deprive my mother who had been living here since 1979 of the care she needed and we had to fight tooth and nail (against) penny-pinching officials from the council.

“And the council is (potentially going) bankrupt.

“Why isn’t it standing up to the Government and saying we need this money for far more higher priorities than this?”

How did the meeting end?

After a multitude of speakers expressing their objections to the Portswood Broadway scheme – and their dismay at ‘not being listened to’ by the council, it was time for the cabinet to make its decision.

Cllr Eamon Keogh, cabinet member for transport, who has been leading the plans, said: “Thank you very much for everyone who has made their contributions today.

“Both cabinet and officers recognise and appreciate that the scheme can only progress if it has the support of the local community and other stakeholder groups.

“We have demonstrated our willingness to listen.

“There is support for the scheme to introduce a bus gate on Portswood Broadway.

“The trial of the bus gate does demonstrates our willingness as a council to listen to the views of the consultation and provide a period where we can establish that co-design group working in partnership with relevant stakeholder groups."

Cllr Keogh said the council will work with other groups to try to design the road closure in a positive way.

He also spoke about the economic impact assessment and why the council has deemed the road closure to be beneficial for local businesses due to increased footfall.

The cabinet member said: “I am pleased to ask the cabinet to support.

“I am pleased we have been able to ensure a consultation that has the public support and the outcome reached is both informed and balanced.”

This last sentence was met with cries from the room, shouting: “Are you insane?”, “Are you deaf?” and “Unbelievable”.

Amid the cries, protests and record-breaking petition, the cabinet voted unanimously in favour of going ahead with the scheme.