Jump to content

How do Sheffield road planners get it so wrong?

Recommended Posts

The traffic lights have made the congestion worse at off peak times and no better at peak times (arguably also worse in fact).

 

---------- Post added 20-09-2017 at 22:39 ----------

 

 

Unfortunately the council only have a stick, they can't or won't use the carrot.

So they punish car drivers, but they provide no viable alternative.

 

If you are referring to the new junction in Broomhill then the installation of the new crossings was required to reduce the number of very serious injuries to pedestrians. Misuse of the junctions due to inconsiderate driving is a significant influence on traffic flow at this junction.

 

Walking, cycling and bus/tram are all viable alternatives for many journeys.

"stick" and "punish" are very emotive words-what do they refer to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Walking, cycling and bus/tram are all viable alternatives for many journeys.

"stick" and "punish" are very emotive words-what do they refer to?

 

Any unviable for many more.

 

Why do SCC not use (and enforce) yellow boxes at roundabouts - that would reduce congestion massively..?

 

Why? Because they would rather go for the cash cow of ticketing people on side streets rather than making the traffic flow smoothly.

 

It is all about the money - not the commuter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any unviable for many more.

 

Why do SCC not use (and enforce) yellow boxes at roundabouts - that would reduce congestion massively..?

 

Why? Because they would rather go for the cash cow of ticketing people on side streets rather than making the traffic flow smoothly.

 

It is all about the money - not the commuter.

 

That's why I said many-not all or most.

Yellow boxes at roundabouts -would this not confuse? Staying in lane would be a far better way of increasing flow.

Does not enforcing mean more money which does not sit very well with your statement about money?

Surely ticketing people on side streets increases traffic flow by reducing obstructions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SCC dont enforce yellow boxes because they cant. it's the police who have to do this. I believe it's only london where boxes are enforced by the borough councils.

 

Traffic in Sheffield, even at peak times is nothing compared to other towns and cities. Bradford, leeds, Manchester, Birmingham are horrendous in comparison.

 

Sheffield city centre road plan is virtually the same as it was 100 years ago. What the planners have the unenviable task of doing is making this 100+ year old infrastructure work with 21st century population and car use. it is never going to be any different unless huge areas of the city are demolished to allow for a massive road building project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are referring to the new junction in Broomhill then the installation of the new crossings was required to reduce the number of very serious injuries to pedestrians. Misuse of the junctions due to inconsiderate driving is a significant influence on traffic flow at this junction.

I was referring to Leppings lane.

 

Walking, cycling and bus/tram are all viable alternatives for many journeys.

"stick" and "punish" are very emotive words-what do they refer to?

 

The council do nothing to make walking, cycling or any public transport an alternative. The fact that alternatives exist doesn't mean you can credit the council with encouraging their use.

The carrot and the stick is a common metaphor for attempts to change behaviour, it's not overly emotive, and by punish I mean the deliberate policy of making car use more difficult, without any policy of actually making alternatives more attractive (the carrot that is missing).

I cycle regularly, in fact I rarely take the car to work, but the council do nothing to make cycling easier. The infrastructure for cycling is poor and poorly thought out. Apart from making my car journey more difficult and my parking more expensive, the council do nothing to encourage me to use the tram or to cycle or to walk.

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 08:19 ----------

 

SCC dont enforce yellow boxes because they cant. it's the police who have to do this. I believe it's only london where boxes are enforced by the borough councils.

 

Traffic in Sheffield, even at peak times is nothing compared to other towns and cities. Bradford, leeds, Manchester, Birmingham are horrendous in comparison.

 

Sheffield city centre road plan is virtually the same as it was 100 years ago. What the planners have the unenviable task of doing is making this 100+ year old infrastructure work with 21st century population and car use. it is never going to be any different unless huge areas of the city are demolished to allow for a massive road building project.

 

Plenty of large projects have been completed, take Derek Dooley Way and it's 27 sets of traffic lights for example. Which are timed to guarantee you can't drive down it without stopping 8 times between the parkway and Penistone Road.

Take Penistone Road, they 'forgot' to apply for the 40 limit, they're still forgetting now 20 years later, but they remembered to put up a speed camera to enforce the 30 limit which only exists because they 'forgot'...

Take the A57 from Rivelin Valley to the Ladybower. They paid for a report into safety to determine whether they should reduce the speed limit.

The report said emphatically NO. There was no case to reduce the speed limit to 50.

