Jump to content


Consultation For A Low Traffic Neighbourhood For Neepsend And Kelham Island

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Resident said:

They've also introduced laws and made inclusions to existing traffic laws for cyclists in Holland. 

 

The chief one being that where there is cycling infrastructure in existence it MUST be used by cyclists. Eg if a cycle path runs parallel to a road then cyclists are prohibited from using the road. 

 

This is something that everytime it's mentioned in the UK cyclists start frothing at the mouth like rabid animals in opposition. 

 

It's almost as if cyclists don't want to share or have any form of restrictions yet expect everyone else to bow down. 

Cycle paths are a rarity in Sheffield.

At best we have "routes" along which people can pootle along, they do not cater for the commuting cyclist. 

I hope you are not confusing cycle paths with bits of footway with lines painted or two foot wide gutters full of  rubbish.

Where they do exist they disintegrate into shared footways and underpasses and become blocked by road sign and street furniture.

For example do I cycle responsibly down Hannover Way(Google Maps) ont Moore Street or divert off the roadway onto the lovely cycle way until the parked and lorries parked outside the Department for Work & Pensions and then illegal turns by through traffic immediately after and then  into the abyss of the roundabout and then a near 90 degree drop onto Moore Street-and that is on a Brompton?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Resident said:

Where does cyclist have to give way to a side road, other than anywhere in which all other traffic does the same? 

 

On Hannover Way as illustrated or Penistone Road into town if you using the glorified footpath you give way at every side road and business entrances and forecourts. On the road you don't- cycling into town is safer unless of course you come across angry amateur drivers.

Edited by Annie Bynnol

Share this post


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

Where does cyclist have to give way to a side road, other than anywhere in which all other traffic does the same? 

if this is a genuine question, see the Penistone road cycle lane for dozens of examples.

 

it's also got bus stops in it, and lampposts, and bins, and pinch-points, and parked cars, and advertising panels, and pedestrians. etc. it completely disappears in the middle, around the car show-rooms, forcing you back onto the A61 - rendering the entire thing completely pointless: you have to be happy to cycle along a dual-carriageway to use the Penistone rd cycle lane - and i would hope that everyone could appreciate how bonkers that is.

Edited by ads36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, the dutch have a law that says you must use the cycle lane, if there is one.

 

but, and this cannot be emphasised enough, *but*...

 

A) the dutch have an excellent network of cycle routes, we don't - we've got a few blue signs next to the A61.

 

B) they have presumed liability, we don't.

 

C) in practice, it only really applies to motorways and A-roads, everywhere else, cars are slowed to a crawl, or excluded entirely . the obligation to use the cycle routes applies to everyone, even motorists....

Edited by ads36

Share this post


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

Where does cyclist have to give way to a side road, other than anywhere in which all other traffic does the same? 

 

Same old tired argument "I shouldn't have to slow down and give way like other traffic, I'm a cyclist, I should be exempt from any rules."

 

 

Penistone Road. What should be a really good cycling corridor to get to/from Hillsborough is abysmal. It is a flat route, could be really quick to cycle into town. Instead, it's punctuated by a thousand side roads and crossings.

 

No reasonable cyclist would expect themselves to exempt from the rules of the road. Some cyclists don't stick to them, as some drivers don't. So what? I don't see any reduction in motor traffic provision because some drivers jump red lights. Nor should I expect cycling provision to be any less because some cyclists jump red lights.

 

If you're trying to compare the cycling infrastructure in Netherlands and Belgium with that in the UK, you're way off the mark. I've cycled extensively in both countries, was very happy to be obliged to ride on what is a very good, well maintained and comprehensive cycling infrastructure, even in the Ardennes, where the hills are far more challenging than Sheffield.

 

All of which has got zero to do with creating a low traffic neighbourhood in Kelham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

Agreed. Never really took of that Netherlands cycling infrastructure....oh hang on, it was and remains a resounding success.

And the Netherlands isn't built on 7 hills.... just fields and dykes.

17 minutes ago, Bargepole23 said:

Penistone Road. What should be a really good cycling corridor to get to/from Hillsborough is abysmal. It is a flat route, could be really quick to cycle into town. Instead, it's punctuated by a thousand side roads and crossings.

 

No reasonable cyclist would expect themselves to exempt from the rules of the road. Some cyclists don't stick to them, as some drivers don't. So what? I don't see any reduction in motor traffic provision because some drivers jump red lights. Nor should I expect cycling provision to be any less because some cyclists jump red lights.

