jimbow
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I am confused by the figures given out for the number of stalls in the Peoples Market that would be lost to the HUB.
When the market was built it had a capacity of 58 stalls, this figure is quoted in the Quarterbridge Report, on the Council website, and in Council reports.
At the meeting yesterday we are advised that 14 stalls would be lost to the new development, and that at present there are 9 vacant stalls, and 9 stalls used by flexi tenants.
If these figures are correct 9 vacant plus 9 flexi total 18,would leave the market with 40 stalls occupied. There would then be the need to close 5 of the flexi stalls to accommodate the HUB.
I do not believe that there are 40 stalls occupied in the market. I believe that the area that stalls once occupied down the left hand side of the market in the xmas grotto area, will be on top of the 14.These have obviously been left unlet for the past two years in readiness for the HUB.
I believe the number of stalls lost to the HUB to be in the region of 24/28.
@Adam 17751 wrote:
My eyebrow also raised when I heard that figure of 17,000 visitors to the Oriel. That’s getting on for 60 visitors a day. I’d suggest that this figure has been creatively combined with figures for the library.
I caught most of the Arts Hub debate. What particularly stood out for me was the continual references to ‘evidence’, ‘recommendations’ and ‘feasibility studies’. Browsing the rest of the agenda topics, there are many areas where it’s perfectly reasonable to refer to 3rd party evidence, be it council officers, consultants or others. This topic however is where judgement, instinct and common sense is required – councillors are not elected to be a faceless jury acting upon evidence of others.
My ‘judgement’ would be that we have an existing gallery with low footfall and little or no income generation. It does however have decent amount of passing footfall due to the adjacent library and has a large visitor potential from the council offices and colleges nearby to potentially sustain any small developments – such as café/gallery or evening bar as proposed for the peoples market.
As Alun points out, the Peoples Market, and adjacent units, are experiencing a slow death as traders move elsewhere in search of more competitive rents and increased footfall. Efforts would be better placed in reversing this trend and maximising the potential of the current layout.
Combining two underperforming and poorly managed sectors on the speculation that footfall and spend will increase considerably should go against the judgement and common sense of most rational people.
I totally agree.
The Hub given the ok to go forward to Phase 2 by a unanimous vote. Two Councillors, Cllr R. Skelland and Cllr D. Davies asked for clarifications as they had reservations about the scheme. Unfortunately they were not allowed a vote. We were told the Oriel Gallery had 17,000 visitors per year.I wouldn’t mind betting 16,500 of them also visited the library at the same visit.They expect 50,000 visitors in the new complex.If you were to put this plan to a private business person to get involved into funding this business,you would not in my opinion get any response.If these Councillors were using their own money to fund it,Phase 2 would not happen. Why waste ratepayers money?
I agree with the above. Around 150 interested local people. Around 60,000 not interested. Over to you Executive Board.
An online survey produced 210 replies of which 156 were local. Online observations produced 40 comments. Two drop in sessions produced viewing figures of 116 people.
Not the greatest interest from a town of 63,000 residents.
This report has not gone before a Scrutiny Committee. Why?
It has been recommended by the Corporate Land and Buildings Strategy Group.
I am the ignorant man in the street. For me the cost of the consultants should be deducted from the salaries of the Chief Exec, Strategic Directors, and Heads of Departments over the next couple of years, for allowing this situation to have occurred. If Cllr. Wynn would like to chip in also, all the better.
BenjaminM. I do not fully agree that Councillors are all to blame for the current situation.I can assure you without any fear of contradiction, that some of the Officers of WCBC who I have dealt with over the years with professional letters behind their names, would also have difficulty in running a whelk stall.
@wrexview 17646 wrote:
If the Council made their own decisions rather than hide behind consultants , this money could actually save some jobs and services.
The Council hide behind consultants because they have not got the bottle to admit they were wrong in their decisions in the first place.I realise that some departments are thin on the ground for staff.Only six years ago we had a town centre manager, Ken Barney,he looked after the town centre management,
project officer, and promotional services,as well as markets manager.When he left,his job was split between a town centre manager,a town centre projects officer and a business services and promotions manager.From a salary of around £30k for one person,the cost for three people rose to around £100k.
Now the Council have to ask consultants to sort out the mess.Where do the Chief Executive and the four Strategic Directors fit into this shambles? What are they employed to do.?I have had an e mail today from Arthurs who have garages at Newtown and Oswestry, to welcome me to their takeover of Dickens Peugeot Wrexham. A little confusing.
