About 9 months ago the Vale of White Horse District Council (VWHDC) moved a lot of their staff out of Abbey House in Abingdon to offices at Crowmarsh Gifford – home of South Oxfordshire District Council, as part of a closer collaboration between the councils to save money. The space they released at Abbey House was then used by Oxfordshire County Council.
It was a shock to see those joint offices in flames on 15th Jan 2015. Two other buildings were also set alight, and a local resident arrested for arson.
Nobody appears to have been hurt.
Meanwhile, there were many comings and goings at Abbey House in Abingdon. An early police presence made people speculate that it too might come under attack.
Core people were moved to ‘hot desks’ at Abbey House. And we were told:
- Services such as recycling and leisure run by external contractors would carry on as usual
- Council Tax payments could be paid as usual.
- Emergency services such as people made homeless, or dangerous structures needing inspecting, could contact the council number – the Abbey House number.
Most council employees were asked to work from home until desks were available.
Residents who wanted to contact the council, with non urgent matters, were asked to delay for a few days until people and systems are back in place.
The sale by VWHDC of Old Abbey House (next door) was delayed because of a community challenge a few months ago. The delay was to give time for bids for community use to come forward. The Vale’s empty properties, like this, may get used again, bringing more Council employees back to Abingdon for a while.
Seems like a no-brainer to move as many staff as possible to Old Abbey House – Crowmarsh offices are going to be out of action for months, maybe a year! This has to be cheaper than trying to rent space elsewhere! David Buckle is conspicuous in his silence – I get that they are busy, but a statement would have been what I expected from a true leader…
Hope the computer server was backed up off site – then they could be up & running fairly quickly – if not, this could be a major problem (let’s hope financial cuts haven’t been too deep!) Guess this will become apparent in time.
And although the weather played a part – I feel that open plan offices are a big part of the severity of this fire – walls help slow the spread of fire – without them, well it’s open season!
So I wish all the staff for both Councils luck with process, the management have a lot to do – will test how good they really are!
Glad no one was hurt – fire service are amazing – well done to them.
That’s some way to hide the Old Gaol deal 🙂
Certainly is Colin – still wondering where the social housing for the old goal is??
The Old Gaol deal required Cranborne to build Social Housing on the Harcourt Way Nursery site. They have since put in two planning applications – both met with howls of protest from local residents. The first was turned down; I am not sure about the second, a year or so ago – and of course can’t check because the Vale website is down – neatly turning this thread back to its origin!
That’s a bit dodgy, surely. Hester – the Council selling the Goal and allowing the social housing element to be left to a different site that doesn’t have planning permission so long after the main site is built – the Council seem to have put themselves in a poor position, owning the Nursery (or recently selling it), giving it to a developer to use for social housing for a very lucrative development, then being in charge of the planning permission! Sounds a but dodgy to me! Seeing as there is still no planning permission, I think they should give over some of the Goal units to fulfill their required number – like it should have been from the beginning. Ask questions of what’s happened on this and I fear there would be a lot of smoke & mirrors!
Or, in the case of Crowmarsh Gifford – smoke without mirrors ?
Given the situation, perhaps the final phase of The Old Gaol should be given over to social housing? This would show that The Vale could be serious about its responsibilities.
Keeping with the council theme have you seen sandy lovatts statement re the guild hall complex? Seems they’ve finally accepted the cinema scheme was as daft as everyone said and abandoned it ( not before they wasted £100k on consultants) and the rest of the project he says will start in September, how complacent of him to assume he’ll get re elected in May !
Someone justified the building of new estates in Abingdon as ‘there are lots of homeless who need housing’. How blinkered is that? All the houses will sell at over three hundred thousand pounds so hardly in the affordable housing category and certainly none at all for the homeless or people on low incomes. Building more houses means more profit for developers and nothing else.
Janet,
What upsets me with these new developments is the banks lend the money, not to people who want to buy to live in the house, but to people who only want to rent it out. So at the end of the day, the tenant will pay off their mortgage and they will end up with a house that cost them nothing, and the tenant ends up with nothing, having paid more in rent than they would have done with a mortgage!
I blame governments for letting the banks do this, and I am making my judgement based on the people in houses where I live.
