The Guildhall development is not to go ahead because, now the tenders have been considered, the project will be too costly.
The press release says …
Following the recent tender exercise in relation to the proposed improvements in relation to the Abbey Hall, the Town Council, at its meeting of 25th January 2017, has reviewed the project.
The Council has, with regret, concluded that the project and the necessary works which are required to bring the Abbey Hall up to acceptable modern standards, is unaffordable in the context of the Council’s overall financial commitments and the fact that many of the services which would have been delivered from the Abbey Hall are provided by other organisations and businesses. Consequently, the capital investment required in the Abbey Hall Project cannot be justified and the Town Council will, over the coming months, be working with other local authorities to explore the possibilities of alternative community uses for the Abbey Hall.
Council Leader Councillor Mike Badcock stated: “We are unable to pursue our project in relation to the Abbey Hall. The Council have worked very hard on finding a solution which is both sustainable and affordable but have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the building has beaten us. Whilst this is to be regretted it is better for this difficult decision to have been taken now before substantial sums were committed to building works. Even based on the lowest tender we were looking at overall project costs of £3,080,000 (note this included a modest budget of £120,000 for works in the historic building). It remains this Council’s intention to move forward and re-open the historic Guildhall when any necessary works have been undertaken in relation to that building.”
What a joke. I’m a casual observer, but it seemed blindingly obvious that the council’s proposed approach, which replicated existing services offered in the town was deeply flawed. We had a real opportunity to re-develop the Guildhall with a commercial partner, who seemed prepared to invest with the council and deliver a viable cinema offer. The current council leaders voted this option down and have now delivered zero. Out of their depth. The team running this should step down.
This has been a sorry story from the beginning with the initial misconceived plans for a cinema perhaps banjaxing the possibility of a proper cinema in the town and follow-up ideas lacking in any inspiration.
My mind goes back to backstreeter’s question as to how much it would cost to demolish the Hall and him being told that it would be more that it would cost to do anything with the building. I guess that with the maintenance costs, etc of an idle building that might no longer be the case.
The TC should never have allowed itself to be ‘palmed off’ with this liability by The Vale. One can only hope they don’t snap up any more bargains on behalf of the community.
This news further demonstrates the town is dieing. Feel sorry for all of you guys who have to travel miles for decent shops and amenities.. I’m very happy in my recent move to didcot, and unfortunately I know many more my age who are contemplating the move. The age old stigmas have decreased.. it might not have Abingdon’s character, but for people aged 20 ish plus… It’s ideal, cheaper rent, better connected to the big cities.. and most importantly… It has shops with even more on the way with orchard centre part 2 and the district centre to include Adds.
Sorry, typo. To include Asda
I hate to say it…..but £100k ago..i told you so…. What a joke! Another fiasco….anyone involved with this should step down..or be forced too!
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry, exasperated and speechless. What a flipping mess! Back at square one, again.
PIcking over backstreeter’s text above I find this:
‘the Town Council will, over the coming months, be working with other local authorities to explore the possibilities of alternative community uses for the Abbey Hall.’
… expense paid trips/lunches for the boys and girls …;0)
which is a ‘lite’ version of what I suggested at the beginning of this project … that research be done on what similar civic halls in the South East have done which has been successful and regional entertainment promoters and agents be approached for advice as to how the money we had could be best spent for the venue to be of interest to people such as themselves.
Most of such research could have been inexpensive desk research which could have been conducted over a summer’s holiday by a small team of Abingdon schools’ senior students interested in a business/commercial career … something for the cv/college application …
Agents would have been keen to scout out another possible outlet for their acts/productions.
Instead the cart went before the horse and people who have no experience in running venues started making decisions about what needed to be built. It should have been ‘function’ first.
I see:
‘this included a modest budget of £120,000 for works in the historic building’
well, at least the TC have a comfy billet improved to their satisfaction … result!
On another note..i saw yesterday that the Charter toilet refurb has been approved. So Aberdeen Assets have been let of the hook with regards to their commitments to the Charter area then…..? Why aren’t they being held to account over this? Is NO-ONE in Abingdon accountable for their actions ever?
Unkown- Didcot v Abingdon? Easy choice, we have the beautiful Thames meandering through, a place of leasure, relaxation and inspiration, you have a main line railway that keeps every awake 24/7, still, as you say being better connected does allow you to escape occasionally,
We have the mighty St Helens church whose spire has dominated our skyline for a 1000 years, you have 3 remaining cooling towers circa 1965,
Our retail occupancy is pretty much full, with the exception on Next there’s nothing I would travel to Didcot for, We have a centuries old market place with coffee shops and regular events all overlooked by one of the finest county halls in the country ( with an excellent, free museum) you have a set of granite steps leading down to a car park next to Sainsbury’s, you speak of extending the Orchard centre, wouldn’t it be better to replace the shanty town of the lower Broadway first? You an Asda coming? Whoopy doo- we have a Waitrose,. Your housing is cheaper? Of course it is !
Very depressing state of affairs.
The reality is that as soon as they removed the functionality that would generate both income and use of the building ie a commercial cinema, then it was always either going to come to this or be a black hole in the public finances.
