Unlike cities of a similar size, Sheffield as not developed as a fully fledged regional capital with it's only metropolitan area.

It is the regional core city of South Yorkshire with a HUGE postcode area taking in Barnsley, Rotherham,Chesterfield and others, much larger than Leeds postal district which has it's own metro.

Surely Sheffield should have one?

Sheffield First For Investment states the population of the Sheffield Regional area is 1,800,482.

The importance of key cities to the region’s economy and competitiveness is increasingly being recognised.

The Yorkshire & Humberside Assembly along with Yorkshire Forward really should put Sheffield's case for it's on metro forward to the Government.

Now that Sheffield's economy is one of the fastest growing in the UK, it would make planning on key issues easier, ensuring towns such as Barnsley, and Rotherham share in Sheffield's success.

To clarify: by "metro" or "metropolitan area" do you mean replace Sheffield city council and the borough councils of Rotherham, Barnsley and so on with a unitary council running the whole of South Yorkshire?

Well, it used to be the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire. There used to be a Metropolitan authority in the 70s and 80s, and I guess the last remanents today are quangos like the SYPTE, the Fire Authority, etc.

But why must we have this hankering for 'big power' all the time?

We get simply another bunch of politicians to layer in a few more rules, policies, protocols and regulations. A few more things we can't do withoit permission.

I'm proud of Sheffield - and I'm sure that the people of Doncaster, Barnsley and Rotherham are proud of their towns as well. We can develop and prosper together without introducing another layer of pointless beaurocracy.

Although I guess it would be useful if we could gather people who WANT to participate in such an authoritarian move in to one place so we can keep a close eye on them. ;)

Joe

Originally posted by JoePritchard
I guess the last remanents today are quangos like the SYPTE, the Fire Authority, etc.

They're not quangos. Their membership is elected councillors from the four district councils.

I'm proud of Sheffield - and I'm sure that the people of Doncaster, Barnsley and Rotherham are proud of their towns as well.

Yey! Bring back County Borough status! :)

--
JGH

But does the Leeds metro include Bradford Skyfitsboy?

I think Doncaster and Barnsley are pretty big places in their own right.

Having said that places like Bolton, Wigan etc are included in Greater Manchesters Metro population so maybe you're right.

Originally posted by jgharston
They're not quangos. Their membership is elected councillors from the four district councils.



Yey! Bring back County Borough status! :)

--
JGH

You mean that ALL the people I currently work with in the PTE are Councillors? I think not.

Now the SYPTA is elected councillors, though.

But the requirements of a town like Doncaster are different to those of a city like Sheffield. Having lived in both in the days of the Metropolitan Authority I'm not convinced that what was done by that body couldn't be done by collaboration between local authorities.

Joe

To be honest I'm not to sure what the definitions of a metropolitan area are either, lol!

Although I do know regional cities attract much more investment than free-standing cities like Sheffield.

Bradford I believe does fall under the Leeds Metro umbrella.

Originally posted by JoePritchard
You mean that ALL the people I currently work with in the PTE are Councillors? I think not.

Now the SYPTA is elected councillors, though.

The SYPT Authority is elected members. They instruct the SYPTE.

The SYPT Executive are employees. They do the actual work.

The PTA is the equivalent of the 84 City Councillors; the PTE is the equivalent of the Council Officers (ie, employees).

--
JGH

The post is riddled with inaccuracies.

Originally posted by skyfitsboy
Unlike cities of a similar size, Sheffield as not developed as a fully fledged regional capital with it's only metropolitan area.


There is already a South Yorkshire metropolitan area in existence. It encompasses Sheffield, Doncaster (with its own directly elected mayor), Barnsley, Rotherham, plus South Yorkshire Police and South Yorkshire Fire.

Originally posted by skyfitsboy

It is the regional core city of South Yorkshire with a HUGE postcode area taking in Barnsley, Rotherham, Chesterfield and others, much larger than Leeds postal district which has it's own metro.


