Public Transport Vs. Heart Of The City Ii

[ECCOnoob]

21 minutes ago, Irene Swaine said:

I am a retired transport worker. I know how transport companies work. Do you not understand that some services are tendered by public funding? Let me explain, the local authority provided some or all of the funding to run a service to keep communities connected. Simple as that.

Oh don't start that crap again.   

 

You are "28 years old" and used to push a catering trolley up and down the train. 

 

Let's not try and make out you have in depth knowledge of public transport procurement and scheduling operations. 

Edited December 31, 2023 by ECCOnoob

[hackey lad]

33 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

They tried to extend it to Ranmoor, the attitude of the locals was pretty much “I’ve got a BMW/Audi/Range Rover, why would I need a tram?” So it was dropped.

??? Then you say it’s no point asking the locals.

Edited December 31, 2023 by hackey lad

[Planner1]

35 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

??? Then you say it’s no point asking the locals.

You might have a “conversation” ( as some cities like to call it) on general principles / support for improved public transport, as part of wider policy development, but there’’s little point consulting the whole city / county ( because it’s not just about Sheffield) on whether they want a tram line to their area as you are not going to be able to do it in any reasonable timescale and in some places you might not be able to do it at all.

 

Proposals for new tram lines take many years to develop, it wouldn’t be a good idea to get into specific consultations too early in the process ( of developing the business case) as you need to look at a lot of options before you arrive at the actual proposals for a specific route or route options.

 

 

[Andy C]

2 hours ago, Resident said:

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

 

From what I remember from the time it was both - the social distancing space was needed for the shops on Leopold Street to be allowed to reopen after the first lockdown but the funding was obtained on the basis of active travel - encouraging more people to walk or cycle.

 

To be fair, the plans for the area when it is all remodelled look like it will be a nicer place to be, so I don't personally have a huge issue with the road being downgraded to be made smaller, catering only for cycles and access, is more how it has been implemented in isolation with no proper replacement bus route and stops provided - at the time Pinstone Street was closed they should have had both Rockingham Street and Arundel Gate remodelled ready for the buses to move into and the stop infrastructure such as shelters, seating, lighting etc moved across for the first day of the altered bus route. Nearly three years later this still hasn't happened, despite various plans being put out to public consultation over the last year or two. 

[E-Man Groovin]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

They tried to extend it to Ranmoor, the attitude of the locals was pretty much “I’ve got a BMW/Audi/Range Rover, why would I need a tram?” So it was dropped.

That's disappointing to hear. Although sometimes it is not only the bias of the respondent at play, sometimes the bias of the listeners plays a part. You know as in confirmatory bias.

 

One would hope that city leaders might be strategic when thinking about transport and attempt to convince everyone that a unified, comprehensive transport system would be in Sheffield's interest.

 

I mean, the wealthy parts of London probably can raise the BMW/Audi/Range Rover of Sheffield to Porsche/Maserati/Ferrari levels, but there you'll find tubes, buses and overground serving areas like Richmond, Chiswick and Kew and I promise you. no one is complaining. 

 

I would hope that all sides could be persuaded to put aside their class-warrior (or at the other end of the scale) nouveau riche biases. The goal here is what's best for Sheffield - all of it - and not pet hates or loves.

Edited December 31, 2023 by E-Man Groovin
typos

[Planner1]

16 minutes ago, E-Man Groovin said:

That's disappointing to hear. Although sometimes it is not only the bias of the respondent at play, sometimes the bias of the listeners plays a part. You know as in confirmatory bias.

 

One would hope that city leaders might be strategic when thinking about transport and attempt to convince everyone that a unified, comprehensive transport system would be in Sheffield's interest.

 

I mean, the wealthy parts of London probably can raise the BMW/Audi/Range Rover of Sheffield to Porsche/Maserati/Ferrari levels, but there you'll find tubes, buses and overground serving areas like Richmond, Chiswick and Kew and I promise you. no one is complaining. 

 

I would hope that all sides could be persuaded to put aside their class-warrior (or at the other end of the scale) nouveau riche biases. The goal here is what's best for Sheffield - all of it - and not pet hates or loves.

They’re already doing so. They believe bus franchising ( as in London) would be the best way forward and give them the most control over the public transport network. It will be interesting to see how Manchester get on with that approach, but they are a lot bigger in population terms. There are potential downsides to franchising (ie no operators to blame…) 

 

I don’t think it’s too helpful drawing comparisons with London as it isn’t a fair comparison at all due to the concentration of people and wealth in one place. It is much easier to justify significant investment in transport in such places.

