OK children, you've had your laugh now put it back, its not funny and its not grown up.

I am of course refering to the new road sytem that goes up Spital Hill, the wicker and that general area. 6 months ago there was no congestion, now the new improvements are underway the traffic jams are horrendous..... and theres no escape route as the roads are blocked off.

I had a cunning plan. when I was stuck on spital hill I thought " I'll turn right onto Carlise St"....NO THATS BLOCKED OFF.

Now my journey time home has almost doubled in the space of 6 weeks

TUT TUT town planners, not funny

Are you mad you actually expected Sheffields planners to make the congestion better!

Still one can always dream.:hihi:

I know, its used to take me 20 mins to get to work using that route now it takes me 40. I thought it was supposed to make the congestion better NOT WORSE.:rant:

Just looked at the council website detailing road closure and works:

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/roadworks/general-roadworks

Is it just me or is that a silly amount of roads to close off? Admittedly some are not yet closed...

Every day is April 1st for Sheffield's planners. :D

Just looked at the council website detailing road closure and works:

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/roadworks/general-roadworks

Is it just me or is that a silly amount of roads to close off? Admittedly some are not yet closed...

It'd be easier for 'em ter put up a list of roads they're not going to close.

It is getting easier and easier for me to believe that the council is making congestion worse in order to bring in a congestion charge.

It is getting easier and easier for me to believe that the council is making congestion worse in order to bring in a congestion charge.

sounds about right they were suppose to be making things better at woodseats but did they hell

sounds about right they were suppose to be making things better at woodseats but did they hell
I completely agree with everything said here. Woodseats is rubbish.

However, it is not just traffic. The planning ( building ) department has changed in the last six months. They are now like Hitler. Someone, somewhere, has said ' put your foot down '. But it all depends on who you get as your officer, some are just plain petty.

For this years April 1st, they are going to announce plans to widen the pavements to 30ft on each side of the road, on every street in Sheffield so only racing bikes with a 3cm wheels base will fit on the road.

and obviously there's another 20,000 traffic lights on order(all permanently set to flash to green for a millisecond once a fortnight).

It is getting easier and easier for me to believe that the council is making congestion worse in order to bring in a congestion charge.


..Never thought of that, but i'll bet it's not far off 'spot on'

............................

OK children, you've had your laugh now put it back, its not funny and its not grown up.

I am of course refering to the new road sytem that goes up Spital Hill, the wicker and that general area. 6 months ago there was no congestion, now the new improvements are underway the traffic jams are horrendous..... and theres no escape route as the roads are blocked off.

I had a cunning plan. when I was stuck on spital hill I thought " I'll turn right onto Carlise St"....NO THATS BLOCKED OFF.

Now my journey time home has almost doubled in the space of 6 weeks

TUT TUT town planners, not funny


Stop whinging and buy a bicycle.

For this years April 1st, they are going to announce plans to widen the pavements to 30ft on each side of the road, on every street in Sheffield so only racing bikes with a 3cm wheels base will fit on the road.

and obviously there's another 20,000 traffic lights on order(all permanently set to flash to green for a millisecond once a fortnight).

The roads will be wide enough for two sets of double yellow lines to pass each other.

sounds about right they were suppose to be making things better at woodseats but did they hell
Well, actually they did make it better. Journey times improved along all sections of that corridor, more parking spaces and greater turnover of parking, more pedestrian crossings. That's making things worse is it?

It is getting easier and easier for me to believe that the council is making congestion worse in order to bring in a congestion charge.
Not true, the Leader of the Council has said very firmly that they aren't looking to introduce congestion charging here.

Not true, the Leader of the Council has said very firmly that they aren't looking to introduce congestion charging here.

And you believe everything that political people say do you. It will turn up sooner or later

We went down the new road (that was supposed to be open) last week, only to find it blocked, we ended up going around in circles for about 10 minutes, my B/F was fuming.

What about the other cock up they have made down on the Wicker.:loopy:

Has anyone noticed this week that as you get to the lights where you could have gone left towards the Parkway if you wanted to or straight up the Wicker into town, they have now changed the straight on lane into the Wicker to a bus lane and they are going to make all traffic go left and over to the Parkway to drop down to Park Square.

So they are turning the whole of the Wicker into one big Hillsborough Tramgate scenario.

Have the business owners down there noticed this and what will it do to the custom down there, but I forgot that on the Wicker you can park where you want when you want so the bus gate shouldn't really make any difference at night during the weekend.

However, if you are Johnny nice and abide by the law and do as the bus gate says for instance lets just suggest that in the week you come in to town that way and want to park in the Blonk Street NCP car park.

So you get to the Wicker and go left and up to the Parkway and then down to Park Square.
You travel out along Castle gate but you cannot turn right back towards the Wicker to get to the NCP as you cannot then turn right off Ladys bridge at the lights to go out along Blonk Street.

Oh no, you have to go along Bridge Street and past the crown court and down Corporation St or what is left of it and right to the bottom to go right along Nursery street back towards the Wicker and then across the lights and onto Blonk Street and into the NCP.

That is great at rush hour and isnt going to make some of my work mates late for work at all. :loopy:
Well not if they set off for work at about 6am it wont.

But Ive already had a laugh with them about this because it will all change when the new road system is completed because as you approach the Wicker on " lap one " and do all the above route, when you get to coming down Corporation Street from West Bar then the new road will take them right round to the bottom of the Wicker as the Nursery Street link looks like it will be getting blocked off so they will finish up back at the Wicker arches and then you've guessed it back round to the start again and back onto lap two.

Not quite sure if the management at the NCP and the Bristol Hotel have realised yet that when the Wicker becomes one big bus gate, no cars will actually be able to turn left onto Blonk Street, making them one big unaccessible island and that will be the end to their custom . !!!

Council planning gone mad yet again, still folks cannot complain if they are daft enough to keep votin them in :suspect: :suspect:

Rant Over.:thumbsup:

Stop whinging and buy a bicycle.



I would, however I can't see a Bicycle being of much use to me, when I need to lump my tools around from job to job.

Some of us work for a living.

I assume you must be a council worker?

Well, actually they did make it better. Journey times improved along all sections of that corridor, more parking spaces and greater turnover of parking, more pedestrian crossings. That's making things worse is it?



Journey times improved? who for ? it takes ages to get through woodseats, and don't ask me to use the bus as the bus lane has been taken away, and the bus is stuck in the traffic too..

Yes more pedestrian crossing, I'll grant that, every 10 meters.... how many crossing points do people need?

And which prat is responsible for redesigning the Wicker/Spital Hill area? a recent graduate with a degree in Sausages?

Well, actually they did make it better. Journey times improved along all sections of that corridor, more parking spaces and greater turnover of parking, more pedestrian crossings. That's making things worse is it?

Take it you don't live at Woodseats

Take it you don't live at Woodseats

Don't live in Woodseats, but I know a good transport scheme when I see one!

Don't live in Woodseats, but I know a good transport scheme when I see one!




You must be a wind up merchant....

YOu know how to ruffle a few feathers with your quotes, pretending to work for the councill.

Its funny though:hihi:

I don't live in Woodseats but I visit friends there and although I don't use the roads at peak times (I avoid them like the plague) I find the new road system quite bizzare.

It may 'look' nice on paper or in a lovely 3d image in graphics but in 'reality' it's no better than it was.

You must be a wind up merchant....

YOu know how to ruffle a few feathers with your quotes, pretending to work for the councill.

Its funny though:hihi:

I DID work for Sheffield Council as a transport planner, up to 6 months ago. Worked for them for 20 years.

I don't live in Woodseats but I visit friends there and although I don't use the roads at peak times (I avoid them like the plague) I find the new road system quite bizzare.

It may 'look' nice on paper or in a lovely 3d image in graphics but in 'reality' it's no better than it was.

The journey time figures say otherwise! It looks different because the into city queue has been relocated and is now held on the periphery of the shopping area so that the centre doesn't get clogged with traffic. Buses can also get to the front of the queue.

You're also forgetting the other improvements which were dilivered, increasing the number of parking spaces in the shopping area and improving matters for pedestrians by providing more crossings.

Don't live in Woodseats, but I know a good transport scheme when I see one!

As do the people and shopkeepers of Woodseats. I have it on good authority that the only complaints received since its implementation have been from non-resident commuters.

At the public meetings where planners answered questions from the concerned public, pedestrians praised the scheme and said how much safer and easier it was to shop whilst motorists complained about having to wait a little longer at the traffic lights.

Journey times improved? who for ? it takes ages to get through woodseats

Hasn't it always taken ages to get through Woodseats? Isn't the problem that there are only 3 main routes into/out of Sheffield to the South (Ecclesall Road, Abbeydale Road, Chesterfield Road), and too many vehicles squeezed into them? I find it surprising that there are no train stations between Dore and Sheffield. Surely a couple of commuter stations in between with a suburban commuter service would improve traffic considerably into and out of Sheffield from the south at rush hour.

As for Spital Hill, apart from when it was down to one lane outside Sorby House for a while, I can't see why it should take longer going up the hill. There are no extra traffic lights coming from town, only going towards town outside Vestry House. I can see how not being able to turn right onto Carlisle Street is a problem. I think that's due to reopen when the ring road is finished (in about 2148 I think!). But Tesco want to close that end of Carlisle Street both ways permanently when they build their massive supermarket on the corner of Saville Street! Scum!

I DID work for Sheffield Council as a transport planner, up to 6 months ago. Worked for them for 20 years.

Perhaps you would be brave enough to name some of the other 'successes' you planned.:huh:

....................

I'm sure it will be all right when the Inner Ring Road is finished.

MOD: Please be polite to fellow forummers, particularly Planner1 as he doesn't have to come on here and correct people's misunderstanding of planning decisions. I've had to delete one offensive post already. Anymore more will result in a short holiday for the perpetrator(s). Thanks.

I find it surprising that there are no train stations between Dore and Sheffield. Surely a couple of commuter stations in between with a suburban commuter service would improve traffic considerably into and out of Sheffield from the south at rush hour.


There has been campaign to get Heeley station reopened which has come to nothing.
What should have happened years ago was supertram going up the Sheaf valley and following the train tracks. Unfortunatly all the waste land has ben sold and built on

Perhaps you would be brave enough to name some of the other 'successes' you planned.:huh:

....................

Recently: Broomhill Residents Parking, Sharrow Vale Residents Parking, Broomhill Traffic Management / Calming, Ecclesall Road / Summerfield Street junction improvement, and many more.

There has been campaign to get Heeley station reopened which has come to nothing.
What should have happened years ago was supertram going up the Sheaf valley and following the train tracks. Unfortunatly all the waste land has ben sold and built on

where would Heeley train station be?

where would Heeley train station be?

Well you could always put a ladder up the wall opposite the White Lion!

Actually, there is another route to go up near Woodseats, and not just the 3 main roads. Then again, I rather not say cos it cuts traffic by a lot in peak time. All I know is that, people do use the route from Chesterfield to commute down the M1 heading South to London and various cities down there.

Talking of planning, the traffic light near the junction of the bottom of The Moor and Arundel Gate is quite hazardous. Cos buses which needs to do a right turn has to do a zigzag turn to avoid the traffic light. I thought that was extremely bad planning. As is the traffic light just off the roundabout near Staples. Cars has to slow down just as they get off the roundabout, and sometimes block that roundabout too, cos the traffic lights are on. It's actualy very very hazardous. It was not used to be like that.

Actually, there is another route to go up near Woodseats, and not just the 3 main roads. Then again, I rather not say cos it cuts traffic by a lot in peak time. All I know is that, people do use the route from Chesterfield to commute down the M1 heading South to London and various cities down there.



Do you mean the not very well kept secret of (coming into town) Dronfield by-pass, Meadowhead, Greenhill Avenue, Bocking Lane etc that thousands of us have known for thirty odd years?

OK children, you've had your laugh now put it back, its not funny and its not grown up.

I am of course refering to the new road sytem that goes up Spital Hill, the wicker and that general area. 6 months ago there was no congestion, now the new improvements are underway the traffic jams are horrendous..... and theres no escape route as the roads are blocked off.

I had a cunning plan. when I was stuck on spital hill I thought " I'll turn right onto Carlise St"....NO THATS BLOCKED OFF.

Now my journey time home has almost doubled in the space of 6 weeks

TUT TUT town planners, not funny

When the new road is finished in the next 12 months it'll be a lot better. Unfortunately we have to go through the pain to achieve this.

You should see Tenter Street most of the day. Solid. :(

As do the people and shopkeepers of Woodseats. I have it on good authority that the only complaints received since its implementation have been from non-resident commuters.

Fair enough but cross-town commutes can take anything up to an hour for what would otherwise be a 15-minute journey (I've timed it. On multiple occasions. In different cars. And different times of the day).

I used to work in Sharrow and lived in Gleadless - I can't think of a single time other than when the kids were off school that the traffic was anything other than a nightmare.

I know it's not the locals' fault, and that the town planners aren't responsible for the volume of traffic on the roads, but there just isn't any other way to get from one side o't city to t'other than by going through (variously) Woodseats / Newfield Green / Manor Top and the changes in Woodseats have made that journey worse than ever for those just passing through.

If there was some amazing express route I'd have happily taken that instead as sitting in standing traffic in the p'ing rain isn't something I usually do for fun. I appreciate that commuters don't live in Woodseats, but I'm sure the people who live in Woodseats commute through other areas that haven't received similar treatment and they'd probably have something to say if their journey-time to other areas of the city was doubled as a result of local improvements.

On top of that the council planners seem rather confused about their objectives. You can't have Chesterfield road both as a major route in/out of the city and a nice semi-pedestrianised shopping centre because it creates the kind of chaos that creeps up the ring-road and affects other areas. Before you know it there'll be more pedestrian crossings to alleviate pedestrian-related problems further down the ring-road that are a direct result of the changes made at Woodseats.

The best town-planners appear to be able to do is move the chaos around a bit. In which case - why not just leave everything alone? If it's chaos on the roads then it's chaos and folks will just have to put up with it. Just moving the chaos around and then trumpeting it as an improvement is facile and annoying.

Surely a couple of commuter stations in between with a suburban commuter service would improve traffic considerably into and out of Sheffield from the south at rush hour.

What about - dare I suggest it - running the tram out over the train-tracks in a southerly direction?

Tesco want to close that end of Carlisle Street both ways permanently when they build their massive supermarket on the corner of Saville Street! Scum!

They do? Well I'm both happy and dismayed in equal measure. It would certainly be an improvement on Rotherham Tescos for the Wincobank crew, but how in the name of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Oh! How Holy his saucy Goodness) am I supposed to visit my mates in Nether Edge?

Do you mean the not very well kept secret of (coming into town) Dronfield by-pass, Meadowhead, Greenhill Avenue, Bocking Lane etc that thousands of us have known for thirty odd years?
No. Apart from London Rd/Abbeydale Rd or Chesterfield Rd all heading up that way, there is actually another road which connects to Woodseat Rd (?) I'll let you to suss that out yourself. ;)

I discovered that out of a whim, but it was a quick connect to Woodseat Road beating traffic on Chesterfield Rd.