Chesterfield is not in South Yorkshire - it's the largest town in Derbyshire, and is part of the East Midlands, and elects it's own East Midlands Euro MEPs.

Sheffield post-codes include not only Chesterfield, but Killamarsh, Eckington, Clay Cross, and extend as far south as Shirland and Higham (just outside Alfreton).
Post-codes are not a reliable indicator of a metropolitan area - they relate solely to the Royal Mail's distribution system!

Originally posted by skyfitsboy

Surely Sheffield should have one?


Repeat: Sheffield is a metropolitan authority already.

Originally posted by skyfitsboy

Sheffield First For Investment states the population of the Sheffield Regional area is 1,800,482.

The importance of key cities to the region’s economy and competitiveness is increasingly being recognised.


That is why the Deputy Prime Minister is promoting the Northern Way.
Originally posted by skyfitsboy

The Yorkshire & Humberside Assembly along with Yorkshire Forward really should put Sheffield's case for it's on {sic} metro forward to the Government.


Repeat once more: Sheffield is a metropolitan authority already.

Originally posted by skyfitsboy

Now that Sheffield's economy is one of the fastest growing in the UK, it would make planning on key issues easier, ensuring towns such as Barnsley, and Rotherham share in Sheffield's success.

Repeat: That is why the Deputy Prime Minister is promoting the Northern Way.

Originally posted by redrobbo
The post is riddled with inaccuracies.



There is already a South Yorkshire metropolitan area in existence. It encompasses Sheffield, Doncaster (with its own directly elected mayor), Barnsley, Rotherham, plus South Yorkshire Police and South Yorkshire Fire.



Chesterfield is not in South Yorkshire - it's the largest town in Derbyshire, and is part of the East Midlands, and elects it's own East Midlands Euro MEPs.

Sheffield post-codes include not only Chesterfield, but Killamarsh, Eckington, Clay Cross, and extend as far south as Shirland and Higham (just outside Alfreton).
Post-codes are not a reliable indicator of a metropolitan area - they relate solely to the Royal Mail's distribution system!



Repeat: Sheffield is a metropolitan authority already.



That is why the Deputy Prime Minister is promoting the Northern Way.


Repeat once more: Sheffield is a metropolitan authority already.



Repeat: That is why the Deputy Prime Minister is promoting the Northern Way.

Well I think you have well and truely hammered that into our head! No need to patronise was there now? :rant:

Originally posted by redrobbo
The post is riddled with inaccuracies.


I was largely quoting from statements made by Yorkshire Forward and Sheffield First Partnerships.

Originally posted by redrobbo
There is already a South Yorkshire metropolitan area in existence. It encompasses Sheffield, Doncaster (with its own directly elected mayor), Barnsley, Rotherham, plus South Yorkshire Police and South Yorkshire Fire.

Sheffield First (http://www.sheffieldfirst.net/) recently stated 'Whilst Sheffield ranks as the United Kingdom's 5th largest city, but because it is a free-standing city it forms only the eighth largest conurbation within the UK.'

Yorkshire Forward (http://www.yorkshire-forward.com/?pw=) is the Regional Development Agency responsible for the sustainable economic development and regeneration of the Yorkshire and Humber area. They state that Sheffield has not, unlike cities of a similar size, developed as a fully fledged regional capital

I understand that South Yorkshire has its own metropolitan area. Does however Sheffield have a City of Sheffield Metropolitan District Council like Leeds and if so what area does this govern?

Originally posted by redrobbo
Chesterfield is not in South Yorkshire - it's the largest town in Derbyshire, and is part of the East Midlands.

Thanks for telling me that, seeing as though I was born in Chesterfield I would never have known this!

Originally posted by redrobbo
Repeat: Sheffield is a metropolitan authority already.

Sheffield is part of a metropolitan area, but is not a northern regional city like Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds.


Originally posted by redrobbo

That is why the Deputy Prime Minister is promoting the Northern Way.