Newcomers comment however is his normal Trumpian reinterpretation of events. For the record…
The town council (originally) DID consider functionality first – the function was cinema and live events (unfortunately they changed their mind after the election)
The council were looking to work with a commercial cimema partner.
The council did receive at least one commercially viable bid that would have delivered a ‘proper’ (3 screen) cinema at the guildhall, have got a lot of people into the building and improved the council’s finances.
For once I fully agree with you CK – although UE is correct about house prices (from what I hear Didcot’s are now also rising quite fast)
….it would make a goid place for some flats?
Just sayin.
I think you’re all missing a fundamental point here? It’s not any councils duty to supply every facility a community desires, least of all a cinema, business will fulfil that desire if and when they see a profit to be had,
I think it brave of the TC to admitt the project that was on the table is unachievable rather than go blindly on spending even more money until we ended up with an even bigger white elephant.
Perhaps if this reasoning had been applied in the first place a cool £100k wouldn’t have been wasted on a folly?
The Guild Hall should be what it was always intended to be, a community building for all the community and if it costs a few £100k a year to run it as such, so what, put council tax up a fiver a year! By the way I don’t think the running costs of the place are that much different to running the county hall and museum?
Captain K..the fundamental point here was that this was ALWAYS. a dead duck in the water…as several of us told Iain at an informal meeting.
Abingdon DOES deserve decent facilities, both for youngsters to enjoy and give them something to do, and for everyone else as well. We had a cinema, why can’t we have one now? A town the size of Abingdon should have cinemas, bowling, theatre and numerous other facilities! Otherwise people will go to Didcot or Oxford…and whilst there they WILL spend money..not only on the exorbitant cinema prices for sweets drinks popcorn etc. but in local shops cafe’s bars etc!
This was always a vanity project, which those involved were too pig-headed to see! Instead they wasted 100k at least..plus all the revenue that has been lost since it was closed for the “work” to start! Fiasco!
‘Trumpian’ … is that the new insult a la mode, Iain? How very, very modern of you.
It seemed to me that the initial drive to ‘functionality’ involved trying to be everything to everyone and placating no-one. All the talk of flat-floor and retractable seating etc was never leading to anything.
The best that can be said of the aborted cinema project is that no-one will ever know whether it would have been a success, or not, and no amount re-imagineering and wishful thinking on your part can change that. However, if you can read the future then readers here would appreciate your information regarding the winners at this year’s Cheltenham Festival.
As I’ve commented before, you’d be advised to stop picking this scab and let it heal.
I’m confused. So what happens to the modern bit now?
This is an all time classic quote that just so happens to be from Mike Badcock, as published on the Herald site:
‘He insisted the £113,000 already spent on surveys and architects’ fees was not a waste of money – comparing it to cash someone might spend on dental consultation prior to potential treatment …’
Thank God for the NHS …
Well said, CaptainKaos
I see the ‘Abingdon is dying’ sweeping statement brigade are out in full force today. Because a cinema hasn’t been built. Get a grip people
Today is National Holocaust day, if all we have to complain about is not having a cinema then life ain’t so bad. is it !!
What a let down !!! Why has the Guilhall been so empty for so long anyway ? Lost revenue from weddings , parties etc !!! Abingdon councillors should take there heads out of the sand and actually do something for once for this fantastic town !! What is there function ? What do they do ? Sad times !
Abingdon Dies slowly thread. The Job Centre is also mentioned as one of 2 for closing. ‘Government Reform’http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15052538.Two_job_centres_could_close_in_government_reform/
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15052538.Two_job_centres_could_close_in_government_reform/
The budget figure of £2.1m is presumably the £1.2m the Vale gave them with the building for capital works and £900,000 of TC’s own funds. Borrowing the rest would cost them £44,000 a year to repay over 40 years, not a great deal for one of the larger Oxfordshire councils. They still presumably have to spend the £1.2m on works to the Guildhall and if this project falls will have to fund the £113,000 quoted as spent so far from revenue.
The figure they quoted was £3.1m
The figure from the vale of £1.2 is before the works to the old building four years ago which accounted for about £200k, so theres £1m left leaving £2.1m to find.
If they borrowed it it would cost a little over £100k pa which would mean a 10% rise in town part of council tax (approx).
That may be so Iain, my point was it’s not councils responsibility to provide or subsidise a cinema, that’s for business to do, in my opinion the Guild Hall should be a community wide place, somewhere the mayor can hold the civic ball, aunt Nellie can hold her 90 th birthday, the railway club can hold their exhibition along with the antique fairs etc etc,
It’s impossible to convert it to a one size fits all needs building, let’s just renovate what we’ve got to the budget that’s available and hope that with all these new estates we’re going to be surrounded by cinema and bowling alley operators will see a need and fulfil it?
I wasnt responsing to your point CK unless you are also Another Steve?
No, I’m deffo CK Iain
I agree a council is not responsible for providing any specific commercial activity but it does have a responsibility to provide opportunities for business to develop and supply the needs of the residents. Abingdon with a population approaching 40000 should have a thriving retail heart but instead has not much more than Headington High Street. For the last 25 years successive administrations have seemed preoccupied with council tax generation rather than using the large former commercial areas to be used for retail. Why are there 6 houses in Burgess Close for example. This entire area should have been a retail centre. Now there seems to be insufficient space for anything worthwhile.