On top of that the council planners seem rather confused about their objectives. You can't have Chesterfield road both as a major route in/out of the city and a nice semi-pedestrianised shopping centre because it creates the kind of chaos that creeps up the ring-road and affects other areas. Before you know it there'll be more pedestrian crossings to alleviate pedestrian-related problems further down the ring-road that are a direct result of the changes made at Woodseats.



The planners aren't confused at all. The planners have a difficult job to balance all of the often conflicting demands placed on them.

The Woodseats scheme is part of a Quality Bus Corridor, aimed at delivering better conditions for bus operations, which it has done. However, it's also dlivered journey time improvements for all traffic along all parts of the corridor. Also it's delivered more parking spaces, improved turnover of parking spaces (ie more parking opportunities) better pedestrian environment an more crossing opportunities. Good news for everyone I'd say.

There is huge demand for pedestrian crossings anyway, over 200 sites on the request list last time I asked. pedestrians are vulnerable and need assistance to cross busy roads. This helps to promote accessibility and reduce casualties (both key Government targets, which a Council's performance is judged upon).

On top of that the council planners seem rather confused about their objectives. You can't have Chesterfield road both as a major route in/out of the city and a nice semi-pedestrianised shopping centre because it creates the kind of chaos that creeps up the ring-road and affects other areas. Before you know it there'll be more pedestrian crossings to alleviate pedestrian-related problems further down the ring-road that are a direct result of the changes made at Woodseats.



Isn't it terrible people walking to their local shopping centre and wanting to cross roads..................

You'd think Woodeats was unique on this planet - if you travel into Leeds from the north through Headingley you get exactly the same - large road carrying lots of out of town traffic hits narrow shopping centre - result, queuing traffic.

The planners aren't confused at all. The planners have a difficult job to balance all of the often conflicting demands placed on them.

OK. My mistake.


The Woodseats scheme is part of a Quality Bus Corridor, aimed at delivering better conditions for bus operations, which it has done.

Great! :)

I don't use the bus :(


However, it's also delivered journey time improvements for all traffic along all parts of the corridor.

It made my journey to work longer. By about 20%. Not much I grant you, and no the world doesn't revolve around me, but your statement is untrue. It hasn't (in virtue of my journey time being longer) delivered improvements to /all/ traffic. 'Most' or 'some' traffic, maybe - although I don't remember the last time I was asked by the council whether or not the changes at Woodseats it had improved my journey time so I'm not sure where this 'all traffic' information's come from.


Also it's delivered more parking spaces, improved turnover of parking spaces (ie more parking opportunities) better pedestrian environment and more crossing opportunities.

Can't say I noticed much of a change in respect of parking spaces, but I tended to visit the shopping centre at night so that's probably the explanation there.


Good news for everyone I'd say.

Well, for those using the shopping centre and the bus.


There is huge demand for pedestrian crossings anyway, over 200 sites on the request list last time I asked. Pedestrians are vulnerable and need assistance to cross busy roads. This helps to promote accessibility and reduce casualties (both key Government targets, which a Council's performance is judged upon).

Are there casualty figures for that stretch of Chesterfield Road?

Isn't it terrible people walking to their local shopping centre and wanting to cross roads..................

You'd think Woodeats was unique on this planet

Which was partly my point. I'm sure the folks further down Chesterfield Rd. are delighted about the improvements half a mile up the road that have made it more difficult for them to cross. Just moving the problem around won't make it go away, and trumpeting "moving a problem around" as an "improvement" is rather misleading.


- if you travel into Leeds from the north through Headingley you get exactly the same - large road carrying lots of out of town traffic hits narrow shopping centre - result, queuing traffic.

Also partly my point - the problem is the volume of traffic on the roads. All the council can do is move the traffic around. What with the traffic network being a system, and what with systems being interconnected things, a change to one part of the system will affect other parts of the system: thus bottlenecks in one location will tend to cause delays in other locations. I guess the question is: Where do you want the bottleneck?

Not true, the Leader of the Council has said very firmly that they aren't looking to introduce congestion charging here.

Well, I don't trust her. I think she's shifty. :suspect: She is a politician you know.

A case in point: The Council Leader goes on about green issues:-

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/your-city-council/a-message-from-the-leader-of-the-council

but, since we have an incinerator to feed, and a private company in charge of waste removal, they have made themselves pretty powerless to do anything.

In the link above she says she will change her light bulbs to energy saving ones. What took her so long! Do I detect a bandwagon being jumped upon?

The questionnaire for "Your council your say" is simply a joke:

http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/your-city-council/your-council-your-say

How's this for dealing with climate change at the local level:


Sheffield needs to reduce its carbon footprint (the amount of carbon we produce as a result of energy consumption). Which of the following do you think is most important for the Council to do?

Help to improve public transport
Inform and support residents on what they can do to save energy
Encourage businesses to save energy

The first item on the list is something that could have money spent on it, and is worthwhile, but will probably just mean more meetings with First Group, the other two items will probably amount to sending everyone a letter.

Council! Bah!

The questionnaire for "Your council your say" is simply a joke

Uh-huh. Like the section that says "Tick one or more boxes" but asks you a question about which is /most/ important. Seeing as I can tick all 3 boxes that kinda defeats the object of the question.

I've been and given 'em my 2 penn'orth.

Better placed, larger P&R schemes (the one on Abbeydale Rd. is pathetic - I've yet to see anyone using it who isn't just doing some recycling);

and if the council are serious about reducing carbon footprints and encouraging the selling of local produce they could do worse than to reconsider their own judgements allowing the Meadowhell / Tesco out-of-town developments.

at last the council have admitted that they ARE going to surrupticiously ban the car under the giuse of the " city centre transport stratagy", more bus gates, 50% more traffic lights, more road closures etc ,detours to the northern half of the city up to 3 times the current journey lengths ( the "star " 20/3/07) .:rant:

i and many like me work in the transport industry and frequently start work at 04.15 am on earlies & finish at 1am on lates, at present i have a direct route to & from work ,not for much longer tho'. at this rate on the early shift ( i already rise at 3.15 am) i'm going to have to get up before i go to bed so as to get to work on time. dosen't seem to bother the 9-5'ers in the town hall tho' . before anyone spouts go by bus ,when was the last time one ran at those hours other than for bus drivers :rant:

mark my words the next step will be the introduction of congestion charging, the cameras and associated technology are already in place. all the traffic heading in one direction,traffic lights every hundred yards or so it'll be so easy :suspect:

often wonder how many of the highway planners actually drive? not many judging by the b****s up their making of Sheffields roadways.

oh by the way it seems our " city centre transport stratagy" has been reviewed by a traffic expert from leeds university, if he had anything to do with leed's city centre hardly fills you with confidence. :rant:

OK children, you've had your laugh now put it back, its not funny and its not grown up.

I am of course refering to the new road sytem that goes up Spital Hill, the wicker and that general area. 6 months ago there was no congestion, now the new improvements are underway the traffic jams are horrendous..... and theres no escape route as the roads are blocked off.

I had a cunning plan. when I was stuck on spital hill I thought " I'll turn right onto Carlise St"....NO THATS BLOCKED OFF.

Now my journey time home has almost doubled in the space of 6 weeks

TUT TUT town planners, not funny

I'm sure when its finished it'll all be fine...:help:

I often think i'd like to move back to Sheffield to settle, but the place is a joke. There is a national shortage of planners, therefore standards have dropped, but i'm starting to think that those responsible for Sheffield are all deaf, dumb and blind.

at last the council have admitted that they ARE going to surrupticiously ban the car under the giuse of the "city centre transport stratagy", more bus gates, 50% more traffic lights, more road closures etc ,detours to the northern half of the city up to 3 times the current journey lengths ( the "star " 20/3/07) .:rant:

Well that'll put the kybosh on the Bollywood stuff then. Can't see anyone going anywhere near the north of the city (where the council decided to locate the arena, stadium, et al) if the traffic's going to be like that.

many moons ago, our illustrious council predicted that our fair city would fall victim to the curse of " TOTAL GRID-LOCK" and by the lord they have & are doing everything in their power to ensure their prophecy comes true.

numerous road closures across the city, a huge proliferation of one way streets and traffic lights, bus lanes, padestrianised presincts , the much extolled new inner ring road with all it's associated restrictions.

the only thing missing is congestion charging,as bw has already said this is the next logical step to force you out of your car on to a public transport system that cannot cope as it is.

coun' Fox states in the article in the"star" Sheffield city council , " is catagorically not banning traffic from the city centre" . well it seems like it to me. :rant:

I'm sure when its finished it'll all be fine...:help:

I often think i'd like to move back to Sheffield to settle, but the place is a joke. There is a national shortage of planners, therefore standards have dropped, but i'm starting to think that those responsible for Sheffield are all deaf, dumb and blind.

I would beg to differ, those responsible for sheffield are far from deaf,dumb and blind. They hear what we say (but choose to ignore)

They are very intelligent (who else would be able to devise such cunning convuluted schemes at such an extortionate fee)

They see what is occuring (and sit patting each others backs on a cunning plan coming to fruition)

They wait the end goal whereby we either all submit and use public transport or we pay more and more of our hard earnt cash to pay for the next cunning episode of YOU WILL USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT OR ELSE or be bancrupt

I would beg to differ, those responsible for sheffield are far from deaf,dumb and blind. They hear what we say (but choose to ignore)

They are very intelligent (who else would be able to devise such cunning convuluted schemes at such an extortionate fee)

They see what is occuring (and sit patting each others backs on a cunning plan coming to fruition)

They wait the end goal whereby we either all submit and use public transport or we pay more and more of our hard earnt cash to pay for the next cunning episode of YOU WILL USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT OR ELSE or be bancrupt


bankrupcy it is then :hihi: :hihi:

There is huge demand for pedestrian crossings anyway, over 200 sites on the request list last time I asked. pedestrians are vulnerable and need assistance to cross busy roads. This helps to promote accessibility and reduce casualties (both key Government targets, which a Council's performance is judged upon).

How do we push for a request? - as I understand it there is a request in for one on Baslow road in Totley, near the Mickly lane junction, and has been for quite some time. I can see no reason for delay to be honest....its not a complicated junction, it would just be to stop the loons that drive at 70, 80 mph....especially coming down the hill from Owler bar. Summer is worst with bikes coming back after a blast round the peaks...I don't think some of them realise they are still travelling at very high speed. I tried to get across the road to the doctors whilst I was on crutches a few months ago....jeez

It is an incredible nightmare, and i agree! Talk about taking your time and making a mess!!!

How do we push for a request? - as I understand it there is a request in for one on Baslow road in Totley, near the Mickly lane junction, and has been for quite some time. I can see no reason for delay to be honest....its not a complicated junction, it would just be to stop the loons that drive at 70, 80 mph....especially coming down the hill from Owler bar. Summer is worst with bikes coming back after a blast round the peaks...I don't think some of them realise they are still travelling at very high speed. I tried to get across the road to the doctors whilst I was on crutches a few months ago....jeez

There's already pedestrian crossing up the top, just as you come into Totley from the Peaks and that hasn't made much of an impact on speed so I doubt one further down would have any effect either, although it would make it easier and safer to cross the road at busy times.

I think the only way to get people to reduce their speed on this stretch of road would be a couple of speed cameras - one at the top of the hill, and one a little further down near Mickley Lane.

As for why it's taking so long - who can say? This stretch of road has attracted high-speed drivers for years - in fact it used to be marked with "Accident Black Spot" signs urging people to slow down (for all the good that did) but they've been removed now.

I'd like to know where the council get their "rose tinted glasses" from, coz from where I'm looking, this council is killing the city.

It be nice of they finished a job b4 starting another!

I know 4 planners. Town planners admitedly not road planners specifically.

Without giving away addresses
they're from Curbar, Bradwell, Baslow, and Casleton.

But whenever i hear them they're banging on about Sheffield needing more Skyscrapers if are to live up to others cities and attract investment. Build cycle lanes everywhere. Keep cars out of city centre.

None of them have to live here !!!

I know 4 planners. Town planners admitedly not road planners specifically.

Without giving away addresses
they're from Curbar, Bradwell, Baslow, and Casleton.

But whenever i hear them they're banging on about Sheffield needing more Skyscrapers if are to live up to others cities and attract investment. Build cycle lanes everywhere. Keep cars out of city centre.

None of them have to live here !!!

& I bet they get a free car parking space as well:hihi:

This is the thing. Private car ark where we are so it doesnt affect them !!

I know 4 planners. Town planners admitedly not road planners specifically.

Without giving away addresses they're from Curbar, Bradwell, Baslow, and Castleton.

But whenever I hear them they're banging on about Sheffield needing more skyscrapers if are to live up to others cities and attract investment. Build cycle lanes everywhere. Keep cars out of city centre.

None of them have to live here !!!

Skyscrapers? *sigh*. How very 80s!

I thought keeping up with the Jones's was a strategy for people who don't have any idea what they really want to do and can only imitate people who are doing something interesting?

I wouldn't mind, but I would happily vote for proper cycle-lanes (not just the pathetic share-your-cycle-with-a-huge-bus lanes we've got at the minute) and for keeping unnecessary traffic out of the majority of the city centre but only if the council made some provision for workable park & ride schemes.

I'd say what tends to attract investors are happy, motivated people with bright workable ideas. I think we have lots of that here - for one thing we have 2 first-class universities. Shame the planners think it's all to do with buildings and roads.

I'd say what tends to attract investors are happy, motivated people with bright workable ideas. I think we have lots of that here - for one thing we have 2 first-class universities. Shame the planners think it's all to do with buildings and roads.

Careful ! you know theres no place for common sense these days !!

Careful ! you know theres no place for common sense these days !!

Sheffield council & coomon sense dont go hand in hand, it's written in the old "republic of south yorkshire" hand book" it says "common sense is not to be used at anytime when making any plans for the city, nor may we as a council listen to the people that a, pay us & b, give us a job":hihi: :hihi:

Careful ! you know theres no place for common sense these days !!

Sorry, sorry! I knew it was a stupid thing to have written as soon as I clicked the 'Submit Reply' button.

You won't grass me up will you?

Can I ask whats going off through the wicker going into town? It says "BUS LANE" on the tarmac but is it 24hours? As I use it to get home from work at about 11.30, midnight and I dont see the point in being diverted when theres no buses coming through at that time?!

Can I ask whats going off through the wicker going into town? It says "BUS LANE" on the tarmac but is it 24hours? As I use it to get home from work at about 11.30, midnight and I dont see the point in being diverted when theres no buses coming through at that time?!

heading into town its a timed bus lane, or it was last week:hihi:

heading into town its a timed bus lane, or it was last week:hihi:

Good cos I drove straight through and will do tomorrow night too! lol

Good cos I drove straight through and will do tomorrow night too! lol

well done so will I tomorrow:hihi:

at last the council have admitted that they ARE going to surrupticiously ban the car under the giuse of the " city centre transport stratagy", more bus gates, 50% more traffic lights, more road closures etc ,detours to the northern half of the city up to 3 times the current journey lengths ( the "star " 20/3/07) .:rant:

There is a useful indication of when the Star is telling fibbs... you can hear the print press going... If you actually read between the spin in the article, you will note that some routes into the City Centre will be easier and quicker, for example getting from Savile Street of Spital Hill to Tenter Street - A very popular route...