I'm all for The Northern Way Growth Strategy but it isn't soley taking Sheffield's case forward to the Government like I suggested, it covers the whole North of England.

Originally posted by redrobbo
Repeat once more: Sheffield is a metropolitan authority already.

Find comments like this very annoying and quite offensive!:rant:

For anyone intrested:

Conurbations and Metropolises

A conurbation is an urban area which encompasses a number of cities or towns. There are numerous examples of conurbations throughout the United Kingdom due to urban sprawl.

A metropolis can encompass one or more cities but also includes peripheral zones such as suburban districts, towns and villages which are not necessarily urban in nature, yet which are dependent on the city or cities, for example commuter belts.

Often an urban area is a conurbation and a metropolis, as the larger it becomes, the more cities become encompased and amalgamate.

Originally posted by skyfitsboy
[B]Does however Sheffield have a City of Sheffield Metropolitan District Council like Leeds

Yes. Didn't you notice the elections last year?

and if so what area does this govern?

Sheffield.

--
JGH

Originally posted by jgharston
Yes. Didn't you notice the elections last year?



Sheffield.

--
JGH

Oh dear i give up!:loopy:

I'm with Skyfits on this one.

County boundaries are completely arbitrary lines that take no account of devlopment and expansion of urban areas. However, Leeds has benefited from this truely random system as it appears to be situated in the middle of the Yorkshire region. However, if you take away the county boundaries what you see is Leeds/Bradford surrounded at some distance by smaller towns.

locally, you would see Sheffield/Rotherham/Chesterfield as an urban amalgam with other SY towns somewhat dislocated.

Now, Leeds have been quick of the mark to brand themselves as capital of a city region that includes, get this, Barnsley and Harrogate. They have aligned themselves as such to present Leeds as the centre of a huge conurbation when, in reality, the Leeds/Bradford metropolis will have a smaller population than Sheffield/Rotherham Chesterfield.

What I believe Skyfits is trying to say is wouldn't it make sense for Sheffield and its immediately environs present itself in a way that truely reflects the importance, density and population of the area a la Leeds/Bradford?

The sooner we relinquish these silly county boundaires the better. After all, shouldn't Rotherham and Chesterfield benefit from the renaissance we see in Sheffield?

Thank you Mattski, that's exactly the point I was trying to make:thumbsup:

If planners for the Yorkshire and Humber Assembly get their way the whole of West Yorkshire From Harrogate all the way down to Barnsley will be swallowed up by a new region - Greater Leeds (http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=880175)

Where will that leave South Yorkshire and Sheffield?!

No probs Skyfits, just glad you could read through my terrible spelling there!

But your point is important. I can remember back at Uni being told in a lecture how Manchester has turned itself around almost solely through the use of good PR and the development of strong civic pride (and the resultant economic investment). Currently, Leeds is taking the same route. Unfortunately, the people of Sheffield often come across as pathologically pessimistic and this is reflected in the counsellors they elect and whos job it is to promote the city. Who can forgot the infamous 'Sheffield women don't want posh frocks' quote?

We have the best city in the UK in terms of location, natural setting and the friendliness and hardworking nature of the people. And yet we have to catch up economically even with cities such as Nottingham and Bristol.

Hopefully we are really seeing the start of a special period in Sheffield's history but we have to wake up and realise that there is also a world out there that is competing for finite investment. Sheffield needs to start getting ruthless. We have had our assets stripped and our graduates and young people taken by more prosperous cities. It's about time we started fighting back.

M

Originally posted by Mattski
Now, Leeds have been quick of the mark to brand themselves as capital of a city region that includes, get this, Barnsley and Harrogate. They have aligned themselves as such to present Leeds as the centre of a huge conurbation when, in reality, the Leeds/Bradford metropolis will have a smaller population than Sheffield/Rotherham Chesterfield. If like Leeds we were a bit retarded, we might as well englobe Doncaster, Lincoln, and why not Grimsby while we're at it and call it Greater Sheffield ...

