Supertram future- consultation

[northernboy 13]

I don't understand this attitude...it's taken you longer to type out your post than it would have done to complete the survey. A good public transport system benefits everyone, even if you don't use it.

 

Nothing to do with my time, I simply think that those who use the service should have their say, unaffected by those of us who don’t use it. What am I supposed to do - put “don’t know” for every answer?

[Vasquez Rich 10]

Supertram was always a massive missed opportunity. What they should have done is work out where the traffic flow goes, where the people who are coming into and out of Sheffield are coming from and make the Tram serve those routes... and before anyone says that is what they did... I lived on the tram route, it went past my drive, I was involved with the "consultation" at the time... sod all notice they took.

 

Maybe

1: a line all the way to Chesterfield/Dronfield by connecting Herdings Spur (waste of time that was) along all that open land along the border with Derbyshire.

2: massive park/ride at jn33 (lots of open land) and a line into the City from there.. not a park and ride located almost in the middle (pointless that is), serves Rotherham/Doncaster and traffic from the M1

 

instead of the mess of half baked routes and spurs we got

[SHFS6 10]

Sorry but that is slightly naïve

 

I have been on the tram a few times, but I have to go out of my way to get on it because it doesn't go near where I live or work. However if I'm commuting in a car or taking a trip in a van or bus as part of my work and I happen to go along side the tram on Netherthorpe Road.

 

Then guess what, it's full of people who are not using cars.

If those people were in cars then there would be another 20 or 30 cars on Netherthorpe road and it would be even more gridlocked.

 

Just because a person who lives in Sheffield does not use public transport, it does not mean they don't benefit greatly from it being there. All those passengers mean there are less cars, less pollution, less congestion and faster journeys overall.

 

I'd imagine it'd be rather more than 20 to 30 cars. I was told on another thread that the teams accommodate around 150 people

[1978 14]

It's probably a good time to look back at the short history of second generation tram and light rail systems that have been built in Britain since the early 1990s. The first to open was Manchester in 1992 then Sheffield in 1994 and thirdly West Midlands Metro in 1999, it was always thought early on that the Sheffield vehicles were by far the better trams of these three systems and this proved to be correct as Manchester had a new fleet of trams by 2009 replacing all the 1992 vehicles and West Midlands Metro had a new fleet in 2013 again replacing the original 1999 trams. Sheffield are still using trams from 1994 by far the oldest trams in use in Britain. All these systems and replacement trams were financed by Government money as was all the rail replacement that's been done in Sheffield over the past few years plus the seven new trams of which three were for the original system. I can't imagine the government not providing funding for new trams having provided large amounts of cash already to keep the system in good order.

 

Manchester was conceived from the outset to capitalise on existing busy suburban railway routes, most of which were still running but with time expiring electric rolling stock. Although the city centre work has been extensive, and in some suburbs, it gains from the high percentage of dedicated traffic free track.

 

The Tyne & Wear (then Tyneside) Metro opened in 1980 and has been extended to Sunderland, again using mostly existing rail routes, much of which had been electrified as long ago as 1904. That old electric system had been shut down with diesel trains taking over - and passenger numbers had dropped as a result.

 

They both use longstanding rail routes which made it possible for both these systems to operate more direct and faster services, using existing stations and with local populations already using trains. The transition to light rail and tram was easier to achieve with less disruption - Newcastle involved tunnelling under the city centre, but Manchester was more akin to Sheffield in the city centre.

 

The meandering up to Hanover Street before going back down to Infirmary Road is just one example of what slows our services down. Herdings Park would be a very long way round if wanting to go to Meadowhead and Dronfield.

 

There's unlikely to ever have been the money (or will be now) to have driven a westward tunnel from Park Square to Broomhill, and a north/south tunnel from Gibraltar Street to Bramall Lane with a central tram interchange near the cathedral unimpeded by traffic of any other kind.

 

Taking the tram south down Abbeydale Road and reusing the old alignment of the trams from Millhouses Park to Beauchief and up to Woodseats would have taken it through heavily populated areas. Using the rail tracks down the Sheaf valley for a tram-train would be far more difficult than running extra trains to Dore & Totley with an additional stop at Millhouses- just need to shift Tesco's and some other units now built on the old track bed!

 

Anyway, for now we just need as much support as possible for our trams by using this link to contribute to the consultation; https://www.surveygizmo.eu/s3/90074191/Mass-Transit-Questionnaire

[Planner1 428]

Supertram was always a massive missed opportunity. What they should have done is work out where the traffic flow goes, where the people who are coming into and out of Sheffield are coming from and make the Tram serve those routes... and before anyone says that is what they did... I lived on the tram route, it went past my drive, I was involved with the "consultation" at the time... sod all notice they took.

 

Maybe

1: a line all the way to Chesterfield/Dronfield by connecting Herdings Spur (waste of time that was) along all that open land along the border with Derbyshire.

2: massive park/ride at jn33 (lots of open land) and a line into the City from there.. not a park and ride located almost in the middle (pointless that is), serves Rotherham/Doncaster and traffic from the M1

 

instead of the mess of half baked routes and spurs we got

Do you seriously not think that the people who plan and design the tram toutes don't understand the traffic flows?

 

They have multi modal traffic models of the whole area which are based on real traffic surveys and roadside interviews. They therefore understand the volume of trips and the reasons for them.

 

Consultation is just that. They want to understand people's views. The final decisions may not be what you asked for. They can't please everyone.

 

Any line that runs past lots of open land is not going to be viable. There needs to be a good population within 400m ( Which is generally considered to be as far as people will walk to public transport) of the line for it to be viable.

 

J33 is too far from Sheffield centre to be a viable park and ride and is way too far away from Doncaster.

