Dannyno

Pedestrians, rule 170 of the Highway Code: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203#rule170

Those figures don't prove that at all. They are the same signs all the time. So if there is an increase on bank holidays, it's not because of what the signs say. It might be because of what people assume.

I don't see any police in that video. There is a paramedic vehicle.

I'm glad somebody has pointed out that bus lines aren't just for buses, but for taxis, cyclists and some other vehicles as well. I'd be in favour of relaxing restrictions when traffic is light - except that in terms of signage you need to keep wording plain and simple. I wouldn't mind if Councils decided to waive fines, except I'd be worried about motorists second guessing the rules. There are FOI requests about the number of PCNs issued in Sheffield on Christmas day. https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bustram_lanegate_pcn_statistics This reveals that on 25/12/2015, 8 PCNs were issued in relation to bus/tram lane/gate restrictions. 4 for Langsett Road and 4 for Middlewood Road. And on 25/12/2016, 7 PCNs were issued, all of them for the London Road bus gate. I'm wondering if David Blythen is our own diezeltruck? If so, then the reason for the interest is clear - his brother was penalised for using the Mansfield Road bus lane on a bank holiday Monday. https://www.thestar.co.uk/our-towns-and-cities/sheffield/hundreds-more-bus-lane-fines-issued-on-bank-holidays-in-sheffield-1-8641540 ---------- Post added 28-12-2017 at 22:11 ---------- And we know from another of Blythen's FOI requests... https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/sheffield_bustram_lanesgates_pen .. that an average 2016/17 Monday PCN haul was 174. And the average on a bank holiday Monday in 2016/17 was 230. Note that the average for Mondays excludes the bank holiday Mondays. It's actually the average for Mondays except for those particular ones. ---------- Post added 28-12-2017 at 22:41 ---------- Not true, they reinstated a handful. On other routes they were recommended to introduce other measures. The consultants report noted a 1-1.5% increase in both bus and other traffic journey times while the suspensions were in effect. Worth comparing their draft report with the report that was officially and initially released. I think it's a good idea to test these things out - it might turn out that some of Sheffield's routes aren't in the right place or have little effect. But I'm not ideologically opposed to bus routes. ---------- Post added 28-12-2017 at 22:49 ---------- The trouble with your "simple mathematics" is that all you've done here is average out the 26 PCNs across the restricted period. But who says that contraventions are equally likely across all hours of that period? Might there not be particular times where more people contravene the restrictions than others? ---------- Post added 28-12-2017 at 22:51 ---------- But there's a wider social question, isn't there? Might it not be a legitimate social aim to encourage people to use public transport, in order to try to reduce car use, on the grounds that otherwise gridlock and pollution are exacerbated and journey times increased?

There's another thing about gritting, which is that there's a science to it. You have to time it right. If you fling grit down and it snows, it's only going to have any effect if there is enough traffic or footfall to crush it all together, otherwise you just get snow sitting happily on top of the grit - if there is lots of snow, anyway. A car park in snowy or icy conditions may not get enough traffic to make gritting worthwhile. This is why it makes little sense to grit quiet side streets. And no point gritting if its going to rain, because it will wash the grit away. On the other hand, it's best if conditions are a bit damp, so the grit sticks. Of course, it also provides some grip. Temperature is important too. Rock salt is a bit warmer than its surroundings, so does have a bit of a melty effect there, but the fundamental mechanism is that it lowers the freezing point of water - so it won't freeze at 0 degrees, but a handful of degrees lower. Also, over time, it will dissolve into the ice and snow, also lowering the freezing point and causing it to melt. So I don't know why the car park wasn't gritted. If council owned, then it's probably not on their priority list. But there could be other reasons, as indicated. . ---------- Post added 15-12-2017 at 22:33 ---------- Nobody is going to sue you, successfully, unless you've recklessly made it more dangerous. ---------- Post added 15-12-2017 at 22:45 ---------- Well, there'd be a gritty surface which might help a bit. But gritting ice once it's already formed is not going to be very effective very quickly. Just an expensive way of wasting grit, really.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/snow-clearing-health-and-safety-myth-shattered "Snow Clearing Health and Safety Myth Shattered" ---------- Post added 12-12-2017 at 17:22 ---------- Being sued is not the same as being successfully sued. How much did the landlord end up paying in compensation? Anything? Nobody can stop someone getting a lawyer to draft a threatening letter. Doesn't mean there's necessarily actually a case to answer.

He's right, that's the law. But ACPO guidance on enforcement says: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road_traffic_offences_guidance_on_fixed_penalty_notices/ As for what speed you got caught at, it will have been in the enforcement letter you were sent. It may not be what you remember.