Don't care about about what the area is called or how big it is or if Lees thinks it's better and larger than us... As long as I get to pay less taxes, have no bus lanes, and have no potholes ... the rest is BS

Originally posted by Mattski
this is reflected in the counsellors they elect
M

Councillors are elected. Counsellors offer counselling.

Back on topic: I think Skyfitsboy expressed himself badly in his original post. However, I think I am now getting the gist of what he was trying to say.

I do not think that Chesterfield, or any other part of Derbyshire, would welcome being incorporated into a Sheffield-wide, or South Yorkshire-wide metropolis. Since 1997, when Derby city became a unitary authority, Chesterfield assumed the status of the largest conurbation in Derbyshire. The town would not value being absorbed into any kind of metropolis. Indeed, the residents of Killamarsh and Eckington have fiercely fought to remain in Derbyshire and would continue to do so.

The continuous urban sprawl in South Yorkshire is already recognised as a metropolitan area, encompassing Sheffield, Barnsley, Rotherham and Doncaster. I personally think that that area is sufficiently large enough without encroaching into more rural Derbyshire.

To formally encompass Chesterfield into an enlarged metropolis would necessitate absorbing huge chunks of North-East Derbyshire District Council, including Dronfield, Coal Aston, Killamarsh, Eckington, and surrounding villages and hamlets. What would remain of that authority would probably have to be absorbed into Bolsover District council.

The loss of population, and loss of council tax to the county authority, would probably make Derbyshire County Council unviable. The loss of Chesterfield would also mean that the Ilkeston - Long-Eaton area would become the county's highest population base. The resulting focus on this south-east axis of the county would inevitably cause conflict with the next highest population base (i.e., Glossop-Buxton area) in the north-west. Since the loss of Derby (when it became a unitary authority) Chesterfield is now what holds the county of Derbyshire together.

The proposals by skyboyfits to encompass Chesterfield (and by implication, its environs) into an enlarged metropolis, would have a severe knock-on effect for Derbyshire County Council as an entity in its own right. They would have little, if any, support by the residents of the town - or the county as a whole. They would be unworkable and fiercely resisted.

And to re-iterate an earlier point - post-codes are not an indicator of anything other than a convenient way for Royal Mail to provide its delivery services.

Originally posted by redrobbo
Councillors are elected. Counsellors offer counselling.

That was totally unnecessary. I don't think you really score points for correcting my spelling. And I don't think you do grasp the point Skyfits and I are making. We aren't talking about postcodes here. Please re-read my previous post.

Long Eaton is classed by many as a commuter town for Nottingham, Dronfield is, essentially, a Sheffield suburb, and Chesterfield would benefit more from association with Sheffield than as a stand alone market town. It is ridiculous that Chesterfield has better bus links to Derby than to Sheffield just because of county lines.

Derby and the rest of Derbyshire/NE Nottinghamshire can look after itself.

M

Originally posted by Mattski


Derby and the rest of Derbyshire/NE Nottinghamshire can look after itself.

M

says the man living in West London ...

also if we stick to pre 74 boundaries sheffield becomes a minor part of a county dominated by the Leeds-Bradford-Wakefield -Heavy Woollen District- Huddersfield conurbation

I think there is a lot of missing the point here. I don't think that skyfitsboy is suggesting that county boundaries be redrawn. If you look at the Manchester metropolis it falls into Greater Manchester, Cheshire and Lancashire. Liverpool falls into all of Merseyside and parts of Cheshire. The London metropolis covers tens of London boroughs as well as much of the Home Counties.

Like it or not Chesterfield IS part of the Sheffield metropolitan area and planning for the region should consider the needs of Chesterfield. Surely it is better for the town to have its needs considered even though it does not fall into South Yorkshire.

If Derbyshire’s situation is as dire as redrobbo suggests then surely Chesterfield should be glad of it's proximity to Sheffield and be fighting to be considered part of 'Greater Sheffield'.

