A cafe boss has warned of disaster if a controversial seafront cycle path is given the go-ahead.
Phil Riggall, co-owner of Ju-Ju's cafe, Worthing, said it was only a matter of time before there was a serious accident near his business.
He and his partner Sue Graham took over the cafe in July and they have already witnessed a number of near misses involving customers carrying trays laden with hot drinks across the promenade path to tables on the shingle.
Mr Riggall said: "At the moment cyclists go up and down with total disregard for people, especially the kids. Sooner or later there is going to be an accident.
"The number of times we have had near misses is ridiculous and this is at a time when they are not supposed to cycle along here.
"Once you give people the authority to ride along here I don't know what is going to happen."
Mr Riggall and people with beach chalets east of Splash Point have organised a petition which has been signed by scores of residents and visitors.
They have also split the path in half with tape to illustrate how narrow the cycle lane would be, and put up a placard alerting pedestrians to the danger.
People in Goring are also objecting to the proposed lane, claiming it would ruin a semi-rural shingle footpath used by pensioners, parents and children.
Protesters include Goring Residents' Association and the Worthing Society conservation group.
But Worthing Borough Council pointed out that when the public was consulted on the idea, it received more than 1,200 responses, most in support of the scheme.
The council now wants to start work on phase one, a path from Western Road, Lancing, to Splash Point, which will cost £310,000.
It believes the path running alongside the chalets is wide enough to cater for both cyclists and pedestrians but could be widened by one metre.
Red-coloured tarmac would be laid to warn people of possible danger areas.
The council scrapped a previous cycle lane on the promenade between the Lido and George V Avenue after a visitor from Surrey was hit by a cyclist and suffered brain damage.
She later sued the council, whose insurers were forced to pay out more than £100,000 to the victim.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article