Closing Roads To Traffic & Widening Pavements For Social Distancing

[RollingJ 1,993]

@ECCOnoobYou expect joined-up thinking from SCC? 🤣

[Michael_N 36]

2 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I'm totally lost about what this is supposed to achieve.

 

As far as I understand it most of Pinstone Street is already closed off to general traffic and the only vehicles allowed are public transport or authorised access such as deliveries.

 

At the moor end, thanks to the council's ingenious design of blocking off one side of the road to furnival gate - traffic is left with absolutely no choice but to go onto Pinstone Street and then are shunted around Burgess Street towards John Lewis.   Unless the council are going to completely redesign the access to John Lewis's car park traffic will still have no option but to go that way.  The council are certainly not going to upset John Lewis - in fact they will bend over backwards and think of England to make  them happy because they are petrified of losing the only prime asset we have got in the city centre the meadowhall doesn't.

 

To me if these proposals are accurate it seems the council has got to try and redesign the entire road network from Charter Square to John Lewis car park and change at least a dozen or more bus routes which will no longer go through the prime artery of the city centre shopping areas.  I can't see that going down well with the retailers and brands who have chosen to invest millions on the council's heart of the city developments.  Nor do I imagine will it be particularly pleasing to HSBC and CMS and Radisson hotels  who have signed a dotted line to move into their brand new shiny buildings.  

 

"....Oh sorry lads we're just going to cull the bus routes and transport access that goes to your front doors..."

 

All seems very odd to me.

Perfectly summed up.

 

I’m also baffled at the proposals. The one I thought would have come about, was the closure of High Street due to the narrow pavement near to McDonalds and the bus shelter for the 2/6/120 bus services. 
 

Pinstone Street has some of the widest pavements in the city centre, alongside a road and it’s rather strange. Also what about people with mobility problems who catch buses - are they expected to walk a further 5-10 minutes to catch their bus services?

 

More amusing is the lack of thought into this, with where the buses are going to go. If they do indeed run along Arundel Gate as usually happens when Pinstone Street is closed for parades/marathon etc. How will social distancing work at the 2-3 bus stops that will have at least another 20+ bus services running from them? 
 

Totally baffled by this one! 

[Baron99 775]

24 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I'm totally lost about what this is supposed to achieve.

 

As far as I understand it most of Pinstone Street is already closed off to general traffic and the only vehicles allowed are public transport or authorised access such as deliveries.

 

At the moor end, thanks to the council's ingenious design of blocking off one side of the road to furnival gate - traffic is left with absolutely no choice but to go onto Pinstone Street and then are shunted around Burgess Street towards John Lewis.   Unless the council are going to completely redesign the access to John Lewis's car park traffic will still have no option but to go that way.  The council are certainly not going to upset John Lewis - in fact they will bend over backwards and think of England to make  them happy because they are petrified of losing the only prime asset we have got in the city centre the meadowhall doesn't.

 

To me if these proposals are accurate it seems the council has got to try and redesign the entire road network from Charter Square to John Lewis car park and change at least a dozen or more bus routes which will no longer go through the prime artery of the city centre shopping areas.  I can't see that going down well with the retailers and brands who have chosen to invest millions on the council's heart of the city developments.  Nor do I imagine will it be particularly pleasing to HSBC and CMS and Radisson hotels  who have signed a dotted line to move into their brand new shiny buildings.  

 

"....Oh sorry lads we're just going to cull the bus routes and transport access that goes to your front doors..."

 

All seems very odd to me.

A good indicator of how SCC & their planning 'experts' have got it wrong over the years is when you're stopped & asked by a visitor for directions to somewhere from one part of the city centre to another part?

 

I often think when I've tried to explain to someone, taking into all the one ways, deadends, no entries, bus gates etc & I send them on their way, the must think I'm one of those people who think it's funny to give visitors false directions?  

 

A couple of times it's been, "Park over there mate & get on that tram over there," it'll be quicker."  Or, "Park here & walk.  It'll only take you about 15 mins but at this of day, it's 45 min journey all round the city centre that you've not factored in.  You've not been to Sheffield before have you? "

Edited May 23, 2020 by Baron99

[Planner1 428]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

A good indicator of how SCC & their planning 'experts' have got it wrong over the years is when you're stopped & asked by a visitor for directions to somewhere from one part of the city centre to another part?

