Eddie odd legs
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2019
- Messages
- 97
- Reaction score
- 161
As someone with mobility limitations I was dismayed to find Harwood St closed off for the Coventry game due to a decision by SUFC to park the visitors coaches there. I enquired with Jon Helliwell, Fan Engagement Lead & Disability Liaison Officer, and got a very prompt response to explain that Coventry had advised United of the number of coaches they anticipated coming to Sheffield ; consequently shutting Harwood St to accommodate them. Also that in future this will be used again if the visitors advise similar large numbers of coaches. Also that a facility called APACOA is provided opposite the petrol station on Bramall Lane at £5.00 per match'
I tried Standall St (the next street down) & found some bloke in a yellow tabard putting unofficial looking red cones down & apparently telling people not to park there. Unfortunately this meant that I was unable to attend the match (I'm a season ticket holder). I replied to Jon & asked that a provision be considered, in any "inclusivity plans", for a facility to store mobility scooters / wheelchairs thereby allowing me (& others similarly affected) to access the ground without worrying about parking as the distance from the ground would not be that important.
Two questions however remain unresolved 1) why was Standall St not used first, as this is nearer the "away" exits & longer than Harwood St & therefore able to accommodate more coaches & 2) who decided that this could be done SUFC or South Yorkshire Police - particularly the attempt to restrict parking in Standall St. I realise this could look like a case of NIMBY but think that a facility inside each set of turnstiles - no responsibility for SUFC for security etc. - would allow more people to access BTDBL.
The "closure" of Standall St looked very dodgy to me. I was fortunate enough about 2 seasons ago to "beat" the closure of Harwood St & witnessed an argument between the SUFC steward & a very irate motorist who said that street closures haveto be advised well in advance & via official channels (street notices etc). As far as I am aware no such notices were posted.
Anybody out there with a view?
I tried Standall St (the next street down) & found some bloke in a yellow tabard putting unofficial looking red cones down & apparently telling people not to park there. Unfortunately this meant that I was unable to attend the match (I'm a season ticket holder). I replied to Jon & asked that a provision be considered, in any "inclusivity plans", for a facility to store mobility scooters / wheelchairs thereby allowing me (& others similarly affected) to access the ground without worrying about parking as the distance from the ground would not be that important.
Two questions however remain unresolved 1) why was Standall St not used first, as this is nearer the "away" exits & longer than Harwood St & therefore able to accommodate more coaches & 2) who decided that this could be done SUFC or South Yorkshire Police - particularly the attempt to restrict parking in Standall St. I realise this could look like a case of NIMBY but think that a facility inside each set of turnstiles - no responsibility for SUFC for security etc. - would allow more people to access BTDBL.
The "closure" of Standall St looked very dodgy to me. I was fortunate enough about 2 seasons ago to "beat" the closure of Harwood St & witnessed an argument between the SUFC steward & a very irate motorist who said that street closures haveto be advised well in advance & via official channels (street notices etc). As far as I am aware no such notices were posted.
Anybody out there with a view?
