Public Transport Vs. Heart Of The City Ii

[E-Man Groovin]

Might some of the Sheffield public transport deficiencies impact the success of the Heart of The City II development?

 

https://peterajohnson.substack.com/p/sheffield-are-we-one

[Irene Swaine]

The city centre redevelopment and the council/SYMCA are the ones causing the issues with public transport. They closed Leopold Street, causing east bound buses to turn back West and routes such as the 51 to omit key parts of the city centre when eastbound, such as Surrey Street and Fargate. They brought in a stupid "clean air zone" scheme that has meant operators such as TM Travel have had to replace reliable buses with ones less reliable, and routes such as the 252 have suffered major cancellations as a result. Other operators have suffered from buses going in to "limp" mode due to modifications required by the CAZ. If there is no transport in to the city, then a redevelopment is pointless if people can't get to it. I blame the council, not the transport operators.

[Andy_terrier]

Now funnily enough we were talking about public transport at work yesterday and came up with a not too stupid idea (well we thought it wasn't!). What about instead of the purple tram running from Hurdings to the Cathedral, it could be diverted down Arundel Gate from Castle Sq.  Now this is where it gets a bit tricky.  Do you then have it terminate at say the old Staples and then just go back along the same single line (like it does at Hurdings) or could it actually go on a loop up Moorfoot, along Charter Row and somehow rejoin the main line above the City Hall?

 

I know the first option doesn't feed HOTC directly but it does assist in the issue of the main shopping area being along the Moor.  Surely easier than the current situation?

[hackey lad]

9 hours ago, Andy_terrier said:

Now funnily enough we were talking about public transport at work yesterday and came up with a not too stupid idea (well we thought it wasn't!). What about instead of the purple tram running from Hurdings to the Cathedral, it could be diverted down Arundel Gate from Castle Sq.  Now this is where it gets a bit tricky.  Do you then have it terminate at say the old Staples and then just go back along the same single line (like it does at Hurdings) or could it actually go on a loop up Moorfoot, along Charter Row and somehow rejoin the main line above the City Hall?

 

I know the first option doesn't feed HOTC directly but it does assist in the issue of the main shopping area being along the Moor.  Surely easier than the current situation?

Good idea  Wait for the naysayers .

[Irene Swaine]

15 hours ago, Andy_terrier said:

Now funnily enough we were talking about public transport at work yesterday and came up with a not too stupid idea (well we thought it wasn't!). What about instead of the purple tram running from Hurdings to the Cathedral, it could be diverted down Arundel Gate from Castle Sq.  Now this is where it gets a bit tricky.  Do you then have it terminate at say the old Staples and then just go back along the same single line (like it does at Hurdings) or could it actually go on a loop up Moorfoot, along Charter Row and somehow rejoin the main line above the City Hall?

 

I know the first option doesn't feed HOTC directly but it does assist in the issue of the main shopping area being along the Moor.  Surely easier than the current situation?

That would work and there is space for it if you turn right at the end of Charter Row, down Furnival Gate and left on to Arundel Gate. It could still call at Fitzalan Square to serve the north east of the city centre too.

 

The purple route never even used to run to Cathedral, surprisingly, it used to run from the railway station straight on to Meadowhall!

[Andy C]

Looking at the article it seems to be based on shops selling expensive things in the City Centre will fail because there isn't good enough public transport from the wealthier areas of the city and that is a political strategy.

 

A few points from me on that..

 