Not everyone will be happy, some will be better off, perhaps even the Star might print a "Sorry, we made a massive mistake, it's actually better", nah, dream on, the Star eating humble pie ?

i and many like me work in the transport industry and frequently start work at 04.15 am on earlies & finish at 1am on lates, at present i have a direct route to & from work ,not for much longer tho'. at this rate on the early shift ( i already rise at 3.15 am) i'm going to have to get up before i go to bed so as to get to work on time. dosen't seem to bother the 9-5'ers in the town hall tho' . before anyone spouts go by bus ,when was the last time one ran at those hours other than for bus drivers :rant:

Unlike popular myth, people like myself understand that public transport doesn't suit everyones needs, I'd say you were a prime candidate for using the car ! Public transport suits people that have to be at work and leave work at "normal" times of the day. Public transport also doesn't suit people that have to make multiple trips, (droping kids off at school or nursery for example) or for those who live and work out of the city centre, for them, the car is usually best... however, how about sharing that ride to work with a fellow work mate if they live close by, saves you fuel and gets a car off of your trip to work...

mark my words the next step will be the introduction of congestion charging, the cameras and associated technology are already in place. all the traffic heading in one direction,traffic lights every hundred yards or so it'll be so easy :suspect:

The technology is certainly not in place, the current (Labour) members do not support congestion charges in Sheffield and neither do I.... I've said for several years now, that the concept of a congestion charge is the stick to encourage people out of the cars and onto public transport, hopefully, we shall never have to resort to nationwide charging... but if people don't change their driving habits, it's not the local councils that will introduce it, it will be the Government - regardless of party, Labour, Conservative or Monster Raving Looney, it will have no choice

often wonder how many of the highway planners actually drive? not many judging by the b****s up their making of Sheffields roadways.

I currently drive about 15 miles daily, I used to drive 65miles to Hull daily, before that, Matlock, Nottingham, Birmingham on a daily basis.... thats about 400,000 miles in 17 years.... I'm pretty sure I know what I'm doing, I've help design major infrastructure, urban networks, motorways and the little stuff... I'm prevented from doing more than I do now, because firstly the electorate doesn't want to pay for what we need, second, we haven't the resources to build (experienced staff, plant and material supply) and lastly, perhaps most important, not everyone wants our cities covered in concrete and macadam....

oh by the way it seems our " city centre transport stratagy" has been reviewed by a traffic expert from leeds university, if he had anything to do with leed's city centre hardly fills you with confidence. :rant:

In any debate, you can get at least half the people to disagree with the other... one expert, even 10 could all disagree with the current strategy, yet I could find a similar independant number who support it, thats the downside of a democracy, you don't always get what you want...

How do we push for a request? - as I understand it there is a request in for one on Baslow road in Totley, near the Mickly lane junction, and has been for quite some time. I can see no reason for delay to be honest....its not a complicated junction, it would just be to stop the loons that drive at 70, 80 mph....especially coming down the hill from Owler bar. Summer is worst with bikes coming back after a blast round the peaks...I don't think some of them realise they are still travelling at very high speed. I tried to get across the road to the doctors whilst I was on crutches a few months ago....jeez

I have recently developed a scheme to improve the crossing facility at this junction, I expect to go out to public consultation in the next month or so.

With regard to your comment on "delay" the City Council responded to the petition submitted and reviewed the site in the Danger Reduction programme. This programme is a block of funding to address sites where there is a public concern but not enough injury accidents to justify Accident Reduction measures (which take priority in funding). Thus the "concept" was included into the works required for the QBC, which seeks to promote ease of crossing for pedestrians at this site. The City Council has many of these sites to look at and petitions to deal with, so sometimes we can't always jump and get Thunderbird 2 in to do the work the next day ;¬)

[QUOTE]some routes into the City Centre will be easier and quicker, for example getting from Savile Street of Spital Hill to Tenter Street

i'll believe it when i see it:suspect:

Not everyone will be happy, some will be better off, perhaps even the Star might print a "Sorry, we made a massive mistake, it's actually better", nah, dream on, the Star eating humble pie ?

actually agree on that point,same with every newspaper i guess :thumbsup:

however, how about sharing that ride to work with a fellow work mate if they live close by, saves you fuel and gets a car off of your trip to work...

already do, but it'll make no difference when all the changes occur,or are we to have special lanes for vehicles with more than 1 occupant? :confused:


The technology is certainly not in place,

so all the cameras that are going up then ,are they just to monitor traffic flow,speed,illegal use of bus lanes and tax disc's ? only a short step to utilise the system incorporate congstion charge collection.
you maybe sincere in your belief that c/c will not come to our fair city,sorry but i'm not so optimistic :suspect:

I currently drive about 15 miles daily, I used to drive 65miles to Hull daily, before that, Matlock, Nottingham, Birmingham on a daily basis.... thats about 400,000 miles in 17 years....

dread to think how many miles i have driven in the 27 years i've been driving,leisure and work related, have driven through virtually every major city in england at some time or other, and in that time things have definately got worse :rant:

I'm prevented from doing more than I do now, because firstly the electorate doesn't want to pay for what we need,

ah ,so it's the voter's that are to blame? silly me :rolleyes:

we haven't the resources to build

there never seems to be,dosen't stop the work beginning though



In any debate, you can get at least half the people to disagree with the other... one expert, even 10 could all disagree with the current strategy, yet I could find a similar independant number who support it, thats the downside of a democracy, you don't always get what you want...:

once again have to agree on that point :thumbsup:

some routes into the City Centre will be easier and quicker, for example getting from Savile Street of Spital Hill to Tenter Streeti'll believe it when i see it:suspect:

Er, well imagine how useful a big fat highway between those two points would be, cos that's what's being built! Shalesmoor - Nursery Street is already partially open and already quicker.

& I bet they get a free car parking space as well:hihi:

Parking spaces are only allocated on operational need, ie you get use of a permit on a day when you need the car. Planning Dept is in Howden House, which has very little parking. Most people who work for the Council in the city centre don't get allocated parking.

I've been and given 'em my 2 penn'orth.

Better placed, larger P&R schemes (the one on Abbeydale Rd. is pathetic - I've yet to see anyone using it who isn't just doing some recycling);

and if the council are serious about reducing carbon footprints and encouraging the selling of local produce they could do worse than to reconsider their own judgements allowing the Meadowhell / Tesco out-of-town developments.

Park and Ride is the province of South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, NOT the Council.

Meadowhall received planning consent from Sheffield Development Corporation who had the planning powers for the East End of Sheffield at that time. Sheffield Council had nothing to do with it.

I have recently developed a scheme to improve the crossing facility at this junction, I expect to go out to public consultation in the next month or so.

With regard to your comment on "delay" the City Council responded to the petition submitted and reviewed the site in the Danger Reduction programme. This programme is a block of funding to address sites where there is a public concern but not enough injury accidents to justify Accident Reduction measures (which take priority in funding). Thus the "concept" was included into the works required for the QBC, which seeks to promote ease of crossing for pedestrians at this site. The City Council has many of these sites to look at and petitions to deal with, so sometimes we can't always jump and get Thunderbird 2 in to do the work the next day ;¬)

Thanks for repying....so we can expect a pelican crossing in the next 3-4 months?

SYPTE ........ NOT the Council.

.......... Sheffield Council had nothing to do with it.


Is SYPTE not answerable to the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority? ... which is made up of representatives from the elected councillors of the member councils.

SYPTE is financed (mainly) and financially underwritten by SYPTA (i.e. the member Councils).

Sir Bob Kerslake is on the Board of Directors of SYPTE.

Park and Ride is the province of South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, NOT the Council.

OK.

Meadowhall received planning consent from Sheffield Development Corporation who had the planning powers for the East End of Sheffield at that time. Sheffield Council had nothing to do with it.

OK.

Parking spaces are only allocated on operational need, ie you get use of a permit on a day when you need the car. Planning Dept is in Howden House, which has very little parking. Most people who work for the Council in the city centre don't get allocated parking.

What about the car park near decathlon which is solely for council workers?

Well you could always put a ladder up the wall opposite the White Lion!

seriously? I know theres a few buildings/archways etc tucked into that wall, I would love to be able to catch a train from there as its the bottom of my street.
It would be a two min journey into town.

Thanks for repying....so we can expect a pelican crossing in the next 3-4 months?

I'm afraid not... as much as the locals want one, there are other places further up the list for having one... specifically places where there has been many injury accidents in the past - these places will always get priority

What is being proposed though is a reduction in road width - keeping 2 lanes - but making the crossing distance about 40% less... this reduces the time it takes to cross the road and the narrowing of the road reduces the speed of some vehicles - I accept that not all vehicles will be slowed by the narrowing, but in Road Safety, a percentage gain has to be a good thing !

Er, well imagine how useful a big fat highway between those two points would be, cos that's what's being built! Shalesmoor - Nursery Street is already partially open and already quicker.

oh i know ,as do lots of other drivers that use that route on a daily basis, it's a car park at peak times and if memory serve's correctly in the not too distant past a single vehicle break down in the shalesmoor/wicker area has managed to grid lock the whole city centre for several hours , not only once but several times. now theres progress for ya .

i agree it can be quicker ,if you travel on it between mid-night & 6am ( as i do often to & from work) but once the traffic starts rolling it's a different story ,one that isn't likely to imrove, with all the extra traffic lights, etc, planned for the route . :huh:

I blame to people of Gleadless - it's all their fault for voting Cllr Fox into power! But they will need educating on who not to vote for in the next election if anyone wants to see him removed from office.

Well, actually they did make it better. Journey times improved along all sections of that corridor, more parking spaces and greater turnover of parking, more pedestrian crossings. That's making things worse is it?NO it hasn't, journey times have not dimished, there aren't more parking spaces and there was a sufficient number of pedestrian crossing beforehand or a subway to accomodate them.Not true, the Leader of the Council has said very firmly that they aren't looking to introduce congestion charging here.Someone once said in their manifesto that they would not introduce top up fees for University.Don't live in Woodseats, but I know a good transport scheme when I see one!You're a salesperson aren't you? Woodseats used to be semi decent for drvigin through up until not so long ago, it's no a constant line of traffic from the bus lights at Morrisons to Scarsdale Road either direction. Would they put balisha beacons and reinstate double lane roads, remove the bus lights and remove the traffic lights at the Abbey Lane junction, we'd all be on our merry way. I remember before the lights, I used to be able to turn right onto Abbey Lane, now I get stuck with no oncoming traffic. Same goes for turning left out of Abbey Lane.You must be a wind up merchant....

YOu know how to ruffle a few feathers with your quotes, pretending to work for the councill.

Its funny though:hihi:It seems he lives in an imaginary world.The journey time figures say otherwise! It looks different because the into city queue has been relocated and is now held on the periphery of the shopping area so that the centre doesn't get clogged with traffic. Buses can also get to the front of the queue.

You're also forgetting the other improvements which were dilivered, increasing the number of parking spaces in the shopping area and improving matters for pedestrians by providing more crossings.I don't know where you live but in Sheffield the recent developments have not improved journey times and there are no additional parking spaces, in fact, Sheaf St car park's being dug up; it is now £2 an hour under travel lodge or fight for a parking on the road next to Pond's Forge. If buses were to be integrated in traffic both their and car journeys would be shorter.As do the people and shopkeepers of Woodseats. I have it on good authority that the only complaints received since its implementation have been from non-resident commuters.

At the public meetings where planners answered questions from the concerned public, pedestrians praised the scheme and said how much safer and easier it was to shop whilst motorists complained about having to wait a little longer at the traffic lights.I don't know who are those people but living in S8 I can tell you the scheme is anightmare for traversing and for visiting: how often have I had to brave Derbyshire Lane's speed bumps to avoid Woodseats traffic lights or walk accross Chesterfield Rd without the green man because it would just not come!I'm sure it will be all right when the Inner Ring Road is finished.What if we're happy to continue using Wicker which is quicker than Cutlers Gate to gain access to Park Square.The planners aren't confused at all. The planners have a difficult job to balance all of the often conflicting demands placed on them.

The Woodseats scheme is part of a Quality Bus Corridor, aimed at delivering better conditions for bus operations, which it has done. However, it's also dlivered journey time improvements for all traffic along all parts of the corridor. Also it's delivered more parking spaces, improved turnover of parking spaces (ie more parking opportunities) better pedestrian environment an more crossing opportunities. Good news for everyone I'd say.

There is huge demand for pedestrian crossings anyway, over 200 sites on the request list last time I asked. pedestrians are vulnerable and need assistance to cross busy roads. This helps to promote accessibility and reduce casualties (both key Government targets, which a Council's performance is judged upon).No they haven't, they have a hard time doing the easy thing, thena gain if they did we wouldn't need them anymore and they'd be out of a job so they come up with more crackajack ideas every 5 years and dig the whole place up again. Neither bus nor car journeys to or through Woodseats have improved, I've texted it long enough to know the new road layout and equipment has slowed things down. The new puffin crossings are neither a blessing for pedestrians nor road users (uncluding our beloved First).

Thats enough for just now, I'm sure Planner1 will spread Council propaganda befor elong.

Journey times improved? who for ? it takes ages to get through woodseats, and don't ask me to use the bus as the bus lane has been taken away, and the bus is stuck in the traffic too..

Yes more pedestrian crossing, I'll grant that, every 10 meters.... how many crossing points do people need?

And which prat is responsible for redesigning the Wicker/Spital Hill area? a recent graduate with a degree in Sausages?

If you mean in the rush hour, wherever you are it takes ages - if you mean any other time, your concept of ages is a bit skewed, it takes maybe 5 minutes max to get from Scarsdale lights to Abbey Lane. I do it twice a day and it never takes me AGES!

And as for crossings, I'd like the time for the red to show to be reduced, when you're standing in the rain waiting for the lights to change, that's MY concept of AGES!! :rant: They should change the second you hit that button :D

there was a sufficient number of pedestrian crossing beforehand or a subway to accomodate them.

Subways are crap for pedestrians, and crossings should only change when someone presses the button, so what's the problem with having more of them?

For Sheffield's planners every day of the year is April 1st. :)

As do the people and shopkeepers of Woodseats. I have it on good authority that the only complaints received since its implementation have been from non-resident commuters.

This is frankly untrue - I know that residents have complained, because I am one of them! And I know several of my neighbours have also complained. Frankly, the current arrangements are a load of pony but I've given up any hope of things being put back as they were.

It wasn't broke, they tried to fix it, they broke it.

Some bright spark decided that instead of a roundabout it would be a great idea to do away with it and install traffic lights at a busy junction in Margate Kent.
5 years of chaotic traffic jams ensued in all directions before sense prevailed and a r/b was reinstated.
No doubt the useless f/r who had the bright idea had a degree in traffic management theory,but the useless local politicians went along with it.
No consolation to you though.

Forgive me asking a stupid question

As someone who likes to walk am not a driver but does catch public transport. How long is this ring road malarkey going to take to complete as someone who uses the 47/48/75/6 routes quite regularly is it just me but nothing seems to happen.

It just seems that each time I come up Saville Street on to the Wicker there seems to be another guy with the regulastion hard hat stood there with another barrier round him but no actual progress on the road development.

