Shipping Containers Coming To Fargate

[nikki-red]

3 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

I thought the entire funding for it came from a Government grant? Sure it’s been mentioned numerous times.

“In June, the budget goes up to £446,000 due to ‘additional level of detail and costs increase on materials’ ‘which is fully funded from the Get Britain Building Fund’.”

From the link in #721 

[HeHasRisen]

Indeed.

 

Was a nice rant though, sure he feels better for it.

[Baron99]

8 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

It has.  It was well publicised when the Yorkshire Water issue first came out that the grant was extended.  It has also been well publicised numerous times that regeneration of entire fargate is being heavily funded by 15m + government grants to redevelop high streets.  Grants which I'm sure the same doom mongers would be whining about if the council didn't take them up

 

But as we know, some people don't bother letting facts get in the way of a good anti-council rant.

So we've basically wasted £150,000 of a Govt grant then.  And this from a Lab run council who sat they get nothing from a Tory Govt. 

 

But at the end of the day, nobody is putting their hands up & taking ownership & responsibility for this financial wastage. 

[ECCOnoob]

18 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

So we've basically wasted £150,000 of a Govt grant then.  And this from a Lab run council who sat they get nothing from a Tory Govt. 

 

But at the end of the day, nobody is putting their hands up & taking ownership & responsibility for this financial wastage. 

What are you wanting? A parade through the middle of the street with the locals shouting shame?  Someone's head on a block?  Someone to be jailed?

 

Somebody did take ownership and responsibility. They immediately consulted, reached an agreement and amended the plans.

 

In any major project, plans change, budgets change. There are some things that can only arise later on in the development such as in this specific case where Yorkshire Water were not legally a statutory consultant because the structure was temporary.  However, as soon as the issue arose, the council immediately actioned it. 

 

Just what more do you expect to happen.  The council was working within the exact legislation they are supposed to.  They didn't have a crystal ball to predict the concern that Yorkshire Water were going to be raising.  As soon as the concern was raised, the council immediately actioned and changed the plans.  Its hardly some great demonstration of gross negligence and wastage.  They are plenty of other things you can pick to demonstrate that.

 

Grow up and realise that not every single thing has a single point of failure. Not every single thing can be immediately predicted and prepared for.  Not every single thing has a single point to place blame.

Edited December 4, 2022 by ECCOnoob

[Baron99]

20 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

What are you wanting? A parade through the middle of the street with the locals shouting shame?  Someone's head on a block?  Someone to be jailed?

 

Somebody did take ownership and responsibility. They immediately consulted, reached an agreement and amended the plans.

 

In any major project, plans change, budgets change. There are some things that can only arise later on in the development such as in this specific case where Yorkshire Water were not legally a statutory consultant because the structure was temporary.  However, as soon as the issue arose, the council immediately actioned it. 

 

Just what more do you expect to happen.  The council was working within the exact legislation they are supposed to.  They didn't have a crystal ball to predict the concern that Yorkshire Water were going to be raising.  As soon as the concern was raised, the council immediately actioned and changed the plans.  Its hardly some great demonstration of gross negligence and wastage.  They are plenty of other things you can pick to demonstrate that.

 

Grow up and realise that not every single thing has a single point of failure. Not every single thing can be immediately predicted and prepared for.  Not every single thing has a single point to place blame.

My bold. 

 

Who?  Which individual?

 

Still wasted £150,000 of a tax payer:s funded Govt grant at the end of the day which will be remembered both by us in Sheffield & individuals in Whitehall.

Edited December 4, 2022 by Baron99

[ECCOnoob]

34 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

My bold. 

 

Who?  Which individual?

 

Still wasted £150,000 of a tax payer:s funded Govt grant at the end of the day which will be remembered both by us in Sheffield & individuals in Whitehall.

In this instance the Council and Yorkshire water. Why don't you get what I'm trying to explain to you. There isn't a single point of failure. There isn't one person to point the blame at.

 

The council was under no obligation to consult with Yorkshire Water because the development they were building was a temporary structure. That was the law.  The council are not mind readers so why on an earth would they have any indication that Yorkshire Water might have a concern over their underground equipment.  As soon as Yorkshire water raised their concerns, the council acted.  Yorkshire Water themselves were directly involved in the negotiations and the problem was sorted with a redraft and slight adjustment to the plans.

 

It wasn't a 'waste of the grant'. Like I said, the budget was an estimate and the figure of the grant was adjusted to include allowance to resolve the previously unknown issue. 

