nightrider

Near Botanical Gardens is also a nice place. Close to Endcliffe park and Sharrowvale road, central to get to other areas.

On 08/09/2020 at 13:25, feargal said:

They can appeal or they might put in revised plans (I suspect very few developers expect a first time pass!). 

 

Quite interesting to read the objections and comments.  Certainly a lot of  NIMBYism, alongside genuine issues such as traffic concerns at Malin Bridge. 

 

 

I suspect they could resolve all the concerns and people would still oppose it again. There is a big housing shortage and we need to build more I'm afraid. 

2 hours ago, West 77 said:

It takes two to tango. If the EU could be trusted and had acted in good faith then the British government wouldn't feel the need to introduce the new domestic legislation. I'm over the moon we have a British government that puts precedence of British law over international law. I'm delighted we have a British Prime Minister who is making Britain great again. I'm more proud to be British today than the same time last year when we had a British parliament containing a majority of British MPs who blocked the implementation of a democratic choice made by the British electorate. 
 

Boris won the election on the back of promising to implement the WA. Then parliament, with his 80 seat majority, passed the legislation. The will of the people was clearly that we sign up to the WA and we did. Now we must obey the consequent law.

14 hours ago, kaytie said:

Omnishambles!   I read that it wasn't realised that the site used to be a reservoir!   Ffs I can recall that it was a reservoir when I was a little kid!

 

 

Of course they knew it was. They just ignored it. Another contractor told them not to build there, but they went with a cheaper rival who said "no problem".

Hello,

Does anyone know what the "going rate" is? I have been quoted £100 and £300 so far (both not including paint) - I found it surprising how they can be so different. Although one is tempted by the cheaper price, I am suspicious it may be too cheap and shortcuts might be taken!

N

On 23/08/2020 at 00:06, catmiss said:

The Collins family are a well known extended traveller family who have settled in Sheffield. I would imagine that traveller families from outside the Sheffield area would attend to pay their respects and arrange wakes in various areas of the city. I think the potential for trouble would have caused many pubs to close and the police to keep a low profile.

why would the police be "keeping a low profile"?

14 hours ago, geared said:

 

Depends:

 

Who did the survey

Who did the engineering calculations

Who drove the piles in

 

If the construction company were working off dodgy plans that had been provided to them it's not their fault the structure has turned out to be inadequate.

Although if the original plans called for more piles and the construction company suggested it would be alrite to leave a few out to save money then they could well be on the hook. 

The UoS claims the remedial work is at no cost to themselves.

17 hours ago, Baron99 said:

Look at this lot in a Lincolnshire pub last Saturday. 

 

https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/local-news/pub-landlord-responds-after-photo-4371548

 

And the landlord will have all their personal contact details of course, won't he? 

and now others who read this may be reluctant to report such transgressions. Seems the person who flagged this up has received a lot of abusive comments from "supporters of the pub".

On 24/07/2020 at 22:04, FORE said:

Well it appears at the moment there are  797 objections and 20 supporting. Seems pretty conclusive to me.

 

If the developer gets the go ahead they won't give a toss when their 'sovs' are rolling in.

Is it only the factory they are replacing? If so I don't understand the nature argument - I walked through there this weekend and the factory does not look to have any wildlife in it and the whole area seems to be covered in litter that people chuck on the ground. The areas around the factory are nice green spaces to walk in, but the factory itself is an eyesore and all that litter would be harmful to wildlife.  But maybe there are also planning to build on green spaces in addition to the factory land?

19 hours ago, andyofborg said:

N ot sure that's the case. Turming the south east of england into a lorry park, the return of roaming charges, the loss of reciprocal health care, there are lots of things which can and will be correctly identified as a consequence of brexit. a lot of these are the sorts of things which will affect people directly. 

Roaming charges won't return - Three has already pledged to not reintroduce them. If others do, people can change providers.

19 hours ago, Weredoomed said:

Doesn't tie up with Butler's post immediately above yours?

Yes it does. The chinese favoured coming here before they saw how we handled covid. Now there is a big question mark whether they will come in the same numbers as last year.

