IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Help me stop the Pavilion
Andy Capp
post Mar 10 2011, 07:00 PM
Post #81


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



Yes, perhaps in this age of austerity it should just be give it the big up and under and we could try and catch it later? Ditto the roving libraries?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Mar 10 2011, 07:05 PM
Post #82


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Mar 10 2011, 07:00 PM) *
Ditto the roving libraries?

I do have a lot of time for the library service. I think the roving libraries do a fantastic job of making books available to the less mobile and I don't think it's easy to appreciate the importance of that until it's you.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Mar 10 2011, 07:08 PM
Post #83


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Mar 10 2011, 07:05 PM) *
I do have a lot of time for the library service. I think the roving libraries do a fantastic job of making books available to the less mobile and I don't think it's easy to appreciate the importance of that until it's you.

Of course, but it is truly used as such. Should this service not be periodically assessed, especially as burgeoning Internet access is insidiously putting everyone out of work already?

This is the thing with cut backs. They usually land on the things that have a high cost per head. There is rarely a benign cut back.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Mar 10 2011, 07:19 PM
Post #84


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,025
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (blackdog @ Mar 10 2011, 06:57 PM) *
The swimming pools would remain - as per WBC's ideas about the Speenhamland School move.

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...?articleID=7649
I can understand why a school would have a swimming pool but why would an art facility need a swimming pool?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Mar 10 2011, 07:34 PM
Post #85


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (user23 @ Mar 10 2011, 07:19 PM) *
I can understand why a school would have a swimming pool but why would an art facility need a swimming pool?

Aah, being deliberately obtuse today are you?

The swimming pools would remain as public swimming pools - located alongside the arts facility. Just as they would have been public pools next door to the relocated Speenhamland School.

Mind you, I'm sure there are artists out there that would love to use a couple of swimming pools in their next masterwork.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Mar 10 2011, 07:38 PM
Post #86


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (blackdog @ Mar 10 2011, 07:34 PM) *
Aah, being deliberately obtuse today are you?

The swimming pools would remain as public swimming pools - located alongside the arts facility. Just as they would have been public pools next door to the relocated Speenhamland School.

Mind you, I'm sure there are artists out there that would love to use a couple of swimming pools in their next masterwork.

A modern day Rubens?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Mar 10 2011, 07:45 PM
Post #87


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Mar 10 2011, 06:58 PM) *
Just a quick question? How much use would this arts center get used do you think? Is there a high demand for this?

Interesting question - would it get more use than a youth centre or a day centre?

However, the idea for the pavilion is that it would not involve taxpayer money - it would be built using grants from Greenham Trust, the Lottery etc and running costs would be met mainly by Greenham Trust (replacing the funding they current provide to NGA) and income from the cafe (ie the rental from whoever runs it). So it shouldn't really be considered in the same way as the current WBC cuts as it will be a shining example of Big Society in action. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Mar 10 2011, 07:46 PM
Post #88


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,025
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (blackdog @ Mar 10 2011, 07:34 PM) *
The swimming pools would remain as public swimming pools - located alongside the arts facility. Just as they would have been public pools next door to the relocated Speenhamland School.
I would have thought it would have operated more like Kennet does than being a public facility all the time.

I don't imagine sn art facility with a swimming pool would work too well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Mar 10 2011, 07:52 PM
Post #89


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (blackdog @ Mar 10 2011, 07:45 PM) *
Interesting question - would it get more use than a youth centre or a day centre?

However, the idea for the pavilion is that it would not involve taxpayer money - it would be built using grants from Greenham Trust, the Lottery etc and running costs would be met mainly by Greenham Trust (replacing the funding they current provide to NGA) and income from the cafe (ie the rental from whoever runs it). So it shouldn't really be considered in the same way as the current WBC cuts as it will be a shining example of Big Society in action. wink.gif


So in effect we are donating part of Victoria Park to a non council enterprise? wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Mar 11 2011, 07:46 AM
Post #90


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (user23 @ Mar 10 2011, 07:46 PM) *
I would have thought it would have operated more like Kennet does than being a public facility all the time.

I guess that would be an option - though two large pools seems overkill for a small primary school. However, it was not what was being considered by WBC

As you evidently couldn't be bothered to read the article I linked to here are a couple of pertinent quotations:
The council is also discussing scaling back the leisure centre to just its two swimming pools, while gyms, sports halls and fitness studios could be moved to Newbury’s secondary schools.
and
The councillor responsible for leisure centres, Pamela Bale (Con, Pangbourne) said that her department was “unaware” of plans to move the school to Northcroft, but admitted downsizing the leisure centre was being considered.

No suggestion that the pools would cease to be a public facility - clearly they were looking at downsizing the leisure centre to the pools alone.

QUOTE (user23 @ Mar 10 2011, 07:46 PM) *
I don't imagine sn art facility with a swimming pool would work too well.

No, I don't suppose it would. But my suggestion was for the swimming pools to be separate from the arts facility, albeit in adjoining buildings if it is impractical to separate them.

If the leisure centre does have a large amount of redundant space it would make some sense 'gyms, sports halls and fitness studios' sound like ideal spaces for conversion to a new home for New Greenham Arts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 3 4 5
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th April 2024 - 12:11 AM