The whole point of the argument is that Sheffield and Sheffielders have to get off their arses and fight for a share of the economic pie. I get sick and tired of reading all the negative comments on the site whenever regeneration is discussed. I came here ten years ago and to be honest it was a bit of a s**thole (sorry if that offends anyone). The regeneration of recent years has been exciting and hopefully will pick up in pace. By presenting a true picture of the Sheffield metropolitan area we become a city of 1.8 million (not less than half a million) with all of the benefit of inward investment and better regional planning that that will bring.

If we as a city rest on our laurels most of South Yorkshire will be consumed by the Leeds metropolitan area.

Originally posted by redrobbo
Back on topic: I think Skyfitsboy expressed himself badly in his original post. However, I think I am now getting the gist of what he was trying to say.


You have consistently expressed yourself badly throughout this thread.

Yes, the towns in NE Derbyshire probably would fiercely resist being absorbed into an enlarged Sheffield metro, just like the towns and villages within West Yorkshire are against the Yorkshire and Humber Assembly plans to form Greater Leeds.

This does not mean this won't become a reality in West Yorkshire, and if it does become a reality the negative implications on Sheffield will be enormous.

No one seems to be battling for Sheffield's interest and prosperity here.

Like Mattski says these silly county boundaries need to be dissolved, they are out-dated and inefficient.

redrobbo's narrow-minded views are typical of the attitude that has held Sheffield and South Yorkshire back for years, we can no longer afford to think this way and need to grab Sheffield by the balls and thrust it back to where it should be.

redrobbo, you don't work for Sheffield City Council do you? That would explain everything:help:

I still don't think everyone fully understands the question posed at the top of this thread (possibly me included). Correct me if I'm wrong but, after your clarifications, I think this is the question you are asking....

"Should Sheffield have its own expanded 'metro-area' or 'city-region'? This means giving it the planning powers of all the local authorities currently governing the towns of that region. This means abolish the councils of Sheffield City, Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham (collectively, what we've known as 'South Yorkshire' since 1974) plus Chesterfield borough. Effectively, restoring South Yorkshire Metropolitan Borough Council, but adding Chesterfield (and possibly other bits of Derbyshire), abolishing the lower tier of councils (which didn't happen in the 1974 version), and then renaming the whole thing 'Greater Sheffield'?"

So you're talking about a nationwide reorganisation of local government based on the urban spaces that exist on the ground and which are likely to be built in the future, rather than being based on pre-industrial and religious communities that no longer exist. There is a case to be made for this, but you'd have to try and be consistent. Why not include North Notts? Worksop and Retford (Bassetlaw) for example look towards Doncaster and Sheffield - both of which would be in your Mega-Sheffield. Bassetlaw is part of the reason Finningley is called Robin Hood Airport. But 'Greater Nottingham' would probably want to keep them (as well as consuming Derby, Leicester and Lincoln).

Wilmslow and Macclesfield would finally join Greater Manchester; Worcester and Hereford would be in Greater Birminhgam...and so on. I wouldn't worry about lines on maps too much though. Newark (New Jersey) airport isn't in New York state never mind New York City but everyone nows it's effectively part of New York because it's a continuous urban area. I wouldn't have a problem with 'Greater Sheffield' as an idea because that's what already exists. You've just got to clarify what powers you give it and what happens to the old boroughs.

Also the government region of 'Yorkshire and Humber' (what would become the Assembly region if it ever happened) obviously doesn't include Chesterfield or Bassetlaw because both are in 'East Midlands' region. There will always be disputes about boundaries and there is no right answer.

Originally posted by Bilge
I still don't think everyone fully understands the question posed at the top of this thread (possibly me included). Correct me if I'm wrong but, after your clarifications, I think this is the question you are asking....


No. The question I was trying to ask has been explained in subsequent posts.

The lack of enthusiasm, ambition, competitiveness and civic pride within Sheffield is truly shocking, particularly amongst the older generation, it’s no wonder we have one of the worst council’s in the country.

