The ruination of Sheffield - St Vincents

[boozy.bird 10]

You seem to be blurring several issues here.

 

Firstly the old argument of "how many student flats, facilities pubs does the city need" is pointless. Clearly, it needs more otherwise a private development company wouldn't build them. Businesses arn't stupid. They know the demands and market.

 

Secondly you compare the loss of an abandoned decaying old church which has not been substantially used by its owners for nearly 20 years to a stadium which is used to thousands of fans every other week and run as an operational business every day of the week. Why should the council pull down one of the football grounds - they are being used. St Vincents is not.

 

Thirdly, you are trying to compare council OWNED vandalised, abandoned and unfit for habitation housing blocks which quite rightly were pulled down to well maintained, privately owned and privately maintained businesses. What involvement to these buildings do the council have again? See point one. If a developer knows the market and they are being USED what right has the council sticking their beak in and saying they cannot build.

 

"it looks nice" doesnt pay the bills. Its all well and good demanding the council prop up these buildings but what is the purpose. You are certainly not telling me that, nice as it is, St Vincents has some national and vital historical purpose that must be preserved. Its a church. A very nice chuch. BUT nobody is using it. Nobody cared enough since 1998 about it, its owners seemed quite happy to sod off to their new premises and take the money from the car parking land - but now there is talk of it being pulled down, suddenly there is protest. Its rediculous.

 

If there were crowds of people by the busload pouring in to Sheffield to stan outside and look at it. If people were queing up to pay a few quid for a tour inside I might be more on your side. There isn't and therefore im not.

 

Sometimes a building can be incorporated into a new development. Some excellent examples of such are shown all over the city. Sometimes the building is useable for some other purpose and again some excellent examples are around.

 

On the other hand, sometimes its just not practical or economical for a developer and quite rightly it has to be pulled down.

 

I say again, nice to look at is not enough. Someone or something has to pay the bills and unless people are prepared to put their hand in their pocket to save their beloved St Vincents why the hell should precious council monies be spent on it. Its not a council building.

 

So in part of your statement you are saying that Sheffield council do not tear down functional building that are in use, only areas that are abandoned & vandalised. I don't think thats quite right. They managed to tear down two market area and relocate/rebuild a market on the moor that by all accounts a lot of people are unhappy with and a lot of traders found difficulty in paying their fees/rates for their pitches.

The remark about the football ground was just to point out that more people would take an interest if it were to be changed.

[Cyclone 10]

Hello Cyclone. I know of quite a few churches that have been reused as community spaces like art galleries or even turned into homes its surprising how many people would like to live in a church. For example Loxley Chapel can still be reused and turned into an home if the will is their St. Vicents can be used for many things St.Mary's church near the Moor has shown it is possible to do like rooms to rent I once attended an meeting in one.

 

Because an building is old doesn't mean it should be flattened that's no way to go image if York decided to do away with all its old buildings and replace them with nice new shiny buildings would people travel to see that ?

 

Sheffield has some great buildings from all eras listed or not it makes Sheffield what it is .

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2016 at 13:25 ----------

 

 

WOW, someone doesn't like Victorian buildings so everything that's old should be cleared away and replaced by unmemorable architecture?

 

The planning application doesn't involve "flattening" the church...

[ECCOnoob 1,030]

 

WOW, someone doesn't like Victorian buildings so everything that's old should be cleared away and replaced by unmemorable architecture?

 

Please highlight where I have said those words in my post or retract it.

 

I dont need you putting false words into my mouth.

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2016 at 17:07 ----------

 

So in part of your statement you are saying that Sheffield council do not tear down functional building that are in use, only areas that are abandoned & vandalised. I don't think thats quite right. They managed to tear down two market area and relocate/rebuild a market on the moor that by all accounts a lot of people are unhappy with and a lot of traders found difficulty in paying their fees/rates for their pitches.

The remark about the football ground was just to point out that more people would take an interest if it were to be changed.

 

The markets were not functional. They were decaying, wholly outdated, dirty and in need of urgent repair. The entire purpose of the castlegate area was changing.

 

After years of people demanding that the city retail up its game and create a more centralised modern shopping space, the moor area is the chosen site for it. The markets was to form part of that.

 

What would be the point of keeping it where it was and having the nearest shopping streets at the other end of town.

 

Traders struggling to pay their fees is quite frankly thier issue. Competition and general footfall in markets has been in decline for years. Traders could have easily dragged themsleves into the modern world and evolved. "markets" in 2016 for the most of us is far far more advanced than meat, veg and bags of broken biscuts. You want to trade in a central city market hall in the middle of the prime retail space then you pay the market rate and offer a product that people want to buy.

 

SCC is not a charity. Taxpayer monies are not infinite.

 

As for the football grounds, IF by some parallel universe SUFC abandoned Bramall Lane and left it rotting for 20 years, followed by a handful of people demanding it be maintained by the Council would you be supportive to their cause?

 

I have no problem with architecture of ANY kind and I would agree that SOME buildings (whether habitable or not) may need to be preserved due to their status. St Vincents IS NOT one of them. Its either got to be used by someone who is prepared to pay the bill or incorporated into any new developments.

 

You have failed to address the key question and seemingly let your noble cause get in the way. Why should precious and finite taxpayer monies be used to preserve a privately owned building that nobody has used for 20 years, is not fit for habitation without major repair and has no major historical interest or national importance to anyone other than a handful of people.

 

I have previously said that the building's owners have abandoned all interest. IF THEY DONT CARE WHY SHOULD THE REST OF US.

 

It appears from the plans that the actual structure will remain standing and be incorporated into whatever the new building will be. Those plans you seemingly object to by the university and their developer overlords might actually save your precious building.

