Have just seen the following comment on Sheffieldbase.com regards the University's Residence Strategy. Seems to be much anger over the poor consultation and badly thought plans. Any of your views on the whole thing??

The University’s one-handedness in its Residences Strategy will only backfire on students
George Woods


The controversial plans The recent complaint lodged by the Broomhill Neighbourhood Action Group is yet another reflection of our University’s aversion to consultation. Or to put it more correctly, consultation to which it intends on listening.

The Residences Strategy involves the complete remodelling of the Endcliffe site, at the cost of many millions of pounds, and has already courted controversy.

The invitation to private contractors to invest and run the new Halls complex will leave generations of future Sheffield students out of pocket, and signal to the private landlords in the area that rents can rise without serious resistance.

Now, the position taken by the local residents’ association is another spanner in the works, and exposes the University’s complete lack of interest in the opinions of the area’s neighbours, who are justified in feeling that they weren’t listened to during the ‘process’.

"What was the point of the public consultation if no notice at all has been taken of the comments?” one member of the group asked.

A good question. Sadly, the university’s failings on consultation do not end there; they also extend to totally ignoring the feedback they sought from current students in focus groups. I know this to be very true, as I was sat in one such focus group, a year or so ago.

Time and again, we unanimously stressed to the market research assistant that providing low cost, budget accommodation would be far more appreciated to debt-riddled students than state-of-the-art facilities, especially once top-up fees are introduced.



Are students going to pay the price? Of course, the assistant had another agenda, and pushed to convince us that actually, what all students wanted were highly priced en-suite rooms with all the trimmings.

Undoubtedly, that is what a minority of better-off students will want, we said, and they should be catered for. But not at the expense of all students, who already face overcharging for their meals and compulsory fees for internet connections that many do not use.

It is no surprise to find that we, like the local inhabitants of Broomhill, were ignored. The university has shown time and again that the interests of hard-up students are not a priority.

And so, to return to the grievances of the Broomhill Neighbourhood Action Group. Their worry that the planned complex will lead to a ‘deterioration of the quality of life’ in the area seems a little over-the-top, but the concerns that the appearance of the building will make the site stick out like a sore thumb are well-founded, not to mention the environmental damage that will be incurred.

It seems probable that the scheme will heighten tension between students and locals and lead to a decrease in community spirit.

But for the university, all is well if they can ride out these minor storms. They will have offloaded the upkeep of a huge proportion of their student accommodation onto unscrupulous, incompetent private firms.

This, of course, is on top of their intention to rid themselves of the other university-owned housing which are vital for catering to students who do not wish to live in a giant white village.

That said, the new facilities will look great on the front of the Prospectus.