Sheff Council - Shalesmoor Road Layout

[Guest busdriver1]

1 hour ago, covfeffe said:

Whatever you say, its easier said than done believe me I've been there. 

 

Cycling is a nice leisure activity but people's general day to day activities can't be done on a bike.

 

You're only going to get away with pushing this so far; there will come a point where opposition to it will offer itself at the ballot box and people will vote accordingly. So watch it.

The problem with that is that the politically motivated do gooders will be voted out and more politically motivated do gooders will be voted in and they will go to the same council employees for advice and they will still be there because if they were employable in the real world they would be there. The vast majority of council employees I have come across fit into this category. I formed this opinion when I worked for a council and yes, I got out, because I could.

[onewheeldave 22]

A thought on the emergency vehicles having problems getting through. This of course is an issue on any city centre road in rush-hour, regardless of the current situation with the cycle path.

 

However, if said path was wide enough for emergency vehicles to get through, it would be an amazing asset in emergencies as ambulances responding with sirens on, could have a clear path without the usual waits for numerus cars to get out of the way.

 

Simply shift the blocks temporarily at the start of the path, and, it would be by far the fastest route in emergencies.

 

 

Edited July 14, 2020 by onewheeldave

[RJRB 688]

28 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

I'll beg to differ with you on that, it most certainly is a route to the city centre, depending on where you are coming from, or going to.

 

I don't need to "get down there" thanks, I've seen plenty of traffic queues, sat in plenty of them and cycled past a good few too.

 

I think you may be forgetting that the role of council officers is to recommend or advise. Politicians take the decisions.

I think it is the duty of any planner to see the reality of a scheme that looked sensible on paper ,and to have the guts and sense to say “that’s not working”.

Same applies to the politicians.

Once again I remind you that the topic under discussion is this particular scheme and not Save the Planet.

We will continue to differ as to Shalesmoor being a route into the city.

Cyclists will continue to use the various alternatives which are not available to motorists,including pavements,underpasses cul de sacs etc.

Its an ill conceived and counterproductive scheme that should be ended immediately.

However ,sheer stubbornness and refusal to accept totally valid criticism will mean that it remains longer than should be the case.

 

 

[Tony 10]

3 hours ago, covfeffe said:

Cycling will always be a minority interest in Sheffield, it's just to hilly to be viable for most people, and apart from commuting to and from work, what do the council think people will generally be cycling, on a day to day basis, for?? 

This is not true and we can put the idea to bed now because the majority of cycling at the moment is on the west side of the city where the big hills happen to be. @Planner1

will be able to confirm this.

 

 

Study after study shows that the reason people don't cycle is because they are frightened of traffic.  The Shalesmoor scheme helps reverse that trend.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Tony

[covfeffe 0]

28 minutes ago, Tony said:

This is not true and we can put the idea to bed now because the majority of cycling at the moment is on the west side of the city where the big hills happen to be. @Planner1

will be able to confirm this.

If it's such viable and easy option, then why aren't much more people just naturally doing it off their own backs? why the need to force people into it?

 

A modest increase in young and relatively fit people may take cycling up but most other people won't so take your head out of the clouds  and get real.

 

By asking people to take up cycling, or even use buses instead of the car, you are asking people to completely restructure their lives, which is a big ask; many people have multiple short journeys to make throughout the day. There was a period when  my day, Monday to Friday, was,  get back from work, then take my partner to her work, then go and get kids from school, one at primary school and the other at secondary school, so three separate locations in a short space of time. Cycling and the buses wouldn't have made this possible. 

 

I suppose you think that it was foolish of us to build such a life but what is the alternative? either me or my partner shouldn't work? or we shouldn't have had kids? what?? 

Edited July 14, 2020 by covfeffe

[Tony 10]

@covfeffe you and your partner aren't being asked to take up cycling. You are being given the opportunity to do it safely. 

 

I'm not trying to be clever with words, I am just trying to explain that it's a mindset, not a problem. One day you might fancy giving it a go for your own reasons that you can't see today. You might not. Other people will though and with those small changes a shift begins to happen until it seems really normal, like cycling in Amsterdam is now but wasn't in the 1960s. It takes time, please just give it a chance.

[onewheeldave 22]

43 minutes ago, RJRB said:

 

Once again I remind you that the topic under discussion is this particular scheme and not Save the Planet.

 

 

 

This particular scheme is an effort to increase cycling uptake and an increase in cycling with the consequent decrease in motor vehicles is very much about saving the environment [as well as saving the medical services and public health].