• If wealthier people want to go into the city by car there has been investment in the inner ring road and there is plenty of parking capacity in multi-storey car parks. If they can afford to be shopping for premium goods they can afford parking fees. There is also the alternative of the Supertram park & ride facilities.
• Pretty much any bus route that is financially viable is operated as a commercial business at the operators own financial risk with little political input other than funding concessionary fare schemes.
• Other bus services that aren't commercially viable but considered economically or socially essential by the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority are publicly specified and funded and you could say the limited funds available are subject to prioritisation. Most of the buses funded are ensuring all communities have some kind of public transport to access shops, doctors surgeries etc and unfortunately things like evening services are low down the list for funding.
• The article quotes Bradway - service 25, provided on a commercial basis by Stagecoach, is actually quite good during shopping hours with buses scheduled to run every 15 minutes (every 30 minutes on Sundays). The big shortfall, as mentioned in the article, is the lack of an evening service, with last buses around 8pm, however that impacts nightlife more than shops.
• In the wealthier areas of Dore and Whirlow, the 81/82 bus provides a half hourly daytime service from Dore village, supplemented on the main road through Whirlow by Peak District buses 65 and 272. Evening service is somewhat more limited.
• The article correctly mentions there are no Supertram services in the South West of the city, although there is Dore & Totley railway station serving this part of the city with trains non stop into the City Centre, however the availability of buses to connect in to the trains is very limited.
• New tram lines would be good, although I understand at the moment the priority is to renew the existing system which is now about 30 years old with some elements of the infrastructure and fleet life expired. An extension beyond Herdings Park to Norton and Lowedges/Greenhill or Jordanthorpe may be an option perhaps, however I'd say any new line needs to be mostly off road on reserved tracks in order to be fast and reliable, not simply run down a road where trams will get stuck in the same traffic congestion that the existing bus services suffer from.
• There are issues in Sheffield City Centre that put people off using buses that are not within the control of bus operators, these being that adequate replacement facilities have not been provided following the closure of Leopold Street and Pinstone Street and the number of unsavoury characters hanging around near bus stops on Arundel Gate, High Street and West Street making it feel unsafe for waiting passengers. Now I appreciate people on the street with drug or alcohol issues is a complex issue to address so lets focus on the other point regarding infrastructure for bus passengers - its now been 3 and a half years since the road closure and the bus stops there are still abandoned complete with shelters, seating, lighting, timetable display cases and electronic departure boards, all of which are missing at the temporary stops provided in unpleasant locations on Rockingham Street and Arundel Gate, with the former not even served by buses on Friday or Saturday nights for safety reasons! This really should have been sorted at the time of the closure of Pinstone Street.
• It would also help if the council, Sheffield BID and the rest involved were more positive about public transport and actually promoted it - all the publicity for attracting people to the City Centre seems to focus on car parking!

 

 

 

 

[Resident]

2 hours ago, Andy C said:

SNIPPED

 

 

 

 

Pinstone St should never been allowed a permanent closure. Sheffield was lied to. 

SCC stated when it was closed that it was for COVID social distancing. When it came time to reopen as the restrictions and SD were lifted all of a sudden it was never closed for SD, it was closed for Active Travel.

When it was closed the council stated that they were using COVID funding then claimed it was Active Travel funding. So which was it and what happened to the funds from the one it wasnt'? 

SHEFFIELD'S
CRIMINAL

COUNCIL

 

[Irene Swaine]

2 hours ago, Andy C said:

There is also the alternative of the Supertram park & ride facilities.

That runs nowhere near the wealthier parts of the city. The tram doesn't serve the South West at all. 

[Irene Swaine]

2 hours ago, Andy C said:

The article correctly mentions there are no Supertram services in the South West of the city, although there is Dore & Totley railway station serving this part of the city with trains non stop into the City Centre, however the availability of buses to connect in to the trains is very limited.

There is certainly space at the station with the large car park to have a small bus drop off and turn around there. One from Dore, Whirlow, Ringinglow and even poor old Bradway which has suffered since the loss of the 25a.

[E-Man Groovin]

Thanks @Andyc - great detailed response. Three points - firstly, the article wasn't only focusing on retail, it mentioned leisure too. Some of the HoC II units are to have a leisure/experience focus I believe, which is why night time public transport is an issue for people who don't want to take taxis 4 nights a week. Secondly, I'd like to offer a counterpoint to this:

Quote

If wealthier people want to go into the city by car there has been investment in the inner ring road and there is plenty of parking capacity in multi-storey car parks. If they can afford to be shopping for premium goods they can afford parking fees. 

as stated in the article, once forced into their cars the options of Meadowhall, Manchester and Leeds (for example) are equally open to them. Good public transport in a city helps with civic coherence I think. Not to mention the night time economy point above. People often want to have a drink of an evening, which is why driving doesn't work so well in that context.

 

Finally, the article was attempting to highlight the unforeseen consequences of prioritising transport to the less well-off areas, rather than saying "all Sheffield public transport is rubbish"!

 

However, I think the points in your post are all fair and accurate, and I appreciate your response.