New Road Needed To City Centre

[ECCOnoob]

This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with many of the points that Andrew C has raised in their post...but

 

Nobody seems to be addressing the obvious first question and biggest hurdle that most of these  campaigners and groups seem to constantly ignore --  Why exactly should car drivers give up their vehicles. Why should they face some arbitrary decision on whether they need to use their car or not. They worked hard to pay for that vehicle. They pay for tax on that vehicle. Driving lessons and tests cost a lot of money and are hard work for many people to achieve. Driving is a perfectly legal activity mandated by the government. ....    so, why on earth are people suddenly expected to stop after all that time and effort.

 

Yes we have all heard the campaigns, yes we are all aware of the environmental impact but nearly all of the dialogue is focused on how vehicles are powered not the use of personal transport itself. Solution:   change how they are powered and that is down to manufacturers and government not individual drivers.

 

Yes we have all heard the dialogue about too many vehicles on the road but many would argue that that is a result of overpopulation and those selfish breeders are just as much a contributor to global warming than 100 car drivers.   So how come the proud parents and yummy mummy brigade are not getting penalised the same way and made to face some harsh decision.

 

Yes there are alternative means of getting around but a vast majority of people do not live in high-density urban environments like London or New York. They live in Suburbs. The working world and globalisation of economy means that many of them have to travel well beyond their place of residence everyday to get to work.

 

Finally let's not forget the simple fact that nothing public transport wise is ever going to beat the the absolute control, flexibility and convenience of having personal transport. A miserable day sat in a traffic jam in a car is one thing but I bet most car drivers will still prefer it to being sitting in a traffic jam with loads of strangers on a bus or stuck in some cold damp railway station because of some delay or crammed underground in a sewer train. 

 

That is the first hurdle needs to be got over before anything else starts being brought up. 

 

All well and good going for the easy targets, disrupting and making a nuisance like the morons currently on the M25 but who exactly is answering the tough questions.

 

It's almost laughable that car drivers are being penalised the way they are when our impact on the global emissions is minuscule compared to some other countries and the government announce they are already doing something about it.  Add on the fact that they they are threatening to push car drivers into all Electric in the next decade when we are still running 50 year old diesel trains on our crippled embarrassing rail network. When the government does try to do something to drag the railways into the 21st century the same morons probably protesting on the M25 are then complaining about HS2 and the disruption that's going to cause to the landscape.  When the local authority tries to set up some ambitious tram network it's always met with the "how much?" brigade banging on about how many nurses or doctors or care workers it could pay for....

 

People wonder why these don't get taken seriously.

[AndrewC]

11 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Well it does. "Built over or under". Under or over what, exactly? A tram route on stilts from Meadowhead to the City Centre, or in a tunnel?

 

Come on now 🤣

 

The only SENSIBLE suggestion would be to extend the Purple route from near its current terminus at Herdings Park, maybe along the double carriageway ring road, but given the tram network has been in place for 27 years without a single extension being made to it (the Tram-Train doesnt count as its using the rail network, not an expansion of the tram network), I cant see this happening.

I can't believe you read so much in to the 'over or under' bit! Wow.

 

Let's keep it simple - bassett one says extending the tram (with reasonable fares) to somewhere near Meadowhead roundabout would help ease congestion between there and town. They're right. You've even managed to come up with your own workable solution to make Bassetone's suggestion happen. Well done!

 

I quite agree that it's disheartening that so little has been invested in the supertram system over the last 30 years. That doesn't mean we should accept nothing will ever happen in the future. Cities like Manchester and Nottingham have seen rapid extensions made to their systems. It just requires political will and investment. Hard to come by, but they found a way; Sheffield can too.

 

No one who gets the benefit of new supertram extensions reaching their neighbourhoods will give a toss if it utilises the rail network or new tram lines. If it's a way to provide a reliable tram link to people currently not on the system, at half the price of building all new on-street infrastructure, then we should take it. Extensions to Totley, Darnall, Waverley etc. could all make use of tram-train technology.

[HeHasRisen]

My suggestion much more sensible than building a network on stilts or in a tunnel, but well done for replying to the poster rather than the post. Well done! Have a pat on the head.