You're all a bunch of miserable ********. Can't you understand what skyfits is sayin?? He talks positevely about Sheffield and wants the city to get the recognition it deserves..

No wonder Sheffield was a mess for so long, most of you haven't got a clue.........

Originally posted by skyfitsboy
Yes, the towns in NE Derbyshire probably would fiercely resist being absorbed into an enlarged Sheffield metro

So, despite the fact that the people who live there wouldn't want it, they should still be forced to be part of a Sheffield 'empire'?

If we take over NE Derbyshire it will give us a larger area to raise an army and invade Leeds before the baby eating subhumans do it to us:)

i agree with skyfits and sony, the civic pride in sheffield is sh*te and its spreading onto this forum. Anything postive about sheffield or any optimism is instantly slammed. This forum is now full of miserable sods.

To be honest skyfitsboy there's no point in starting a thread on this forum it will only get the old 'its all a load of rubbish' treatment, or the patronising spellcheck dickh*ads scrutinising you,unless of course its about something trivial, which it increasingly is on this forum.

Is it true that redrobbo is a councillor? If it is true then that makes me very worried as to the kind of people that run our city.

Final note, i agree that sheffield needs to market itself better and judging from Leeds and Manchester's success, forming some sort of extended metro/city region is one option to look at.

I think the nail has been hit on the head - there is no pride in Sheffield. Other cities that have a 'Greater' area tend to have people wanting to be part of that city, even though they live in quite another area - i've often heard St Albans being referred to as London, as is Lichfield for Birmingham and Warrington for Manchester. The trouble with Sheffield is that no-one wants to be part of it - we have people who are actually situated within the boundary (Beighton, Stocksbridge, Dore Village(!)) but still refuse to say they live in Sheffield. With this in mind, what hope do we have for the likes of Dronfield and Killamarsh??
As a lifelong promoter of Sheffield, I've given up! The Council tend to stick with the anti-Sheffield brigade, so a waste of time trying...
we shall have to move somewhere that is more forward thinking..

As you say, places towards Chesterfield would rather try and keep it's associations with Derbyshire, than become a part of the 'Full Monty/failed steel industry' image that Sheffield evokes for many people.

This may sound over simplfied, but if Sheffield truly had something to offer the nearby towns and villages, they would actively be promoting their ties with Sheffield, not avoiding them.

Surely it should be the carrot, and not the stick, which brings people here.

Councillors are elected. Counsellors offer counselling.

Yuk! I hate people whose best arguments are picking up on peoples spelling and grammar!


I think the question of pride is an odd one when it comes to sheffield. Here we have a city which is, in a way, a by-word for community anf civic pride - and yet it is blatantly obvious that its something thats lacking more and more everytime new developments are released, the council fails or crime stories hit the headlines - perhaps its up to developers and councillors (sp?) to provide services and developments that inject pride back into the hearts of sheffield folk - and no the embarrasingly average blocks at the heart of the city.

Originally posted by Bilge
This means abolish the councils of Sheffield City, Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham ... plus Chesterfield borough. Effectively, restoring South Yorkshire Metropolitan Borough Council, but adding Chesterfield (and possibly other bits of Derbyshire), ... and then renaming the whole thing 'Greater Sheffield'?"

So you're talking about a nationwide reorganisation of local government ... There is a case to be made for this, but you'd have to try and be consistent. Why not include North Notts? Worksop and Retford (Bassetlaw) for example look towards Doncaster and Sheffield - both of which would be in your Mega-Sheffield. Bassetlaw is part of the reason Finningley is called Robin Hood Airport. But 'Greater Nottingham' would probably want to keep them (as well as consuming Derby, Leicester and Lincoln).

Wilmslow and Macclesfield would finally join Greater Manchester; Worcester and Hereford would be in Greater Birminhgam...and so on.

Sounds like the Redcliffe-Maud proposals.