On 16/07/2020 at 13:44, RJRB said:

I wonder what repercussions there will be on the city due to our national worsening relationship with China.

Less investment,less students?

It can’t be good for our economy as we suddenly adopt principles that are conveniently ignored in respect of other countries.

Our brave new Brexit world is shrinking fast

Sheffield University's finances are very dependent on their fees. If they don't come it seems possible there will be large scale job losses and/or pay cuts for staff.

19 hours ago, the_bloke said:

Which is what will have to be proven in court. It was widely reported at the time that the government said she was eligible for Bangladeshi citizenship, which is why it was thought lawful to remove her UK citizenship.

 

https://www.ejiltalk.org/shamima-begum-may-be-a-bangladeshi-citizen-after-all/

 

It is evident that the relevant legal provisions are far from precise and efficient. However, it is abundantly clear that Ms Begum is legally a citizen of Bangladesh until she attains the age of 21 years. Thus, the claims of the Government of Bangladesh and some others that Ms Begum is not a Bangladeshi citizen owing to the fact that she does not hold a Bangladeshi passport or any other proof of citizenship, has never submitted any application for dual nationality, and has never visited Bangladesh, have no legal basis.

 

Therefore, as of February 2019, Ms Begum is legally a Bangladeshi citizen. Consequently, the decision of the Home Office to deprive her of her British citizenship does not legally render her stateless. Hence, the measure is not unlawful insofar as the issue of statelessness is concerned. Although, it may very well be unlawful on other grounds, whether under British law or even international law.

Interesting. If true she is a citizen of Bangladesh. We still won't be able to deport her there though because presumably they won't accept her into the country?

Ironically I suspect if we had not stripped her of citizenship she would not be coming back here - my understanding is that the journey out of Syria, from her location, is sufficiently dangerous that without help she would never make it out alive. Now someone is providing funds for safe passage to come and have the legal appeal.

1 hour ago, the_bloke said:

The three reasons for the appeal don't mention her age, so the fact she was 15 is irrelevant. 

 

`Ms Begum's legal team was challenging the government's decision to revoke her citizenship on three grounds - that it was unlawful because it left her stateless; it exposed her to a real risk of death or inhuman and degrading treatment; and she could not effectively challenge the decision while she was barred from returning to the UK.`

 

I hope she returns to the UK, loses any further court challenges and is deported to be honest.

We won't be able to. She is British and its illegal to remove citizenship, unless said person has citizenship of another country (which she does not).

4 minutes ago, El Cid said:

She voted remain in the referendum, then accepted the result. Nothing wrong with that.

Apparently she does not accept the result anymore. She no longer wants the consequences that come with brexit.

On 08/07/2020 at 20:11, Magilla said:

Liz Truss spots the blindlingly obvious 3 months later:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/08/liz-truss-warns-boris-johnson-over-brexit-border-plans

 

Oh dear

She knew that all along. She was a remain supporter, then supported brexit for career reasons (one can only assume). And now is trying to shift blame onto others, again presumably for career reasons.

5 hours ago, onewheeldave said:

Yes. The highway code says "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car " and many car/van/lorry drivers don't- they pass dangerously close, putting the cyclists life at risk.  No amount of awareness campaigns has make those drivers alter their reckless behaviour, so, yes, at this point, I think dedicated lanes for cyclists where cars are not permitted is the way forward.

 

 

If you sell your car, then either with the proceeds, or the consequent vast savings from not having to insure it, fuel it and maintain it, you could afford a very nice cycle and all the kit to go with it. How you prioritise is up to you, but, you can afford a cycle.

 

As for your age- I'm 53 and have had 3 strokes; I've got a bike with low gears and there is not a hill in Sheffield I can't get up easily. If I'd not cycled for ages I'm sure I'd also find the prospect of a 1/4 mile ride unpleasant, but once you get into it, you may well, like me, cycle to Oughtibridge, climb Jawbone hill and cycle back, for fun.