[AndrewC]

31 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with many of the points that Andrew C has raised in their post...but

 

 

You ask some good questions and make some good points - and I will reply! - but it will have to be later on 👍

[ads36]

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with many of the points that Andrew C has raised in their post...but

 

Nobody seems to be addressing the obvious first question and biggest hurdle that most of these  campaigners and groups seem to constantly ignore --  Why exactly should car drivers give up their vehicles. Why should they face some arbitrary decision on whether they need to use their car or not. They worked hard to pay for that vehicle. They pay for tax on that vehicle. Driving lessons and tests cost a lot of money and are hard work for many people to achieve. Driving is a perfectly legal activity mandated by the government. ....    so, why on earth are people suddenly expected to stop after all that time and effort.

it's a great question.

 

we need to make the alternatives *better* than driving.

 

(quicker, more reliable, cheaper, less stressful,  etc.)

 

for sake of argument, let's build a tram line from Meadowhead, to the city centre. A journey of about 4 miles, with a stop every mile.

 

that journey would take about 15-20 minutes - unaffected by traffic, and cost a few quid.

 

you'd have to be mental to choose driving, if that option existed.

 

.

 

See also, bike lanes. they're cheap, high capacity, and fast. why on earth would i drive to the city centre if there was a safe bike route that got me there in 25mins?

Edited September 20, 2021 by ads36

[altus]

48 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with many of the points that Andrew C has raised in their post...but

 

Nobody seems to be addressing the obvious first question and biggest hurdle that most of these  campaigners and groups seem to constantly ignore --  Why exactly should car drivers give up their vehicles. Why should they face some arbitrary decision on whether they need to use their car or not. They worked hard to pay for that vehicle. They pay for tax on that vehicle. Driving lessons and tests cost a lot of money and are hard work for many people to achieve. Driving is a perfectly legal activity mandated by the government. ....    so, why on earth are people suddenly expected to stop after all that time and effort.

Because they don't like sitting in the traffic jams.

Quote

Yes we have all heard the campaigns, yes we are all aware of the environmental impact but nearly all of the dialogue is focused on how vehicles are powered not the use of personal transport itself. Solution:   change how they are powered and that is down to manufacturers and government not individual drivers.

Changing how they are powered is about improving the environment as a whole which benefits everyone - including the owners of the cars.

Quote

Yes we have all heard the dialogue about too many vehicles on the road but many would argue that that is a result of overpopulation and those selfish breeders are just as much a contributor to global warming than 100 car drivers.   So how come the proud parents and yummy mummy brigade are not getting penalised the same way and made to face some harsh decision.

 

Yes there are alternative means of getting around but a vast majority of people do not live in high-density urban environments like London or New York. They live in Suburbs. The working world and globalisation of economy means that many of them have to travel well beyond their place of residence everyday to get to work.

Both of these are about 70+ years of transport infrastructure designed around car use - making the alternatives more difficult. People don't have to travel long distances to get to work - they choose to. They could choose to move closer to work or choose to get a job closer to home. There are people who make choices that means they do not travel long distances to get to work, not it's not impossible.

Quote

Finally let's not forget the simple fact that nothing public transport wise is ever going to beat the the absolute control, flexibility and convenience of having personal transport. A miserable day sat in a traffic jam in a car is one thing but I bet most car drivers will still prefer it to being sitting in a traffic jam with loads of strangers on a bus or stuck in some cold damp railway station because of some delay or crammed underground in a sewer train. 

 

That is the first hurdle needs to be got over before anything else starts being brought up. 

Public transport certainly should be improved but the first hurdle that needs to be got over is that those who's lifestyles are built around using their cars for everything are going to have to accept that the government is not going to base transport infrastructure primarily around them in the future.

 

 

[Rockers rule]

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with many of the points that Andrew C has raised in their post...but

 

Nobody seems to be addressing the obvious first question and biggest hurdle that most of these  campaigners and groups seem to constantly ignore --  Why exactly should car drivers give up their vehicles. Why should they face some arbitrary decision on whether they need to use their car or not. They worked hard to pay for that vehicle. They pay for tax on that vehicle. Driving lessons and tests cost a lot of money and are hard work for many people to achieve. Driving is a perfectly legal activity mandated by the government. ....    so, why on earth are people suddenly expected to stop after all that time and effort.

