Sheffield Becoming A 15 Minute City

[The_DADDY 3,477]

3 hours ago, makapaka said:

I think that’s equally nonsensical.

Fair enough. I guess we'll see what happens then eh? 

[top4718 838]

7 hours ago, makapaka said:

I think that’s equally nonsensical.

You claim they need to spend billions but then say it's nonsense when someone else says they wont? So are you saying all these things will be built?

[metalman 21]

17 hours ago, makapaka said:

One thing I would say - If the government and local authorities are gonna push this ideal then they need to put their money where their mouth is.

 

and it would cost billions to make it workable.

 

im not against it: but using crookes and Walkley as an example - we now have an “active neighbourhood” where they’ve basically shut roads to get people to not use their cars.

 

the result is loads of ugly temporary lights, concrete road blocks, planters with dead plants - strewn all over the area.

 

and every morning I join a queue of idling cars that wasn’t there before it started.

 

sh or get off the pot comes to mind.

Does anyone know whether the temporary pedestrian crossing lights in Crookes have any sort of counter attached to them so that they can tell how many times the button has been pressed? I saw somebody cross at the ones by the bus terminus yesterday for the first time since they've been put in. You would think there might be a way of telling how many people have crossed so that if the answer is hardly anybody, they could be moved somewhere else.

[Guest makapaka]

26 minutes ago, top4718 said:

You claim they need to spend billions but then say it's nonsense when someone else says they wont? So are you saying all these things will be built?

I’m saying it’s nonsense that you are going to be placed under “restrictions”.

[top4718 838]

1 minute ago, makapaka said:

I’m saying it’s nonsense that you are going to be placed under “restrictions”.

You won't be placed under restrictions but payments may be required to travel outside your "zone" which is a form of restriction in itself, it will be interesting to see if these things are pushed in the US as it would be against the constitution.

[Guest makapaka]

58 minutes ago, top4718 said:

You won't be placed under restrictions but payments may be required to travel outside your "zone"

No that’s what you believe is going to happen for your own reasons.

 

it’s not a statement of fact.

 

and given that there’s no evidence of it - it’s likely to be nonsense.

[The_DADDY 3,477]

9 minutes ago, makapaka said:

No that’s what you believe is going to happen for your own reasons.

 

it’s not a statement of fact.

 

and given that there’s no evidence of it - it’s likely to be nonsense.

Hmm, a bit like the building of all the needed facilities eh?

[Organgrinder 1,946]

54 minutes ago, makapaka said:

No that’s what you believe is going to happen for your own reasons.

 

it’s not a statement of fact.

 

and given that there’s no evidence of it - it’s likely to be nonsense.

No evidence that it isn't going to happen either so you are guessing like we are guessing.

Knowing the council,  I would be surprised if it doesn't happen,  and that is no more rubbish than your theory.

 

 

 

[Guest makapaka]

46 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

Hmm, a bit like the building of all the needed facilities eh?

It’s more straightforward - they dont have the money to make it palatable to sell as a vision to people.

 

so it’s just half assed attempts at trying to get people out of their cars.

 

it’s not an attempt to imprison people in their homes.

1 minute ago, Organgrinder said:

No evidence that it isn't going to happen either so you are guessing like we are guessing.

Knowing the council,  I would be surprised if it doesn't happen,  and that is no more rubbish than your theory.

 

 

 

Riddle me this.

 

 

 

 

[Organgrinder 1,946]

7 minutes ago, makapaka said:

 

Riddle me this.

 

Meaning you just don't have an answer

 

 

[top4718 838]

4 hours ago, makapaka said:

No that’s what you believe is going to happen for your own reasons.

 

it’s not a statement of fact.

 

and given that there’s no evidence of it - it’s likely to be nonsense.

So if the intention is to cut car use and the facilities you need are not available are people going to be free to travel to them without limit?

[Guest makapaka]

3 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Meaning you just don't have an answer

 

 

Meaning I don’t know what you’re on about. Do you want me to find evidence that something isn’t going to happen because you can’t find any evidence that it is going to happen? That’s a bit odd.

7 minutes ago, top4718 said:

So if the intention is to cut car use and the facilities you need are not available are people going to be free to travel to them without limit?

What you asking me for it’s your theory.