Amey still seem to be doing road surfacing, according to their Twitter feed. It does feel like they've slowed down though.

K&C has a population of about 157,000. Sheffield has a population of about 547,000. K&C say they will spend £409 million in 2017/18. They need to raise £76 million in council tax. https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/council-tax/what-we-spend Sheffield spends £1.3 billion, and will raise £183 million from council tax. https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content/dam/sheffield/docs/council-tax/check-my-band/Council%20Tax%20Leaflet%202017-18.pdf Compare K&C and SHF and other cities here: http://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/view/lga-research/lga-research-report-headline-report-for-london-boroughs-bar-charts?mod-area=E09000020&mod-group=Core_English_Cities&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup

There is a tendency to say, "well, what can you do if you only get white people applying?". But there's things you can do to ensure a more diverse recruitment pool, which may be about how and where you advertise, what you say the requirements of the job are, and lots of things like that. And of course a more diverse pool is in your interests, so you don't miss the best candidate for the job. Discrimination is illegal unless it can be "objectively justified" (there may be genuine occupational requirements, for example). There's an exception for all woman shortlists for election candidates. But generally speaking "positive discrimination" is likely to be illegal (except I think in relation to disabled people), but "positive action" may be allowed. "Positive action" means things which compensate for a disadvantage. So you are allowed to encourage disadvantaged groups to apply, and you can offer special training. So for example you could offer supervisor training to a minority ethnic group if members of the minority ethnic group were unrepresented among supervisors. Appointment decisions still have to be made on merit, but assuming two candidates are equally qualified to do the job, then it is legal to offer the job to the person who, to use the language of s159 of the Equality Act 2010, is reasonably thought to suffer a disadvantage by virtue of sharing a particular protected characteristic. Or if such persons are disproportionately low participants in the activity being recruited to. So say women are under-represented in, I don't know, penguin-wrangling. It would be permissible to put on special training for women in penguin-wrangling and to advertise where women are most likely to see the adverts. And if, at interview, it comes down to a man and woman both of whom are qualified for the penguin-wrangling role, you can legally appoint the woman rather than the man - so long as the conditions above are met. .

This bit of Easy Livin's post: Is copied and pasted from a Daily Telegraph article from 2013: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10375233/Nine-in-10-walk-free-for-first-violent-crime.html It's hard to know what to make of those numbers. Prison isn't the answer for everything, and I'm not sure first time offenders ought to be imprisoned in relation to *all* the offences mentioned. Of course there isn't enough detail to make those kinds of judgements. The most recent criminal justice statistics (they're quarterly, so the most recent are from March) are here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/638225/cjs-statistics-march-2017.pdf They say:

http://saragasbestossupport.org/ http://asbestosvictimadvice.com/2016/02/asbestos-risk-and-mesothelioma-sheffield-highlighted/

The corner towers are listed: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/results?q=hillsborough%20barracks As is most of the rest of the site, it seems. ---------- Post added 21-08-2017 at 23:40 ---------- But I can't find a listing for the toll house.

Not easy to access? I don't understand this. If it's busy it's certainly slower, but it's hardly difficult, is it?

Where and when did you read about this? Dan ---------- Post added 20-07-2017 at 11:33 ---------- Most of roads I see look good, so I disagree that all the resurfacing has been substandard. I think you'd expect different experiences though. This is because Amey are using different subcontractors, and because some roads just get more hammer than others, and because mistakes will have been made. So it could be that they have to resurface some that they have done before, because they've underestimated what was required. And sometimes damage is caused by vehicles, or by road subsidence, or because other agencies have had to dig up the road etc. Sometimes they'll just have to come back and do it properly because they did it badly. And they won't be using the most expensive techniques and materials, that's for sure. Maybe on some roads, more expensive surfacing is required (but then maybe this a cost-benefit thing, maybe it's cheaper to resurface than to surface more expensively - I don't know.

Very few of these "my friend says" claims turn out to be true, so let's not get all excited about speed humps yet. It seems unlikely anyway that they would be put in for the entire distance, but maybe they would be useful at certain points. As for whether things have got better or worse over time, you can see some of the statistics at: http://www.crashmap.co.uk/. You can type in "Rivelin Valley Road" and then look at the stats in different ways. That will show you where accidents happen (so you can see the hotspots), and whether they are fatal, serious, or 'slight'. Data, which comes from police reports, goes back to 1999, so you can get some idea of trends. And it shows incidents and casualties. In what follows, I looked at casualty figures. Fatal accidents on that road were much more common in the early 2000s than they are now, and there will be more than one reason for that. One will be that cars have got safer, one will be that speeds have come down, and one will be that more can be done to save lives now than a decade plus ago. But it's definitely good news that there are fewer fatal accidents now. It might be more representative to look at accident casualties generally, and if you do that you will also find that average number of accident casualties per year has also fallen (it goes up and down year on year, obviously, but the average is definitely on the decline). But you do some number crunching of your own if you like. ---------- Post added 20-07-2017 at 11:11 ---------- Accidents are not "caused" by steep roads. They are caused by bad driving or technical failures. Weather might be a contributory factor, but if it's so icy that it's not safe to go down Hagg Hill, then it's poor judgement to go down Hagg Hill. Anyway, as noted above it is clear that the accident rate on that road has in fact declined over time, along with the number of casualties. If I knew when the speed limits changed, it would be interested to see if the decline could be attributed to that.