So they did it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SCC dont enforce yellow boxes because they cant. it's the police who have to do this. I believe it's only london where boxes are enforced by the borough councils.

That's correct. In England, box junctions and banned turns can only be enforced by camera in London,

 

Councils have asked for the powers, but Government refuses to roll them out saying they don't think it's necessary.

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 08:23 ----------

 

Plenty of large projects have been completed, take Derek Dooley Way and it's 27 sets of traffic lights for example. Which are timed to guarantee you can't drive down it without stopping 8 times between the parkway and Penistone Road.

That's because they kept the side roads open, as they were criticised for closing them off in the past.

 

You can't have it both ways.

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 08:28 ----------

 

Take Penistone Road, they 'forgot' to apply for the 40 limit, they're still forgetting now 20 years later, but they remembered to put up a speed camera to enforce the 30 limit which only exists because they 'forgot'...

Do you have proof to back this up?

 

As I recall it, it was just someone on here who made an unfounded allegation.

 

Things like that are not "forgotten".

 

You've clearly "forgotten" (conveniently) the report which was done on converting it to a 40 limit which listed the costs of adding extra detection equipment at traffic signals and changing street furniture, which are required in a 40 limit.

 

If they just "forgot" to put in the 40 limit signs and order, all of the other physical infrastructure would have been in place.

 

This is just nonsense and anyone with any sense can see it is.

Edited by Planner1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can have it both ways of course, they're called give way junctions. Or of course the roundabout.

 

You could be correct, perhaps for some reason they made Halifax Road a 40, and they made Netherthorpe Road a 40, but the section between, that at the time went through only industrial areas, they actively decided to make that a 30 zone, a wide, dual carriageway access to the city from the north 30 zone.

I'm not sure which would be worse, forgetting to apply for the 40 zone, or deliberately making it a 30 for no good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can have it both ways of course, they're called give way junctions. Or of course the roundabout.

 

You could be correct, perhaps for some reason they made Halifax Road a 40, and they made Netherthorpe Road a 40, but the section between, that at the time went through only industrial areas, they actively decided to make that a 30 zone, a wide, dual carriageway access to the city from the north 30 zone.

I'm not sure which would be worse, forgetting to apply for the 40 zone, or deliberately making it a 30 for no good reason.

 

You are someone who usually asks for proof/evidence and bemoans anecdotal accounts but that's all your posts seem to contain at the moment.

 

You are of course entitled to you opinion no matter how wrong it might be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was referring to Leppings lane.

 

The council do nothing to make walking, cycling or any public transport an alternative. The fact that alternatives exist doesn't mean you can credit the council with encouraging their use.

The carrot and the stick is a common metaphor for attempts to change behaviour, it's not overly emotive, and by punish I mean the deliberate policy of making car use more difficult, without any policy of actually making alternatives more attractive (the carrot that is missing).

I cycle regularly, in fact I rarely take the car to work, but the council do nothing to make cycling easier. The infrastructure for cycling is poor and poorly thought out. Apart from making my car journey more difficult and my parking more expensive, the council do nothing to encourage me to use the tram or to cycle or to walk.

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 08:19 ----------

 

 

Plenty of large projects have been completed, take Derek Dooley Way and it's 27 sets of traffic lights for example. Which are timed to guarantee you can't drive down it without stopping 8 times between the parkway and Penistone Road.

Take Penistone Road, they 'forgot' to apply for the 40 limit, they're still forgetting now 20 years later, but they remembered to put up a speed camera to enforce the 30 limit which only exists because they 'forgot'...

Take the A57 from Rivelin Valley to the Ladybower. They paid for a report into safety to determine whether they should reduce the speed limit.

The report said emphatically NO. There was no case to reduce the speed limit to 50.

So they did it anyway.

 

 

The road system as designed in the 60s and 70s made it very much more difficult to use walking and cycling as an alternative to cars for short commutes for example into town. As in in many cities this just promoted more traffic through rather than around city centres and physical and emotional barriers in the form of fencing, bridges, tunnels and dead land around these roads to cycling and walking.

 

In the face of opposition, the re-engineering of these routes to remove them as barriers, speed limits to make roads safer, protected crossings in the city centre to make them suitable for all users is beginning to see a move away from car dependency in every city.

 

A lack of basic understanding of the interactions of how people and things move is clearly seen in threads like this. A classic example is Penistone Road where many users think that because it is a dual carriageway it therefore must be some form of expressway into town for them. For many it was an obstacle to be crossed. Its new design is to accommodate both.