So what happens now? even when maintained, an unused building slowly decays. Does it remain boarded up for the next fifty years, until some future council declares it derelict and pulls it down? CaptainKaos is right about the attractions of Abingdon, but a large derelict building on the main street to Abbey Park and the moorings is not exactly going to show off the new play area and open air pool, is it?
Ck, get what your saying, Abingdon is nice to look at… However, if you find yourself (like I and many other people my age) travelling to socialise, be that a cinema, a restaurant, a decent set of shops.. then your going to seriously think about why your travelling all the time. Unfortunately we don’t all own our houses, so we need to rent.. and again, you are going to want to do that as economically as possible. I personally promote Abingdon to many A person, but.. I am glad i now live somewhere that meets my needs. I think Abingdon does get a harsh deal being within the ’20-30 min trip to Oxford area’ with little infrastructure improvement, and from what I have experienced in my 5 years… Little amenity improvement. In an ideal world, the businesses would spend their money in Abingdon, but with the pull of the glory of being in Oxford, and getting a seemingly easier time getting into places like didcot.. why would they want to risk their capital on low footfall into a town centre full of Turkish barbers, hairdresser’s and estate agents? There is no attraction there!
Unknown, you can only play with the hand your delt with, Burgess Close was Burgess the printers site, they sold it for housing, not the council, ditto the old William press site that’s now Thames view, The Alison’s have just sold their Ock st garage to Churchill homes, the council didn’t do it, go back 50 years and the new out of town retail park (Fairacres) put the town way ahead of other towns just as the “new precinct ” did. It’s not that we’ve failed to move forward, it’s more the others ( Witney & Didcot) gave caught up and to some extent overtaken us.
For sure we need to rethink the traffic situation and the lack of parking too, but would I want to lose all the independent businesses in town and replace them with yet another clone street? definitely not.
Shops alone do not make a town, a pleasant environment, events and attractions, the river, abbey grounds and meadows, the flowers, the nags head, brewery tap, coffee shops, the cenotaph, long alley, the schools, clubs & society’s, fun in the park, Heritage Day, etc etc
Shops? Well how about Added Ingredients, Fabulous Flowers, Finishing Touch, Mostly Books, Out Door Traders. Abingdon Sports, Eileen, Marie, Masons, The Gift Centre, Art n Stuff, Prices Stationary? Now that’s what you call shops !
The nags head is a beautiful pub, spoiled by an egotistical, showoff at the helm.
Not saying lose the independent shops, but it really highlights our different social class/age group.i have used 2 of the above shops, one of them 3 times. And I don’t have enough hairs on my partly balding bonce to tot up the amount of people I know that can say they use any of those shops on a quarterly basis let alone on a daily/weekly like it sounds you do.
Neither of us are wrong, but then neither of us are right in the description of our age groups… We should just agree to disagree
White elephant. Big ooooops by the TC then. And how much was spent on Consultants?
Another big oooooops.
Oops. I posted this in the wrong thread. here it is….
Since this was decided on Burn’s Night……
I lang hae thought, in Abingdon Toon,
The Gildhall wa’ an eyesoor
Neglekt and serving nae useful end
An’ upkeep was unco poor.
Tho’ the Vale did pass it to the toon council’s care
Wi’ a hefty cash sum to appease
There’s now nae money to do it up
It’s all gone on Consultancy fees.
So th’ toon is now left wi’ nuthin tae show
Nae dancehall, nae cinema screen
An’ th’ Council’s admitted an’ signal’d defeat
Abingdon’s left with nary a bean.
I do hope it isn’t turned into housing, I mean hey don’t we have enough housing… if not we soon will have. A big vote of no confidence for the TC for what has/hasn’t been achieved so far, an almost criminal waste of money that has not benefited anyone in Abingdon. I’d bet a cheeky sell off is on the cards and we’ll never see the money or benefit to the community again. I think I’d rather have Anarchy than these idiots in charge.
I’m selling up and leaving. As someone has said, when you find yourself travelling for shopping and entertainment then you need to re assess the situation. Also, I agree with the comment about The Nags Head and unfortunately it is the only place to enjoy our part of the Thames.
Are these alternative facts Iain (no 25)? The quote says the budget is £2.1m so they must have £900,000 covered and even adjusting for £200,000 spent that is only £1m to find i.e. £50,000 a year or 5% on the town part of council tax (approx.).
I don’t know what article you are reading Steve – the number quoted by Badcock in the article above (4th line from the end) says the cost of building was £3.1m (well £3,080,000). Are you referring to something else?
Good to see all the comments on the Guildhall. Both/all sides make very good points.
Two questions – 1. Why was the Guildhall closed years before the project began? (or not as the case is now) With good competent people, keeping it open would have provided precious revenue.
2. How can the project be over budget when the Town Council have paid consultants £113k? Surely part of their remit/brief would have been ‘This is our budget for the project. Come back with a scheme that fits it.’