And Similiar when going down Corporation Street on to Mowbray St upto Pitsmoor there just seems be an extra barrier and a load of cones.


Is it just my perception of the situation that is wrong Or is there really frenetic activity? which I for one am certainly not aware of!

Subways are crap for pedestrians, and crossings should only change when someone presses the button, so what's the problem with having more of them?subways are excellent for pedestrian, I am a pedestrian half the time: I know. The issue with pedestrians is that all new lights fitted do not change to the green man when you press the button and there are too many of them (yet still some choose to avoid them). Put barriers and subways: seggregate, it's the safe thing.

Fair enough, Segregate (although it doesn't really work), just as long as it's the cars that are in tunnels underground, not the pedestrians.

oh the council they always seem to cause more trouble on the roads, then they say dont use your car go by bus or tram !!! grrrrrrrrrr

And Similiar when going down Corporation Street on to Mowbray St upto Pitsmoor there just seems be an extra barrier and a load of cones.

Is it just my perception of the situation that is wrong Or is there really frenetic activity? which I for one am certainly not aware of!

Due to complete this year. Obviously they've lost a week or two what with having to clean up after Wicker was flooded but it's getting there. Also, the Burngreave Road area is being smartened up at the same time though these works are not related to the Ring Road works. I would go as far as to say someone in the council is showing a bit of initiative since while the bottom end of Spital Hill is being dug up anyway they may as well tidy up the rest of the main road through Burngreave while they're at it.

subways are excellent for pedestrian, I am a pedestrian half the time: I know. The issue with pedestrians is that all new lights fitted do not change to the green man when you press the button and there are too many of them (yet still some choose to avoid them). Put barriers and subways: seggregate, it's the safe thing.

What you are saying here flys in the face of everything that pedestrians groups are saying. The trend nowadays is not to have barriers and to have surface level crossings for pedestrians. At signal controlled crossings, the lights cannot always change immediately when a ped presses the button. There has to be a balance struck between the needs of pedestrians and the need to keep trafic flowing, particualrly a peak times. In Sheffield, crossings are set to give the most priority they can to pedestrians.

There has to be a balance struck between the needs of pedestrians and the need to keep trafic flowing, particualrly a peak times. In Sheffield, crossings are set to give the most priority they can to pedestrians.

Hence the massive traffic jams on Ecclesall Rd on Sundays, especially if the sun comes out. All so that people walking to the park can cross the road in groups of 1 or 2 instead of 3 or 4. Balance?

What you are saying here flys in the face of everything that pedestrians groups are saying. The trend nowadays is not to have barriers and to have surface level crossings for pedestrians. At signal controlled crossings, the lights cannot always change immediately when a ped presses the button. There has to be a balance struck between the needs of pedestrians and the need to keep trafic flowing, particualrly a peak times. In Sheffield, crossings are set to give the most priority they can to pedestrians.

Can we have a link to these pedestrians groups, it would be interesting to see how many people are for and against.

Can anyone tell me what the situation is with Gower St (the one inbetween Spital Hill Rd and Carlisle St roundabout. They made it a one way road but with the left lane being a bus lane. Is the left lane actually a bus lane??? as every time I drive down this road it seems everyone uses this lane. When in rush hour traffic all the cars queue in the bus lane leaving no room for the buses. The buses end up using the normal lane on many occasion. When I have drove down the correct lane and all other cars are in the bus lane they dont let you pull in!!!! They look at you as though you are pushing in when you are using the correct lane and they arnt :rant::rant:. This is why I want to know if its actually a bus lane.
Thanks

Re: Woodseats traffic

Alternatively you can do what the National Express coach drivers do and avoid the entirely of Chesterfield Road by going up East Bank Road, Daresbury Road, Gleadless Road, Blackstock Road, Hemsworth Road, and taking the Ring Road from Lightwood to Meadowhead instead. Guaranteed to be faster.

Well, actually they did make it better. Journey times improved along all sections of that corridor, more parking spaces and greater turnover of parking, more pedestrian crossings. That's making things worse is it?

not if you drive it on a regular basis. why dont the council ban all cars in sheffield it would save them a fortune putting in one way systems, bus lanes, cycle routes, and (once in a blue moon ) doing some road repairs. they could spend all the savings on people/service where needed

It seems to me that the people who have to drive through the "improved" road layout hate it, the people who live along the route hate it, but someone has some statistics that show an improvement (and we all know what they say about statistics!)

For the person complaining about the Wicker being closed to cars heading townwards:

Since they made that a buslane and routed cars out to the Parkway I've actually found I get through that part of the journey faster. I don't usually head that way when I'm going home but if I'm picking up my missus (once or twice a week I suppose) I do and its not nearly as frustrating as trying to make it along the Wicker was.

What you are saying here flies in the face of everything that pedestrians groups are saying. The trend nowadays is not to have barriers and to have surface level crossings for pedestrians. At signal controlled crossings, the lights cannot always change immediately when a ped presses the button. There has to be a balance struck between the needs of pedestrians and the need to keep trafic flowing, particualrly a peak times. In Sheffield, crossings are set to give the most priority they can to pedestrians.It's terrible to see that what organisations that live in out of space can be terribly wrong and people who live in the real world pay for their mistakes.

Thing is Planner1, most of what you say (I say most to be polite) seems to be the words of someone completely out of place and on the margin of the world of the people who 'use'/suffer from the improvements people like you spend money on. The puffin crossing do not change immediately for pedestrians. The puffin crossing does not have approrpaitely placed green man lights. The puffin crossing does not wait for pedestrians to have cleared the roadway before changing green for cars. The puffin crossing sometimes waits the blue moon or teethed chickens to change green for cars. The puffin crossing balances the need of neither the pedestrian nor the road driver, stopping the latter for nothing and preventing the first from crossing.

The pelican lights change green for peds immediately, gives ample time for him/her to cross before giving the right of way to the road, unlike the puffin which does that to neither category.

Trend it may be but it sucks, serving no one other than steel walls and fountain builders.

The pelican lights change green for peds immediately, gives ample time for him/her to cross before giving the right of way to the road, unlike the puffin which does that to neither category.

Hate to break it to you, love, but pedestrian-controlled crossings changing the moment the button is pressed are the exception not the norm.

On a clear stretch of road it may well be possible to have the amber-red sequence come on the moment the button is pressed and so it should be. However when you have situations where crossings are just up from a roundabout or light-controlled crossroads then the timings invariably have to link in with what the lights are doing a few yards away otherwise there would be chaos and the junction would lock up. There are even places where is doesn't make a difference if you press the button at all: you have to wait your turn and it's there to give the impression the pedestrian is doing something!

All types of crossing give plenty of time to actually cross before the lights change. And no matter what the lights are doing motorists must give way to people crossing.

So be wary of using a few examples to make a sweeping generalisation. The point is you have to weigh up the needs of two conflicting groups of people vying for the same space: the road users and those wishing to cross the road. Giving one of these groups an inalienable right of way over the other is no way to run a city. You appear to be advocating that.

OK children, you've had your laugh now put it back, its not funny and its not grown up.

I am of course refering to the new road sytem that goes up Spital Hill, the wicker and that general area. 6 months ago there was no congestion, now the new improvements are underway the traffic jams are horrendous..... and theres no escape route as the roads are blocked off.

I had a cunning plan. when I was stuck on spital hill I thought " I'll turn right onto Carlise St"....NO THATS BLOCKED OFF.

Now my journey time home has almost doubled in the space of 6 weeks

TUT TUT town planners, not funny

And it will get worse till were paying per mile!

Has anyone googled for the "pedestrians groups" that Planner 1 mentions, If they have such a big impact on what goes on, where are they.

Originally Posted by Planner1
What you are saying here flies in the face of everything that pedestrians groups are saying.

Has anyone googled for the "pedestrians groups" that Planner 1 mentions, If they have such a big impact on what goes on, where are they.

Originally Posted by Planner1
What you are saying here flies in the face of everything that pedestrians groups are saying.

Try http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/

Yeah, and I think the blind groups are quite involved and so are wheelchair users.

Re: Woodseats traffic

Alternatively you can do what the National Express coach drivers do and avoid the entirely of Chesterfield Road by going up East Bank Road, Daresbury Road, Gleadless Road, Blackstock Road, Hemsworth Road, and taking the Ring Road from Lightwood to Meadowhead instead. Guaranteed to be faster.

Maybe some of them do, but there's still a heck of a lot of them using Chesterfield Rd/Woodseats ... probably one in each direction every 30 minutes or so ... why don't they just use the ring road and drop down City Road into the bus station instead of that convoluted route you've just mentioned. It's not as though they're allowed to drop off anywhere local like they used to years ago.

Try http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/

Sheffield branch please.

and whilst on the suject of Planning, heres a bit of good planning quoted from the site above,

quote,
A review of pedestrian crossings along Sheffield's tram network is underway after a safety watchdog ruled that a fence might have contributed to the serious injury of a pedestrian by obscuring the view of the tram driver. The Railway Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) found that the positioning of a parapet fence, separating the tramway from the footway prevented a tram driver from seeing a pedestrian until it was too late to apply the brakes. Stagecoach in Sheffield has identified a number of other locations where similar conditions exist.

Source: The Surveyor, 9 March 2006

Hate to break it to you, love, but pedestrian-controlled crossings changing the moment the button is pressed are the exception not the norm.Sorry, love (?). Which is why pelican crossing are simply the best, you press a button it does something,. If by pressing a button nothing happens it isn't well designed.

On a clear stretch of road it may well be possible to have the amber-red sequence come on the moment the button is pressed and so it should be. However when you have situations where crossings are just up from a roundabout or light-controlled crossroads then the timings invariably have to link in with what the lights are doing a few yards away otherwise there would be chaos and the junction would lock up. There are even places where is doesn't make a difference if you press the button at all: you have to wait your turn and it's there to give the impression the pedestrian is doing something!The orange-red sequence what? Yes after red it's invariably is orange... Then most often green.

All types of crossing give plenty of time to actually cross before the lights change. And no matter what the lights are doing motorists must give way to people crossing.All except the puffin, today again, office colleauges unanimously agreed: the puffin crossing is the biggest pain ever; unatural use, slow, impractical...


so be wary of using a few examples to make a sweeping generalisation. The point is you have to weigh up the needs of two conflicting groups of people vying for the same space: the road users and those wishing to cross the road. Giving one of these groups an inalienable right of way over the other is no way to run a city. You appear to be advocating that.To serve both types of users all the puffin does is to anoy both groups. Pedestrians and road users should not share the same space (oh my god) pedestrians on seggregated pedestrian way and road users on the road!

:hihi:cock up, at hillsborough as well traffics a nitemere and the tram gates that no one wants at hillsborough stupid, the roads are falling to bits around hillsborough , but the council have spent money on camaras so if you go thru the tram gates they will fine you how great is that!!!! on some side roads the cobbles are coming thru ! this great council of ours eh!!!:hihi::loopy:

Sheffield branch please.

Why don't you ask Living Streets, I'm sure they'll put you in touch.

Sorry, love (?). Which is why pelican crossing are simply the best, you press a button it does something,. If by pressing a button nothing happens it isn't well designed.


I do wish you'd stop going on like you know something about the way crossings work. From your posts it's clear you haven't got a clue.

There are a number of ways in which the responsiveness of a pelican crossing to pedestrian demands can be set up and the approach will vary depending on site circumstances.

You may well find that some crossings generally respond almost instantly, but not every one does.

oh the council they always seem to cause more trouble on the roads, then they say dont use your car go by bus or tram !!! grrrrrrrrrr

perhaps it has something to do with the fact that several decision makers on the planning team DON'T drive, and as such have only theoretical understanding of how traffic flow really works or maybe it's just that the council in general DON'T want you to use your car in Sheffield (or anywhere else).
like the government ,they want us to buy shiney new cars, tax,test and fuel them, then sit them on the driveway and admire them with-out actually using them.:suspect:

those highway "improvements" such as woodseats and the laughable inner ring road are solely designed to force all traffic to flow into and out of the city in ONE direction, on ONE road, so when the inevitable happens such as break downs or rta's ,the result is total grid lock along virtually the entire system.:loopy:

throw into the equation the proliferation of pelican & puffin crossings, coupled with the normal traffic control lights, one set or the other every couple of hundred yards or so, none of which appear to syncronised and the result at peak times is again almost total grid lock along the entire system :rant:

gridlock, i might add, the council and their associates predicted over 15yrs ago and have since gone out of their way to ensureing their own predictions come true and enforcing these alleged improvements on the rest of us

the council then have the audacity to claim that they are not trying to force private cars off the road in sheffield :gag:

you mark my words congestion charging is on it's way, and any council spokesperson that claims otherwise is speaking with forked tongue.

I do wish you'd stop going on like you know something about the way crossings work. From your posts it's clear you haven't got a clue.

There are a number of ways in which the responsiveness of a pelican crossing to pedestrian demands can be set up and the approach will vary depending on site circumstances.

You may well find that some crossings generally respond almost instantly, but not every one does.

sorry mate i drive for a living and as such am on the road 8 hours a day 5 days a week and all the p' crossings i come across are geared to the demands of non-roadusers, not nessacerily a bad thing just an observation.

I do wish you'd stop going on like you know something about the way crossings work. From your posts it's clear you haven't got a clue.
.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

perhaps it has something to do with the fact that several decision makers on the planning team DON'T drive, and as such have only theoretical understanding of how traffic flow really works or maybe it's just that the council in general DON'T want you to use your car in Sheffield (or anywhere else).
like the government ,they want us to buy shiney new cars, tax,test and fuel them, then sit them on the driveway and admire them with-out actually using them.:suspect:

those highway "improvements" such as woodseats and the laughable inner ring road are solely designed to force all traffic to flow into and out of the city in ONE direction, on ONE road, so when the inevitable happens such as break downs or rta's ,the result is total grid lock along virtually the entire system.:loopy:

throw into the equation the proliferation of pelican & puffin crossings, coupled with the normal traffic control lights, one set or the other every couple of hundred yards or so, none of which appear to syncronised and the result at peak times is again almost total grid lock along the entire system :rant:

gridlock, i might add, the council and their associates predicted over 15yrs ago and have since gone out of their way to ensureing their own predictions come true and enforcing these alleged improvements on the rest of us

the council then have the audacity to claim that they are not trying to force private cars off the road in sheffield :gag:

you mark my words congestion charging is on it's way, and any council spokesperson that claims otherwise is speaking with forked tongue.

The fact that some transport planners and engineers CHOOSE to travel by public transport, walk or cycle, doesn't mean they don't know their job or understand the dynamics of traffic.

Go to any sizeable town or city in the UK and you'll see similar traffic management measures to the ones in Sheffield.

I supppose that you don't think that congestion is anything to do with rising car ownership and usage then??????

The Leader of the Council has said very clearly that congestion charging is not currently on the Council's agenda as it is thought that it could adversely affect the city's economic regeneration. No one can say there will never be congestion charging as the Government seem to be keen to see it introduced.

