Jump to content

Sheffield Clean Air Zone

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Weredoomed said:

We are not talking about through traffic, we are talking about commuter traffic being forced onto a single, vulnerable route that is prone to gridlock in the event of an incident.  I note planner1 carefully ignores that aspect of the situation. It is also highly short-sighted to block roads that can act as alternative routes in the event of an incident on the only available major route around the city, as I have already mentioned.

 

 

No I don’t ignore it. I’ve addressed this issue any number of times on various threads.

 

All major cities use the same traffic management measures, Sheffield is no exception.

 

Moving traffic from point A to point B in the quickest possible time is not the only consideration that Councils have to make. 

 

The factest and most most direct route for many is straight through the city centre. That is not desirable if you want the city centre to be an attractive place to live in, visit or do business, so traffic is directed around the city centre, not through it, in order to make the city centre a more liveable and pleasant place.

 

Add to that the fact that it is government policy to manage / discourage car use in order to get more people travelling by active modes and public transport.

 

Also, having  commuter traffic percolating through residential neighbourhoods isn’t a great idea if you happen to live in one of them, so Councils introduce traffic calming and restrictions to discourage through traffic and slow it down. 

 

All of this concentrates traffic on the primary routes. Yes, it’s accepted that occasionally, incidents can cause delays, but, how often do major problems occur? A few times a year. The problems that unrestricted traffic would cause would be there all the time. The benefits the restrictions bring are considered to outweigh any downsides. Your elected representatives take the decisions to implement these restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

No I don’t ignore it. I’ve addressed this issue any number of times on various threads.

 

All major cities use the same traffic management measures, Sheffield is no exception.

 

Moving traffic from point A to point B in the quickest possible time is not the only consideration that Councils have to make. 

 

The fastest and most most direct route for many is straight through the city centre. That is not desirable if you want the city centre to be an attractive place to live in, visit or do business, so traffic is directed around the city centre, not through it, in order to make the city centre a more liveable and pleasant place.

 

Add to that the fact that it is government policy to manage / discourage car use in order to get more people travelling by active modes and public transport.

 

Also, having  commuter traffic percolating through residential neighbourhoods isn’t a great idea if you happen to live in one of them, so Councils introduce traffic calming and restrictions to discourage through traffic and slow it down. 

 

All of this concentrates traffic on the primary routes. Yes, it’s accepted that occasionally, incidents can cause delays, but, how often do major problems occur? A few times a year. The problems that unrestricted traffic would cause would be there all the time. The benefits the restrictions bring are considered to outweigh any downsides. Your elected representatives take the decisions to implement these restrictions.

It almost always isn't... now. (without using bus gates, that most abuse anyway knowing no cameras - Bessimer on Leopold being a key one).

 

I often take the ring road when in the past through town would be quicker. This isn't now the case with closures (the most obvious one being not being able to cross the top of the Moor from Charter Sq (or whatever it's called now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, *_ash_* said:

I often take the ring road when in the past through town would be quicker. This isn't now the case with closures

sounds like it's working.

 

well done Planner1 !

 

More of this please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, ads36 said:

sounds like it's working.

 

well done Planner1 !

 

More of this please.

It's good for keeping general traffic out, but means taxis and buses have to take longer routes through town, meaning more pollution.

 

There are several places where a bus gate would make journeys much simpler for public transport, encouraging people to use it, and if a camera is placed on it, then the public won't use it (or get fined).

 

Either way, it won't make a difference after CAZ as ring road charged regardless of going into the centre.

 

 

Edited by *_ash_*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but do bus gates actually lead to a significant increase in bus users??

It's like the car pool lanes in Leeds, they have absolutely zero effect for their intended purpose and simply lead to increased traffic.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, geared said:

but do bus gates actually lead to a significant increase in bus users??

It's like the car pool lanes in Leeds, they have absolutely zero effect for their intended purpose and simply lead to increased traffic.

 

 

I wouldn't claim that bus gates alone make a significant difference to bus patronage.

 

They are part of a wider package of measures to improve the quality and punctuality of bus travel, which, could be argued to be necessary to maintain bus travel as  a viable alternative to car use. 

 

They do make a difference to the punctuality of bus and tram services and are useful for traffic management purposes.

 

Bus patronage is generally on a downward trend across the UK and evidence points to any mode shift towards bus use tending to come from people who already walk and cycle and growth in walking and cycling tending to come from existing public transport users.  Surveys taken on Supertram showed that it did induce car drivers to change mode, but getting them to catch the bus or walk/cycle is much harder.

 

Most cities have an ambition to significantly increase bus patronage, but it is a very difficult one to deliver.

 

On the car share lanes, my view is that anything that is not easily enforceable by the local Council is very prone to abuse and probably won't work. Only the Police could enforce the car share lane and they have far better things to do, so they weren't enforced and didn't work, so were removed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, geared said:

but do bus gates actually lead to a significant increase in bus users??

 

It's like the car pool lanes in Leeds, they have absolutely zero effect for their intended purpose and simply lead to increased traffic.

 

 

I think there is a big difference between bus gates and car pool lanes.