 

[although that was during the lockdown, when the roads were fit for purpose due to the lack of cars]

Well I was on there twice yesterday, so it's safe to assume that, as well as not seeing me, you didn't see the other cyclists who would have used it, isn't it?

 

Also, as I've pointed out before, most cyclists in Sheffield do not know this lane exists yet.

 

or cannot get to it without braving busy roads with dangerous drivers....

There's something to be said for making a safe lane that connects two areas people already travel between, rather than a very short lane within a small area (which is what this seems to be?).

3 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Lets not get carried away. They've taken out a lane on one stretch of  a multi lane road as a temporary measure at a time when traffic is not at normal levels.

 

There's no suggestion of it happening more widely, or motorways being reduced in capacity.

 

The improvements that were made at Bridgehouses are permanent works which are still there and will be helping if traffic in the area is busy. On the grand scale of things, the recent improvements weren't that costly.  Remember this cycle lane is temporary, they are trying something out and it can all be taken away as easily as it was put out.

 

It isn't the end of the world as we know it and I genuinely doubt we are going to see the wider road network flooded with  diverting traffic as you suggest. More traffic might use alternative routes, but traffic levels are still lighter than normal, so is that a real problem?

 

What they are doing here is entirely in line with adopted transport policy at all levels. The general thrust of transport policy in this country is now towards encouraging and supporting active travel modes.  National and local government want to bring about a step change in the way people travel. That won't happen without some turbulence. You've heard the saying, you can't cook an omelette without cracking a few eggs. I'm sure the decision makers are expecting some kick back.

 

 

 

 

All the arguments seen in this thread were made in the Netherlands in the 1970's when it was car-centric.

5 minutes ago, RJRB said:

I’m not sure what you are arguing here.

Careless and drink or drug fuelled driving is illegal.

Hand held mobile  phone usage is illegal.

Cycles and motor cycles are more likely to get in a drivers blind spot and as a result they should also have a responsibility to exercise care.(As should pedestrians who step into the road oblivious to traffic or to walk behind a vehicle which is already in the process of reversing).

We should all be aware road users,but this doesn’t require an ill thought out scheme such as this.

If the van driver was turning right either the cyclist was overtaking the van or the cyclist was not in fact in his blindspot, but rather the van turned across the other lane and hit the cyclist.

1 hour ago, alchresearch said:

I'd be ashamed to use it.  You'd get all sorts of hate and abuse from motorists stuck in traffic because they'd took a lane away.

This is one reason I don't like cycling. Have had abuse hurled at me from cars speeding past far too close and even things thrown at me from car windows in the past! There are many car users who should not be allowed on the road.

31 minutes ago, forgeman said:

If cyclists are to have their own piece of road then why not tax them for the upkeep.

We already do.

8 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Not true. Many people wouldn’t need to change or get a shower after a short cycle journey. Electric bikes make it even less effort. In any case, lots of employers do provide showers, changing rooms and secure storage for bikes and gear. They can get grants to help with the costs.
 

 

Showers are shut at workplaces due to covid currently.

1 minute ago, forgeman said:

If I could walk 40 minutes each way I would.

 

This thread was started due to Shalesmoor being congested which is a ring road and is if I'm wrong supposedly a route AROUND the city centre.

I thought Planners argument was that much of the car traffic is not through traffic, but people driving < 1  mile. Get rid of the latter and the ring road will have throughput for long distance traffic?

5 minutes ago, forgeman said:

Only to create problems where there were none before

Well, let's see.

All these same arguments were made by car users in the Netherlands in the 1970s. And look at them now.

btw I'm a car user, but would rather cycle. I don't because of the dangers posed by other car users. So I would be happy if we could get more people to move over to cycling and have proper segregated cycle lanes.

5 minutes ago, alchresearch said:

That's my worry for micropubs.    They've been mainly lager-lout free because they don't sell Fosters or Stella.  But as pubs close, they might descend on them.

This crisis has brought to the fore that we have quite a big problem with public drunkenness, along with associated violence, in this country. Perhaps it will be a catalyst to finally confront the problem and change!