Playing fields at High Storrs closed to the public

[gnvqsos 10]

Ownership by SCC or a school is NOT 'public' in the sense of unlimited access for everyone.

 

I realise this as it forms the basis of this discussion.Thanks for emphasising the obvious.My point is that one public user should not exclude others when not needing it themslves.

[Jeffrey Shaw 93]

But mine was that your assumption is incorrect: 'needing it themselves' is irrelevant in terms of land ownership/usage.

[growup 10]

I realise this as it forms the basis of this discussion.Thanks for emphasising the obvious.My point is that one public user should not exclude others when not needing it themslves.

 

What if it costs the original user money. Schools have a limited budget and have to pay caretakers to ensure the field is clean and safe for school use. This involves clearing rubbish and dog/fox muck up. Obviously they can't do anything about the fox muck but can limit the amount of litter and dog muck by keeping the general public off the field. I would prefer schools spent money on educating children rather than clean up mess!!!

[gnvqsos 10]

What if it costs the original user money. Schools have a limited budget and have to pay caretakers to ensure the field is clean and safe for school use. This involves clearing rubbish and dog/fox muck up. Obviously they can't do anything about the fox muck but can limit the amount of litter and dog muck by keeping the general public off the field. I would prefer schools spent money on educating children rather than clean up mess!!!

 

Where do you live?Fox muck?This is Sheffield not Quorn!Caretakers?They are site supervisors.Have you just finished watching Tom Browns Schoolboys?

[gnvqsos 10]

But mine was that your assumption is incorrect: 'needing it themselves' is irrelevant in terms of land ownership/usage.

 

As usual what is legal may not be moral:hihi:

[Frenchie9920 10]

I live near High Storrs School and can confirm there was a lot of problems with dog walkers and vandalism - the kids vandalise our houses and property, so they would have thought nothing of vandalising the school out of hours.

 

I think the main reason it was closed off though was because of various football teams using the field at weekends without permission. By the time it stopped there were about 3 or 4 different leagues playing on Saturdays and Sundays. This wasn't a problem to anyone, but the parking was. Ringinglow Road used to be full of cars on both sides, meaning only one lane of traffic could move at any one time. This caused a nightmare with the buses and traffic jams and I think the bus companies complained to the Council about it. Plus the usual problems of people's driveways being blocked etc. It just got too much.

[growup 10]

Where do you live?Fox muck?This is Sheffield not Quorn!Caretakers?They are site supervisors.Have you just finished watching Tom Browns Schoolboys?

 

There are many names for caretakers now but it doesn't change what I was saying. I don't live near high storrs so don't know if there is fox muck there but know there are a lot of foxes around me (including some living at the bottom of my garden) and know limpsfield school field is covered in fox muck. There is such a thing as urban foxes!!!

[gnvqsos 10]

There are many names for caretakers now but it doesn't change what I was saying. I don't live near high storrs so don't know if there is fox muck there but know there are a lot of foxes around me (including some living at the bottom of my garden) and know limpsfield school field is covered in fox muck. There is such a thing as urban foxes!!!

 

I know -a lot of them drink in Hillsborough at the weekend.I would be worried if I thought a school was covered in fox faeces,and not its fields.

[stressconsul 10]

What a pity that the relatively small costs of keeping a site in good order are seen as more important than the health of our children. If cost is the main consideration do people really believe that in ten years the obesity crisis that we are now incubating is going to be cost neutral? A country full of obese twenty-somethings sprawled on their broken sofas, unable to work, struggling to control the remote with their bloated fingers, in the queue for gastric band surgery, which will have to be performed on extra large operating tables - now that is going to be expensive.

[Goon 10]

What a pity that the relatively small costs of keeping a site in good order are seen as more important than the health of our children. If cost is the main consideration do people really believe that in ten years the obesity crisis that we are now incubating is going to be cost neutral? A country full of obese twenty-somethings sprawled on their broken sofas, unable to work, struggling to control the remote with their bloated fingers, in the queue for gastric band surgery, which will have to be performed on extra large operating tables - now that is going to be expensive.

 

 

Wow! You're quite the drama queen aren't you. So a private field not being made available to the public is responsible for the decline of childrens health. It's been pointed out on here that there are plenty of fields in the vicinity for our precious children to use if they want to.

 

It really wouldn't surprise me though if in a few years time some fat waster with major health issues used the unavailability of a private field as an excuse to sit on their fat arse shovelling pizza and cake into their gaping maw.

[Shef_Fitness 10]

Seems odd that we can fund loss making schemes around sport (Activity Sheffield for example), yet we can't pay a caretaker an extra 2 hours wages to clean the fields each week (or even 3 or 4 extra hours each week).

 

We can fund many wierd and wonderful weight loss clubs for kids, again all fully funded which make huge losses and fail miserably.

 

Get the playing fields open so the local kids can have a kickabout, or generally play among themselves. If a local ex footballer wants to make a bit extra cash by running football lessons on the field, then what does it matter? charge him a bit of rent to cover the upkeep.

 

After all, as a country we are serious about dealing with the obesity epedemic? or are we?

 

I believe many peoples livelihoods (well paid livelihoods) would be severely damaged if we had a society similar to that in the 1980s where kids did run around and play. Imagine all the obesity experts losing their jobs?

[alchresearch 215]

Seems odd that we can fund loss making schemes around sport (Activity Sheffield for example), yet we can't pay a caretaker an extra 2 hours wages to clean the fields each week (or even 3 or 4 extra hours each week).

 

There are far more costs than just paying a caretaker for a few hours. Insurance, for one.