 

I often think when I've tried to explain to someone, taking into all the one ways, deadends, no entries, bus gates etc & I send them on their way, the must think I'm one of those people who think it's funny to give visitors false directions?  

 

A couple of times it's been, "Park over there mate & get on that tram over there," it'll be quicker."  Or, "Park here & walk.  It'll only take you about 15 mins but at this of day, it's 45 min journey all round the city centre that you've not factored in.  You've not been to Sheffield before have you? "

This isn't exclusive to Sheffield. Most city centres have this type of access loop system, which means people drive around a ring road and can get into and out of areas they need to visit by car, but can't get across the city centre by car.

 

You can't effectively cut out through traffic any other way. Many drivers will drive straight through the city centre if there's any way they can, because its the shortest route. Having through traffic in the middle of a city centre is generally seen as being a bad thing for numerous reasons. 

2 hours ago, Baron99 said:

"No mention or appreciation of pedestrians or cyclists?" 

 

There wasn't in the post I quoted.

 

2 hours ago, Baron99 said:

As for the West Bar area?  Go on then, you seemed to be clued on the subject?  Tell us all more? 

The scheme you are talking abut round West Bar is called Grey to Green Phase 1. Phase 2 is Castlegate area which you can find out about here

 

You can read about the West Bar Square redevelopment scheme here 

 

The Inner Relief Road scheme was designed to take the through traffic out of that area, to enable redevelopment and make it more of an integral part of the city centre.

 

2 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

Nor do I imagine will it be particularly pleasing to HSBC and CMS and Radisson hotels  who have signed a dotted line to move into their brand new shiny buildings.  

 

"....Oh sorry lads we're just going to cull the bus routes and transport access that goes to your front doors..."

 

All seems very odd to me.

People who locate or invest heavily in city centres don' t do so based on whether there's a bus stop outside the front door. In a city centre there will normally be a bus stop within a reasonable distance.

 

HSBC have just moved their operation to the very centre of the city, they have gone from a building that had lots of on-site car parking to one which has hardly any but has large amounts of cycle parking. They are actively encouraging staff to walk and cycle to work and work from home. Do you really think they are going to be bothered that the bus stops get moved around a bit in order that the area around their building is a better place to be in? 

[RollingJ 1,993]

Walking/cycling is great in summer - but not so nice in winter/bad weather, and just in case you (and others), haven't noticed, we don't live in the South of France round here.

[Baron99 775]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

This isn't exclusive to Sheffield. Most city centres have this type of access loop system, which means people drive around a ring road and can get into and out of areas they need to visit by car, but can't get across the city centre by car.

 

You can't effectively cut out through traffic any other way. Many drivers will drive straight through the city centre if there's any way they can, because its the shortest route. Having through traffic in the middle of a city centre is generally seen as being a bad thing for numerous reasons. 

There wasn't in the post I quoted.

And that's why I told you to read my initial post, less you think I was slating pedestrians, pedestrianised areas  or cyclist but you appear not to want too.

 

In one of your posts Planner1 you state;

 

"We tried building more and bigger roads back in the 60's/70's/80's. That resulted in swathes of the city centre being cut off from other parts and some parts being pretty unpleasant places to be. " 

 

What SCC appears to be advocating now is to remove access by public transport & other vehicles & increase the pedestrianisation of the city centre? 

 

Now all well & good if you can get to the part of the city centre you want to be in & you're not reliant on public or private transport, or even taxis but are prepared to cycle in or walk.  Now if your only options are public & private transport & you can then only get to the peripheries of the pedestrianised areas but then have to walk there & back, (perhaps with a heavy load of shopping), it's not going to work. 

 

Keep increasing the size of the pedestrianised areas & linking them up to form even larger areas, without allowing transport for the masses & you're only going to replicate the mistakes you mention for 60's, 70's & 80's.  

Edited May 23, 2020 by Baron99

[ECCOnoob 1,017]

54 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

People who locate or invest heavily in city centres don' t do so based on whether there's a bus stop outside the front door. In a city centre there will normally be a bus stop within a reasonable distance.

