Jump to content
The Christmas Logo Competition is back. See thread in Sheffield Discussions for details ×

Sheff Council - Shalesmoor Road Layout

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, NewBiz said:

Surely any organisation fit to be in charge of public funds has a clear set of criteria by which they measure the merits or otherwise of any proposed schemes? 

One would think so wouldn’t one 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, RJRB said:

One would think so wouldn’t one 😁

I would be very surprised if there was not one. Sadly I would also expect it to be an internal department who have in there arsenal a very large broom and an appropriate sized carpet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Do the funds for the  the removal of the scheme and putting the road back to it's pre-cycle lane condition come from central government or the council's own budget ?

 

Edited by darylslinn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, darylslinn said:

Do the funds for the  the removal of the scheme and putting the road back to it's pre-cycle lane condition come from central government or the council's own budget ?

 

Another very good question. Where's Planner1 when you need him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NewBiz said:

Surely any organisation fit to be in charge of public funds has a clear set of criteria by which they measure the merits or otherwise of any proposed schemes? 

1. one cyclist per day using the new cycle path and no inconvenience to Councillors driving to council meetings?

2. spend the money before the government take it back?

3. provide things to do for council staff?

 

NewBiz surely you know that the criteria for success will be decided afterwards when the data is available for the PR folks to try and pull the wool over our eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/08/2020 at 15:56, NewBiz said:

What I'd like to know, and hopefully Planner1 will be able to help here, is what metrics SCC have been measuring during the trial (ie number of cyclists using the lane, reduction in vehicular transport as a result of greater cycle use, impact on traffic flow, journey times etc) and what criteria would have to be met for it to be declared a success.

 

Specifically what outcomes, agreed before the trial would need to be seen for SCC  to make the cycle lane permanent.

 

My understanding is that it was not likely to be a permanent change, as it would have required a very significant redesign of the road layout in order to meet new government design standards for cycle facilities.
 

The scheme was about trying to provide an alternative to the car for the many who had been walking and cycling during lockdown and for those who’d been advised not to use public transport if they could avoid it. It also provided an opportunity to build it and see whether they (Cyclists) would actually come and see what people’s opinions and experiences were.

 

The council monitored traffic, cycle and pedestrian use and queue lengths, before the cycle lanes were introduced and while it has been in place.

 

They had criteria for removing the temporary measures which related to queue lengths and traffic levels ( relative to pre-Covid levels). It was the increase in traffic levels which triggered the decision to remove it.

Share this post


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

My understanding is that it was not likely to be a permanent change, as it would have required a very significant redesign of the road layout in order to meet new government design standards for cycle facilities.
 

The scheme was about trying to provide an alternative to the car for the many who had been walking and cycling during lockdown and for those who’d been advised not to use public transport if they could avoid it. It also provided an opportunity to build it and see whether they (Cyclists) would actually come and see what people’s opinions and experiences were.

 

The council monitored traffic, cycle and pedestrian use and queue lengths, before the cycle lanes were introduced and while it has been in place.

 

They had criteria for removing the temporary measures which related to queue lengths and traffic levels ( relative to pre-Covid levels). It was the increase in traffic levels which triggered the decision to remove it.

Sorry not buying it.  All sounds far too much like PR spin to save face.

 

Isn't the reality that it was the massive backlash from the public and business owners - not just in this city but many other cities that have introduced these half assed schemes - that was the trigger in the decision to remove it.  

 

Maybe next time those geniuses in town hall might actually want to do some proper consultation and ask people whether they want and use such facility before implementing such massive disruption to people. 

 

They can try and spin it all they want but it was clear it was nothing more than a desperate money grab.   Central government was handing out the pounds to try something and they jumped in grabbing with both hands without any thought as to how it would actually be implemented, how it would actually affect the population and whether the city even wanted it in the first place. 

 

It's the whole student games, city of sport, city of sanctuary, clean air initatives, tram-train trial...... all over again.   Whoring ourselves time after time to be the lab rat ready to be tested on, poked and messed around to demonstrate some harebrained idea.  

 

Oh well never mind. Its only ratepayers money chucked down the drain to rectify this u-turn. Nobody in town hall cares about them, after all they are just a little people funding the SCC dreamworld.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

So Planner1 ''They had criteria for removing the temporary measures which related to queue lengths and traffic levels ( relative to pre-Covid levels). It was the increase in traffic levels which triggered the decision to remove it''

 

So you're saying the traffic levels triggered the decision to remove it? Could you elucidate please. Obviously queue lengths, which you also mention, were going to lengthen when you cut an arterial road's capacity in half (even given the mitigating factors of lockdown ) So what exactly about the traffic levels was it that 'triggered the decision to remove it' ?

  •  
Edited by NewBiz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/chaotic-shalesmoor-cycle-lane-could-18630789

I think that Cllr.Mohammed and a very high majority of the population recognised immediately that it was a harebrained scheme which should never have been sanctioned.

However rather than losing face it has been allowed to run its course.

Planner 1 has done his best to justify the experiment ,but any talk of monitoring ,or statistics prior to,and during the trial period is neither believable or necessary.

It was somebody’s daft idea and thankfully a few tens of thousands later it will be gone.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RJRB said:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/chaotic-shalesmoor-cycle-lane-could-18630789

I think that Cllr.Mohammed and a very high majority of the population recognised immediately that it was a harebrained scheme which should never have been sanctioned.

Opposition councillor criticises party in power. There’s a shock...........

13 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

Maybe next time those geniuses in town hall might actually want to do some proper consultation and ask people whether they want and use such facility before implementing such massive disruption to people. 

Maybe next time the government will give them enough time to do proper consultation....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, NewBiz said:

So what exactly about the traffic levels was it that 'triggered the decision to remove it' ?

Traffic levels reaching 80% of pre-Covid figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

It's the whole student games, city of sport, city of sanctuary, clean air initatives, tram-train trial...... all over again.   Whoring ourselves time after time to be the lab rat ready to be tested on, poked and messed around to demonstrate some harebrained idea.  

 

Oh well never mind. Its only ratepayers money chucked down the drain to rectify this u-turn. Nobody in town hall cares about them, after all they are just a little people funding the SCC dreamworld.  

The student games was a bid to host a major event, hardly an experimental scheme. The legacy facilities have been a great asset for the city, gained it the reputation for being the city of sport and resulted in even more sporting facilities coming to the city. 
 

Tram-train trial is a national trial to see how trams can operate on heavy rail tracks. It’s got us more new trams and opened up a new route towards Rotherham. I’m not sure what’s not to like about that one. It doesn’t actually directly involve SCC. It’s SYPTE who own the tram system. But hey, lets not let a few  inconvenient facts get in the way of an anti SCC rant...... It got handed to SYPTE very late in the day and the lengthy delays in the project were basically down to Network Rail, who’d been running it before.

 

Clean Air Zones are national policy and have been forced on all the major cities by the government with the threat of huge court fines for non compliance being possported to local authorities. SCC have been compelled to do a CAZ. Nothing to do with volunteering for an experiment. 

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.