@Captainkaos2 – where have you seen the Sandy Lovatt statement – I have looked in all the obvious places, but can’t see anything?
The Old Gaol new build were to sell, and the Old Gaol original building will all be to rent. Mr Cranborne’s retirement loot.
Hester, he’s pm the front age of the freebie guardian. Re the posts about all the proposed new housing, presumably there will be a proportion of social housing on the plan? Are they aware that on the new great western development and other such in didcot there is now an over supply of social housing so they are now offering th as far a field as Manchester and Newcastle ! So much for catering for the local need
….how depressing….
Here we go again; another 5 years have passed, and even a change in “bleedership”, and the woes of Abingdon are exactly the same now, as they were then. And the time before.
More house have already been built – and not for the good of The Town, but for the developer.
More houses are due. Not for the good of the Town, but for the developer.
The infrastructure is no longer as bad as it was; it’s worse.
The good people of Abingdon get let down (by those in charge), or screwed over (by those with a profit line)…or both.
Meanwhile….do we have even an inkling of a full interchange at Lodge Hill? The second river crossing as part of AbIts is now mythology. The ex-perts have said that we will no longer queue on Drayton Rd or Ock St, as we’ll have a crossings rejig, that no one wants or think will work.
We had a 60min makeover to the precinct…that had been fruitless….but our leaders allow Scottish Widows to get away with such ineptitude….and, hopefully, the Phase 2 development is now part of the same mythology as that road bridge….all as Didcot gets its M&S….
And as for a decent cinema….
Is pantomime season still going….?
Have I missed anything?
Oops… I did miss something….
Of all the relatively easy, cheap, quick wins…. A brown Historic Market Town sign on the A34 letting people know that our lovely place exists, would be one to tick off easily.
Still no sign of such a sign though.
For those that might be interested…
http://oxfordshireguardian.co.uk/cinema-plan-on-hold-as-build-date-is-set/
First, on the main topic of the post, thank goodness noone was hurt in this appaulling attack on the council offices. Its really difficult to fathom the minds of some people. Congratulations to the fire service for putting themselves in harms way and preventing this from becoming far worse than the loss of a building.
On the article in the South Oxfordshire Guardian – I’d like to correct the facts, predominantly the main headline, which seem to have arisen from some sort of misunderstanding between Cllr Lovatt and the reporter.
The council has not taken any decision to put plans for the cinema on hold, nor will it do so until the outcome of the tender process with potential cinema operators which are currently in progress. This decision will be discussed in March/April at which point we will have more information on which of various potential ways forward best meets the aims of the project.
The current designs have been built in a modular way so that, depending on the results of the tender process, the project can proceed in different ways driven by funding. The preferred scenario remains that we create a dedicated 110 seat cinema to the rear of the building together with a ground floor cafe bar and the Abbey Hall be developed as a second, larger screen, which is multiuse to allow for stage and flat floor uses. Should the bids from potential operators be insufficient to allow this model, then it may be that the a phased approach is followed with the dediacted screen being deferred until funding is available, operating with only the multi use screen, although this would still provide a cinema offering to the town only on a smaller scale. In additon to these there are various other aspects to the design including improving disability access to the historic parts of the building.
I would reiterate no decisions have been taken on which route we will take, nor do any councillors, including myself (i chair the committee running the project for people who dont know me), have enough knowledge of what the various operators short listed will bid to be able to offer anything more than speculation on the best alternative at this stage in the process.
I hope this helps clarify the situation.
As clear as mud now then ! The leader of the council has made a false statement to the press needing a correction of facts ( that’s a contradiction on itself) to be made by one of his minions ? Talk about the left hand not knowing what the right ones doing, perhaps sandy Lovett should make another statement, this time more accurately and on here too ?
So the plan is that we be still be getting a dedicated 110 seater cinema….(IF funding can be found!), for the Vale’s largest town…population 33,000. Iain, do you really believe that this is adequate for a town of this size??!
Or is this, as a lot of people are now coming to realise, just a way to offset the horrendous running costs of the Guildhall pup that the town was landed with when the Vale (wisely) cut their losses and passed it on!
Why is it that all other towns can have a PROPER cinema, but Abingdon isn’t deemed worthy?
