Ty Pawb Another Consultants report
-
Posts
-
Another consultant’s report ‘Culture Runner’ to inform the Council of Ty Pawb problems that many on this forum over the years have been saying.
In my opinion, Councillors did not scrutinize this project in the depth needed at the onset. I believe the project being led by the Lead Member did not fully understand it either.
When the Ty Pawb project was first brought to scrutiny, the Lead Member report stated there would be a loss of 14 stalls from the then Peoples Market set up of 55 stalls. I emailed the Lead Member to point out that I believed these figures somehow did not add up. The reply I received was that we will have to wait and see.
‘We will have to wait and see’ still remains the plan. Maybe the Scrutiny meeting today will ask more searching questions? Or will the Council tear it up as they did with other Ty Pawb Consultants Reports?
The Council having to have yet another report shows they have really lost control of this project- getting new reports all the time from different consultants does not change the overall underlying issues. Perhaps Cllr Hugh Joines who has been the Lead on this should reflect on the answer he gave Cllr Malcolm King right at the very beginning when he asked why are the Council taking the lead and the response from HJ was “It is normal for these projects to be set up by Councils and then get the community o run afterwards.” Really.
What is being shown is that the original plan was never fit for purpose and that it was a Council vanity project designed to get maximum grant income to do up a building that was in a very poor condition.
The original plan showed that there was going to be a breakeven position and not be a burden on the ratepayers of Wrexham. What will happen when the grant funders pull out as they don’t want to support year on year.
What happened to the original £250k that was supposed to go to improve the multistorey car park to get a Quality Mark?
How many of the stalls are either free or low rental as they are occupied by charities /community benefit organisation?
How come the latest report has now identified the problems with high energy consumption – this was supposed to be a state of the art building yet clearly has significant problems that are pusing up costs.Derek, I agree Council vanity project sums it up, It is the Regeneration Department that in my opinion seem to be failing the City. The Butchers/General Market refurbishment still trundles on, way behind anticipated starting dates.
It came across to me very clear from yesterday’s meeting, Plaid and Labour councillors were the only parties asking questions. The Regeneration Department Report not fit for purpose was a joke.
The Consultants Report pointing out the possible need for a Dedicated Executive Director consider the present set up as being not dedicated?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