 

If you look at the gates now, they are where the public are diverted away from the city (towards the ring road in many cases), but where traffic is INTENDED to be in the city (e.g. buses)  still has to get through. It would be impractical to send the bus out onto the ring road, only to bring it back in at the next junction. It'd never pick anyone up as people aren't on the ring road

 

 

---

also, do you have any info on the new closure at the LMS?

 

It was chaos today even when quiet.

 

@Planner1

Edited by *_ash_*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Public transport is never going to be viable for everyone, however on corridors where lots of people are travelling in the same direction such as to the City Centre or other key shopping/business/employment district you want people using public transport (mass transit solutions) as it is less vehicles on the road, therefore less congestion, less pollution and less space in those key destinations that has to be given over to parking.

 

For public transport to be attractive, there are elements such as frequency, comfort, cleanliness, accessibility and reasonable ticket prices, however the most important thing is the journey time and that journey time being consistent and reliable.

 

For the journey time to be attractive and reliable, you need to segregate the public transport (be that bus, train or tram) into its own free flowing lane/track away from the congestion other road traffic suffers from.

 

If both car and bus sits in a traffic jam, people would rather sit in the comfort and privacy of their own car. If by catching a bus you avoid the traffic jam and get into town quicker, it becomes an attractive option - thats when the other factors such as price, comfort etc come into play.

 

That is why bus/tram priority measures benefit.

 

Then there is the idea of the clean air charge being imposed on buses. That adds operating costs, therefore increased fares. That starts swinging things back towards car and causes congestion, which causes pollution.

Edited by Andy C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Andy C said:

Public transport is never going to be viable for everyone, however on corridors where lots of people are travelling in the same direction such as to the City Centre or other key shopping/business/employment district you want people using public transport as it is less vehicles on the road, therefore less congestion, less pollution and less space in those key destinations that has to be given over to parking.

 

For public transport to be attractive, there are elements such as frequency, comfort, cleanliness, accessibility and reasonable ticket prices, however the most important thing is the journey time and that journey time being consistent and reliable.

 

For the journey time to be attractive and reliable, you need to segregate the public transport (be that bus, train or tram) into its own free flowing lane/track away from the congestion other road traffic suffers from.

 

If both car and bus sits in a traffic jam, people would rather sit in the comfort and privacy of their own car. If by catching a bus you avoid the traffic jam and get into town quicker, it becomes an attractive option - thats when the other factors such as price, comfort etc come into play.

 

That is why bus/tram priority measures benefit.

 

Then there is the idea of the clean air charge being imposed on buses. That adds operating costs, therefore increased fares. That starts swinging things back towards car and causes congestion, which causes pollution.

As the closing date is today, have you filled it in yet? If not the link is in 1st post, make sure you do it Andy, otherwise this bold will happen (along with all the other issues!)

 

I'm disappointed with the lack of entries from the industries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Andy C said:

For the journey time to be attractive and reliable, you need to segregate the public transport (be that bus, train or tram) into its own free flowing lane/track away from the congestion other road traffic suffers from.

 

I could bore you to death in real life, with what I consider has made public transport rubbish in Sheffield. But 2 things stand out.

It's the cutting off of two sides of the city. The West St side, and the bottom end of town (Arundel Gate side). There is no connection now at all, bus gates or not).

 

The only viable fixes are make the turn at the top of the Moor a bus gate*, (so they can cross the one-way system at this point)

AND re configure a downwards path from West St to Castle Sq (old whole in road for people not knowing street names)

I can't see the second one happening, it's too much work.

 

 

*more info, for clarity. meaning open up the road for buses to be able to go from Charter Row (BT TOWER/new hsbc) over to Furnival Gate (redgates).

 

 

Edited by *_ash_*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I've filled the survey in.  Posters have been on TM Travel buses encouraging passengers to have their say against it. The publicity suggested it was a public consultation, not an industry one.

 

I agree regarding Moorhead. Forcing buses that come down Pinstone Street to turn left, spin round roundabout and double back is unnecessary extra fuel burned and if the Arundel Gate/Eyre Street traffic is busier than normal the roundabout can gridlock.

Edited by Andy C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Andy C said:

I've filled the survey in.  Posters have been on TM Travel buses encouraging passengers to have their say against it. The publicity suggested it was a public consultation, not an industry one.

 

I agree regarding Moorhead. Forcing buses that come down Pinstone Street to turn left, spin round roundabout and double back is unnecessary extra fuel burned and if the Arundel Gate/Eyre Street traffic is busier than normal the roundabout can gridlock.

Hopefully TM have got a few responders. The taxi uptake in the survey is very low, but I think because a lot are old timers, rather than not bothered. Small bus companies are screwed when this comes into effect, just like SME/SE inc taxi drivers. Another win for the big boys.

 

It's been posted all over the cycle sites, and green sites, so the responses will inevitable be one-sided, especially as so many loaded questions too.

 

ah well. A few of us tried. Really though a waste of time, as I thought it would be.

 

Over and out

 

-

 

yes moorhead is a mistake, but now the new building is there, it's probably too difficult to fix. Empty building too on the bottom floor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by *_ash_*

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.