 

If you're trying to compare the cycling infrastructure in Netherlands and Belgium with that in the UK, you're way off the mark. I've cycled extensively in both countries, was very happy to be obliged to ride on what is a very good, well maintained and comprehensive cycling infrastructure, even in the Ardennes, where the hills are far more challenging than Sheffield.

 

All of which has got zero to do with creating a low traffic neighbourhood in Kelham.

Aren't the council or another authority looking at putting a pure cycle route alongside the river down that corridor ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, darylslinn said:

Aren't the council or another authority looking at putting a pure cycle route alongside the river down that corridor ?

sort of, there is *something* being discussed. but not a 'pure' cycling route, it'll be shared-used, meandering and muddy.

 

yes, you'll be able to cycle along it, but it won't be suitable for commuters. It'll be lovely  in the sunshine, when there's a few other people around, maybe see an otter, that kind of thing. But it'll feel sketchy and unsafe when it's dark, and quiet, for half the year, before and after work.

Edited by ads36

Share this post


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

And the Netherlands isn't built on 7 hills.... just fields and dykes.

Aren't the council or another authority looking at putting a pure cycle route alongside the river down that corridor ?

Plenty of hills in large parts of the Netherlands, I've cycled up lots of them. Similarly in Belgium, which also has lots of hills and an excellent and well used cycling infrastructure.

 

Cycle routes for commuting have the same requirements as car routes for commuting. Quick and easy to navigate, safe to use, well kept and well lit. The reality is lots of them are dark, meandering and poorly surfaced. The five weirs walk, which the council have designated as a cycle route from meadowhall to Town, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Road users vote with their wheels. 

If its better/quicker/safer then it will be used. Each individual user will make his/her decision on their own priorities.

 

The 4 wheel rat runners were using Alma Street/Green Lane but that has been stopped by the concrete blocks in front of The Fat Cat. Leaving the coast clear for the 2 wheel rat runner and the local businesses and residents will experience the effects of that. If the 2 wheelers are dangerous then the blocks can be re-configured to slow them down but its pretty tight and cycling speed has to be reduced considerably to get through safely. I went through it yesterday and pedestrian movement on the cycle path also slowed me down. I also went through the blocks on  Ball Street bridge and the Pinstone street and found it to be better even at the reduced speeds needed to get through safely. It works for me.

 

Theres no need for massive policing of systems IF things are  designed  to make the best use the safe use.

Share this post


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

And the Netherlands isn't built on 7 hills.... just fields and dykes.

Aren't the council or another authority looking at putting a pure cycle route alongside the river down that corridor ?

They have strong winds though which can be just as tough.

 

The route I think you mean is a widened footpath near parkwood springs. It won't be lit and will not be suitable terrain for all cycles. It's being funded mainly by sustrans who maintain the transpennine trail - which as an example is often covered in mud and flooded in parts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hard to fathom the changes to the West Bar roundabout.

 

The traffic has always been mad coming down Tenter street and feeding on to the roundabout. It's always been the case that this roundabout in particular, is dangerous for cyclists to cross, not helped by idiots using the left turn lane to go straight across and down Corporation street.

 

My desk used to look over the roundabout, and I've seen countless incidents of cyclists being hit by cars when trying to cross it. Do the council really think their 'Dutch Style' plan is going to help the situation where the roundabout is always (more or less) a free for all.

 

 

If they really want to change that roundabout, how about making it one lane coming up to the roundabout and two lanes going across it from Tenter street.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/02/2021 at 02:59, littlebasher said:

I find it hard to fathom the changes to the West Bar roundabout.

 

The traffic has always been mad coming down Tenter street and feeding on to the roundabout. It's always been the case that this roundabout in particular, is dangerous for cyclists to cross, not helped by idiots using the left turn lane to go straight across and down Corporation street.

 

My desk used to look over the roundabout, and I've seen countless incidents of cyclists being hit by cars when trying to cross it. Do the council really think their 'Dutch Style' plan is going to help the situation where the roundabout is always (more or less) a free for all.

 

 

If they really want to change that roundabout, how about making it one lane coming up to the roundabout and two lanes going across it from Tenter street.  

I don't understand - you seem to agree that it's currently dangerous for cyclists and that largely comes about from the slightly mad way drivers use it, and the fact that bikes & cars are on the roundabout at the same time.

 

The proposal should help by taking bikes away from the roundabout itself and providing segregated crossings across each of the feeder roads. The priority given to cyclists and pedestrians at those crossings - over the drivers in cars - should also, over time and with the right enforcement, encourage drivers to take more care at the roundabout (slow down, observe the junction properly, etc.) rather  than use it irresponsibly as - like you say - often happens now.

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.