 

Leeds have been struggling to get a tram for years and they are significantly bigger than here in population terms. 
 

Meanwhile here, experienced public transport operators can’t make money on Supertram, so the MCA are going to run it in house. Doesn’t bode well for justifying enormous investment from the government, who’ve already told us that buses offer better value for money here when the last request for a tram extension went in. Also might not have helped our case that we have had to ask the government for all the money to refurbish and renew the existing tram system.

[Andy C]

1 hour ago, E-Man Groovin said:

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:

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.

Ah, there's a whole different conversation when it comes to evening services which can be split into longer term issues and post covid issues.

 

Before licencing reform, which was introduced when Tony Blair was Prime Minister, generally speaking all pubs closed at 11pm and all nightclubs closed at 2am. Last buses on the main routes were generally at 11:15pm catering for those leaving the pubs, then at the weekend there was a night bus to many areas - one at midnight (useful for those working in the pubs that shut at 11 as well as those that went for food after the pubs shut before getting a bus) then the same vehicle would return to town to provide a 2:30am departure after the clubs kicked out. It was very difficult to get a taxi around these times, not just because of high demand but also a limit on the number of taxi licences the council issued.

 

Now pubs, bars and clubs are free to apply for a licence for whatever hours suits their business, subject to council licencing policy for particular areas. Many traditional pubs now open until midnight rather than 11pm at the weekend and there are bars open as late as 3 or 4 in the morning and some clubs until 6am. This has spread demand for travel  much wider through the evening and night and at the same time there are not only more taxis available but modern app based private hire cabs like Uber have made taxis more affordable, more convenient and possibly even safer. Whilst changes to opening hours and taxis is mostly positive, it made night buses no longer viable.

 

Fast forward post covid the hospitality industry is suffering - people have not only changed their habits and go out less after Covid anyway but with the cost of living crisis and the skyrocketing energy prices hitting both consumers and businesses - and bus operators are no exception.

 

First bus in Sheffield was a loss making operation before Covid then post covid with lower passenger numbers, significantly increasing operating costs and an industry wide shortage of drivers their management made a decision to do some pruning of the network and concentrate on their core business and network in order to turn the operation around to not only actually make a modest profit but also be more reliable. Some of the cuts made of random route extensions did hurt - the removal of the 52a beyond Hillsborough to Wisewood and Loxley left those areas only covered by tendered services 61 and 62 whilst the removal of the 24 beyond Lowedges to Bradway left Bradway with no buses at the time the Stagecoach 25 doesn't operate, although Stagecoach did add extra early morning journeys to replace the 24 at those times, Bradway still has no service after 8pm.

 

Meanwhile, the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority has been suffering on the budget front when it comes to buses. In the last year or two the country's economy has been bad with very high inflation and soaring energy costs meaning the cost of providing bus services has become much higher. Also not helping locally of course is the Sheffield City Centre Clean Air Zone charges meaning bus operators can no longer bid for contracts with a low public subsidy on the basis of using older buses. At the same time SYMCA have not had an increase in funding from the government or council so therefore cannot afford to support as many bus services as before. So priorities have had to be made and with evening services low down the list of priorities, existing supported evening services have been reduced to use minimal resources whilst there is no money for supporting anything extra - hence the example of the 25 Woodhouse-Bradway which has a public subsidy to operate under contract at the Woodhouse end but not at the Bradway end (the 24 that previously provided an evening service to Bradway is operated on a commercial basis).

 

There is also a side issue with both driver shortages and increased costs meaning operators are being more selective about what contracts they bid for - that was the reason why after Powells bus went bust no operator was interested in the contract for the 10/10a inner circle or the Sunday service on the 61/62 to Bradfield, also why after the Hulleys contract on the M17 from Dore ended no one else took it on!

 

Some might argue that if the mayor hadn't spent so much money subsidising 80p fares for young adults or £2 fares on the trams (which have now ended) there may have been more money left for supporting tendered bus services of course...

 

One of the projects funded by Derbyshire County Council as part of their government funded Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) has been to kick start evening service provision on some key services. This has seen an evening service introduced on the 218 Sheffield-Bakewell via Totley, X17 Sheffield-Chesterfield via Meadowhead and 257 Sheffield-Bakewell via Crosspool (since suspended due to driver shortage) plus improvements to the 44 Sheffield-Chesterfield via Dronfield. Frustratingly due to local politics these don't seem to have been promoted this side of the country boundary.

