budgets City Region

Sustainable Transport Money (£450,000) on Road Widening: Doncaster’s Herten Way 2 Way Scheme

The Sheffield City Region Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme is funding car parks and cycle lanes where parking is allowed. Previously the Local Sustainable Transport Fund paid to widen a trunk road roundabout. The latest questionable scheme is in Doncaster and is widening a road to convert it from 1 way to 2 way with the aim of alleviating motor traffic congestion and encouraging new retail shops to be built.

The proposed scheme will convert Herten Way into a two way road which will help to alleviate traffic congestion issues with ASDA in particular but also make an existing piece of development land more attractive for investment as access will be greatly improved.

From the Scheme brief document


The schemes general arrangement drawing is available here.

The original design included an unsegregated shared use footway/cycleway, however even that was dropped from the design before the scheme was built. The shared use footway was the token sustainable transport part of this scheme, but even that minimal cycling facility was never built.

Following consultation with the Council’s cycling Transport Planners it has been decided that the length of footway along Herten Way will not be shared with cyclists at this time. Tactile provision will be amended accordingly. At such time as further development occurs in the area the cycling facilities will be reconsidered.

From the Road Safety Audit

A new toucan crossing was built, at a cost of probably no more than £100,000 (guestimated), but the signals were required to facilitate the new turning movement at the junction because traffic is now 2 way, the junction was previously unsignalled.

Questions must be asked about the governance of the Sheffield City Region Sustainable Transport Exemplar Programme given some of the schemes that it is funding. This scheme cost £450,000 in total. Funds like these should go to creating well designed cycle infrastructure, not shared use pavements, not road widening, and not converting 1 way roads to 2 way at an out of town retail park.

The road safety audit provides a good insight into how the scheme has been designed.

The raised plateaux is intended as an aid to pedestrians crossing the carriageway rather than a traffic calming feature such as a road hump. As such the approach and exit ramps will be installed with a shallow gradient <1:20. The ramp areas will also be treated with red coloured surfacing and a set of warning triangles which the Designers feels would be sufficient warning to approaching drivers and would highlight the presence of pedestrians.

This is the freedom of information request where this information is from.

4 replies on “Sustainable Transport Money (£450,000) on Road Widening: Doncaster’s Herten Way 2 Way Scheme”

There doesn’t seem to be any oversight of what the STEP money is being spent on. Is this because it is done through the Sheffield City Region which is even less accountable than the local authorities? Who should be scrutinising this?

There is likely a governance procedure for STEP funds. I’m looking for it but can’t find it because
1) The search tool is broken:
2) The website blocks google from indexing it:

What was that you were saying about accountability? Without reading through the governance documents it’s not clear what to do.

There is an overview and scrutiny committee, perhaps they could help?

Public expectations are embodied in what funding is intended to do / achieve. Highway authorities should not abuse the trust placed in them by the Government or public. When clear abuse of fnding occurs, an evidenced complaint should be made to the authority which, upon reaching unresolved stage 2 should be submitted for investigation to the Ombudsman. Authorities need to be shown that they cannot get away with this type of poor performance.

In ths case, funding for sustainable transport has been used to deliver the exact opposite. Conditions for active travel may actually worsen as a result of DMRB compliant designs which are inappropriate where walking and cycling are to be facilitated. The apparently deliberate decision to make cycling an afterthought is, to my mind, an abuse of funding and perhaps even fraudulent.

Leave a Reply