Julian – when I want to go to see the latest blockbuster I can either get the bus into Oxford (30 minutes) or get in my car for 15-20 minutes to the Vue or Didcot. When I do that I usually find the multiplexes almost empty – and totally soulless. I am not an expert, but I suspect that if there was a business case for a multiplex in Abingdon, one of the chains would be knocking on our door by now.
The option of a walk into Abingdon to see the film in a cosy, comfortable small cinema, possibly followed by a drink or meal in one of our excellent local hostelries is a
pretty attractive one to me – and would be even more so if I couldn’t afford the bus fare and either couldn’t drive or didn’t want to.
Regular readers of this blog will know your views by now – and many may agree with you, but I think it is important to recognise that there may be many others with different views and wishes.
Would they be the mere 300 who replied to the rather pathetic attempt at canvassing the public for their opinion on the cinema/guildhall project? The minuscule group who put forward the equally. Daft ( and inappropriately named) Isis project ?
I am sorry if I am boring you with my views, Hester, maybe once I’ve stated my view I should just shut-up and accept whatever is foisted upon us by this seemingly inept council/Vale? (Who cannot it seems even get their facts right!)
Personally, I find your comment quite patronising, and a case of “Pull the ladder up Jack, I’m alright!” Why SHOULD we go elsewhere to see the latest blockbuster? Maybe some people are not as fortunate as you and I and cannot afford to travel as well as spend money going to the cinema? Youngsters will not HAVE cars!
But why should I have to travel? I may want a drink after the film…with the last bus leaving Oxford at about 10:30, and then a mile walk back to my house I don’t relish that thought!
I also find your view very narrow-minded for the town’s well-being. Do you honestly think that all the people who travel to Didcot, or Oxford to see a film, JUST see the film and go directly home again??…No,some will also visit shops on the way in while hanging about for the film to start, and possibly visit a pub or restaurant either before or after the film. Whichever, they will be funding businesses that are NOT Abingdon businesses.
Maybe a “cosy” cinema is pretty attractive to you…but only another 109 people could visit at the same time? I guarantee that once you have walked to your cosy cinema and been turned away a couple of times, because you are the 111th person…then you wouldn’t bother returning.
Hey Julian, in the short time I’ve been reading this blog it soon becme perfectly clear that there a a small number of Hester types who assume they are of a superior intellect than the majority of the rest of us plebs, you see it’s perfectly acceptable for a hand ful of ( I know best ) do gooders to steer the good ship Abongdon along their tunel visioned model of what their ideal town should be and woe betide any who thinks different ! A cosy cinema opening at times to suite her showing war and peace and gone with the wind may be just what she and the councilor consider cultural entertainment, what the masses want is no concern of hers, as for being not worthy? Well judging by the garbled ramblings of the councilor and Miss Hester one can only conclude that the people are worthy of far better than these? The only saving grace is that come May the councilor will be no more ( apparently he only got on by one vote? And that was probably his wife’s ?) and the good lady doesn’t have the courage of her convictions to stand for anything !
Captainkaos2, unfortunately Abingdon, (or rather a handful of people that seem to make decisions) has got very pretentious, stating that we MUST only have “Indy” shops, a boutique cinema, open air opera house (that one seems to have quietly bitten the dust!), All that is fine, as long as you have catered for the majority 1st! A town this size should be a hub of entertainment. Not expecting its residents to gobelsewhere??
What has happened to the 2nd phase of the Charter area that we were promised two if not three years ago? Why aren’t the Council and the Vale badgering S.Widows on a daily basis until they do something worthwhile with it? Just because Sainsburys pulled out it doesn’t mean that they can renage on their responsibilities to the town! If they are not prepared to fulfil those responsibilities then use the penalties available to reclaim the lease so that someone who IS interested in the town can do it! I am sick of hearing these pretentious people, most of whom I wouldn’t mind betting weren’t even born here, telling me what I WANT in MY town.
I am also sick to death of each particular body blaming someone else for the failings and stating that it “isn’t down to us, it’s …………. fault” It’s about time someone took responsibility for it all….that’s ABITS, Scottish Widows failing, Stert st culvert/barriers (4 yrs now?), lack of entertainment facilities, lack of 2nd river crossing, lack of rail transport (for a town this size it is inexcusable!), developers riding roughshod over planning conditions,/ developing estates even though there are safety concerns regarding school children’s crossings……the list goes on and on.