 

There are also some frustrations I observe on the Abbeydale Road corridor where if bus timetables were better co-ordinated the evening frequency would be doubled and therefore made more attractive - the 75/76 and 97/98 leave the City Centre at the same time!

 

It isn't all bad news - Some routes like the Stagecoach 52 and 120 still has a good evening service and there have been some improvements in the time of the last bus by First such as the introduction of a midnight bus to Totley on weekdays.

 

Ultimately I think a lot of work needs to be done on evening timetables, for our local authorities to be more supportive not just funding buses but promoting them and encouraging use and of course for local people to actually buy tickets and use them - ultimately if revenue is good enough to justify it then the service can be improved, there is evidence of that where Stagecoach have increased the frequency of the 120 between Fulwood and Sheffield City Centre in an evening at the weekend during the University term to cater for demand from students in accommodation around Broomhill and Ranmoor.

 

 

[Andy C]

29 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

They’re already doing so. They believe bus franchising ( as in London) would be the best way forward and give them the most control over the public transport network. It will be interesting to see how Manchester get on with that approach, but they are a lot bigger in population terms. There are potential downsides to franchising (ie no operators to blame…) 

 

I don’t think it’s too helpful drawing comparisons with London as it isn’t a fair comparison at all due to the concentration of people and wealth in one place. It is much easier to justify significant investment in transport in such places.

 

Leeds have been struggling to get a tram for years and they are significantly bigger than here in population terms. 
 

Meanwhile here, experienced public transport operators can’t make money on Supertram, so the MCA are going to run it in house. Doesn’t bode well for justifying enormous investment from the government, who’ve already told us that buses offer better value for money here when the last request for a tram extension went in. Also might not have helped our case that we have had to ask the government for all the money to refurbish and renew the existing tram system.

Comparing with London does need some health warnings. Transport for London finances are what you might call challenging and the mayor is regularly having to negotiate with the government for more money. The London Overground network has transformed run down orbital rail routes and it is amazing on a weekend to see them running trains into Stratford every 15 minutes up to midnight that are full and standing! Investment in expanding the Docklands Light Railway and constructing the Elizabeth Line, part funded by developers regenerating some of the areas served are also good news stories and a big success. On the other hand London buses are seeing declining patronage and cuts to services as a result of slow journey times and poor reliability because of getting stuck in traffic congestion - when Boris Johnson was mayor he removed some of the bus priority measures.

 

As for Greater Manchester and their Bee Network, it is early days, there have been modest increases in usage but they have already discovered that franchising and painting buses yellow doesn't solve reliability issues caused by traffic congestion and are now having to fund extra buses for some routes to maintain the same level of service as the journey times need to be longer realistically. I'd say in Sheffield there are similar issues with traffic and provision/enforcement of bus priority measures where it doesn't really matter who is in charge of the buses themselves - its the politicians at the council that are responsible for any solutions regardless.

 

I believe Mayor Coppard has in line with his manifesto when elected started the process investigating bus franchising for South Yorkshire and is going through the proper required audit workstreams to see how it would work, how much it would cost the taxpayer and whether it is viable. All I'll say is if we want to see more and better bus services, I think the taxpayer will have to chip in much more than now.

 

As for Supertram, it is indeed loss making, however until the rail replacement programme began I believe Stagecoach was managing to break even and attracting healthy passenger numbers. Their contract ends in March, they haven't walked away from it. SYMCA led by Mayor Coppard has decided to effectively bring it in house from March with it to be run by a company owned at arms length by SYMCA, in my view this is quite sensible given that in the coming years there will be a fair bit of disruption to manage as investment is made in renewing life expired infrastructure (its about 30 years old now) which is what the bid to government for funding was about.

 

All the ideas for network extensions that have been publicly stated have been for the Tram-Train operation, extending beyond Parkgate as well as the potential of the introduction of passenger services to the Stocksbridge line to be a Tram-Train. There has been less firm talk of extensions to the classic tramway although we keep hearing aspirations to serve the Northern General Hospital or to continue beyond Herdings Park through Norton and beyond, however what I'd say is to achieve the speed and reliability people want then street running has to be avoided where possible - no point in trams getting stuck in the same traffic jams that make the existing bus service unattractive.

[E-Man Groovin]

Thanks again @AndyC.  The comparison with London was not for the purpose of trying to say "let's build our transport system like London". Of course that is preposterous. It was specifically a riposte to the local opinion shared by @Planner1 of "we have BMWs therefore we don't need public transport". I could have chosen any wealthy region of any city that is well served by public transport to highlight the weakness of such an opinion. Besides, I lived in Richmond and Kew so I know what I'm talking about in respect of the social make up of those areas!