37 minutes ago, Tony said:

 

 

 

Study after study shows that the reason people don't cycle is because they are frightened of traffic.  The Shalesmoor scheme helps reverse that trend.

 

17 minutes ago, covfeffe said:

If it's such viable and easy option, then why aren't much more people just naturally doing off their own backs? why the need to force people into it?

 

A modest increase in young and relatively fit people may take cycling up but most other people won't so take your head out of the clouds  and get real.

 

By asking people to take up cycling, or even use buses instead of the car, you are asking people to completely restructure their lives, which is a big ask; many people have multiple short journeys to make throughout the day. There was a period when  my day, Monday to Friday, was,  get back from work, then take my partner to her work, then go and get kids from school, one at primary school and the other at secondary school, so three separate locations in a short space of time. Cycling and the buses wouldn't have made this possible. 

 

I suppose you think that it was foolish of us to build such a life but what is the alternative? either me or my partner shouldn't work? or we shouldn't have had kids? what?? 

As Tony points out, the main block to people taking up cycling is that the roads are currently not safe for cyclists. Once they are safe for cyclists, there will obviously be a lot more cyclists, given that taking up cycling comes with great financial savings and health improvements [the exact opposite of car use] as well as being very pleasant in itself.

 

 

[RJRB 688]

41 minutes ago, Tony said:

@covfeffe you and your partner aren't being asked to take up cycling. You are being given the opportunity to do it safely. 

 

I'm not trying to be clever with words, I am just trying to explain that it's a mindset, not a problem. One day you might fancy giving it a go for your own reasons that you can't see today. You might not. Other people will though and with those small changes a shift begins to happen until it seems really normal, like cycling in Amsterdam is now but wasn't in the 1960s. It takes time, please just give it a chance.

Same response as to others.

Cycling is good.

BUT this scheme is ill conceived and does nothing whatsoever to encourage cycling for the vast majority.

It is primarily a part of the route on and off the Parkway for vehicles.

It is not a suitable place to encourage leisure cycling or indeed a pleasant area to cycle.

The money has been wasted when it could have been used sensibly.

Just to  add I have had cycles since my Junior school days and enjoyed them on the roads in and around Sheffield.

Even at my fittest,public transport or a private vehicle was the choice for work for numerous reasons which should be obvious to anyone especially planners.

Edited July 14, 2020 by RJRB

[Guest busdriver1]

Sorry but to get back to the origin of this scheme, it is NOT an environmental scheme, it is a scheme to facilitate easier public movement when the public are being discouraged from using public transport. That is the reason the money was given to the council. Not to save the planet. That is for another day. Ideally when the aircraft industry is brought to book. 

[creweblade 10]

Agree with rjrb - the issue here is that this particular additional cycle lane is inappropriate on the cities arterial ring road especially as the route in question already had a cycle lane and one of the widest footpaths around - bob Jackson and the rest of the council need to have the guts to realise they messed up and reverse this particular change

[BoroB 10]

5 hours ago, Planner1 said:

That scheme started in planning several years ago.

 

The Covid pandemic has presented what many people regard as a once in a lifetime opportunity to do things differently in terms of how we travel. The government has also provided funds for immediate, "emergency" measures. What are the Council supposed to do? Stick with what's been done before, or try something different?

So a scheme that was several years in the planning has been sacrificed barely 6 months after completion, removing road capacity that was (and still is) clearly needed.

4 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Going to the local shops, leisure facilities and for exercise, basically most trips of up to 5km. Sheffield is not too hilly. Bern in Switzerland has good levels of cycling for just one example of somewhere that isn’t exactly flat. 
 

Bikes have gears and they are low enough to get up any hill. For those who really aren’t fit enough or who don’t want to put in that level of effort, there are lots of electric bikes nowadays, which make hills an absolute breeze. 

There was an interesting section on the BBC's click show at the weekend regarding electric bikes, apparently in many EU countries cyclists using these need to be registered and insured.  Bring it on.

[BoroB 10]

2 hours ago, Baron99 said:

From my observations over the years, those that aren't jumping red lights, (and it doesn't matter if they slow down to see if it's safe to proceed against a red light, they are a road user & are required to obey the Highway Code.  You don't see drivers, driving through a pelican crossing that's been pressed, although there's no pedestrians on the crossing), are generally breaking the other law of riding on the pavement, endangering pedestrians. 

And we wonder why a lot of cyclists seem to be against a number plate type  system and insurance.

 

Seems like cyclists don't want to be identifiable or accountable.