How do you feel about this scheme?

Negative

What do you like about this scheme?

• Improved route for buses

• More attractive environment

• Improved bus stops

What do you dislike about this scheme?

• Harder to reach my home/business

• Harder to park by car

• Reduced access for through traffic

• Changes to routes for motor vehicles

What is your connection to the area?

• I work here

• I visit for shopping

• I visit for leisure or a night out

How do you feel about our proposal for a Dutch-style roundabout at West Bar which would give priority to cyclists and pedestrians over motor vehicles?

Very negative

Please explain why you feel this way.

This area suffers with congestion already, slowing the flow of traffic will hurt this more. Closing sections of this route will put extra pressure on others.

Do you agree with the proposals to close Alma Street and Ball Street to create an improved environment which is safer for cyclists and pedestrians?

No

How will the improvements to walking routes through Burngreave and Pitsmoor affect your choices about how you travel to and from Neepsend, Kelham and/or the City Centre?

No change

In the future, post Covid-19, do you see yourself walking or cycling MORE to access Neepsend, Kelham and the City Centre as a result of these proposals?

No

How do you currently travel to/from the area?

• Car

Do you have any other comments on this scheme?

Schemes are often running along side several others and little time is taken to properly assess the impact on the area and those surrounding it. Without collecting real world data how can they be considered a success or feed into future schemes?

How do you feel about our proposal for a Dutch-style roundabout at West Bar which would give priority to cyclists and pedestrians over motor vehicles?

Very positive

What do you like about this scheme?

• Improved cycle crossings

• More attractive environment

• Safer to walk and cycle

• Priority for cyclists and pedestrians

• Better environment for cyclists

• Active neighbourhood with reduced traffic

• Environmental benefits

• More child-friendly

• Better environment for walking

• Improved pedestrian crossings

What do you dislike about this scheme?

• Not enough improvement for cyclists

What is your connection to the area?

• I travel through the area

Please explain why you feel this way.

Because this style of roundabout makes it easier to cycle through a junction

Do you agree with the proposals to close Alma Street and Ball Street to create an improved environment which is safer for cyclists and pedestrians?

Yes

How will the improvements to walking routes through Burngreave and Pitsmoor affect your choices about how you travel to and from Neepsend, Kelham and/or the City Centre?

Big change

In the future, post Covid-19, do you see yourself walking or cycling MORE to access Neepsend, Kelham and the City Centre as a result of these proposals?

Yes

How do you currently travel to/from the area?

• Cycle

• Car

Is this likely to change after the improvements? If so, how do you think you will travel to/from the area?

• Cycle

How do you feel about this scheme?

Mostly positive

Do you have any other comments on this scheme?

This is heading in the right direction, which is to reallocate road space from private motor car use to walking cycling and buses. Go for it!

How do you feel about this scheme?

Mostly positive

What do you like about this scheme?

• More attractive environment

• Active neighbourhood with reduced traffic

• Environmental benefits

• Better environment for cyclists

• Greener streets

• Better environment for walking

What do you dislike about this scheme?

• Not enough improvement for cyclists

What is your connection to the area?

• I work here

• I own a business here

• I visit for shopping

• I live here

• I visit for leisure or a night out

• I travel through the area

• Local Interest Group

• I visit friends/family who live here

How do you feel about our proposal for a Dutch-style roundabout at West Bar which would give priority to cyclists and pedestrians over motor vehicles?

Neither positive nor negative

Please explain why you feel this way.

We are concerned about the vulnerability of cyclists using the new layout. Particularly when vehicles take a left turn from West Bar Green towards Shalesmoor. There must be significant speed reduction methods employed, and education provided in order to inform motorists of the risks. We also suggest that the whole roundabout should be a different surface (both level and material) to the surrounding roads, to raise awareness of this new traffic layout. What signage will be provided, and where, as the system and routes are not self-explanatory. We also question the use of dual-way cycle paths in some areas, particularly to Tenter Street, as it appears the tendency would be for cyclists to remain on the highway rather than follow the complex route.

Do you agree with the proposals to close Alma Street and Ball Street to create an improved environment which is safer for cyclists and pedestrians?

Uncertain

How will the improvements to walking routes through Burngreave and Pitsmoor affect your choices about how you travel to and from Neepsend, Kelham and/or the City Centre?

Not sure

In the future, post Covid-19, do you see yourself walking or cycling MORE to access Neepsend, Kelham and the City Centre as a result of these proposals?

Uncertain

How do you currently travel to/from the area?

• Walk

• Cycle

• Bus

• Car

Is this likely to change after the improvements? If so, how do you think you will travel to/from the area?

• Walk

• Cycle

• Bus

• Car

Do you have any other comments on this scheme?

