Sheffield City Council Collects up to £5Million from Bus Lane Fines

[Planner1]

5 minutes ago, Top4719 said:

 

Doesn't the levy just cover the contract cost? It doesn't particularly mean the service will be improved.

The council spend millions every year on improving bus routes and the facilities on them, to improve bus service speed and punctuality and improve access to bus stops. They put in tactile paving and raised kerbs at bus stops. Historically, bus lane / gate surplus income has contributed to these.
 

Doesn’t the levy also contribute to the “mayors fares” initiative?

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, Top4719 said:

 

What improvements have their been, public transport is a disgrace?

Are you going to respond on the question of whether you actually think the current administration favour more affluent areas?

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Planner1 said:

The council spend millions every year on improving bus routes and the facilities on them, to improve bus service speed and punctuality and improve access to bus stops. They put in tactile paving and raised kerbs at bus stops. Historically, bus lane / gate surplus income has contributed to these.
 

Doesn’t the levy also contribute to the “mayors fares” initiative?

That is what they are supposed to do - partly - some of that action is the responsibility of SYCMA, and even then they make a hash of a lot of it. Also, my understanding is that the erroneously named 'mayors fares' initiative is funded by central government.

[Top4719]

30 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

The council spend millions every year on improving bus routes and the facilities on them, to improve bus service speed and punctuality and improve access to bus stops. They put in tactile paving and raised kerbs at bus stops. Historically, bus lane / gate surplus income has contributed to these.
 

Doesn’t the levy also contribute to the “mayors fares” initiative?

 

That should be part and parcel of services anyway, so where did that money come from before, I would think any shelters built in the last decade would have tactile pavers etc as standard.

[sheffbag]

correct - the £2 scheme is funded by central govt

[Planner1]

28 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

correct - the £2 scheme is funded by central govt

This article suggested some public transport levy went towards it.

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Planner1 said:

This article suggested some public transport levy went towards it.

Possibly at the start, prior to the central govt. decision - what, about a month? - but not now.

[Planner1]

31 minutes ago, Top4719 said:

 

That should be part and parcel of services anyway, so where did that money come from before, I would think any shelters built in the last decade would have tactile pavers etc as standard.

Part and parcel of what services? Do you actually think that is paid for from council tax / business rates / mainstream council funding?

 

Highways funding comes from the government via the combined authority. Very little of that money is for the normal minor highway improvements that people ask for.
 

Most of the funding is as a result of competitive bidding processes and the council have to put specific schemes into the bids that meet the funding criteria.

 

On bus corridor schemes, all of the improvements at stops, including kerbing, paving, pole, flag, shelter, lighting, real time information etc are paid for with the government funding.

 

The council have for many years been systematically putting in improvement schemes on major bus routes. I worked on them 15 years or so ago and they have continued ever since.

[Top4719]

3 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Part and parcel of what services? Do you actually think that is paid for from council tax / business rates / mainstream council funding?

 

Highways funding comes from the government via the combined authority. Very little of that money is for the normal minor highway improvements that people ask for.
 

Most of the funding is as a result of competitive bidding processes and the council have to put specific schemes into the bids that meet the funding criteria.

 

On bus corridor schemes, all of the improvements at stops, including kerbing, paving, pole, flag, shelter, lighting, real time information etc are paid for with the government funding.

 

The council have for many years been systematically putting in improvement schemes on major bus routes. I worked on them 15 years or so ago and they have continued ever since.

 

I'm not really bothered where the funding comes from what I'm saying is bus stops/routes need repairs, maintenance always have always will so if the money from fines in now allocated to this where did the money come from before, from my observations I don't see any major changes from when this fine money wasn't available.

[Planner1]

15 minutes ago, Top4719 said:

 

I'm not really bothered where the funding comes from what I'm saying is bus stops/routes need repairs, maintenance always have always will so if the money from fines in now allocated to this where did the money come from before, from my observations I don't see any major changes from when this fine money wasn't available.

It isn’t maintenance. That only covers what is already there. Any improvements / additions have to be paid for from somewhere else.

 

Improvements are paid for from capital funding, which is mainly government grants, which now come via the MCA.

 

In terms of the infrastructure, the bus stop pole, flag, shelter and real time screens are owned and maintained by the MCA. The paving, kerbing, roads and signs / marking are owned and maintained by the council via the Amey contract.

 

The relatively modest amounts of surplus income which come from bus lane / gate fines are a drop in the ocean compared to the amounts of government grant funding that goes into improvements.

 

So are you going to comment further on your implication that the Labour / Green coalition prioritise more affluent areas, or are you admitting it’s a load of drivel?