[QUOTE=Planner1;2434319]
I supppose that you don't think that congestion is anything to do with rising car ownership and usage then??????
QUOTE]

The ever decreasing route's that traffic can travel is far more to do with congestion caused by poor planning than car ownership and usage,
as soon as the planners see a smooth flow of traffic up goes another barrier, and is called an improvement for the motorist, all motorists groups agree :roll: well some, at some hard to find sites do :), that there are too many restrictions.

I do wish you'd stop going on like you know something about the way crossings work. From your posts it's clear you haven't got a clue.

There are a number of ways in which the responsiveness of a pelican crossing to pedestrian demands can be set up and the approach will vary depending on site circumstances.

You may well find that some crossings generally respond almost instantly, but not every one does.I don't remember mentioning I knew the design behind the puffin crossings, I observed their designed meant that their behaviour served no one.

There are similar reactions depending on the type of crossing (or there would be no types). How can you say "some crossings generally respond almost instantly, but not every one does." the crossings are either made or not made to do this! Pelicans are designed to change immediately colour, puffin think for half an hour then do something. One of the little case where a pellican does not change colour is when it has been solicited recently and gives road users a minimum amount of time before giving way to pedestrians.

You shouldn't be criticising my knowledge of pedestrian crossings (geeeeek!) but rather if people find them acceptable, I and many, many others who have contributed on the 'oh we hate puffin crossings' threads you should get back on the drawing board.

If I have a mobile, a computer, a television that does not do what I want I either tell the manufacturer their model is inadequate, buy another model, or dispense myself of such a device.

If the crossing does not change colour when I use it: it's found to be defective, if it was designed not to do that then it needs to be replaced. Get it? no... off course not... "It's better for me this way"

[QUOTE]No one can say there will never be congestion charging as the Government seem to be keen to see it introduced

so even you agree it's on it's way, but at least the council will be able to put the blame on central government, shame they haven't got that option for all the other traffic debacles currently imposed on the sheffield road user.

its fine having all the theorhetical soloutions gleaned from books etc, but nothing can replace the knowledge gained in a practical environment.

i know how to lay bricks in theory, would you want me to bulid your house without also having practical experience?, i don't think so

[QUOTE=Planner1;2434319]

so even you agree it's on it's way, but at least the council will be able to put the blame on central government, shame they haven't got that option for all the other traffic debacles currently imposed on the sheffield road user.

its fine having all the theorhetical soloutions gleaned from books etc, but nothing can replace the knowledge gained in a practical environment.

i know how to lay bricks in theory, would you want me to bulid your house without also having practical experience?, i don't think so


Indeed you're right about theoretical solutions. That's why most of the measures introduced in Sheffield are tried and tested, it generally pays to let others be at the cutting edge and learn from their experience. Planners and engineers do share knowledge and experience right across the country, so we have a pretty good idea what works and doesn't. There's usually a very good reason why things are done, but it's perhaps a failing of Local Authorities that in general, they don't communicate their message well enough and encourage the debate on transport issues. People often don't appreciate the varied and often conflicting pressures on Local Authorities regarding transport schemes.

The people who plan and design Sheffield's traffic schemes are well qualified and experienced, myself included!

Planner1 wrote,
The people who plan and design Sheffield's traffic schemes are well qualified and experienced, myself included!


What tune is that trumpet in,
Steer well clear of the X Factor :rolleyes:

Even well qualified and experienced people make mistakes - the difference is, some of them are able to admit when they have made a mistake.

Sheffield branch please.

and whilst on the suject of Planning, heres a bit of good planning quoted from the site above,

quote,
A review of pedestrian crossings along Sheffield's tram network is underway after a safety watchdog ruled that a fence might have contributed to the serious injury of a pedestrian by obscuring the view of the tram driver. The Railway Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) found that the positioning of a parapet fence, separating the tramway from the footway prevented a tram driver from seeing a pedestrian until it was too late to apply the brakes. Stagecoach in Sheffield has identified a number of other locations where similar conditions exist.

Source: The Surveyor, 9 March 2006

The railings just outside Abbeydale Road Tesco's are a similar accident waiting to happen.

I supppose that you don't think that congestion is anything to do with rising car ownership and usage then??????

And might this have to do with some businesses being located in out-of-town developments which needed planning permission?

Try http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/

A site which has a forum on which there are 5 threads, latest activity being 23 March this year. Each thread contains exactly one post - the post that started the thread.

Planner1 , i really do think your brave to come on a Sheffield Forum and to justify the current chaos that is happening on the road in Sheffield.

This is one example; on the Brook Hill roundabout, do you actually think it is wise to have pelican crossings just of every roundabout exit? i have seen so many accidents here and near misses that i think it wont be long before someone is killed!

Why not just have foot bridges or something, it's a ludicrisy dangerous idea to have here which i deem the most dangerous island in Sheffield, even over Park SQ!!

Planner1 , i really do think your brave to come on a Sheffield Forum and to justify the current chaos that is happening on the road in Sheffield.

This is one example; on the Brook Hill roundabout, do you actually think it is wise to have pelican crossings just of every roundabout exit? i have seen so many accidents here and near misses that i think it wont be long before someone is killed!

Why not just have foot bridges or something, it's a ludicrisy dangerous idea to have here which i deem the most dangerous island in Sheffield, even over Park SQ!!

They aren't pelican crossings. They're signal controlled pedestrian crossings which are part of the signal installation which controls the entries to the roundabout. This signal installation was put in years ago when traffic levels were lighter. The Council are aware that it's not ideal. I believe it's being looked at for revision as part of the regeneration works in the city centre and the upcoming south Yorkshire Inteligent Transport System (SYITS) works.

Footbridges aren't used these days, people prefer surface level crossings as they are more accessible, particularly to those with disabilities, wheelchairs, prams etc.

Crossings need to be on the pedestrian desire line and that's where they are.

http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/

I narrowed it down,

Thank you for your message. Yes, we do have a branch in Sheffield.
Nether Edge Neighbourhood Group are also an affiliated group.

So when Planner1 says-all pedestrians groups,-have they really asked anyone at all, or is it just another way of decieving the public.

I believe, sadly, Planner1 is a "stirrer". Whatever anyone says he/she will disagree, even in the face of practical proof. I have read a Mr. A. Hitler had a similar trait i.e. his Generals said there were no divisions to protect Berlin, he said there were. I think there's a medical term for the condition.

To add a little light relief to this thread...

http://xkcd.org/c277.html

Go to any sizeable town or city in the UK and you'll see similar traffic management measures to the ones in Sheffield.


I have never seen the proliferation of crossings just off roundabout in any other city in England, Britain or the World.

Does this not make things worse, by backing traffic up onto the roundabout? Thus producing gridlock...

Why has the council tried to alleviate this by putting "Keep Clear" areas on the approach to the gridlock areas? These road markings have no meaning in law, whereas a yellow hatched box would!!

[QUOTE=madcow;2443537]The people who plan and design Sheffield's traffic schemes are well qualified and experienced, myself included!

Are you related the the Planner1 who used to be an employee of the council? Or are you talking in the past tense?

Planner1 wrote,
The people who plan and design Sheffield's traffic schemes are well qualified and experienced, myself included!


What tune is that trumpet in,
Steer well clear of the X Factor :rolleyes:

qualified/Experienced in what tho? Caos?

[QUOTE=Planner1;2444153]

Are you related the the Planner1 who used to be an employee of the council? Or are you talking in the past tense?

Some of the stuff I planned in Sheffield is still being implemented, so the statement is true.

I believe, sadly, Planner1 is a "stirrer". Whatever anyone says he/she will disagree, even in the face of practical proof. I have read a Mr. A. Hitler had a similar trait i.e. his Generals said there were no divisions to protect Berlin, he said there were. I think there's a medical term for the condition.

So what practical "proof" has anyone offered, that I've ignored?

On this forum I try to explain why the planners and engineers do the things that some of you disagree with, there si a difference between "stirring" and having a debate.

and obviously there's another 20,000 traffic lights on order(all permanently set to flash to green for a millisecond once a fortnight).

:D:hihi:

So true, e.g: woodseats road bridge, and gleadless town end (when the f***** tram goes past):mad:

This is one example; on the Brook Hill roundabout, do you actually think it is wise to have pelican crossings just of every roundabout exit? i have seen so many accidents here and near misses that i think it wont be long before someone is killed!

Brook Hill roundabout is also dangerous because many drivers not familiar with it think that a green light on the approach gives them right of way on to the roundabout.

Disagree with Taximark on the footbridges though - no-one uses them.

http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/

I narrowed it down,

Thank you for your message. Yes, we do have a branch in Sheffield.
Nether Edge Neighbourhood Group are also an affiliated group.

So when Planner1 says-all pedestrians groups,-have they really asked anyone at all, or is it just another way of decieving the public.

Living Streets are a national campaigning group on pedestrian issues, there are others who come from a slightly different angle, like Sustrans and others who represent the interest of people with disabilities. Community groups also take an interest in pedestrian issues.

The original post I referred to was advocating the use of subways. All across the UK subways are being filled in because people don't want to use them, they much prefer surface level crossings. The old ways of segregating people and trafic by using subways, footbridges, underpasses, lots of barrier rail are now very unpopular. At Sheffield I used to get loads of requests for surface level crossings at sites which already had a subway.

Look at Arundel Gate / Eyre Street in Sheffield, there used to be lots of barriers, subways and an underpass with a footbridge. It was very unattractive ot pedestrians and severed parts of the city centre. Isn't it better now that it's on a much more human scale?

I would like to see less mothers fetching their kids home because half of them add to the daily traffic jams. I would also like to see the unemployed use their feet more while the workers get on with their day.

I've just taken away 10% of traffic there i think.

Brook Hill roundabout is also dangerous because many drivers not familiar with it think that a green light on the approach gives them right of way on to the roundabout.

Disagree with Taximark on the footbridges though - no-one uses them.

The crossings are set sufficiently far back from the roundabout for it to be clear that drivers have to give way. This type of layout is pretty common nowadays. Think about how many signalised junctions have a left slip off lane with a signalled crossing across it and a give way beyond it. It's exactly the same thing.

In any case most people using the junction will be locals and it has been there for a quite a while now.

Living Streets are a national campaigning group on pedestrian issues, there are others who come from a slightly different angle, like Sustrans and others who represent the interest of people with disabilities. Community groups also take an interest in pedestrian issues.

The original post I referred to was advocating the use of subways. All across the UK subways are being filled in because people don't want to use them, they much prefer surface level crossings. The old ways of segregating people and trafic by using subways, footbridges, underpasses, lots of barrier rail are now very unpopular. At Sheffield I used to get loads of requests for surface level crossings at sites which already had a subway.

Look at Arundel Gate / Eyre Street in Sheffield, there used to be lots of barriers, subways and an underpass with a footbridge. It was very unattractive ot pedestrians and severed parts of the city centre. Isn't it better now that it's on a much more human scale?

Who planned the unattractive barriers subways and underpasses with a footbridge, and squandered taxpayers money on something that obviously didn't work, on a whim at the office no doubt, short term planning like most of Sheffield,
instead of opening roads up, and repairing the neglect mostly due to bad planning and lack of maintenance, not enough money we are told,
it seems money can be found by the planners to put as many hazards in the way for all road users, pedestrians and motorists alike, street funiture chucked up at an alarming rate, so called traffic calming.
that only causes more chaos than calm's anything, speed bumps the concrete type that cause damage to cars, and do little to stop the speeders.

In any case most people using the junction will be locals and it has been there for a quite a while now.


Hmm, so if you are in a crash, then it's ok, it is a visitor... and they don't count

I have never seen the proliferation of crossings just off roundabout in any other city in England, Britain or the World.

Does this not make things worse, by backing traffic up onto the roundabout? Thus producing gridlock...

Why has the council tried to alleviate this by putting "Keep Clear" areas on the approach to the gridlock areas? These road markings have no meaning in law, whereas a yellow hatched box would!!


Planner1 - you omitted to comment on the above - any justification for the use of non-standard road marking?

Planner1 - you omitted to comment on the above - any justification for the use of non-standard road marking?

Not sure of exact reason that they used the "Keep Clear" marking (I'll ask), but box junction markings are expensive to put in and maintain and enforcement can only be carried out by the police, for whom it is not a priority.

Can anyone tell me why they only resurfaced have of Carlisle Street? It's not like the end closest to Meadowhall was the worst bit, the whole road was terrible. Now half if it is terrible!

Hmm, so if you are in a crash, then it's ok, it is a visitor... and they don't count

I've observed that junction many many times while working in UTC and I drive through it at least twice a day. I've not seen any problem with people not giving way when entering the roundabout. There are many junctions of this nature out there, in Sheffield and elsewhere.

Not sure of exact reason that they used the "Keep Clear" marking (I'll ask), but box junction markings are expensive to put in and maintain and enforcement can only be carried out by the police, for whom it is not a priority.

May I step in....

Yellow Box markings are not prescribed for use on roundabouts, thus the correct marking to use on a roundabout is a keep clear marking. Monitoring on the three roundabouts where these markings have been placed has shown a reduction in vehicles blocking traffic entering the roundabouts.

Planner1 is quite correct in that yellow boxes are costly to install, maintain and they get a low priority from the Police.

Who planned the unattractive barriers subways and underpasses with a footbridge, and squandered taxpayers money on something that obviously didn't work, on a whim at the office no doubt, short term planning like most of Sheffield,
instead of opening roads up, and repairing the neglect mostly due to bad planning and lack of maintenance, not enough money we are told,
it seems money can be found by the planners to put as many hazards in the way for all road users, pedestrians and motorists alike, street funiture chucked up at an alarming rate, so called traffic calming.
that only causes more chaos than calm's anything, speed bumps the concrete type that cause damage to cars, and do little to stop the speeders.

In the 60's and 70's urban planners all over the country put in urban motorways with underpasses, footbridges etc. This was in line with the national and local planning policy of the time, which was to accommodate traffic growth and very little thought was given to the effects this would have on pedestrians and accessibility. Colin Buchanan's report for the Ministry of Transport, Traffic in Towns (1963) set the agenda for many years afterwards. Even as late as 1989 the DfT's report Roads for Prosperity saw building more roads as the way forward. However, that has all now changed and it is widely accepted that you can't build your way out of congestion. New roads are now seen as a last resort and demand management is in favour.

Most things, including planing policy, evolve and improve over time, learning from the experiences of the past. This is one such example.

It can be argued that Sheffield has been fortunate. Because of the low levels of car ownership back when roadbuilding was in favour, we have probably got less of the urban motorways, concrete canyons, underpasses etc than other major cities in the UK.

Mod. Note

The next person to make accusations of corruption against identifiable individuals gets a nice long holiday.

Thanks.

So Planner1, it is clear that the crossing of the Brook Hill Roundabout is extremely dangerous so what alternative does the council suggest?

Or do we have to wait till there is a serious accident? i don't particularly like footbridges myself it was just a suggestion, so why not get rid of the crossings altogether and use just the big main one where the Tram stop is? Just means people have to walk 40 yards further.