 

HSBC have just moved their operation to the very centre of the city, they have gone from a building that had lots of on-site car parking to one which has hardly any but has large amounts of cycle parking. They are actively encouraging staff to walk and cycle to work and work from home. Do you really think they are going to be bothered that the bus stops get moved around a bit in order that the area around their building is a better place to be in? 

Yes I do actually.

 

I think for businesses about to decide whether or not to invest huge amounts of money into a location, access and public transport is high on the agenda.  Even more so when we are not just talking about offices but we are also talking about retailers for whom the question of how people get to their doors and where their footfall is coming from is absolutely vital considerations. 

 

These are not issues to be sniffed at.

 

[Planner1 428]

54 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

And that's why I told you to read my initial post, less you think I was slating pedestrians, pedestrianised areas  or cyclist but you appear not to want too.

 

In one of your posts Planner1 you state;

 

"We tried building more and bigger roads back in the 60's/70's/80's. That resulted in swathes of the city centre being cut off from other parts and some parts being pretty unpleasant places to be. " 

 

What SCC appears to be advocating now is to remove access by public transport & other vehicles & increase the pedestrianisation of the city centre? 

 

Now all well & good if you can get to the part of the city centre you want to be in & you're not reliant on public or private transport, or even taxis but are prepared to cycle in or walk.  Now if your only options are public & private transport & you can then only get to the peripheries of the pedestrianised areas but then have to walk there & back, (perhaps with a heavy load of shopping), it's not going to work. 

 

Keep increasing the size of the pedestrianised areas & linking them up to form even larger areas, without allowing transport for the masses & you're only going to replicate the mistakes you mention for 60's, 70's & 80's.  

Would that be your initial post in which you mostly moan about wider footways and narrowings of junctions?

 

Strangely enough, pedestrianised areas have worked pretty well on the Moor and Fargate where you can only access by public transport or from car parks from each end or adjacent streets. The Pinstone St proposal is no different.

 

The government and the council want to massively increase the levels of walking and cycling as well as improving the air quality in city centres. They won't achieve this by doing nothing. Things have to change. As with any change, some people will benefit, some might not.  

[Planner1 428]

17 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Yes I do actually.

 

I think for businesses about to decide whether or not to invest huge amounts of money into a location, access and public transport is high on the agenda.  Even more so when we are not just talking about offices but we are also talking about retailers for whom the question of how people get to their doors and where their footfall is coming from is absolutely vital considerations. 

 

These are not issues to be sniffed at.

 

And they aren't "sniffed at". 

 

SCC will have discussed this with the PTE and the public transport operators, whose opinions are taken seriously. Also there is the city centre Business Improvement District (BID) which contains representatives of many of the big businesses, who will also have been consulted.

 

It's not as if they are proposing to remove public transport access completely from a wide area. Some people might have a bit further to walk to a bus stop, that's all.

 

Ultimately, roads are closed using legal orders. People have the right to object to them if they feel it isn't a good idea. Councillors will have approved the closure and councillors have to consider the objections. The councillors are accountable to the electors at the ballot box. That's the democratic process and you can have your say. 

Edited May 23, 2020 by Planner1

[Guest busdriver1]

3 hours ago, Planner1 said:

So, everyone everywhere who designs, implements and approves highways schemes has got it wrong? What exactly do you consider should be  the right approach?

 

You're wrong about training courses, most councils can't afford to send people on many training courses, SCC included. The training budget for their transport and infrastructure service is very very small.

 

So by default, you are saying they have got it right then. OK maybe no money for training courses but money there for  consultants. Hmmm

I recall when I lived there in Dunstable they brought in a consultant to "Improve" the traffic in the town. The resultant revisions cost over £5 million and straight away it was obvious that they had got it very wrong. It was admitted that he had not visited the area and the last 3 projects he had consulted on had all been complete disasters but, he was cheap. Within 3 weeks the work was undone and traffic started moving again. 

Good these consultants aren't they?

[RollingJ 1,993]

@busdriver1Your last question is brilliant - wonder what the answer will be? Or will it, like my comments on this thread, be ignored?

[Guest busdriver1]

2 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

@busdriver1Your last question is brilliant - wonder what the answer will be? Or will it, like my comments on this thread, be ignored?

I am sure councils run courses on avoiding difficult questions or avoiding points that disprove their "theories".