 

Leaving it to rot away just like its own owners have done for the past 20 years aint gonna help much is it.

Edited November 5, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[crookedspire 10]

The planning application doesn't involve "flattening" the church...

 

I know it's not be demolished nor do I wish it so!

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2016 at 18:14 ----------

 

Please highlight where I have said those words in my post or retract it.

 

I dont need you putting false words into my mouth.

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2016 at 17:07 ----------

 

 

The markets were not functional. They were decaying, wholly outdated, dirty and in need of urgent repair. The entire purpose of the castlegate area was changing.

 

After years of people demanding that the city retail up its game and create a more centralised modern shopping space, the moor area is the chosen site for it. The markets was to form part of that.

 

What would be the point of keeping it where it was and having the nearest shopping streets at the other end of town.

 

Traders struggling to pay their fees is quite frankly thier issue. Competition and general footfall in markets has been in decline for years. Traders could have easily dragged themsleves into the modern world and evolved. "markets" in 2016 for the most of us is far far more advanced than meat, veg and bags of broken biscuts. You want to trade in a central city market hall in the middle of the prime retail space then you pay the market rate and offer a product that people want to buy.

 

SCC is not a charity. Taxpayer monies are not infinite.

 

As for the football grounds, IF by some parallel universe SUFC abandoned Bramall Lane and left it rotting for 20 years, followed by a handful of people demanding it be maintained by the Council would you be supportive to their cause?

 

I have no problem with architecture of ANY kind and I would agree that SOME buildings (whether habitable or not) may need to be preserved due to their status. St Vincents IS NOT one of them. Its either got to be used by someone who is prepared to pay the bill or incorporated into any new developments.

 

You have failed to address the key question and seemingly let your noble cause get in the way. Why should precious and finite taxpayer monies be used to preserve a privately owned building that nobody has used for 20 years, is not fit for habitation without major repair and has no major historical interest or national importance to anyone other than a handful of people.

 

I have previously said that the building's owners have abandoned all interest. IF THEY DONT CARE WHY SHOULD THE REST OF US.

 

It appears from the plans that the actual structure will remain standing and be incorporated into whatever the new building will be. Those plans you seemingly object to by the university and their developer overlords might actually save your precious building.

 

Leaving it to rot away just like its own owners have done for the past 20 years aint gonna help much is it.

 

Its the way you across with this subject you said this before on an another thread basically on the lines of new build is good . Their is people out their who do think certain buildings should be saved yes I agree some are not worth saving but each should be assessed on their merits.

Edited November 5, 2016 by crookedspire

[999tigger 10]

Yes I can see that the company developing the area are called Unite but this is for student accommodation..... Do you suppose all these facilities are for people that are from the school of hard knocks or the school of life. or maybe just maybe they are for university students.

How much student accommodation, facilities, hubs & pubs does one city need.

In todays Sheffield star yet another page concerning the development of Hollis croft and the multi story buildings in the area.

I guess you might feel differently if they wanted to redevelop the football ground, but that would never happen. Well never say never.

I am not opposed to change and redevelopment of rundown areas but please try and conserve some of the cities history.

It's not so long ago that Sheffield council were tearing down high rise blocks saying that they were not good for the Sheffield area and no here we are again building more.

 

It is a private company and not the University. theres a difference between converting and tearing down.

Unfortunately if they are willing to either buy it or work in conjunction with its owners, then you dont really get a say, because its theirs and not yours. Perhaps if the good people of sheffield till went to church , then it could have maintained its original usage.

 

If you dont wnat more students in Sheffield then stand for the Council and start opposing the universities, which are one of the few success stories for this city.

[the_bloke 17]

I do understand the need for accommodation for students given the fact Sheffield has two large universities but given the amount that's already built or been planned surly by now theirs more than enough to go round?

 

You do realise that the crumbling student digs of the 1980s and 1990s are no longer wanted by students to live in anymore, it's all about serviced self contained flats now. The students are returning to the town centre, and the nasty little terraces with woodchip and mould on the walls and 30 year old carpets are returning back to normal occupation.

[crookedspire 10]

You do realise that the crumbling student digs of the 1980s and 1990s are no longer wanted by students to live in anymore, it's all about serviced self contained flats now. The students are returning to the town centre, and the nasty little terraces with woodchip and mould on the walls and 30 year old carpets are returning back to normal occupation.

 

And soon will be the latest must have for Sheffielders.

[tzijlstra 11]

Its the way you across with this subject you said this before on an another thread basically on the lines of new build is good . Their is people out their who do think certain buildings should be saved yes I agree some are not worth saving but each should be assessed on their merits.

 

Once more - this building looks like it is being saved. By private investors, not the council.

 

What more do you want, free biscuits? Your argument is baseless and flawed from head to toe.

[crookedspire 10]

Once more - this building looks like it is being saved. By private investors, not the council.

 

What more do you want, free biscuits? Your argument is baseless and flawed from head to toe.

 

Well at least the church been saved that's what matters at the end of the day.

 

As for my argument which in reality is just opinion I'm sure you have posted some flawed and baseless views over the years

[tzijlstra 11]

Well at least the church been saved that's what matters at the end of the day.

 

As for my argument which in reality is just opinion I'm sure you have posted some flawed and baseless views over the years

 

 

 

Point them out please.

[crookedspire 10]

Point them out please.

 

How long have you got?

 

Back on topic now .I'm hoping this goes ahead this development might kick start work on the Queens Hotel on Scotland Street I noticed that work has started around that area further down on Scotland Street .A lot of Chinese students live in this area and have a shop their Iv been in it.

[lazarus 68]

There's more to this city than students, I for one are sick and tired of pandering to student needs, what about the people who would love new accomodation but are stuck in substandard homes.