Save Our Streets

[Findlay]

The Op is weeing in the wind as this is a National modal shift policy, not just a Sheffield policy, that is given grant money to build.

Research from London has found LTN attract people to the shops rather than discourages them.

What research do you have that would suggest businesses would fail?

Constructively speaking, I think you are blinkered. As an exercise for one week try promoting the policy to get a different perspective.

 

[Planner1]

17 hours ago, Save Our Street said:

 

Successive councils have squandered money on ridiculous half-baked ideas such as the world student games, which we are still paying for, a tram system that hardly anyone uses, and the total remodelling of the city centre, at a cost of millions to the tax payer, that no one wants to visit since the council allowed John Lewis out of a contract that saw the company immediately leave the city. I have no desire to eat pretzels from the tardy faux Swiss chalets by the peace garden, or use container toilets, parked over mains utility services, at the top of Fargate. I doubt the majority of Sheffield residents do either. The idea, that turning the centre of the city into a totally residential area, when it  now has little appeal, is totally farcical.

 

 

The tram system was installed by and is owned by SYPTE, not the council. It was paid for by government grant. If you think no one uses it, try getting one one in the city centre at peak times. The PTE have tried to extend it, but the government won’t fund it.

 

Remodelling the city centre - I presume you mean the road system? Most cities are removing through traffic from their city centres and making them better to get around by active travel. It’s government policy to promote active travel and public transport and that’s what they will provide funding for.

 

More residential in the city centre is a theme in all cities nowadays. It’s always been like that in a lot of European cities. 
 

Red Lines - they are very similar to yellow lines but can be enforced by camera. Do you have a problem with more effective enforcement of restrictions?

 

 

[HeHasRisen]

11 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

The tram system was installed by and is owned by SYPTE, not the council. It was paid for by government grant. If you think no one uses it, try getting one one in the city centre at peak times. The PTE have tried to extend it, but the government won’t fund it.

 

Remodelling the city centre - I presume you mean the road system? Most cities are removing through traffic from their city centres and making them better to get around by active travel. It’s government policy to promote active travel and public transport and that’s what they will provide funding for.

 

More residential in the city centre is a theme in all cities nowadays. It’s always been like that in a lot of European cities. 
 

Red Lines - they are very similar to yellow lines but can be enforced by camera. Do you have a problem with more effective enforcement of restrictions?

 

 

Isnt the issue with these proposed red lines that they are currently going onto roads that currently have no restrictions at all (or just have them at peak?)?

 

Going from nothing to double red lines is a bit of a jump, wouldnt you agree?

 

The comment about "nobody uses" the trams is laughable, that I agree on.

Edited February 1, 2023 by HeHasRisen

[Planner1]

9 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Isnt the issue with these proposed red lines that they are currently going onto roads that currently have no restrictions at all (or just have them at peak?)?

 

Going from nothing to double red lines is a bit of a jump, wouldnt you agree?

 

The comment about "nobody uses" the trams is laughable, that I agree on.

From a brief read of the proposals, the Abbeydale Rd and Ecclesall Rd “Connecting Sheffield” schemes include some new waiting restrictions to facilitate  bus lanes and bus priority.
 

There’s also a separate proposal to change some yellow lines to red lines. The big advantage of red lines is that they are camera enforceable, where yellow lines are not. There wasn’t anything specific that I saw about exactly which ones they want to change to red lines.

[HeHasRisen]

OK so will these red lines be enforceable 24 hours?

[Planner1]

16 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Going from nothing to double red lines is a bit of a jump, wouldnt you agree?

No. I think that if you are going to have a restriction, it’s a good idea to make it the best one available for enforcement. It’s also a good idea to have consistency of restrictions on the routes in question. 

[Planner1]

2 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

OK so will these red lines be enforceable 24 hours?

Red lines and yellow lines come in different types.

 

They both have single and double ones. Both can include some exemption for loading or allow blue badge use.

 

Double red or yellow lines are enforceable 24/7.

 

A standard double red line means no stopping for any reason. A standard double yellow allows drivers to stop to load / unload or pick up and set down passengers.

 

The Highway Code explains it.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

The tram system was installed by and is owned by SYPTE, not the council. It was paid for by government grant. If you think no one uses it, try getting one one in the city centre at peak times. The PTE have tried to extend it, but the government won’t fund it.

 

Remodelling the city centre - I presume you mean the road system? Most cities are removing through traffic from their city centres and making them better to get around by active travel. It’s government policy to promote active travel and public transport and that’s what they will provide funding for.

 

You have disproved your own argument there by saying it's government policy to  promote active travel and public transport and they will provide funding for it.

Then you say that the PTE want to extend the Supertram but, the government won't fund it.

It's time the council and the planners realised that the government is just a load of empty talk and promises.

They won't fund anything that costs more than a tin of paint,  except in London, of course.

Then you try to tell us that we need to take active travel seriously.

You are as daft as they are, but, we are certainly not.

 

[Planner1]

44 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

You have disproved your own argument there by saying it's government policy to  promote active travel and public transport and they will provide funding for it.

Then you say that the PTE want to extend the Supertram but, the government won't fund it.

It's time the council and the planners realised that the government is just a load of empty talk and promises.

They won't fund anything that costs more than a tin of paint,  except in London, of course.

Then you try to tell us that we need to take active travel seriously.

You are as daft as they are, but, we are certainly not.

 

Supertram isn’t the only form of public transport. Tram systems are very expensive and value for money is an important part of the business case.  

 

When the government turned down the extensions here, they said bus rapid transit (BRT) should be looked at as it provided better value for money. That’s why the BRT scheme near Meadowhall went in. 
 

£570 million in the recent City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement (CRSTS) buys a bit more than a tin of paint.

 

The current funding model isn’t great. The government comes up with funding pots like CRSTS but city regions have to bid competitively for the money, so they don’t have funding certainty and can’t plan effectively in the longer term. The bidding process is costly and wasteful.

 

The city region mayors and the local authorities tell the government frequently that the current setup isn’t good and proper devolution is what’s needed. It clearly doesn’t suit the governments agenda to do that. They provide the money so local government has to dance to their tune. No one likes it but that’s how it is. You can’t blame the local authorities for that.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Supertram isn’t the only form of public transport. Tram systems are very expensive and value for money is an important part of the business case.  

 

When the government turned down the extensions here, they said bus rapid transit (BRT) should be looked at as it provided better value for money. That’s why the BRT scheme near Meadowhall went in. 
 

£570 million in the recent City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement (CRSTS) buys a bit more than a tin of paint.

 

The current funding model isn’t great. The government comes up with funding pots like CRSTS but city regions have to bid competitively for the money, so they don’t have funding certainty and can’t plan effectively in the longer term. The bidding process is costly and wasteful.

 

The city region mayors and the local authorities tell the government frequently that the current setup isn’t good and proper devolution is what’s needed. It clearly doesn’t suit the governments agenda to do that. They provide the money so local government has to dance to their tune. No one likes it but that’s how it is. You can’t blame the local authorities for that.

Typical planner thinking.

No, Supertram isn't the only form of public transport. Sheffield does not have a decent & value for money,  public transport system AT ALL.

People in Sheffield wondering how they are going to leave their cars and still get to work every day and the planners think a BRT scheme at Meadowhall will do it.

Talking about value for money, the government has just spent more than £30 billion in London on their scheme.

 

My thoughts are " they can please themselves but, the public will not accept the changes if it is always going to be more of the same"

The council should refuse to implement the changes unless it's done properly and fairly.

Stop making excuses, the planners and thee council have failed us for years.