2013-09-16 JP Written and published on http://ecclesfield.axiomatic.biz
2013-09-21 JP Submitted to http://www.sheffieldmotorwayservices.co.uk/share-your-thoughts/
I realise that most of the following suggestions below will turn out to be naïve, and all of them are incomplete and in need of a proper cost/benefit analysis. However, I am concerned at the loss of an irreplaceable resource, very close to where I live and walk. I have therefore set out below, some thoughts in the hope that if there is to be loss, the developers can produce something better than the standard, rather anonymous, off-motorway service station.
1. Swap the CAR PARKING and the FACILITIES / HOTEL to bring the main building South so that it becomes visible to Northerly traffic in time to turn off the Motorway. The next services to the North, is almost invisible, and I often miss it. In addition, although the land is not flat so views would have to be constructed to prove it, I suspect that placing the main building at the edge of the site would make the site appear larger, with more of its facilities visible to visitors.
2. Swapping the CAR PARKING and FACILITY/HOTEL would also allow a single ring-road to serve the whole site. This would avoid drivers having to make a non-obvious decision about which way to fork. It would also reduce the area (and therefore the capital and maintenance costs), lost to roads, and improve the appearance of the site. I have occasionally ended up in the wrong car park (which is embarrassing) or prematurely ended up in the petrol station (which looses custom for other parts of the site) at existing motorway services.
3. Aligning the longer sides of the FACILITY / HOTEL with the edges of the site would make it possible to arrange for more of the windows of the restaurant and hotel to look out over the woodland, and open spaces. In addition, the resulting side-on aspect might even make the services building more visible from the M1 at the point north going traffic needs to turn off the M1; and also from HS2, thereby ensuring that the services get known and used quicker.
4. Move the Southerly part of the site some 20 metres to the West so that all the remaining woodland is joined and species extinction is less likely.
5. The green area marked on the map between the FUEL STATION and HGV/LGV PARKING, would seem difficult to enjoy. In its planned position, all it seems to do is to increase the distance drivers need to travel in order to buy fuel. Perhaps it would be more beneficial in sight of the FACILITY / HOTEL, and placed outside the perimeter road where it would not increase distance travelled, and would protect wildlife by buffering the remaining natural woodland.
1. It looks from the map as if the two approach roads to the FUEL STATION take up a lot of space. Is it not possible to reduce or accommodates queues using less land? E.g. using space within the HGV area, or providing a slip road adjacent to the existing roadway, or by increasing the number or speed of the fuel pumps.
6. Drivers already know and use the lay-by on the A629 to the West of J35. Keeping and signposting the existing footpath from the lay into the Service Station should increase visitor numbers and sales from people who primarily want to stop and walk or picnic. If there are security concerns, then I am sure that an extension of the service station’s camera system to the lay by would be welcomed.
7. Allowing pedestrian access to the service station from the south would allow employees to walk from Jumble Lane, or the footbridge across the M1 to Thorpe Hesley, thereby releasing car parking spaces that can be used by paying visitors.
8. Consider whether a mammal pipe under the entrance to the service station from the roundabout would be useful. ( http://www.cresswell1.plus.com/news1.htm )