 

Yes we have all heard the campaigns, yes we are all aware of the environmental impact but nearly all of the dialogue is focused on how vehicles are powered not the use of personal transport itself. Solution:   change how they are powered and that is down to manufacturers and government not individual drivers.

 

Yes we have all heard the dialogue about too many vehicles on the road but many would argue that that is a result of overpopulation and those selfish breeders are just as much a contributor to global warming than 100 car drivers.   So how come the proud parents and yummy mummy brigade are not getting penalised the same way and made to face some harsh decision.

 

Yes there are alternative means of getting around but a vast majority of people do not live in high-density urban environments like London or New York. They live in Suburbs. The working world and globalisation of economy means that many of them have to travel well beyond their place of residence everyday to get to work.

 

Finally let's not forget the simple fact that nothing public transport wise is ever going to beat the the absolute control, flexibility and convenience of having personal transport. A miserable day sat in a traffic jam in a car is one thing but I bet most car drivers will still prefer it to being sitting in a traffic jam with loads of strangers on a bus or stuck in some cold damp railway station because of some delay or crammed underground in a sewer train. 

 

That is the first hurdle needs to be got over before anything else starts being brought up. 

 

All well and good going for the easy targets, disrupting and making a nuisance like the morons currently on the M25 but who exactly is answering the tough questions.

 

It's almost laughable that car drivers are being penalised the way they are when our impact on the global emissions is minuscule compared to some other countries and the government announce they are already doing something about it.  Add on the fact that they they are threatening to push car drivers into all Electric in the next decade when we are still running 50 year old diesel trains on our crippled embarrassing rail network. When the government does try to do something to drag the railways into the 21st century the same morons probably protesting on the M25 are then complaining about HS2 and the disruption that's going to cause to the landscape.  When the local authority tries to set up some ambitious tram network it's always met with the "how much?" brigade banging on about how many nurses or doctors or care workers it could pay for....

 

People wonder why these don't get taken seriously.

Excellent Post.  ECCOnoob.

Protect your right to drive, cycle or ride.

Yes I can walk to the local C0-OP  (who's prices are higher than anywhere else) if need be.

I have cycled when i was working closer to home (16 mins to get car out of the yard or 11 mins to jump on't bike)

Buss' i honestly can't remember the last time i went on one (tell a lie, i can, & had to come to the aid of the driver from yobs causing trouble.)

When i shop i buy in bulk (saves using the car more often) & couldn't imagine trying to catch the two busses i would need to if shopping in town. 

I do drive smaller cars these days and there is good argument for this especially if your more of an urban driver than a  Motorway user.

Bicycles are not the be all of everything, especially in somewhere as hilly as Sheffield or susceptible to our delightfully eccentric British weather.

 

Keep safe.

 

19 minutes ago, ads36 said:

it's a great question.

 

we need to make the alternatives *better* than driving.

 

(quicker, more reliable, cheaper, less stressful,  etc.)

 

you'd have to be mental to choose driving, 

Is there anything better than driving?

Driving/ Riding is only as stressful as you make it & the camera footage can always be used in court 

Mental - positively certifiable   🚚🏍️🚗🚐🧐

 

 

6 hours ago, whiteowl said:

I think the only route (aside from pie in the sky thinking, like tunnels and fly-overs) would be up Derbyshire Lane and through Graves Park. Can't see that getting much support though!

Cutting up Graves park 'll have all the 'do-gooder friends of furry rodents' up in arms 🐹.

 (haven't a Rat Emoji you'll have imagine it's a very colourful Rat).

 

Keep safe,

[Bargepole23]

2 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

This is all well and good, and I don't disagree with many of the points that Andrew C has raised in their post...but

 

Nobody seems to be addressing the obvious first question and biggest hurdle that most of these  campaigners and groups seem to constantly ignore --  Why exactly should car drivers give up their vehicles. Why should they face some arbitrary decision on whether they need to use their car or not. They worked hard to pay for that vehicle. They pay for tax on that vehicle. Driving lessons and tests cost a lot of money and are hard work for many people to achieve. Driving is a perfectly legal activity mandated by the government. ....    so, why on earth are people suddenly expected to stop after all that time and effort.