 

Encouraging walking and cycling requires the removal of obstacles and promoting routes which despite vocal objections and lack of money it is happening here just as it is other cities and towns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Councils are anti-car, if you are pro car you are pro congestion and pro pollution. The road network cannot cope with demand, it is just a series of bottlenecks and any improvements just move the problem. The anti-car stance is only ever going to get worse with the new air quality regulations.

 

Car ownership and the right to travel when and where you want is an aspiration and seen as a right, no amount of carrot will get people out of their cars so its all stick stick stick.

 

If you actually think about it, the council do a lot to encourage walking and cycling and the use of public transport, is it enough no, is there funding for large scale interventions available, probably not anymore thanks the recent break down in the devo deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are someone who usually asks for proof/evidence and bemoans anecdotal accounts but that's all your posts seem to contain at the moment.

 

You are of course entitled to you opinion no matter how wrong it might be.

 

You're right in that I haven't provided any proof. But you're wrong if you think that makes it an opinion, I've clearly made statements that I belief to be factual.

 

The post you've quoted in fact contains something clearly factual, you can use give way or roundabout junctions in place of traffic lights, and then something that can only be an opinion, the reflection on which is worse, deliberately making a road a 30 zone or forgetting to apply for the 40 order.

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 09:14 ----------

 

The road system as designed in the 60s and 70s made it very much more difficult to use walking and cycling as an alternative to cars for short commutes for example into town. As in in many cities this just promoted more traffic through rather than around city centres and physical and emotional barriers in the form of fencing, bridges, tunnels and dead land around these roads to cycling and walking.

I read a fascinating article about Stevenage the other day, let me see if I can find it for you.

It's about the great cycling infrastructure that was built into the city and how it simply isn't used.

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/sep/19/britains-1960s-cycling-revolution-flopped-stevenage

 

In the face of opposition, the re-engineering of these routes to remove them as barriers, speed limits to make roads safer, protected crossings in the city centre to make them suitable for all users is beginning to see a move away from car dependency in every city.

I'm not sure it is though.

It's seeing life made more difficult for motorists, but they don't stop using their cars, they continue, just with more difficulty.

 

A lack of basic understanding of the interactions of how people and things move is clearly seen in threads like this. A classic example is Penistone Road where many users think that because it is a dual carriageway it therefore must be some form of expressway into town for them. For many it was an obstacle to be crossed. Its new design is to accommodate both.

I suspect that most people using don't want to go into town at all, I generally don't. I want to go to somewhere beyond town, but I am hampered by the lack of an outer ring road, or indeed any alternative route, and then further hampered by the council trying to make it difficult for me to go into town, where I don't even want to go!

Who is it a barrier to though? Most of Penistone Rd doesn't run through residential areas. You rarely see pedestrians near it, why would they be, walking from Upperthorpe to Neepsend perhaps? Or Hillsborough to Shirecliffe?

 

Encouraging walking and cycling requires the removal of obstacles and promoting routes which despite vocal objections and lack of money it is happening here just as it is other cities and towns.

 

I don't see much evidence of it happening. I see evidence of the stick, motoring made ever made more difficult, but no evidence of the carrot.

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 09:15 ----------

 

 

If you actually think about it, the council do a lot to encourage walking and cycling and the use of public transport,

 

For example?

 

---------- Post added 21-09-2017 at 09:16 ----------

 

Councils are anti-car, if you are pro car you are pro congestion and pro pollution.

 

Deliberately causing congestion increases, well, obviously congestion and also pollution.

Free flowing traffic is better for the environment and everyone involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I belief to be factual.

 

Exactly, without any proof your belief isn't enough to actually make them factual.

 

The examples include, funding the tram, funding bus gates, bus priority measures, ensuring new employers provide facilities for cyclists as part of the planning process, removing obstacles for pedestrians, such as underpasses in include just a few.

 

We all want a monorail but no one wants to pay for it.

 

Freeflowing traffic in a city is just unrealistic, even the idea itself if flawed, free flowing for who, the main road or the side roads, do you suggest we remove pedestrian crossing facilities? It only ever occurs on long straight roads not in cities, all the free flow does is increase congestion at the next bottleneck.

 

Maybe you would like to see roads everywhere like in America, a place well know for its good air quality and free flowing traffic.

Edited by the fonz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.