Jump to content

Shipping Containers Coming To Fargate


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

O

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. 

I'm not defending them. I'm giving you the practical reality of big infrastructive projects from someone who has experience from a legal and regulatory side of how things work involving civil liabilities, damage recovery and institutional failures.

 

This sort of thing happens all the time and there is not always a single point of failure or single person to blame.  Previously unknowns are always being discovered on things. Budgets are always being amended or extended or breached. Nobody can predict absolutely everything all the time.

 

Of course there are levels of consultation and due diligence and planning. But this particular structure was not digging down to create great vast foundations. It is not a massive building which is going to be in permanent situ. If the council complied with the set regulations then that's the end of conversation.  For all I know, the council may have well been within their right to disregard the speculative concerns raised from Yorkshire Water and maybe had no obligation to change their plans whatsoever. However, for whatever reason they chosen to take such concerns on board, negotiate a compromise and  make adjustment to their design. The Grant was extended to cover the cost of this and problem solved.

 

I've really can't get my head round the drama with this no has anyone categorically demonstrated that it's the council themselves who are completely and unequivocally at fault.

Edited by ECCOnoob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

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. 

Did you forget to log in as Planner1? 

The council could have negotiated with the owners, even offered a financial incentive, costing far less than 450k 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HeHasRisen said:

Meanwhile in the real world, one of the retailers seems to be doing alright

 

Screenshot-20221206-081115-Facebook.jpg

:hihi:

And once again Mr Risen, you're taken in by what you've read on Twitter!


"We did more Raclette fries than we've ever done!" could mean they've just managed to sell their first portion...


... probably confirmed by their "we've got plenty of wheels of Raclette in the fridges" (presumably that they need to shift fast as it's now approaching it's sell by date?) :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Didnt think your beef here was with the retailers, Mr Bloke?

 

Thats not a Twitter screenshot either, btw. Surely someone as savvy with a computer as you knows that.

:hihi:

It's not, Mr Risen!


It's with people like yourself who believe ANYTHING they're told without using their own grey cells to try to understand WHY they're being told what they are!

 

And I've no idea where that screenshot is from... I was just guessing that's where you found it.

 

But like MOST sensible folk, I've never used it myself! :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.