[Hook 10]

J33 is too far from Sheffield centre to be a viable park and ride and is way too far away from Doncaster.

 

I couldn’t disagree more. The current P&R situation in Shrffield is terrible. Meadowhall is full very early on as are valley and ikea, Halfway serves its area well, but Middlewood gets snarled up in traffic and Nunnery is completely pointless - you have to drive into the city to get there and so nobody uses it. It only looks full because it’s used by Supertram staff & management, know how staff and SYP, none who pay for it because they’re issued passes by their employer.

 

Who wouldn’t jump at the chance to park directly off the motorway, and then spend 15 minutes on a tram direct to the city center away from any traffic?

[arrowhead 20]

Do you seriously not think that the people who plan and design the tram toutes don't understand the traffic flows?

 

They have multi modal traffic models of the whole area which are based on real traffic surveys and roadside interviews. They therefore understand the volume of trips and the reasons for them.

 

Consultation is just that. They want to understand people's views. The final decisions may not be what you asked for. They can't please everyone.

 

Any line that runs past lots of open land is not going to be viable. There needs to be a good population within 400m ( Which is generally considered to be as far as people will walk to public transport) of the line for it to be viable.

 

J33 is too far from Sheffield centre to be a viable park and ride and is way too far away from Doncaster.

 

100%. Having lived and worked in 3 other major cities of the UK, my conclusion is Sheffield's road planning is done by a troop of monkeys.

[Michael_N 36]

Do you seriously not think that the people who plan and design the tram toutes don't understand the traffic flows?

 

Of course it wasn't designed properly. It was based on 1970s/1980s travel patterns and what was even more bizarre was the fact how it was routed along Infirmary Road (beside Kelvin Flats) and through Norfolk Park along Park Grange Road, to have all these high-rise flats and high-density residential areas vacated and eventually bulldozed. Very clever planning from Sheffield City Council that one! :hihi:

 

J33 is too far from Sheffield centre to be a viable park and ride and is way too far away from Doncaster.

 

Well in that case, should we rip up Meadowhall/Ikea/Valley Centertainment as they will be too far away from the city centre? Nunnery Square must be one of the most pointless P&Rs in the entire country, you even have to drive to Park Square to come back on yourself... :loopy:

[BigAl1 142]

100%. Having lived and worked in 3 other major cities of the UK, my conclusion is Sheffield's road planning is done by a troop of monkeys.

 

Please remember monkeys have feelings

[Hook 10]

Of course it wasn't designed properly. It was based on 1970s/1980s travel patterns and what was even more bizarre was the fact how it was routed along Infirmary Road (beside Kelvin Flats) and through Norfolk Park along Park Grange Road, to have all these high-rise flats and high-density residential areas vacated and eventually bulldozed. Very clever planning from Sheffield City Council that one! :hihi:

 

 

 

Well in that case, should we rip up Meadowhall/Ikea/Valley Centertainment as they will be too far away from the city centre? Nunnery Square must be one of the most pointless P&Rs in the entire country, you even have to drive to Park Square to come back on yourself... :loopy:

 

Spot on - it’s just completely illogical.

[BigAl1 142]

Do you seriously not think that the people who plan and design the tram toutes don't understand the traffic flows?

 

They have multi modal traffic models of the whole area which are based on real traffic surveys and roadside interviews. They therefore understand the volume of trips and the reasons for them.

 

Consultation is just that. They want to understand people's views. The final decisions may not be what you asked for. They can't please everyone.

 

Any line that runs past lots of open land is not going to be viable. There needs to be a good population within 400m ( Which is generally considered to be as far as people will walk to public transport) of the line for it to be viable.

 

J33 is too far from Sheffield centre to be a viable park and ride and is way too far away from Doncaster.

 

Just had a look at Wikipedia and this is part of what they say and it makes interesting reading

 

Upon opening, the network was operated by South Yorkshire Supertram Limited,[7] which was a originally wholly owned subsidiary company of SYPTE established to run the venture. The early years of the Supertram were not straightforward; in the eyes of some officials, the scheme was reportedly viewed as having been a failure. Running in direct competition with cheaper and more frequent buses, far greater numbers of passengers chose to continue commuting by means other than the fledgling tram network; retailers also frequently complained due to the disruption caused by the lengthy construction works performed while establishing the Supertram network.[8] The complex ticketing system originally adopted has also been attributed as having being a source of irritance and confusion to would-be passengers.[2]

 

Within the first two years of operations, it became clear that the projections for passenger numbers had been overly optimistic, while there was concern that the system represented poor value for money and did not seem to be gaining traction.[8] Thus, the issue of what party should bear the cost became a politicised matter. Allegedly, by 1996, the councils backing the Supertram had recognised that the operation had both operational and managerial problems which required addressing, thus consultants were asked to draw up options for the system's reorganisation into a more commercially-viable venture, including the franchising of Supertram and its wholesale selling-off.[

[Vasquez Rich 10]

I know for certain that whoever planned the supertram routes did not understand the traffic flow in my area.

 

We were told that the tram route along Ridgeway Road "would greatly alleviate the traffic and pollution on that stretch of the ringroad".

 

The locals (that included myself) undertook a survey of the traffic on Ridgeway Road, at Manor Top by asking each of 3 cars at the lights, when the lights were on red, where they were coming from and going to.

 

At Manor Top, the vast majority of traffic was headed across the junction and down Prince of Wales Road. The traffic heading into town was going up Mansfield Road and down City Road, likewise at Townend the traffic headed into town was going across and down Gleadless Road.

 

The tram did absolutely nothing to alleviate traffic along Ridgeway Road. That tells me 2 things:

 

1 The Planners knew sod all

2 They ignored local information

 

more likely:

3 both the above

 

Somebody will tell me I am wrong no doubt.