In the late 1960s Harold Wilson's Labour government set up the Redcliffe-Maud Commission. They proposed that most of England would have a system ot unitary authorities, which would ignore the previous boundaries and be a total redrawing of the map.

The proposals were met with uproar, and were opposed by the Conservative Party opposition led by Edward Heath. When they won the 1970 general election they redrew England into uniform counties and districts largely modelled on the existing counties.

Under the original proposals Sheffield, Dronfield, Chesterfield and Rotherham would have been in a single unitary authority.

--
JGH

that actually sounds like a much more realistic reflection of the working population base of sheffield.

Originally posted by jgharston
Sounds like the Redcliffe-Maud proposals.

The proposals were met with uproar, and were opposed by the Conservative Party opposition led by Edward Heath. When they won the 1970 general election they redrew England into uniform counties and districts largely modelled on the existing counties.

Under the original proposals Sheffield, Dronfield, Chesterfield and Rotherham would have been in a single unitary authority.

--
JGH

Exactly. The likely uproar is the reason no government is ever too keen on reorganising local government, despite the fact that it's well overdue. It brings nothing but grief and is no vote-winner. But it's a complete mess at present and we need some change. The English regional assembles suggested by Prescott (and defeated in the North East referendum) sounded like a start at this, but have gone down like a lead balloon. So where we go next isn't clear.

The vague 'metro-areas' mentioned on here are meaningless unless you state how they relate to the existing structures - the local councils and regional bodies, their powers and lines on maps. Pointing this out isn't moaning or being a small-minded Little-Sheffielder, it's being constructive.

Unlike cities of a similar size, Sheffield as not developed as a fully fledged regional capital with it's only metropolitan area.

It is the regional core city of South Yorkshire with a HUGE postcode area taking in Barnsley, Rotherham,Chesterfield and others, much larger than Leeds postal district which has it's own metro.

Surely Sheffield should have one?

Sheffield First For Investment states the population of the Sheffield Regional area is 1,800,482.

The importance of key cities to the region’s economy and competitiveness is increasingly being recognised.

The Yorkshire & Humberside Assembly along with Yorkshire Forward really should put Sheffield's case for it's on metro forward to the Government.

Now that Sheffield's economy is one of the fastest growing in the UK, it would make planning on key issues easier, ensuring towns such as Barnsley, and Rotherham share in Sheffield's success.


leeds postal district is larger than sheffield's

south yorkshire could arguably be sheffield's metro area - sheffield after all is the only city in s.yorks.

west yorkshire has 3 cities. 2 of which dont seem to be coining in on leeds success whatsoever...

there is no county council in s.y is there?

I think there is a lot of missing the point here. I don't think that skyfitsboy is suggesting that county boundaries be redrawn. If you look at the Manchester metropolis it falls into Greater Manchester, Cheshire and Lancashire. Liverpool falls into all of Merseyside and parts of Cheshire.

1. the manchester metropolis IS greater manchester.

2. if recognising the existance of greater manchester, then it falls approx. 50/50 into the cheshire and lancashire.

3. its wrong to state that it falls into all 3.

the same for liverpool...

if you recognise merseyside as a county, it was formed out of again a 50/50 lancashire/cheshire split.

greater nottingham however, one of the newer metropolitan areas in the UK is 100% within nottinghamshire. so there should be no real difficulty for its residents.

as regional capitals go...(assuming that all counties are soon to be abolished in preference of a regional assembly structure) leeds will be the capital for yorks and the humber, manchester will govern the north west, newcastle the north east, nottingham the east mids, birmingham the west mids, bristol the south west, norwich for anglia, london for london, and if im not mistaken, reading for the southern...with this in mind, see that 2 of the regional capitals are 75 miles apart on the M1... (leeds/nottingham) - is it feasible to expect sheffield, being dead in the centre of these 2 is likely to receive the investment... nah, i shouldnt think so.

The term "Metro" has a strong overtone for me, however I'm all for a little more thought on regionalising certain things.... for example, Chesterfield, Rotherham and Sheffield are close geographically and could benefit from shared services... waste, healthcare, education, police, fire etc.... The difficulty is managing the finance systems.....