 

Look I'm not a guy who is familiar about the detail of this stuff. I'm an ideas and a vision person. It was a simple proposal: a new focus on public transport to bring the wealthy into the city centre in order to help HoC II have a fighting  chance of success. Of course you guys with all the knowledge of details will no doubt highlight the obstacles, and I have no problem with that. The obstacles shouldn't invalidate the vision though. Maybe at some point we'll have a chance to execute on the vision. If a vision exists and one day an opportunity comes along, then one can carpe diem. If there is no vision, then opportunities might be squandered or not even recognised as such.

 

Thanks for reading my article and being reasonably polite about these thoughts. I've learned quite a lot from reading your responses.

Edited December 31, 2023 by E-Man Groovin
some blah

[Andy C]

17 hours ago, E-Man Groovin said:

Thanks again @AndyC.  The comparison with London was not for the purpose of trying to say "let's build our transport system like London". Of course that is preposterous. It was specifically a riposte to the local opinion shared by @Planner1 of "we have BMWs therefore we don't need public transport". I could have chosen any wealthy region of any city that is well served by public transport to highlight the weakness of such an opinion. Besides, I lived in Richmond and Kew so I know what I'm talking about in respect of the social make up of those areas!

 

Look I'm not a guy who is familiar about the detail of this stuff. I'm an ideas and a vision person. It was a simple proposal: a new focus on public transport to bring the wealthy into the city centre in order to help HoC II have a fighting  chance of success. Of course you guys with all the knowledge of details will no doubt highlight the obstacles, and I have no problem with that. The obstacles shouldn't invalidate the vision though. Maybe at some point we'll have a chance to execute on the vision. If a vision exists and one day an opportunity comes along, then one can carpe diem. If there is no vision, then opportunities might be squandered or not even recognised as such.

 

Thanks for reading my article and being reasonably polite about these thoughts. I've learned quite a lot from reading your responses.

We need people like you with vision and ideas and both the enthusiasm and calmness to keep pushing them in the right way and of course part of that needs to be listening to those in the industry who can explain how it would need to happen and why. So keep it up I say. 

 

I don't own a car and rely on a combination of public transport, taxis and lifts to get around. I'd also love to see a great public transport system and as someone whose hobbies and social life pretty much revolves around pubs and beer is very unhappy at the lack of evening buses! However I can see and understand the reasons and challenges and also the changes in demand.

 

The biggest frustration for me is politicians, be they MPs, councillors or the elected mayor - as well as journalists - who just keep pushing the line that if it wasn't for those nasty private businesses we'd have a perfect public transport system, ignoring all the public sector failings that lead to many of the problems that impact bus operation - be that the state of the roads, the economy or whatever.

 

The truth is yes, we could have much better bus, tram and train services, however it would need a lot of public money injecting into the system to fund loss making services and also invest in the infrastructure, it would also require political balls of steel to go ahead with the bus priority measures needed for a reliable service, just look at how it went with the consultation over the bus lanes on Ecclesall Road and Abbeydale Road!

 

It would also require a whole new public sector mentality where different departments actually worked together towards the bigger picture rather than just ticking their own boxes - the Heart of the City project is doing a very good job at regenerating the City Centre but public transport really has been frozen out of it, the planners consider that someone else's problem whilst highlighting the car park facilities serving their shiny new buildings.

 

Where we are at now is we have businesses that run buses that have a lot of experience and knowledge within them, the bigger players also bring associated resource with them that a lot of people don't think about such as back office systems for ticketing and information. These businesses are quite happy to work with the local authorities be that the current hybrid commercial/tendered operation or the franchising model currently being investigated, but either way the local authorities need to play their part as they provide the operating environment (roads, bus stops etc) and funding for socially/economically necessary services that would otherwise not be financially viable.

 

I think the way things are now post covid franchising may well be a good thing - the bus operating businesses can just focus on the logistical side of running buses with the financial risk moved away from their business whilst it would also be a good opportunity for a great reset of the network, changing routes and timetables to reflect changes in demand post covid. Ticket simplification would be great too, although we still have a challenge with cross border services into West Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire.

 

Also an interesting aside is the process is now underway to set up an East Midlands Mayoral Combined Authority which would include Derbyshire (ie Dronfield, Eckington, Killamarsh, Hope Valley etc) and Nottinghamshire (ie Mansfield, Worksop etc) and if their public transport policy goes down the road of bus franchising it will be interesting to see how the two authorities work together on cross border bus services!

Edited January 1 by Andy C