In the 60's and 70's urban planners all over the country put in urban motorways with underpasses, footbridges etc. This was in line with the national and local planning policy of the time, which was to accommodate traffic growth and very little thought was given to the effects this would have on pedestrians and accessibility. Colin Buchanan's report for the Ministry of Transport, Traffic in Towns (1963) set the agenda for many years afterwards. Even as late as 1989 the DfT's report Roads for Prosperity saw building more roads as the way forward. However, that has all now changed and it is widely accepted that you can't build your way out of congestion. New roads are now seen as a last resort and demand management is in favour.
Most things, including planing policy, evolve and improve over time, learning from the experiences of the past. This is one such example.

It can be argued that Sheffield has been fortunate. Because of the low levels of car ownership back when roadbuilding was in favour, we have probably got less of the urban motorways, concrete canyons, underpasses etc than other major cities in the UK.

Thats got to be the worst get out for spending, simple maths, i've got two bricks that fit snuggly in a box, i get six more bricks i need a bigger box.

Planners seem to think that by shrinking the box they'll get more bricks in.

So Planner1, it is clear that the crossing of the Brook Hill Roundabout is extremely dangerous so what alternative does the council suggest?

Or do we have to wait till there is a serious accident? i don't particularly like footbridges myself it was just a suggestion, so why not get rid of the crossings altogether and use just the big main one where the Tram stop is? Just means people have to walk 40 yards further.

Well, no, it isn't clear at all. Do you have any evidence to back up your assertion that it's dangerous for pedestrians? Personally I can't remember seeing any pedestrian collisions there.

The Council have access to the police records of all injury accidents in the city and they target their resources at locations where there are actually collisions taking place which involve injuries. Reducing road casualties is a major Central Government target and thus is a main performance indicator for Local Councils. Failing to meet performance targets results in reduced funding. Believe me, if there were lots of pedestrians getting injured, the Council would know and be looking to take remedial action.

Thats got to be the worst get out for spending, simple maths, i've got two bricks that fit snuggly in a box, i get six more bricks i need a bigger box.

Planners seem to think that by shrinking the box they'll get more bricks in.

No, by reducing the size of the box, they restrict the number of people wanting to shove bricks into it!

Thats got to be the worst get out for spending, simple maths, i've got two bricks that fit snuggly in a box, i get six more bricks i need a bigger box.

Planners seem to think that by shrinking the box they'll get more bricks in.

What about if said box is a bit bigger than your two bricks and with a bit of rearranging you can fit a third brick in without having to make the box bigger?

No, by reducing the size of the box, they restrict the number of people wanting to shove bricks into it!

Meaning those who have paid to put their bricks in the box, have been charged for a service they can't use= fraud,

So are you saying that the government are fraudulently taking tax off the motorist.

What about if said box is a bit bigger than your two bricks and with a bit of rearranging you can fit a third brick in without having to make the box bigger?

There was no mention of extra space, snuggly means snuggly,
do you work for the DoT :hihi:

Meaning those who have paid to put their bricks in the box, have been charged for a service they can't use= fraud,

So are you saying that the government are fraudulently taking tax off the motorist.

For many many years, road tax has not been ringfenced to be spent on roads, it's just like any other tax.

[QUOTE=Planner1;2444153]

Are you related the the Planner1 who used to be an employee of the council? Or are you talking in the past tense?

think you may have misreadf my post:huh:

Mod. Note

The next person to make accusations of corruption against identifiable individuals gets a nice long holiday.

Thanks.



although i have not yet posted an opinion on this thread, i was interested in why you felt the need to post such a threat.

i have not read any posts to date which actually accuse any one of corruption, or did i miss something?

although i have not yet posted an opinion on this thread, i was interested in why you felt the need to post such a threat.

i have not read any posts to date which actually accuse any one of corruption, or did i miss something?

You missed something. The offending post was removed.

No, by reducing the size of the box, they restrict the number of people wanting to shove bricks into it!

*edit* Sorry, previous answer was completely garbled. *

Not so - by reducing the size of the box all you do is create a queue where same number of people as before have to wait until the box becomes free.

[QUOTE=Litotes;2446994]

think you may have misreadf my post:huh:

You probably need to put your question in a more straightforward way. What do you want to know?

*edit* Sorry, previous answer was completely garbled. *

Not so - by reducing the size of the box all you do is create a queue where same number of people as before have to wait until the box becomes free.

The theory goes that some people will not want to wait and might use a double decker brick instead.

No, by reducing the size of the box, they restrict the number of people wanting to shove bricks into it!

No they won't, they'll just restrict the number of people able to shove bricks into it, which isn't the same thing at all.

Using the term "demand management" when you mean "supply restriction" is intellectually dishonest - complete doublethink.

No they won't, they'll just restrict the number of people able to shove bricks into it, which isn't the same thing at all.

Using the term "demand management" when you mean "supply restriction" is intellectually dishonest - complete doublethink.

Supply restriction is a demand management technique.

The theory goes that some people will not want to wait and might use a double decker brick instead.

What about using some tiles and a matchstick? Would that help clear the bricklog, sorry, backlog?

Supply restriction is a demand management technique.

Hmm not sure 'bout that y'know.

If I turn on the upstairs shower and my partner turns on the downstairs shower then we've both placed demands on the water system. If the head of water isn't sufficient the demand will remain the same but the meeting of that demand via water supply will be unable to cope so we'll both end up with showers that drip instead of blasting us across the other side of the bathroom with lethal force.

Reducing supply doesn't /necessarily/ reduce demand for any and all kinds of system. I agree for systems like economics where demand is kind-of defined as "the amount you're /willing/ to pay", where one's willingness goes up or down more-or-less in line with price.

I suppose there are kind-of demand cut-off valves in the road system in a similar manner to economics, but from the kind of traffic chaos I saw during the floods I'd say it doesn't always work like that.

Supply restriction is a demand management technique.

But with supply restriction, generally the price goes up - is this a veiled hint that the cost of driving in Sheffield will rise - is the ex employee of the council privvy to insider knowledge?

Anyone want to open a book on how long it will be before road charging comes into the 'steal city'?

Until you guys get off your bums and go speak to your local councillors and MP's, the Engineers are left sticking their finger in the dyke patching up the existing road network.

Simple fact of life is that demand for road space in Sheffield (and just about everywhere else in the UK) has outstriped what the existing network can effectively manage. Yes, lets build some more capacity in, but wait, that means homes need knocking down to make way for wider roads, it means your council tax and central taxes will increase to fund the construction, it means beautiful green space is lost to blacktop....

Best value is to make sure the people that will change to other modes, get benefits such that they stay on other modes, thus making it easier for those who can't swap (or won't) to make best use of the network.

It's become socially unacceptable in Sheffield to use the bus, why so ??? in London it's acceptable for most to use bus, tram and tube, yet in Sheffield, it's seen as a second class means of travel. OK, there are pros and cons to public transport, but lets face it, we are in this mess because we have become a bunch of selfish folk who don't want to accept the bigger picture that we are the traffic jam and we are passing the blame to our government and demanding their action, yet when they do, we do nothing but complain...

It's odd really, having just returned from north america, even they think they are hard done by when it comes to road building - sigh... never happy !

[QUOTE=Haydn1971;2454637]

It's become socially unacceptable in Sheffield to use the bus, why so ??? QUOTE]




Its not socially unaceptable, just too expensive and too unreliable

But with supply restriction, generally the price goes up - is this a veiled hint that the cost of driving in Sheffield will rise - is the ex employee of the council privvy to insider knowledge?

Anyone want to open a book on how long it will be before road charging comes into the 'steal city'?

Sheffield Council have no plans to introduce congestion charging. The Leader of the Council has said this very plainly and publicly on a number of occasions.

.
Simple fact of life is that demand for road space in Sheffield (and just about everywhere else in the UK) has outstriped what the existing network can effectively manage. !

The existing road network could be more effectively managed by removing some of the nonsensical restrictions, whats the point of having roads narrowed or blocked off, bus lanes where non are needed one way systems that only send traffic round to create a problem elsewhere, after going past Gower Street, where the road has been improved to such a extent that a bus can no longer turn from Burngreave Road on to Gower Street without encountering a vehicle stood at the traffic lights, certainly makes me wonder who is in charge of Planning.

Until you guys get off your bums and go speak to your local councillors and MP's, the Engineers are left sticking their finger in the dyke patching up the existing road network.

Simple fact of life is that demand for road space in Sheffield (and just about everywhere else in the UK) has outstriped what the existing network can effectively manage. Yes, lets build some more capacity in, but wait, that means homes need knocking down to make way for wider roads, it means your council tax and central taxes will increase to fund the construction, it means beautiful green space is lost to blacktop....

Best value is to make sure the people that will change to other modes, get benefits such that they stay on other modes, thus making it easier for those who can't swap (or won't) to make best use of the network.


But capacity is being taken away, planner1 confirms that supply restriction is seen a valid way to "reduce demand" in the through-the-looking glass world of current UK transport ecomonics, where having no roads or railways at all would mean zero transport demand (which would be being met of course) and everyone being happy (and it's not just an excuse to save money, oh no).

So the theory goes that people will shift from car to bus if traffic jams are made bad enough deliberately ('cos that's what planner1 says is the policy). OK, so can anyone point to any figures that show a correlation between, say, the provision of bus lanes and increased bus ridership?

As to getting off bums etc., I've written several times to the DfT about the Mottram bypass, supporting it. I get back a load of stuff from them saying that they want to build the road but accept that that will have the negative result that people will actually use the road (I'm not making this up) so they will "restrict demand" by putting in unnecessary traffic lights and roundabouts to hold traffic up. So why build the flipping thing?

Lunatics... asylum...

Not true, the Leader of the Council has said very firmly that they aren't looking to introduce congestion charging here.

Well thats alright then.
I feel so reasured :rolleyes:

... the Engineers are left sticking their finger in the dyke patching up the existing road network.

*** obvious joke deleted ***

The existing road network could be more effectively managed by removing some of the nonsensical restrictions

Yeah right, thats why we have traffic jams on the M1 every day... You miss the point that yes, some schemes restrict traffic, but at the benefit to other traffic - bus lanes are one such type of scheme that will perhaps annoy you as a driver, but delight 40-80 on each bus that uses a bus lane to past people in cars.

Can people be that blinkered not to realise that getting people on the bus that can use the bus is better for those people who can't (or won't) use the bus ?????????????????

As to getting off bums etc., I've written several times to the DfT about the Mottram bypass, supporting it.

Thats not the sort of action I'm suggesting - The Highways Agency who are promoting the bypass are an executive division of the DfT, who fall under central government control. i.e. they are the monkey not the organ winder !

You need to get all your mates to contact their local MP and tell their local MP that they aren't going to take this anymore and want central government to invest in infrastructure. Then get them to asked their mates to do the same...

Although, be aware, for whats needed, your looking at perhaps 3-5% on your income tax to pay for it !

It's a democracy, use your MP to express your view !

I get back a load of stuff from them saying that they want to build the road but accept that that will have the negative result that people will actually use the road (I'm not making this up) so they will "restrict demand" by putting in unnecessary traffic lights and roundabouts to hold traffic up. So why build the flipping thing?

Lunatics... asylum...

Totally agree - whilst I support a better link accross to Manchester, I'd stop short at a dual carriageway thats being demanded. The traffic flows over the Woodhead don't even come close to justifying it. I would reopen the Derbyshire plans to improve the bad bends, build on those plans to level the grades out on the climb on the Manchester side (remove the ups and downs that form the overall climb), I'd provide a climbing lane on the Manchester side, build the Mottram bypass (without roundabouts) and also bypass the small villages and Flouch on this side of the Pennines. Oh, and get rid of that annoying roundabout at Tankersley - build a flyover !

The environmentalists will be up in horror, but isn't slow moving traffic travelling over the hill making more of an environmental blight with emmissions and noise than a vehicle travelling at steady easy 50-60mph. Could a Transportation Engineer offer a detailed analysis of the economics using DMRB ?

It's a democracy, use your MP to express your view

The trouble is, that in the steal city, when the majority opinion goes against the council, it gets ignored!

Can people be that blinkered not to realise that getting people on the bus that can use the bus is better for those people who can't (or won't) use the bus ?????????????????

Eh??? Is that council speak?

Simple fact of life is that demand for road space in Sheffield (and just about everywhere else in the UK) has outstriped what the existing network can effectively manage.

It's become socially unacceptable in Sheffield to use the bus, why so ??? in London it's acceptable for most to use bus, tram and tube, yet in Sheffield, it's seen as a second class means of travel.

The two are realted and tell you everything you need to know about public transport. The buses where used until privitisation (by the council) leading to expensive unreliable buses that only fed busy areas at the expense of the less used but equally important rural areas. This is negative congestion planning as a direct result of a council action. Still think this is part of a joined up policy Haydn?

Yeah right, thats why we have traffic jams on the M1 every day... You miss the point that yes, some schemes restrict traffic, but at the benefit to other traffic - bus lanes are one such type of scheme that will perhaps annoy you as a driver, but delight 40-80 on each bus that uses a bus lane to past people in cars.

Can people be that blinkered not to realise that getting people on the bus that can use the bus is better for those people who can't (or won't) use the bus ?????????????????

Missing no points, the traffic jams on the M1 will have been caused by traffic being restricted at points of entry and exit, due to poor traffic management, causing a queue to build up.
Busses are now run as private business and i'm sure the 40 to 80 people on a bus would delight the bus company's, reality is it only happens at peak times,leaving a bus lane with empty busses the rest of the day.

Privatisation was a central government decision, not a council one.

Missing no points, the traffic jams on the M1 will have been caused by traffic being restricted at points of entry and exit, due to poor traffic management, causing a queue to build up.
Busses are now run as private business and i'm sure the 40 to 80 people on a bus would delight the bus company's, reality is it only happens at peak times,leaving a bus lane with empty busses the rest of the day.

Traffic jams nothing to do with to many vehicles being on the road then?

Traffic congestion occurs mostly at peak hours (which have spread over time), some bus lanes are peak hour only. I observe that most people don't tend to drive in bus lanes at all, irrespective of whether the lanes are peak hours or 24/7?

Traffic jams nothing to do with to many vehicles being on the road then?

Traffic congestion occurs mostly at peak hours (which have spread over time), some bus lanes are peak hour only. I observe that most people don't tend to drive in bus lanes at all, irrespective of whether the lanes are peak hours or 24/7?

Traffic jams are caused by squeezing to many vehicles into the same area at the same time, hence the need for so called rat runs, which the planners seem to delight in closing, as for the bus lanes, if they were peak only it would avoid the confusion.

Most bus lanes are peak only, but most car drivers seem to not be able to read the signs and so avoid using them.

Traffic jams are caused by squeezing to many vehicles into the same area at the same time, hence the need for so called rat runs, which the planners seem to delight in closing, as for the bus lanes, if they were peak only it would avoid the confusion.
You were talking about the M1, not many rat runs there.

You were talking about the M1, not many rat runs there.

I was you wasn't, so i answered your question.:)

Most bus lanes are peak only, but most car drivers seem to not be able to read the signs and so avoid using them.

Most drivers have already read six chapters of road signs before they get to the one, thou shall not use the bus lane even though there's no busses in it.

As to getting off bums etc., I've written several times to the DfT about the Mottram bypass, supporting it. I get back a load of stuff from them saying that they want to build the road but accept that that will have the negative result that people will actually use the road (I'm not making this up) so they will "restrict demand" by putting in unnecessary traffic lights and roundabouts to hold traffic up. So why build the flipping thing?