This response has been submitted on behalf of the Sheffield Society of Architects, who have reviewed the scheme and provide the following comments in addition to the above - - We hope that the changes to pedestrian/cycle/bus networks into the Neepsend area and beyond signal further improvements and a true extension of the Grey to Green principles into these areas. - We question the proposed road closures to the Kelham Island area, as access to the Little Kelham development appears closed to vehicles. - We must praise the Ball Street closure in improving the pedestrian environment, but if Neepsend and Kelham are to be better linked then more bridges perhaps needed. - We also praise the improvements proposed for pedestrians to the Neepsend Bridge junction, but question the lack of connectivity between this area and Kelham Island – relying upon the cycle lanes and paths already in place along Penistone road. - We recognise that many of the cycle / pedestrian crossings highlighted are already in place and praise better transparency of route proposed at these points. - The extension of SUDS is welcomed and celebrated. It is critical in maintaining the Kelham and other riverside areas that sustainable drainage solutions are further employed. - The creation of right filter lane in area C is welcomed in improving access points into the Kelham area. - The proposed pedestrian routes / rights-of-way over West Bar roundabout may cause confusion, particularly to the east side where pedestrians cross first a cycle lane, reach safety, then two lanes of vehicular traffic, again reaching safety, before reaching another cycle lane, all within a short distance. - It is felt that the removal of the Broad Lane roundabout to Tenter street may cause increased car speeds travelling in either direction, but particularly downhill towards the new Dutch roundabout. - We query the graphic showing the base of Garden Street at the junction with Tenter Street, as it appears to be suggested as pedestrianised but there is no note pertaining to it. - We suggest the potential for Area A to be extended towards the Rockingham Street junction, where a safe crossing is very much needed between the new student developments of St Vincents / the Co-op and routes into the city centre, extending the north/south connections retained through the St Vincent’s area. - Townhead Street could potentially become a busy junction for buses and cars accessing Cathedral Quarter. This traffic flow does not appear accounted for in the drawing provided. - We question whether a crossing point should be provided at the end of White Croft over Tenter Street, as there is an increased flow of pedestrians now that Hollis Croft has new residences. - There is lack of detail on the Burngreave / Pitsmoor proposals. We suggest that rather than the extended route shown, it might be better to propose a shorter but more complete route. The proposals seem a little sporadic the further out it goes and don't really promote the Grey to Green ethos - One of the huge advantages of the West Bar in it's continuity. - The visualisation of the continuous footways shows vulnerability for those using tactile paving for navigation – it is unclear from which approach the tactile dots serve the pedestrian and could cause confusion when a kerb is not available for reference.

How do you feel about this scheme?

Mostly negative

What do you like about this scheme?

• Active neighbourhood with reduced traffic

• Safer to walk and cycle

• Environmental benefits

• Better environment for walking

What do you dislike about this scheme?

• Not enough improvement for pedestrians

• Harder to park by car

What is your connection to the area?

• A walker in the area

How do you feel about our proposal for a Dutch-style roundabout at West Bar which would give priority to cyclists and pedestrians over motor vehicles?

Somewhat negative

Please explain why you feel this way.

Doubtful value for money, what's been done to assess it? Cyclists likely to be a nuisance for pedestrians (have to watch out for them all the time) and for drivers trying to get past the roundabout, e.g. having to stop too often and at the last minute for cyclists.

Do you agree with the proposals to close Alma Street and Ball Street to create an improved environment which is safer for cyclists and pedestrians?

Yes

How will the improvements to walking routes through Burngreave and Pitsmoor affect your choices about how you travel to and from Neepsend, Kelham and/or the City Centre?

No change

In the future, post Covid-19, do you see yourself walking or cycling MORE to access Neepsend, Kelham and the City Centre as a result of these proposals?

No

How do you currently travel to/from the area?

• Walk

• Bus

• Car

Do you have any other comments on this scheme?

Not convinced that planting, landscaping, sustainable drainage and any new seating or artwork will be good value for money and well maintained in future. I walked from West Bar to the Canal Basin a few days ago (past the Courts, former brewery and along Castlegate, and came back via Kelham Iasland). The planting, seating and artwork along West Bar and at Love Square (done about 4-5 years ago?) looks uncared for, litter hasn't been removed, and seats, artwork and information cards need attention for minor damage and weathering. Does anyone use Love Square? There's also some damage on one of the new seats in Castlegate. Not what was promised - for example see this from October 2014: http://lovesquare.group.shef.ac.uk/?p=284 I didn't see many cyclists and the riverside walk from Lady's Bridge to Kelham Island needs some attention (litter, graffiti on information board 2). The proposed "small pocket of landscaping" where Russell Street meets the Inner Ring Road will be tiny and far short of what's needed for the Kelham and Neepsend area that's desperately short of greenery. I've also searched the Council's website and, so far, been unable to find any reports to councillors on the extent to which the first 2014-5 scheme (West Bar) has been successful and what the annual maintenance arrangements and costs are.

How do you feel about this scheme?

Positive

What do you like about this scheme?

• Environmental benefits

• Greener streets

• Better environment for walking

• More attractive environment

• Priority for cyclists and pedestrians

• Better environment for cyclists

• More child-friendly

• Active neighbourhood with reduced traffic

• Improved cycle crossings

• Safer to walk and cycle

What do you dislike about this scheme?

• Not enough improvement for cyclists

• Not enough improvement for pedestrians

What is your connection to the area?

• I travel through the area

• I visit for leisure or a night out

• I visit friends/family who live here

How do you feel about our proposal for a Dutch-style roundabout at West Bar which would give priority to cyclists and pedestrians over motor vehicles?

Very positive

Please explain why you feel this way.

Sheffield has some good cycle routes but needs them better networked in order to make cycling viable for all, this is a step in the right direction.

Do you agree with the proposals to close Alma Street and Ball Street to create an improved environment which is safer for cyclists and pedestrians?

Yes

How will the improvements to walking routes through Burngreave and Pitsmoor affect your choices about how you travel to and from Neepsend, Kelham and/or the City Centre?

Big change

In the future, post Covid-19, do you see yourself walking or cycling MORE to access Neepsend, Kelham and the City Centre as a result of these proposals?

Yes

How do you currently travel to/from the area?

• Bus

Is this likely to change after the improvements? If so, how do you think you will travel to/from the area?

• Cycle

• Walk