 

Yes we have all heard the campaigns, yes we are all aware of the environmental impact but nearly all of the dialogue is focused on how vehicles are powered not the use of personal transport itself. Solution:   change how they are powered and that is down to manufacturers and government not individual drivers.

 

Yes we have all heard the dialogue about too many vehicles on the road but many would argue that that is a result of overpopulation and those selfish breeders are just as much a contributor to global warming than 100 car drivers.   So how come the proud parents and yummy mummy brigade are not getting penalised the same way and made to face some harsh decision.

 

Yes there are alternative means of getting around but a vast majority of people do not live in high-density urban environments like London or New York. They live in Suburbs. The working world and globalisation of economy means that many of them have to travel well beyond their place of residence everyday to get to work.

 

Finally let's not forget the simple fact that nothing public transport wise is ever going to beat the the absolute control, flexibility and convenience of having personal transport. A miserable day sat in a traffic jam in a car is one thing but I bet most car drivers will still prefer it to being sitting in a traffic jam with loads of strangers on a bus or stuck in some cold damp railway station because of some delay or crammed underground in a sewer train. 

 

That is the first hurdle needs to be got over before anything else starts being brought up. 

 

All well and good going for the easy targets, disrupting and making a nuisance like the morons currently on the M25 but who exactly is answering the tough questions.

 

It's almost laughable that car drivers are being penalised the way they are when our impact on the global emissions is minuscule compared to some other countries and the government announce they are already doing something about it.  Add on the fact that they they are threatening to push car drivers into all Electric in the next decade when we are still running 50 year old diesel trains on our crippled embarrassing rail network. When the government does try to do something to drag the railways into the 21st century the same morons probably protesting on the M25 are then complaining about HS2 and the disruption that's going to cause to the landscape.  When the local authority tries to set up some ambitious tram network it's always met with the "how much?" brigade banging on about how many nurses or doctors or care workers it could pay for....

 

People wonder why these don't get taken seriously.

We have tarmacced over the world to allow car use. Let's not pretend for one moment car drivers are a persecuted bunch.

[Hopman]

We need to decide what Woodseats is. Is it a corridor or is it a residential and commercial suburb? The problem is it can't be both.

I've looked on an old map and found a few benchmarks. Whilst it is easy to draw a line on a map, there are problems with altitudes. Supposing we dig a tunnel from The Coach and Horses (460 feet above sea level) to come out at Lidl on Chesterfield Road (246 feet above SL) That's quite a gradient. Starting at the Bowshaw roundabout would be better as it could link to the Dronfield By-pass, but this would start at 535 feet above SL. It would be a shorter but steeper tunnel. There exists the possibility of cars queuing inside the tunnel, belching out fumes unless the tunnel is electric vehicles only.

Put a tram track up Chesterfield Road and it will solve some problems as the disruption will close many businesses in Woodseats; after this no-one will be visiting. You have only to remember the constant complaints from West Street retailers when the tram tracks were laid. There there were alternatives (Broad Lane or Division Street). These alternatives don't exist for Woodseats unless you force all traffic along Abbey Lane and right at the roundabout or right at Bowshaw to go via Jordanthorpe.

Extend the Herdings tram line to go along the Ring Road to the Norton Roundabout would mean widening the Ring Road, putting the tram tracks in the centre like Netherthorpe Road. To get maximum usage, you'd need a Park & Ride facility somewhere. 

[Rockers rule]

1 hour ago, Bargepole23 said:

We have tarmacced over the world to allow car use. Let's not pretend for one moment car drivers are a persecuted bunch.

Persecuted - No - Fleeced & a easy cash cow. 

 

Permit holders areas  everywhere (paying for something you are already paying for).

Disgusting condition of our roads (something road tax was introduced for).

Bigger cars - higher taxation paying for those using the same roads paying zero or minuscule amounts.

My 2.4 £300+,  Lads 1.6 turbo diesel £20 .

Cost of fuel .

Messing with Fuel grades putting 1,000 of cars potentially on the scrap heap.

& we'll not even go into insurance company's. 

Dare to go in a Bus lane, smile for the camera and wait for the fine to come.

 

Keep safe 

 

 

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Rockers rule
additional info