Road Changes on Brook Hill/Western Bank Will Increase Congestion?

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

Fraid not.

 

I've not seen if Planner1 has responded, but in terms of the assessment of importance of highways for the purposes of repairs, it's accepted practice that intervention levels (the level at which repairs are required) are considered differently for roads and pavements on the basis that cars will be on pavements, and pedestrians will be on roads.

 

The intervention levels are different as the two are legally considered different parts of the highway for different purposes.

 

Planner1's comment suggests otherwise, but if that were the case, and if pedestrians had equal access rights to the carriageway as they do the footpath, the liabilities and repair duties under the Highways Act would be the same. They aren't. Sheffield Council admits that in all correspondence.

 

PS I've been a PI lawyer for 20 years, I can assure you the above is correct.

Hmmm...

 

... 20 years is obviously not long enough!

[ads36 217]

Sheffield council choosing to prioritise road-repairs over pavement-repairs is definitely not the same thing as 'cars have priority on the road'.

[Andy1976 10]

Hmmm...

 

... 20 years is obviously not long enough!

 

So you're telling me that they don't have different intervention levels?

 

Ok! Good luck with that.

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2016 at 16:19 ----------

 

Sheffield council choosing to prioritise road-repairs over pavement-repairs is definitely not the same thing as 'cars have priority on the road'.

 

Ok, but it is.

 

See my last post.

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

So you're telling me that they don't have different intervention levels?

 

Ok! Good luck with that.

Now read the bit in your post that I put in bold... S-L-O-W-L-Y!

[stifflersmom 11]

Bus/cycling/walking would be far slower and less convenient, so isn't an option.

 

The highway terms issue are as follows.

 

The Council has a duty to repair the highway (under the Highways Act). The highway is the whole thing - footpath and road.

 

They separate the two. Their intervention level (the level at which a pothole or other defect needs to be repaired) is different. It's 40mm for roads, and 20mm for pavements.

 

That alone means that the Council (all councils) consider them differently.

 

Asked why they do that in Court, they will say openly it's because pedestrians trip over defects of 20mm, so on footpaths, that's a sensible level. The Council will say that pedestrians shouldn't be on roads, so they apply a higher level there. They say 40mm could damage a car, so they use that level.

 

Planner1 said that pedestrians have equal rights, but their own policy doesn't adhere to that. If it did, and if pedestrians were allowed on the roads, then the repair levels should be the same.

 

Planner1 says one thing to justify all the crossings, but his employer (or ex-employer) relies on something very different in Court. That's my issue with it.

 

Thank you, so it has absolutely nothing to do with the legal position of who has right of way/priority on the highway then, in the case of a collision or accident; which is what I believe Planner1 was referring to.

[Andy1976 10]

Thank you, so it has absolutely nothing to do with the legal position of who has right of way/priority on the highway then, in the case of a collision or accident; which is what I believe Planner1 was referring to.

 

Absolutely not - if that's what he was saying then my apologies, as that's not what I read him to mean. My interpretation of what he was saying is that there are so many pedestrian crossings as pedestrians have an equal right to be on the road, which isn't the case. If I interpret that incorrectly I of course apologise.

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2016 at 16:26 ----------

 

Why should a pedestrian have to walk 400 yards just to cross a road? They have as much right to use that road as drivers.

.

 

That was the quote I was referring to

[ads36 217]

...

 

Ok, but it is.

 

 

do you have a copy of your made-up list of hierarchy?

 

question: does a Prius have more or less road-priority than a 3-wheeler?

 

if i'm on a moped, do i have to stop on a roundabout to let a car out?

[Andy1976 10]

do you have a copy of your made-up list of hierarchy?

 

question: does a Prius have more or less road-priority than a 3-wheeler?

 

if i'm on a moped, do i have to stop on a roundabout to let a car out?

 

Your sarcasm is rubbish.

 

There you are - from the Council - explaining their position. See points 8 and 9.

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/pot_holes_11

 

Carriageways - roads - have a 40mm intervention level.

20-40m is marked as cat3, and marked for repair in the next batch.

Pavements - it's 20mm.

 

I've explained my points above. Your call whether to read them or not.

 

Edit - and if you're really, really bored, check out Bolton's system of intervention levels, which is far more complex still... http://www.bolton.gov.uk/sites/DocumentCentre/Documents/Code%20of%20practice%20for%20Highway%20Safety%20Inspections.pdf

 

Second Edit - I'm actually not sure whether you're being sarcastic, or just entirely missing my point. I'm not saying there's a heirarchy of vehicles, I'm saying that vehicles take priority over pedestrians on roads. I've never, ever said that there are heirarchies of vehicles.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Andy1976

[biotechpete 10]

Absolutely not - if that's what he was saying then my apologies, as that's not what I read him to mean. My interpretation of what he was saying is that there are so many pedestrian crossings as pedestrians have an equal right to be on the road, which isn't the case. If I interpret that incorrectly I of course apologise.

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2016 at 16:26 ----------

 

 

That was the quote I was referring to

 

I guess it really comes down to how you define equal right. The only part of UK highways which pedestrians 'must not' walk on is the motorway. They are free to walk on all other roads if they wish.

[Andy1976 10]

I guess it really comes down to how you define equal right. The only part of UK highways which pedestrians 'must not' walk on is the motorway. They are free to walk on all other roads if they wish.

 

True. But anyway, I've worked hard enough today, so I'm off home!

Have fun!

[The PIT 10]

Well the changes to system round Brookhill have added 10 to 15 minutes too my Journey time and that's if I'm lucky. The route home has been cut to two options from four. You may not think that much but I'm only driving down a short section of the change. God knows how much time it adds from the Hallamshire to West West.

Just wait until there's a breakdown or a single snow flake. Gridlock for the area.

[*_ash_* 88]

The new change at Glossop Road is causing more fun too.

 

No left turn onto the ring road now near UNI tramstop. And no access to Hounsfield Road, and given that Favel Road is also a No entry, how are you supposed to get to Hicks building? Or IC?