Lunatics... asylum...

As Haydn1971 has said, the flows across the A628 and A57 are actually quite low, and are not the cause of all the problems in the Mottram area. Therefore you would have to assume the majority of the traffic problem is caused by local people living in the area.

So, you could argue that the bypass isn't actually going to solve a problem at all, as local traffic will still queue to an extent, but it would make it easier for the cross-Pennine traffic as it wouldn't have to negotiate all that Mottram queue. Eastwards of Mottram etc the A628 can't cope with the extra demand across the Pennines that the bypass would encourage, and so that's why they need to try and restrict demand.

Makes the whole thing a little pointless eh? Maybe the existing train route from Glossop and Hadfield could have been improved instead - a fast shuttle into Manchester would be ideal - giving the local people a better alternative in the first place.

Most drivers have already read six chapters of road signs before they get to the one, thou shall not use the bus lane even though there's no busses in it.
The signs tend to have a picture of a bus and the legend "08:30-10:30 and 16:30-19:00" or similar. It doesn't take a lot of brain power to decipher them, yet a alot of people tend to not see them or take them in. Worse still are the ones who deliberately try to hinder your progress when legitimately making your way down a bus lane out of restricted hours.

The signs tend to have a picture of a bus and the legend "08:30-10:30 and 16:30-19:00" or similar. It doesn't take a lot of brain power to decipher them, yet a alot of people tend to not see them or take them in. Worse still are the ones who deliberately try to hinder your progress when legitimately making your way down a bus lane out of restricted hours.

They may well have a picture of a bus
and the legend "08:30-10:30 and 16:30-19:00" or similar,
but along with all the other street furniture, they tend to be not as important as trying not to knock a pedestrian down, if the bus lanes were at peak times only, everyone would get used to it and act accordingly.

If you're travelling too fast to absorb the meaning of signs and drive with due care and attention then you need to slow down or get off the roads.

They may well have a picture of a bus
and the legend "08:30-10:30 and 16:30-19:00" or similar,
but along with all the other street furniture, they tend to be not as important as trying not to knock a pedestrian down, if the bus lanes were at peak times only, everyone would get used to it and act accordingly.

I don't agree. Most of the bus lanes have been in for years, most of the drivers are local and should be well used to the restrictions but still they don't use bus lanes outside the restricted times.

There are some places which have to be restricted 24/7, so if you want to have one-size fits all, that's what it would have to be.

I don't agree. Most of the bus lanes have been in for years, most of the drivers are local and should be well used to the restrictions but still they don't use bus lanes outside the restricted times.

There are some places which have to be restricted 24/7, so if you want to have one-size fits all, that's what it would have to be.

You are assuming most of the drivers are local, the roads are for road users country wide, and I have yet to see a bus route that needs to be restricted 24/7, unless there's a night shift we haven't heard about.

You are assuming most of the drivers are local, the roads are for road users country wide, and I have yet to see a bus route that needs to be restricted 24/7, unless there's a night shift we haven't heard about.

Most drivers on local roads ARE local.

Bus lane times are set on a site specific basis. Not all need to be 24/7 but some do, eg bus lanes leading to bus priority signals (Western Bank, Meadowhead etc) need to be 24/7 because the signals are worked by transponders fitted to buses/taxis.

OK children, you've had your laugh now put it back, its not funny and its not grown up.

I am of course refering to the new road sytem that goes up Spital Hill, the wicker and that general area. 6 months ago there was no congestion, now the new improvements are underway the traffic jams are horrendous..... and theres no escape route as the roads are blocked off.

I had a cunning plan. when I was stuck on spital hill I thought " I'll turn right onto Carlise St"....NO THATS BLOCKED OFF.

Now my journey time home has almost doubled in the space of 6 weeks

TUT TUT town planners, not funny


So much for the purpose of the so-called 'RELIEF' Road!

My guess is that completion of this road has been seriously delayed by all the flooding, but I, for one, who has worked in construction-related jobs in the most atrocious conditions, wouldn't baulk at getting my feet a bit muddier if it meant completing the work sooner...

Most drivers on local roads ARE local.

Bus lane times are set on a site specific basis. Not all need to be 24/7 but some do, eg bus lanes leading to bus priority signals (Western Bank, Meadowhead etc) need to be 24/7 because the signals are worked by transponders fitted to buses/taxis.

That dosen't contstitute a need to hog half the road 24/7, as if the lights change according to the transponders, then the busses are not held up at off peak times and should run in accordance with normal traffic.
As for taxis they should be treat as normal traffic as they normally carry no more passengers than the average car.

And half the buses don't seem to have the necessary technology, so we sit at the red light while all the cars sail past in the neighbouring lane ... until eventually the bus driver gets fed up and uses the "car" lane instead!

Where are you getting your facts from? You seem to be confused: the majority of bus lanes are NOT 24/7 and any taxi's passenger count is way way higher than the average of a normal car.

Where are you getting your facts from? You seem to be confused: the majority of bus lanes are NOT 24/7 and any taxi's passenger count is way way higher than the average of a normal car.

It seems you are the one who is confused I never said all bus lanes were 24/7, and most taxis can only carry the same number of passengers as the average car,
I made no mention of the passenger count as that is irrelevent.

You did argue that most traffic isn't local... Which is a highly unlikely scenario.

So we're back with the local traffic, and local drivers who should be aware of what the restrictions are, but still don't use the bus lane when they should.

You did argue that most traffic isn't local... Which is a highly unlikely scenario.

So we're back with the local traffic, and local drivers who should be aware of what the restrictions are, but still don't use the bus lane when they should.

Please keep up, i never argued that most traffic isnt local.

That dosen't contstitute a need to hog half the road 24/7, as if the lights change according to the transponders, then the busses are not held up at off peak times and should run in accordance with normal traffic.
As for taxis they should be treat as normal traffic as they normally carry no more passengers than the average car.

The lane is needed to get the bus to the front of the queue and the lights give it priority over other traffic.

Taxis are classified as public transport and allowed to use bus lanes in many towns and cities across the UK. In Sheffield, cycles, motorcycles and private hire cabs are also allowed to use bus lanes.

You are assuming most of the drivers are local, the roads are for road users country wide,

If you weren't arguing that drivers weren't local, then what was the point of this comment?

Of course by decreasing bus journey times, the overall capacity of the network is seriously reduced and congestion is increased for all other traffic, particularly at peak times.
That's your stick, shame the SCC can't offer a carrot.

Of course by decreasing bus journey times, the overall capacity of the network is seriously reduced and congestion is increased for all other traffic, particularly at peak times.
That's your stick, shame the SCC can't offer a carrot.

Well, no. The government's measure of congestion is person delays, so delaying 40 single occupant cars to speed up a bus carrying 80 people is an overall reduction in congestion.

The lane is needed to get the bus to the front of the queue and the lights give it priority over other traffic.

Taxis are classified as public transport and allowed to use bus lanes in many towns and cities across the UK. In Sheffield, cycles, motorcycles and private hire cabs are also allowed to use bus lanes.

O'Leary, who runs Ryanair, bought himself a taxi plate, stuck it on the back of his beamer & can legally use bus lanes in Dublin :o

O'Leary, who runs Ryanair, bought himself a taxi plate, stuck it on the back of his beamer & can legally use bus lanes in Dublin :o

Actually, that's quite smart.
I've seen someone bought a taxi and use it privately as a car too. :hihi:

Actually, that's quite smart.
I've seen someone bought a taxi and use it privately as a car too. :hihi:

I've seen many taxis that ignore virtually all traffic regulations as well!

What a pity SCC who arranges these bus lanes doesn't provide (m)any park and ride feeders for them...


But I suppose that would require planning and foresight.

O'Leary, who runs Ryanair, bought himself a taxi plate, stuck it on the back of his beamer & can legally use bus lanes in Dublin :o

A private hire car driver was recently telling me he got a ticket for using the bus lane when he wasn't on duty.

The trouble is, that in the steal city, when the majority opinion goes against the council, it gets ignored!

And theres me thinking all this time it was Steel City ;¬)

Eh??? Is that council speak?

As I've said time and time before, I speak for myself on here, I do so in my own time and the words I lay before you are mine only...

The two are realted and tell you everything you need to know about public transport. The buses where used until privitisation (by the council) leading to expensive unreliable buses that only fed busy areas at the expense of the less used but equally important rural areas. This is negative congestion planning as a direct result of a council action. Still think this is part of a joined up policy Haydn?

The buses were deregulated by central government in 1986, not the council. I'm also aware that most transport experts are in favour of re-regulation to get out of the competative market created by the Tories in 1986.

I'm also aware that Sheffield is amongst several local authorities that are fighting to get re-regulation in place in their city - hopefully, the current insanity of a bus service being delivered as a profit driven product will end and the bus will get back to providing a service. Now thats joined up thinking.

Missing no points, the traffic jams on the M1 will have been caused by traffic being restricted at points of entry and exit, due to poor traffic management, causing a queue to build up.

Traffic jams on motorways are caused by sheer volume. The M1 past Sheffield takes in excess of 105,000 vehicles per day - a three lane motorway in designed to take a maximum of about 67,000vpd - a 3 lane motorway becomes congested at about 97,000vpd, depending on the HGV content.

Busses are now run as private business and i'm sure the 40 to 80 people on a bus would delight the bus company's, reality is it only happens at peak times,leaving a bus lane with empty busses the rest of the day.

So go lobby your MP and demand that he pushes the bill to re-regulate the buses !

What a pity SCC who arranges these bus lanes doesn't provide (m)any park and ride feeders for them...


But I suppose that would require planning and foresight.

SYPTE are in charge of Park & Ride, not the Council.

SYPTE are in charge of Park & Ride, not the Council.

So much for an integrated transport policy then.

I suppose the council instigates bus lanes at random with no consultation with SYPTE, and this is why the council could not create P&R car parks where SYPTE could service them.

As I've said time and time before, I speak for myself on here, I do so in my own time and the words I lay before you are mine only...

I was commenting on the english, not the content...

So much for an integrated transport policy then.

I suppose the council instigates bus lanes at random with no consultation with SYPTE, and this is why the council could not create P&R car parks where SYPTE could service them.

Don't you understand plain english? Park & ride is the sole responsibility of SYPTE. They find & operate the sites.

Yes, clearly understood.
So where the hell is the joined up thinking that makes integrated transport work. Are you obliged to not talk to each other, or do SYPTE and SCC just choose not too?

I was commenting on the english, not the content...

What is it you find so difficult about the following...

"Can people be that blinkered not to realise that getting people on the bus that can use the bus is better for those people who can't (or won't) use the bus"

The more people that use a bus, means less people in cars, means more road space for people who have no choice but to use the car.

Yes, clearly understood.
So where the hell is the joined up thinking that makes integrated transport work. Are you obliged to not talk to each other, or do SYPTE and SCC just choose not too?

What would make integrated transport work is if SYPTE had control over the companies that run the buses, trams and trains - thats not going to happen until full re-regulation is in place. SYPTE and the four LA's that make up South Yorkshire are closely related, in terms of delivery of the Local Transport Plan, however, when competition and the free market gets mixed in, the bus operators, supertram and railways will practically fight between themselves to such a degree that integrated transport can't be made to work.

Believe me, your not the only one who feels like their banging their head against a brick wall !!!!

What a pity SCC who arranges these bus lanes doesn't provide (m)any park and ride feeders for them...


But I suppose that would require planning and foresight.

litotes, why do you always have to be so sneaky and sarcastic in your posts? this thread has had some good debate but you are always making loose and vague criticisms.

its getting boring...why not try and enter a debate fully, rather than 1 line???

to answer the quote above.....most would agree that a P&R is needed in, for example, the south and south west of the city (forgetting the Tecso Abbeydale). But where? Green belt, National Park, steep sided hills, little available space. Don't you think the PTE and Council would have tried to get a P&R in before, if there was a lovely bit of derelict land that people didn't mind a massive car park being put on?

It's very easy to criticise, but sometimes things don't happen for a reason. My 52 bus route is great now the S10 Corridor is finished - it doesn't get stuck like it used to - so bus lanes don't have to have a P&R to be useful.

this utopian ideal of an " integrated transport system" is ,in it's simplest terms, just a more ergonomic way of saying "you will go by public transport even if you don't want to or can afford not to".

the powers that be are hell bent on making it ever more difficult and costly for the working classe's to go about their daily lives under their own steam ,in their own transport.

it won't be too long now before only the rich will be able to drive anywhere any-way because they will be the only one's able to afford road fund increases, higher fuel charges, congestion charges etc etc etc.
just as it was only the rich that could afford to buy cars many moons ago.

Yes, clearly understood.
So where the hell is the joined up thinking that makes integrated transport work. Are you obliged to not talk to each other, or do SYPTE and SCC just choose not too?

This is the point, integrated transport is extremely difficult to deliver under current conditions.

As Haydn1971 points out, SYPTE and Barnsley, Rotherham,Doncaster adn Sheffield Coucils are part of the South Yorkshire LTP partnership. It is throught this partnership that they bid for government funding for transport schemes. It is natural that as the only county-wide authority, SYPTE should take the lead on park & ride provision, because they can deliver on a strategic basis. As it is a partnership effort, SCC cannot dictate to SYPTE where funding should be spent. The funding level and county-wide prioritisation of P&R sites is the responsibility of SYPTE.

Park & Ride is one part of the toolkit, but it isn't the only one. As Haydn points out, the S10 Smart Route (Quality Bus Corridor) is successful without P&R. In many cases, there just isn't any suitable site which the PTE could aquire within the right area.

P&R brings it's own problems, research indicates that there are many instances where localised congestion problems have occured at P&R sites and that they actually generate more car trips, because people drive to the P&R instead of walking to the bus stop and catching one bus and changing to another.

It seems that a couple of the P&R sites in Sheffield are under-used anyway. The Abbeydale one and the Holme Lane one don't seem popular, so is there really that much demand for it?

this utopian ideal of an " integrated transport system" is ,in it's simplest terms, just a more ergonomic way of saying "you will go by public transport even if you don't want to or can afford not to".

No, it's about giving people choice - some people (myself included) find the bus inappropriate for general use, however if I worked in the city centre, I'm pretty sure I'd use the bus, perhaps more likely the tram to avoid the traffic and parking hassles... others, simply don't have a choice, either by virtue of inability to afford a car, or in some cases, unable to drive a car either to lack of the necessary skills, or perhaps loss of the necessary skills - there is nothing stopping you using your car, but there are measures to encourage you onto other modes - in my mind, these encouragement measures need to go much further than they do now

the powers that be are hell bent on making it ever more difficult and costly for the working classe's to go about their daily lives under their own steam ,in their own transport.

It's not the powers that be you need to point the finger at - you need to look first at the car manufacturers, who other the last couple of decades have made the cost of car ownership a fraction of what it was, but have put none of their profits back into the network. Then you need to look in the mirror - you have demanded as the voting public that the NHS and Education are important to you, you as the voting public have supported the free market dream of stocks and shares that saw the industry that we already owned, sold to us again, you as the voting public decided that you wanted to buy your council homes - all of this removed funding away from infrastucture and put the money in the hands of the free market...

it won't be too long now before only the rich will be able to drive anywhere any-way because they will be the only one's able to afford road fund increases, higher fuel charges, congestion charges etc etc etc.
just as it was only the rich that could afford to buy cars many moons ago.

