Join up safe cycle routes across Portsea Island

The problem and who is affected

Portsmouth has more people cycling each week than the England average, but the share fell between 2016 and 2023. New routes are being added in pieces: corridor schemes, crossings, and a two-way cycle path along each rebuilt seafront section. The city has no published check of whether these pieces join into continuous, safe routes. Police-reported cyclist casualties have fallen, but over 100 cyclists are still hurt each year, and casualty counts alone do not show risk.

Who is affected: People who cycle or would like to, including commuters, students, children travelling to school and disabled people using adapted cycles. Pedestrians who share paths. Residents near busy junctions. Drivers and bus users where road space changes.

What this would change

Aim: Join existing and planned cycle routes, including the new seafront paths, into a connected network that people of different ages and abilities can use safely, starting with the gaps and junctions that matter most.

What success would mean: A published map of continuous links meeting national design guidance, with gaps and unsafe junctions named and a dated programme to fix them; more people cycling; and fewer cyclist and pedestrian casualties per trip. No numeric target is proposed until a usage baseline is agreed.

The council would audit how the LCWIP corridors, recent schemes and the seafront cycle paths connect, and publish a gap and junction list. It would appraise route options, including a seafront and Hilsea link, against cost, safety, accessibility, pedestrian conflict, land ownership and maintenance. The forthcoming Walking and Cycling Strategy would set the priority order. Schemes would use the existing active travel allocation and implementation plan, with counting before and after each scheme.

Proposed lead: Portsmouth City Council (proposed; as local highway and transport authority). Partners: Active Travel England (funder), Southsea Coastal Scheme team, Portsmouth Cycle Forum and disability groups (already consulted on schemes), Sustrans (National Cycle Network routes), Hampshire and the Solent Combined Authority (future funding route).

Powers: The council is the local transport authority with a statutory Local Transport Plan (ltp4-amr-2026) and delivers schemes on roads it manages. Roads managed by National Highways are outside its control (ras0403 notes). Active Travel England allocates funding (ate-alloc-2026-30). Seafront works are delivered through the council-led Southsea Coastal Scheme, so cycle design there is tied to flood-defence approvals (scs-booklet-oct26). Land outside the highway, such as parks or Ministry of Defence land, needs owner agreement; ownership was not checked.

Options

• Current approach: Current approach. Deliver LCWIP corridor schemes, crossings and the coastal cycle paths as separate projects, as funding allows, with a Walking and Cycling Strategy in preparation.
• Proposed response: Connectivity audit and prioritised gap programme. Map how routes connect, publish gaps and unsafe junctions, and rank fixes in the Walking and Cycling Strategy, using the existing active travel allocation and before-and-after counts.
• Alternative: Signposted Portsea Island circuit. The legacy idea: a signed leisure and commuter loop linking Hilsea, Eastney, the seafront and Old Portsmouth. Needs route definition, junction design and costing; may compete with commuter corridors for funds.
• Alternative: Corridor-first. Concentrate funds on the LCWIP commuter corridors with the greatest potential cycling demand, accepting slower seafront and loop connections.

Further appraisal may change the choice because route lengths, junction costs, land ownership and expected use have not been measured, and the available active travel allocation (about £258,000 capital a year) is small relative to major junction works.

Delivery plan

A first practical step: Publish a simple map showing which existing and newly built cycle routes connect and where they stop, using records the council already holds.

Costs and funding

One-off costs

Not costed. The connectivity audit and options appraisal need a staff or consultant estimate. Construction costs depend on the chosen links.

Recurring costs

Not costed. Surface, lighting, signs and counter maintenance would add to highway maintenance budgets.

Capital or revenue

Both: capital for construction; revenue for planning, counting and promotion.

Funding status

Existing allocations: £258,433 capital a year (4 years) and £81,085 revenue a year (3 years) from DfT and Active Travel England for 2026/27–2029/30; £419,974 in 2025/26. These cover all active travel work, not this proposal. The coastal scheme budget is for flood defence.

Affordability

Not assessed. The allocation is small compared with major junction redesigns, so priorities would be needed.

Costing still needed

Cost the audit; then cost each candidate link with unit rates from recent Portsmouth schemes such as Lake Road and the East-West corridor, including maintenance.

Benefits, risks and trade-offs

Possible benefits: Safer, more connected routes could make cycling practical for more people, reduce car trips and support health. Benefits are not quantified.

Risks:

• Junction changes may reduce road capacity and slow buses or traffic, causing opposition.
• Shared paths on the seafront can cause conflict between cyclists and pedestrians, especially at busy times.
• Funding is small and spread across all active travel work.
• Coastal construction dates may slip, delaying seafront links.
• Survey estimates are imprecise, so small changes in cycling may not be detectable.

Who could gain or lose: People without cars, young people and those on low incomes could gain most from safe routes. Disabled people may gain or lose depending on design, kerbs and shared-path rules. Drivers may face slower journeys at some junctions.

Environment: More cycling could reduce car traffic and emissions. Construction on the seafront and at Hilsea interacts with protected habitats and heritage, handled through existing coastal scheme approvals.

Capacity: The council reports recent recruitment of project managers but also delays to internally funded schemes from resource constraints.

How to judge progress

Reassess when: Reassess when the Walking and Cycling Strategy is published for consultation, when the 2026/27–2029/30 implementation plan or Local Transport Delivery Plan is read, and when each coastal frontage opens.

Where things stand

What is known:

• The LCWIP was approved in February 2022 and focuses on commuter corridors.
• Several schemes have been built since, including Lake Road and the East-West corridor.
• Rebuilt seafront frontages include two-way cycle paths.
• Portsmouth has a defined active travel allocation for 2026/27–2029/30.
• Cyclist casualties and weekly cycling both fell between 2016 and the latest years.

What is not known:

• Whether completed sections join into continuous safe routes.
• The length and cost of any circuit or missing links.
• Land ownership on candidate links off the highway.
• Cycle usage on most routes.
• What the July 2026 implementation plan and Local Transport Delivery Plan allocate to cycling.
• Whether e-scooters and e-bikes change risk; the Other vehicle casualty category has risen.

Decisions needed:

• Whether to commission a connectivity audit.
• Whether the Walking and Cycling Strategy should include a seafront and Hilsea link or circuit.
• How to split the active travel allocation between corridors and connecting links.

Existing work:

• Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (adopted document titled 2021–2031): Approved 24 February 2022 (as of 2022-02-24).
• Walking and Cycling Strategy: In development during 2026 (as of 2026-09-17).
• Southsea Coastal Scheme cycle paths: Frontage 3 open (April 2026); Frontage 5 East due spring 2027; Frontage 6 due late summer 2028 (as of 2026-10).
• LTP4 implementation plan active travel schemes: 2026/27 plan approved March 2026; replaced by a four-year plan in July 2026 (as of 2026-09-17).
• North Portsea Coastal Scheme final phase: Works until end of 2026 (as of 2026-11-02).

Next review: When Portsmouth publishes its Walking and Cycling Strategy for consultation, or when DfT publishes 2026 casualty data (expected July 2027).. Evidence last checked 2026-11-02.

Sources

Where earlier ideas went

• cycle-circuit (earlier ten suggestions): restored. cycle-connections (circuit kept as an alternative option) Not carried forward: The 12km length, mid-single-digit millions cost, 3–7 year timescale, Solent Transport funding route and the one-main-road claim were dropped as unverified. The evidence attributed to the Development Plan was a UK Facts page, not a council assessment.