Rant over…for now. I’m worn out
Meanwhile the TC are clueless when it comes to stemming the haemorrhaging of the Town taxpayers’ funds due to the mistaken purchase of this money-pit and their belief that they had the skill set to become entertainment entrepreneurs.
What’s the Guildhall’s monthly operating loss? Is this commercially confidential? Are the figures not to hand? Aren’t they readily available? Would the figures be too complicated for the electorate to understand? Will we know the results of the Chilcott Inquiry before we know what’s really happened/happening with the Guildhall?
It’s not just the cinema project, it’s the money that’s being wasted on this project. It’s the opportunity cost.
Maybe the council need to consider partnering with Moviola? Romsey show movies in the Town Hall every month in partnership with Moviola and have great attendances.
http://www.moviola.org/index.html
Didn’t an independent cinema organisation approach the council, offering to finance the whole shabang, but were turned away?
That is complete rubbish Daniel
Not if the guardian freebie is correct? Seems there are things already cast in stone that you know nothing about? So says Sandy Lovatt!
Backstreet – to avoid perpetuating a false rumour with no basis in fact whatsoever you may wish to consider removing Daniel’s comment. I can categorically say that the town council has received no such approach.
The not so anonymous poster above can comment all he likes but I’ve corrected error made by the Oxfordshire Guardian. I cant comment on why theyve misreported but presumably there was some sort of misunderstanding. It’s easy to look for conspiracy theories but sometimes misunderstandings do arise.
This is the same Sandy Lovatt that said we are owed £7million for the Old Gaol,So the man has form.
Who said ” there are lies, lies and damn lies”?
talking about lies Mr K regarding your post 24.
Where do you get this rubbish about the plan being to create some sort of niche arts cinema. This has never been the proposal, i’ve never said this, and the council would not support this.
The proposal is for a small scale, independent cinema showing a broad programme which would include both recent releases, family films, classic films and live relays. There are dozens if not hundreds of examples of this around the country.
It is not big or clever to make up your own version of events then tout them as if they are fact.
By the way I’d rather have 1 ‘do gooder’ like Hester in our town than 100 ‘captainKaos2’s. She’s too modest to say but is a fantastic person, who gives generously of her time for the community, notably to the friends of abingdon, the community shop, whats on and the CAB. You sit in your armchair pontificating about the failings of others whilst contributing nothing yourself. You dont even have sufficient backbone to publish under your own name – people can draw their own conclusions as to what sort of person you are.
Ian, i apologise – there’s no malice involved. If I am wrong, I am happy to be rubbished for all to see!
Thx Daniel – yes I can confirm no such offer has been received, and if it were we would be highly unlikely to turn it away asuming it were credible.
As I’ve commented previously, we are currently in the process of tendering for offers from potential operators. I cant yet comment on the details as, until an operator is selected and a contract signed, the details would be commercially in confidence, but we have a range of very interesting and highly experienced organisations who have formally registered their interest.
‘… you may wish to consider removing Daniel’s comment …’
Oh dear … politicians just can’t restrain their desire to control the media. Jackboots along the High Street next? 0;)
Well, we’re told that
‘a range of very interesting and highly experienced organisations who have formally registered their interest’
which is an improvement on the expensive DIY approach that has been taken thus far.
I wonder how much of the TC’s ‘Guildhall Windfall’ is left after the consultants’ feeding frenzy?
And what’s happened to the bid proposal? Another of Ian’s babys that’s had the wheel fall off ! Can’t wait to see the town councils. Accounts for this year, bet they’re not released till after the election?
…I’m not a huge fan of the Guildhall development, the proposal, the way its been gone about etc…but if there really IS going to be a professional organisation running it, that is good news. From talking to people who have had the up hill struggle of trying…dare they ask…to put an event on there; the venue management is dire…or, so they say.
In fact…just getting some proffesionals in to run the place “as is” sounds like it could be a cheaper (or could have been) a cheaper opportunity to just try and run the place properly and at less of a loss – or even a profit….should that have been the objective…