Go lobby your MP about your worries !

litotes, why do you always have to be so sneaky and sarcastic in your posts?

I do it because I am getting fed up being fobbed off by the council. Recently I complained to the council about street lighting in my street. 8 months later, and only after the press got involved, did they even do anything about the lamp posts in question. And even then all they did was dig up the road. It took another 4 weeks to actually get anything done. They pretend that they have a level of response in place - but from my experience it is not so.

I pay my taxes here as much as anyone else does, and yet I do not get value for them.

Don't you think the PTE and Council would have tried to get a P&R in before, if there was a lovely bit of derelict land that people didn't mind a massive car park being put on?

There are plenty of spaces - there are disused playing fields on the west side of the city which have car parks in place and yet the playing field have not been cared for, for years, in fact they are now getting dangerous - what better place to put P&R car parks in?

But it gets worse, despite massive public opposition to it, they are due to implement (6 months after when they said they would) the Sharrowfail Parking Scheme - and yet they have not put any alternatives in for commuters or local residents.

It is all very well closing down one option, but only if there are other available - Now I know Planner and Hadyn will say that the option is to not own a car - but that is not viable!

It's very easy to criticise, but sometimes things don't happen for a reason.

If that is the case - then they shouldn't happen - or, alternatively, is it that the reason is not one that the council wants to go public about - like perhaps the introduction of road pricing in Sheffield - the steal city!!

It is natural that as the only county-wide authority, SYPTE should take the lead on park & ride provision, because they can deliver on a strategic basis.

But hold on... SCC seem happy to provide the SYPTE with dedicated bus lanes - surely there should be some quid pro quo - this doesn't seem to be happening. Is this yet another example of the SCC not getting value for money, and thus not giving its stakeholders (the people of Sheffield) what it should?

...there are measures to encourage you onto other modes - in my mind, these encouragement measures need to go much further than they do now

Encouragement is a 2 way process - they should encourage, but in doing so provide viable alternatives - these are not in place for many people - and until they are, then the 'encouragement' should stop. You don't sell your own house and then look for somewhere else to stay - you do it in parallel - this isn't being done by the council.

It's not the powers that be you need to point the finger at...

By definition it is... :)


...Then you need to look in the mirror - you have demanded as the voting public that the NHS and Education are important to you, you as the voting public have supported the free market dream of stocks and shares that saw the industry that we already owned, sold to us again, you as the voting public decided that you wanted to buy your council homes - all of this removed funding away from infrastucture and put the money in the hands of the free market...

But the very acts of the NHS etc (for example in making the Northern General the only A&E in the city after 8 pm) means that public transport is not viable - thus making it imperative that you have access to a car.

What is it you find so difficult about the following...

"Can people be that blinkered not to realise that getting people on the bus that can use the bus is better for those people who can't (or won't) use the bus"

The more people that use a bus, means less people in cars, means more road space for people who have no choice but to use the car.

Ahhh, the wonders of punctuation!

I do it because I am getting fed up being fobbed off by the council.

As I've siad before, my words on here do not represent the Council - these are my own views, perhaps you are asking too much of your council - why not complain to the next level up and see what that gets you ?

Recently I complained to the council about street lighting in my street.

It would be fair to say that engineering judgement comes into play here, I know nothing of your situation, it seems like you have been left in the dark... However, it may be that some other works have delayed the work to the street lighting outside your home, perhaps a fault in the supply several streets away that has taken months to get the relevant statutory undertakers involved to deal with, perhaps it was put on a list of priority work, but the priority was lower than at other sites, such as in subways, at crossing points, outside areas of high use etc... perhaps even your council has only a finite amount of funding to deal with faulty street lights...

Next time I'm at Olive Grove, I'll check to see what Thunderbird 2 is doing... as you clearly expect the City Council to have it tucked away waiting for a call from you so that it can launch into action and deal with your problem seconds after you put the phone down...

I pay my taxes here as much as anyone else does, and yet I do not get value for them.

I pay my taxes too, I'm happy with the value I get from my Council Tax, this is a democracy, if you don't like the value you get from your taxes, you can either lobby your elected members, become one yourself, offer up sensible affordable solutions, help the city council find extra funding for your pet project, or leave the city limits !

There are plenty of spaces - there are disused playing fields on the west side of the city which have car parks in place and yet the playing field have not been cared for, for years, in fact they are now getting dangerous - what better place to put P&R car parks in?

Playing fields ? you mean the green space that Sheffield is known around the world for ? In who's opinion are these areas becoming dangerous ?

Whilst we all seem to agree that P&R isn't as fully provided as it is in other cities, funding is limited to buy the necessary plots if they where available - I'm sure you are fully aware of the cost of land these day - a nice empty plot for a house in the west of Sheffield can cost upwards of £500k, just how much would a plot big enough for a car park and bus turning area cost ?

But it gets worse, despite massive public opposition to it, they are due to implement (6 months after when they said they would) the Sharrowfail Parking Scheme - and yet they have not put any alternatives in for commuters or local residents.

This record is stuck... I'll let Planner1 explain (again) why you are incorrect on this one...

It is all very well closing down one option, but only if there are other available - Now I know Planner and Hadyn will say that the option is to not own a car - but that is not viable!

I'm pretty sure that neither Planner1 or myself have ever suggested not owning a car, Planner1 has two very nice modern classic cars, I drive a more modern sports saloon. My opinion is that some people could do more in terms of using public transport, to make life easier for those who cannot use public transport. I'm aware that Planner1 in part drives to work, then rides the train into Manchester, I don't have that choice, but have used the bus, tram, train and car share at previous workplaces. I'm also a member of a Sheffield Carshare Scheme

If that is the case - then they shouldn't happen - or, alternatively, is it that the reason is not one that the council wants to go public about - like perhaps the introduction of road pricing in Sheffield - the steal city!!

Thats a very backward thinking attitude, I'm sure for everything you have a problem with, some logic can be applied - be it a faulty streetlight or a delayed road widenning scheme. It usually comes back to funding, but some of the time, it's down to being unable to get the required tasks to happen in order - thats generally through no fault of each party, it's just the way it is !

But hold on... SCC seem happy to provide the SYPTE with dedicated bus lanes - surely there should be some quid pro quo - this doesn't seem to be happening. Is this yet another example of the SCC not getting value for money, and thus not giving its stakeholders (the people of Sheffield) what it should?

SYPTE indirectly provides the funding for the bus lanes, through the local transport plan, which is granted from central government based on past years performance in key targets such as road safety, public transport, congestion, air quality etc...

It would seem that SCC gets great value for money, given that it would get nothing from central government without the SYPTE

Encouragement is a 2 way process - they should encourage, but in doing so provide viable alternatives - these are not in place for many people - and until they are, then the 'encouragement' should stop.

At last, you accept that encouragement is not in in place for many, thus it must be in place for some people ? ;¬)

Now we are making real progress !

You don't sell your own house and then look for somewhere else to stay - you do it in parallel - this isn't being done by the council.

I think you will find that whilst most people would like to do home buying this way, the reality is that sales fall through in the same way as opportunities to do certain work, thus many people have to look around after they have sold their home at what is available at that time.

But the very acts of the NHS etc (for example in making the Northern General the only A&E in the city after 8 pm) means that public transport is not viable - thus making it imperative that you have access to a car.

What would you have done before you owned a car - in an emergency, perhaps you would have asked a neighbour, use the ambulance service, perhaps even pay for a taxi. Just to get a level of your A&E use, just how many times have you needed to use A&E in the last 10 years ?

Ahhh, the wonders of punctuation!

Indeed, I'm not very good with my commas, just as your inability to spell gets in the way of you being able to spell "Steel" correctly ;)

It's an internet forum, not a thesis !

But it gets worse, despite massive public opposition to it, they are due to implement (6 months after when they said they would) the Sharrowfail Parking Scheme - and yet they have not put any alternatives in for commuters or local residents.

It is all very well closing down one option, but only if there are other available - Now I know Planner and Hadyn will say that the option is to not own a car - but that is not viable!

If that is the case - then they shouldn't happen - or, alternatively, is it that the reason is not one that the council wants to go public about - like perhaps the introduction of road pricing in Sheffield - the steal city!!

So now we actually get around to the real reason you're sticking your head over the parapet again. Still whinging about the Sharrowvale residents parking scheme!

Yes, there may have been some objections, most of them were about specific issues, which have been addressed. When you look at the overall number of properties in the area, the actual number of objections was small, not "massive" as you put it.

What are you on about - not putting in alternatives for local residents? The scheme is all about local residents, they get the permits, the commuters don't, that's the whole idea. There are plenty of alternatives for commuters, is Ecclesall Road not well served by public transport? Many of the commuters who park in that area do so because they can, not because there isn't a viable alternative.

How many more times do the Leaders of your Council have to tell youthat they aren't looking to introduce congestion charging? Change the record for heaven's sake!

What would you have done before you owned a car - in an emergency, perhaps you would have asked a neighbour, use the ambulance service, perhaps even pay for a taxi. Just to get a level of your A&E use, just how many times have you needed to use A&E in the last 10 years ?

I would have used the local A&E which was within walking distance...

but the whole point of A&E is that it is there for an <i>emergency</i>.

What are you on about - not putting in alternatives for local residents? The scheme is all about local residents, they get the permits.

No they don't - they (might) get the chance to buy permits.

And the reason I have 'stuck my head over the parapet' as you so rudely put it, is that I am getting so dissatisfied with the council, the way it spends my taxes, and the lack of response from my councillor that I feel I must make some statement.

When you look at the overall number of properties in the area, the actual number of objections was small, not "massive" as you put it.

We have been through this before, and previously you didn't accept that a majority of responses received were against the proposal, so you are unlikely to now.

Just leave it - we know your position.

However, it may be that some other works have delayed the work to the street lighting outside your home, perhaps a fault in the supply several streets away that has taken months to get the relevant statutory undertakers involved to deal with, perhaps it was put on a list of priority work...

Strange how the work was started the day that the Star put a call into the council, then, when it became apparent that they wouldn't be running a story, it stopped... until the next time they put a call in, when it was finally completed.

SYPTE indirectly provides the funding for the bus lanes...

But does nothing to fund P&R schemes - hmmmm... couldn't the council put a provisio in place...

(Don't be silly, that would need forethought and planning...)

Playing fields ? you mean the green space that Sheffield is known around the world for ?

But hold on, isn't this the same council that is trying to sell off those green spaces for alternative uses... (The green spaces, incidentally, some of which were given to the council for 'recreation', not selling)

In who's opinion are these areas becoming dangerous ?


The opinion of local householders who have already complained to their councillors. (See council minutes passim)

I think you will find that whilst most people would like to do home buying this way, the reality is that sales fall through in the same way as opportunities to do certain work, thus many people have to look around after they have sold their home at what is available at that time.

Bravo!!! - do the council train their staff to avoid the question so well?

But does nothing to fund P&R schemes - hmmmm... couldn't the council put a provisio in place...

(Don't be silly, that would need forethought and planning...)

I think you're wrong to get hung-up on the P&R issue. SYPTE built a park & ride at Holme Lane and last I heard on this Forum, hardly anyone was using it. P&R isn't the solution to all the ills, it's just one of a range of options.

Sheffield Council can lobby SYPTE for P&R sites, and it does (but so do the other SY Authorities) , but SYPTE's funding is their own and they set their own priorities. SCC can't put "provisos" in place as they don't hold the purse strings.

SCC can't put "provisos" in place as they don't hold the purse strings.

They surely can put provisos in place before granting any new bus lanes or other preferential treatment for SYPTE.

They surely can put provisos in place before granting any new bus lanes or other preferential treatment for SYPTE.

Public transport schemes are discussed in a spirit of partnership. Partners don't respond well to "provisos".

It's not just SYPTE that want public transport improvements, The City Council share that aim. Public transport is largely provided by private companies like First and Stagecoach. SYPTE only fund a small number of services that are seen as a social need, so they don't have direct control over much of the public transport network.

Holding back on public transport related schemes to force a partner into providing something they do not want to would be counter productive. SCC and SYPTE are in this together as partners, their future funding depends on the success of the schemes they produce, so they have to work together, understand each others priorities and make compromises.

Programmes are planned over a number of years and the allocated funding has to be spent within the timeframe. If a partner suddenly decided not to proceed unless conditions were met, the programme would run into serious problems, probably resulting in future government funding being scaled down, which is in no-ones interest.

It's clear from your comments that you don't have the slightest idea of the amount of effort that goes into partnership working on this scale.

You said earlier that integrated transport was made difficult because of all the seperate organisations, ie SCC putting in random bus lanes and SYPTE doing nothing to provide people with the means to catch the bus.
Now you've reversed your tune and it's all partnership and hand holding.

Which is it, is integrated transport failing because of the separate organisations, or is it because of a lack of joined up thinking?

Sheffield Council can lobby SYPTE for P&R sites, and it does (but so do the other SY Authorities) , but SYPTE's funding is their own and they set their own priorities. SCC can't put "provisos" in place as they don't hold the purse strings.

That's a bit misleading. Isn't it.

Isn't SYPTE responsible to, and primarily funded by, the SYPT Authority which is made up mainly of Councillors from the partner Councils?

The Councils, through this mechanism, do actually have a lot of control over SYPTE.

It is wrong to imply that SYPTE is an autonomous body that sets "its own priorities".
Those priorities are determined by the policies set by the Authority and as such come from our electred representatives.

I don't agree. Most of the bus lanes have been in for years, most of the drivers are local and should be well used to the restrictions but still they don't use bus lanes outside the restricted times.

There are some places which have to be restricted 24/7, so if you want to have one-size fits all, that's what it would have to be.

It is very annoying that people don't use the bus lanes when they are not bus lanes. However, as a transport planning person can you not perhaps come up with a solution? Not painting the blasted things green, maybe? Making the signage better? Getting rid?

That's a bit misleading. Isn't it.

Isn't SYPTE responsible to, and primarily funded by, the SYPT Authority which is made up mainly of Councillors from the partner Councils?

The Councils, through this mechanism, do actually have a lot of control over SYPTE.

It is wrong to imply that SYPTE is an autonomous body that sets "its own priorities".
Those priorities are determined by the policies set by the Authority and as such come from our electred representatives.

You're correct that the PTE is the delivery arm of the PTA, which has Councillors from the South Yorkshire Local Authorities sitting on it, so there is an interrelationship in that way.

But, I'm sure the PTE would disagree with your assertion that it isn't an autonomous body. I work for a PTE and I can assure you that they are very independant. They might share policy goals with LA's but they work towards them in the way they choose.

As I said before, PTE's and Local Authorities work together in partnership and, as anyone who has been involved in it will tell you, this kind of working is very difficult. The individual LA's often have differing levels of buy-in to PTE policies, which causes enough headaches in South Yorks with four Authorities. Just think how difficult it is in Greater Manchester with ten!