Transportation too... as said earlier in this thread, the three areas do form a greater urban sprall, so we should consider pooling our resources. There are massive issues at several interfaces between the three authorities... J34 near Meadowhall and Catcliffe spring to mind, both are on the edge of boundaries and as such, less of a concern to each authority... oddly, J33 is in Rotherham Borough, whilst the maintenance is paid for centrally via the Highways Agency, yet the traffic lights are managed by Sheffield !

Maybe a regional roads authority like Transport for London could address the isolationaist issues that each of the three suffer from, there doesn't have to be boundary changes, just a lot more cross border interaction.... it's time to accept that people commute on a local level between Sheffield, Rotherham, Chesterfield, Worksop, Doncaster Barnsley... also many travel daily to Leeds, Manchester and Nottingham, it's time to think bigger !

Unlike cities of a similar size, Sheffield as not developed as a fully fledged regional capital with it's only metropolitan area.

It is the regional core city of South Yorkshire with a HUGE postcode area taking in Barnsley, Rotherham,Chesterfield and others, much larger than Leeds postal district which has it's own metro.
There isn't a vacancy for a regional capital, unfortunately: Leeds is the regional capital of Yorkshire, Nottingham of the East Midlands, Manchester of the North West etc. This is a drawback as being a regional capital brings with it the regional HQs of lots of public and private sector organisations (including the media). The only other of the eight big cities of England which isn't a regional capital is Liverpool.

I'm inclined to say that there isn't much mileage in trying to promote the idea of a Sheffield metropolitan area. However, the government was toying with a 'city regions' concept a little while ago; I don't know what's happened with that. A metropolitan Sheffield area would (in terms of geographical coherence) sensibly include Chesterfield, though probably not Doncaster (a bit like the Redcliffe-Maud proposals referred to above). This area is, however, somewhat less populous than West Yorkshire or Greater Manchester.

In the meantime Sheffield is probably best carrying on with what it is doing: getting its act together on redeveloping the city centre (eg with the shopping area and the railway station). More needs to be done in terms of improving some of the transport links such as the road link to Manchester and the rail links to Leeds and London.

Greater Sheffield? hmmm *ponder* quite like the sound of that ... but I see that the defeatist, naysayers are at it again ... no room for poor old Sheffield to be known as anything worthwhile, or to get a big-up from its residents, little Nottingham is a regional city, and dirty Leeds is a regional city, and of course Manchester is already great ...

Just for once, could the denigrators and bringers down of optimism just keep their traps shut or get with the programme - it would make such a refreshing change.

No offence if it seems it's you I'm directing this post at ... it just gets soooo boring all the time.

I think the origins of Leeds City Region that get referred to a lot in this thread are from the Regional Spatial Strategy (and possibly also the Regional Economic Strategy) These are rather dull but possibly worthy documents that would guide the planning of the region (and the spending decisions of Yorkshire Forward).

For information, there is a Sheffield City Region mentioned in these documents too. I am not at all clear why people think the Leeds City Region is being given more powers etc than Sheffield City Region. Leeds City Region does indeed cover half of Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council's area, but it won't take over the planning or other functions of Barnsley Council.

The City Region idea I think just reflects the fact that big places tend to influence the smaller places around them...

I think we've had the "Greater Sheffield" discussion before. As a resident of Lancashire and not "Greater Manchester" it's only a name and I personally have yet to see any benefits of being in Greater Manchester.

In fact, you turn on the local news and hear of a stabbing in "Greater Manchester". It's only when you listen and find out that it's in somewhere obscure like Middleton or Royton - dozens of miles away at the opposite outer edge of the area and of no danger or consequence to me whatsoever. However, by that time the scaremongering has grabbed you.

How would you feel if Calendar opened up the news bulletin with "Murder in Greater Sheffield" and it turned out to be Thorne or Grimbsy?