 

What do you mean it will be "remembered by us".  Don't include me in that. If you mean remembered by morons who don't have a single clue how major projects work and desperately try finding irrelevant and unreasonable things to complain about the council with, then knock yourself out. 

Edited December 4, 2022 by ECCOnoob

[Resident]

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

It has.  It was well publicised when the Yorkshire Water issue first came out that the grant was extended.  It has also been well publicised numerous times that regeneration of entire fargate is being heavily funded by 15m + government grants to redevelop high streets.  Grants which I'm sure the same doom mongers would be whining about if the council didn't take them up

 

But as we know, some people don't bother letting facts get in the way of a good anti-council rant.

Tell me, where does the Government get the money it uses for these grant? 

Additionally how does a few shipping containers situated for mere weeks, next to shop units that have lain empty for months before the containers were planned, 'redevelop' the hugh street? 

[Baron99]

O

41 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

In this instance the Council and Yorkshire water. Why don't you get what I'm trying to explain to you. There isn't a single point of failure. There isn't one person to point the blame at.

 

The council was under no obligation to consult with Yorkshire Water because the development they were building was a temporary structure. That was the law.  The council are not mind readers so why on an earth would they have any indication that Yorkshire Water might have a concern over their underground equipment.  As soon as Yorkshire water raised their concerns, the council acted.  Yorkshire Water themselves were directly involved in the negotiations and the problem was sorted with a redraft and slight adjustment to the plans.

 

It wasn't a 'waste of the grant'. Like I said, the budget was an estimate and the figure of the grant was adjusted to include allowance to resolve the previously unknown issue. 

 

What do you mean it will be "remembered by us".  Don't include me in that. If you mean remembered by morons who don't have a single clue how major projects work and desperately try finding irrelevant and unreasonable things to complain about the council with, then knock yourself out. 

My bold. 

 

Oh but there is always someone responsible ultimately.  We never even see our highly paid Chief Executive or council leader putting their heads above the parapet on such occasions. 

 

You & I aren't privvy to such things but sure as eggs are eggs, someone somewhere, will be having their backside kicked over this. 

 

And what?  SCC don't employ structural engineers or have people who deal with the utility companies on a daily basis & don't think to mention to them that they are about to position a few hundred-weight of metal a few feet above water, gas & electrics? 

 

At the end of the day, not your job to defend SCC for such a financial waste & debacle. That's the highly paid job of Kate Josephs & or Terry Fox. 

Edited December 4, 2022 by Baron99

[fools]

34 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

Why don't you get what I'm trying to explain to you. There isn't a single point of failure. There isn't one person to point the blame at.

Oh but there is, anyone with a brain would have worked out it was a silly idea before a penny was spent

 

The source of the money is a diversion, it all comes from us

[ECCOnoob]

1 hour ago, Resident said:

Tell me, where does the Government get the money it uses for these grant? 

Additionally how does a few shipping containers situated for mere weeks, next to shop units that have lain empty for months before the containers were planned, 'redevelop' the hugh street?

 

Jesus Christ.  The container park was, is and always will be a temporary attraction meant to fill some space and bring a little bit more footfall to an area which was slowing down. It's entire purpose was only ever to be a stop gap until the more substantial and permanent redevelopment work commences next year., With the containers themselves moving to another location in the city so they will remain being utilised.  

 

As for these stupid remarks about empty shop units, how many more times do we have to explain,  the council do not own the empty buildings so they cannot on a whim just shove something in it.  They don't have power to enforce a business to move into somebody else's property.  Those empty buildings are already earmarked if not ongoing redevelopment right now. There is going to be several residential developments being built on fargate, including current proposals to convert the entire bottom corner fronting Church Street into multiple apartment floors.  They're going to be building a large event, art and community space. There are blocks earmarked for leisure and restaurant space.  There's going to be entirely new paving and street furniture and greenery all being funded by the major grant it bid and successfully was awarded from Central government.

 

If you bother to read any of the masses of material out there it explains all about it.  Cities are changing. They are not just some glorified shopping mall. If they didn't apply for all these grants, how long would it be before you'd be on here moaning about us not keeping up with our  neighbours.  Complaining about how our 'incompetent' council failed to take these grants and development opportunities like other cities did. 

 

Attitudes like yours are absolute fodder for things like Yorkshire live and the Sheffield Star. All we need is a sad face picture and we've got the set. 

Edited December 4, 2022 by ECCOnoob