The grit lorries mainly do priority routes, not every road, but ironically "exclusive private roads" are the one place that council grit lorries would *never* visit.

Planner1 is right that the adjudicator did not say the council had to pay everyone back, after reviewing 7 cases (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7447327.stm). So in that sense you can say the Council did the right thing rather than being compelled to do the right thing. However, had they not done the right thing, in response to the adjudicator's decision on those particular cases, then they might have ended up being forced to do it anyway. So in that sense Berberis is right.

You mean muntjac. One needed rescuing a couple of years ago: http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/video-oh-deer-distressed-doe-rescued-from-sheffield-brook-1-7188491 ---------- Post added 11-07-2017 at 13:49 ---------- But red deer and roe deer are often sighted in Sheffield too.

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/council-housing/fire-safety

It was 2015, wasn't it? And more planned for next year. https://www.travelsouthyorkshire.com/tramrail/ http://www.volkerrail.co.uk/en/projects/detail/sheffield-supertram-rail-replacement-project

Yeah, it is some kind of community project. There was I think a sign indicating what it was. There's a thread about it: http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=376637 ---------- Post added 28-06-2017 at 07:43 ---------- http://www.itsyourcommunity.co.uk/ProjectDetail.aspx?f=s&p=1498

Both black and red and black are traditional. Some anarchists in fact stuck with the red flag. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_symbolism

Nobody has pointed out the obvious fact that the headline "Sheffield named one of worst cities in Britain to bring up a family." is simply not accurate. Or no more accurate than one that said "Sheffield named in top 30 best cities in Britain to bring up a family." The moneysupermarket.com survey included only 35 cities - but there are 69 (officially designated) cities in Britain. And obviously many more large towns like Rotherham which are as big as some cities but not officially designated so.

349 Chesterfield Road was the home of Lewis Connelly, "slaterer and plasterer", who was made bankrupt in 1925 (see London Gazette, 25 August 1925: https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/33078/page/5676/data.pdf, according to which he was "Lately residing at and carrying on business at 41 Fieldhead Road." In the early 1920s it seems to have been the home of Ethel Wragg (a library assistant who appears in the Library Association Record at this address in 1922), and her older sisters Dorothy and Nellie Wragg (the former listed in White's Directory of Sheffield 1919-1920 as a dress maker, and the latter as a milliner). At the time of the 1911 census, all three sisters were living at 292 Albert Road, then home to William Henry Wragg (the sporting knife cutler, then aged 52), his wife Sarah Ann (also 52), and his sister Kate Wragg (a music teacher, aged 47). Dorothy was then aged 28 and listed as a dressmaker, and Nellie was aged 25, no trade listed. Ethel was 13 and at school. Other siblings were Alice, a teacher then aged 27; Harry, then a 19 year old apprentice engineer; Eva, then 17 and a bookkeeper; Kate (15) and Hubert (9), both at school. Dorothy died in 1955. I haven't traced the family any further, and I don't know who else, if anyone, was at 349 c.1920-1922. However, the 1948 electoral register has Dorothy, Nellie, Kate and Ethel all living at 2 Fitzwilliam Street, Wath Upon Dearne. And they were all still there in 1952. 351 Chesterfield Road was the address of Charles Black c.1905. According to various medical directories, he was a member of the Royal College of Surgeons and of the Royal College of Physicians, having qualified in 1897. He was resident medical officer at the hospital at Weston Super Mare, and the same at Firvale Union Infirmary. He was also ships surgeon of ss. Jerome at some point between 1900 and 1905. c.1899/1900, directories put him at 32 Sedan Street, Then he goes to 351 Chesterfield Road, and by 1911 he was at 656 Chesterfield Road, and he was definitely still there in 1943. He died on 17 June 1947, aged about 75, leaving over £21K. I don't know when he moved. White's Directory has Arthur Lee Jnr, a pattern maker, living at 351 c 1919-1920. Presumably this would be one of the sons of Arthur Lee & Sons. I haven't gone any further yet, just thought it would be interesting to record this for now.