Sheff Council - Shalesmoor Road Layout

[RJRB]

8 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Cut down perfectly good trees? Didn’t end well last time..........

Seems to be a complete absence of forethought,analysis  and coordinated Planning as the whole route along Penistone Road through Shalesmoor and Derek Dooley Way has been the subject of much work and expense.....and just look at what a mess has been achieved.

Heads should roll but as no one takes ultimate  responsibility the buck can be passed endlessly.

[Tony]

9 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Manchester bid for and received specific government funding for those cycle routes (and they have had the benefit of increased funding through their devolution deal for several years now).Sheffield bid for the same funding but weren’t successful. 

Saying "not successful" is rewriting history.

 

Sheffield screwed up the application in 2014 and blamed "complicated forms" or some such nonsense. Manchester and other places managed it and now we can see how far that city is in front of Sheffield.

 

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/row-grows-sheffields-absence-government-cycling-funding-147081

 

Quote

Row grows over Sheffield’s absence from Government cycling funding

Councillors are blamed for not applying for 'cycling ambition city' status, but they say the application process was 'unworkable'

With Sheffield missing out on a share of the £214m of Government funding for cycling, councillors are claiming the city did not have the chance to apply for the money.

 

Eight cities across England were awarded ‘cycling ambition city’ status, entitling them to part of the government pot to improve their cycling infrastructure, but Sheffield, who hosted a stage of the 2014 Tour de France, was not selected.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Tony

[Parkside]

9 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Cut down perfectly good trees? Didn’t end well last time..........

The centre section looks brilliant on Penistone  road plenty of room for a good cycle lane to the left down ward side , ,the cycle lanes need some kind of unobtrusive barrier instead of just white lines that motorists take no notice of ,some of em even park in the bike lane including police cars .

 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Parkside

[Michael_N]

Another council seeing sense.

 

New traffic restrictions in Gateshead are being scrapped after two days following a backlash from motorists.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-tyne-53574236?__twitter_impression=true

[Planner1]

The Government is planning a £2bn cycling revolution, see: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-kickstarts-2bn-cycling-and-walking-revolution

 

So this route is probably just the beginning and we'll be seeing plenty more in the near future.

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, Tony said:

Saying "not successful" is rewriting history.

 

Sheffield screwed up the application in 2014 and blamed "complicated forms" or some such nonsense. Manchester and other places managed it and now we can see how far that city is in front of Sheffield.

 

As I recall, there were a couple of tranches of funding available. SCC bid to one round and weren't successful and didn't get a bid in on the other one. The problem with these competitive bidding situations is that you need to have quite well developed schemes already worked up in order to meet the very pressing timescales for the bidding process. I don't think Sheffield did, so didn't feel they could mount an effective bid.

 

I've worked in both city regions and yes, Manchester are well in front. They have a longer history of collaborative working on transport across the city region and they are better resourced, due to them being better funded as their population being twice that of Sheffield city region. They've also had a mayoral funding devolution deal in place for quite a few years, which gives them even more money to spend. The have good strong leadership and work effectively with the government, which all helps.

[RJRB]

14 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

The Government is planning a £2bn cycling revolution, see: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-kickstarts-2bn-cycling-and-walking-revolution

 

So this route is probably just the beginning and we'll be seeing plenty more in the near future.

It would be great if some ideas were floated as to where these might be and to achieve what end.

Pop up schemes are an unnecessary gamble and this particular scheme is remarkable in that it serves the purposes of nothing to anyone.

The toolbox of the modern planner seem to amount to a lump hammer .

 

 

[Tony]

6 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

As I recall, there were a couple of tranches of funding available. SCC bid to one round and weren't successful and didn't get a bid in on the other one. The problem with these competitive bidding situations is that you need to have quite well developed schemes already worked up in order to meet the very pressing timescales for the bidding process. I don't think Sheffield did, so didn't feel they could mount an effective bid.

 

I've worked in both city regions and yes, Manchester are well in front. They have a longer history of collaborative working on transport across the city region and they are better resourced, due to them being better funded as their population being twice that of Sheffield city region. They've also had a mayoral funding devolution deal in place for quite a few years, which gives them even more money to spend. The have good strong leadership and work effectively with the government, which all helps.

Size isn't everything.

Quote

The programme will see Bristol, Birmingham, Cambridge, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Norwich and Oxford accelerate the development of their cycling networks.

Sheffield just wasn't on top of its game so we're left with a legacy of feeble yet inherently dangerous stripes of paint instead of infrastructure that encourages people onto bikes. Let's hope the future is a bit better and the City is smarting enough from the past screw up to make this round really count. Sheffield isn't beyond hope. Or even Bamford.  

[Planner1]

43 minutes ago, Tony said:

Size isn't everything.

It often is in funding terms.

 

Even when you go through a competitive bidding process, the funding awards are often based on population levels.

 

Mayoral authorities with a devolution deal often get the funding allocated directly ( again on a per capita basis) so they at least avoid having to bid ( which isn’t easy or cheap)

Edited July 29, 2020 by Planner1

[Bargepole23]

53 minutes ago, RJRB said:

It would be great if some ideas were floated as to where these might be and to achieve what end.

Pop up schemes are an unnecessary gamble and this particular scheme is remarkable in that it serves the purposes of nothing to anyone.

The toolbox of the modern planner seem to amount to a lump hammer .

 

 

And then you would get the responses of those who would benefit drowned out by those who can't see the world beyond the end of their car bonnet, backed by the likes of the AA.

 

The same AA who were chuffed with an increase in speed limits through motorway repairs, citing a 68 second reduction in travel time as the tangible benefit.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Bargepole23