Mareel - Cinema & Music Venue

[Evil Inky]

like what?

Beer.

[Ghostrider]

I have to admit when I first started reading about this I was a little puzzled about everything they're trying to pack into the building,....

 

The number of different roles intended for the building has always been something I've always been concerned about the sanity of. Seems to me this has been designed to be "everything to everyone", and since when did one of those ever work out perfectly? Either it falls short of everyone's ideals, or it's perfect for a few and on a sliding scale down to useless for everyone else.

 

Yes, a performing venue is no bad idea, especially since the Star went the way it was badly needing to, but music and the various audiences it attracts is just far too diverse to all be catered for in one building. A venue that's a headbanging, fall flat on your face, spew your guts up, bloody knuckle session one night, and a sedate harp and flute evening the next just won't work in practice in my mind.

 

Music Education I have no fault with, providing it's leading someplace, and not just a filler to keep aimless teens amused while they faff around deciding what they want to do with their lives. There are plenty of livings to be made in the trade for those with talent and drive, and if that's what largely uses it, that's fine by me.

 

A cinema would be nice enough, but I've never been convinced it could be justified, and I doubt I ever will. Back in the 70's the only way the Star kept it's head above water,and that was in the pre-video, one channel B&W TV days, was by staffing it almost entirely by schoolkids for regular films.

 

Maybe I'm wrong and the same space that has some visiting kiltie playing 'Scotland the Brave' on the bagpies one night can happily and profitably be blasting out Winehouse or Kanye from a turntable the next, while a profitable cinema is showing 'National Treasure' in the other end, but I doubt it. The diversity that's been shoved all together on to the one site just will not mix, certain things need a certain amount of space, and they're not getting it here.

[Caeser]

What really gets my goat now is that Mareel is now is curently referred to by the arty people as the 'arts hub'.

 

It appears the original proposal for a concert venue etc has fallen by the wayside.

 

From what I can gather it will not be a replacement for either the North Star or Clickimin for large concerts as it is not big enough.

 

I suspect there is major 'spin' going on here.

 

So what we have is a cinema which is clearly not viable, and a variety of arty facilities and off course expensive arts trust headquarters.

 

Can someone please pull on the handbrake for this train, just long enough for 'da flea' to blow it out of the water once and for all!

 

The alternative as I said before is to pay the arts trust staff out of the operating surpluses of the building, after all other costs have been paid.

 

I suspect the situation may change very quickly.

[JohanofNess]

like what?

 

Schools

Care homes

Maintenance and upkeep of exisitng facilities

Public transportation

Roads

 

Does it not make more sense to improve what you've got than build something that if it was needed somebody else would have already built without public money.

[Carlos]

That's what I was thinking, you've got about 22k people on Shetland, if there was a significant demand for a cinema then why haven't one of the chains put one up?.

 

Because it would not make a return on the investment.

The Mareel analysis has them making enough income to more or less cover the running costs. A business setup would want to cover the running costs, it's £9M mortgage payments and a healthy profit before they would look at it.

 

To follow from Caeser's point, in terms of viability is it not better that the building would be set up to cover a combined 85% of music venue/cinema/music development/media hub needs? To make worthwhile facilities in each of those things individually would cost more, and give us something that is less likely to be financially viable.

 

Regardless of your feelings on the need for Mareel, I think a big positive of the design so far is that they have added extra functionality to the same sized building as the original proposals by cutting back on the "fancy bits" and making the spaces as flexible as they can be, instead of what has often been known to happen on Council projects, doubling the size and budget.

[Twerto]

Schools

Care homes

Maintenance and upkeep of exisitng facilities

Public transportation

Roads

 

schools we are hardly strugglign for schools as it is, yes AHS but that is already accounted for in other ways.

 

Care homes onyl benifit one age group not all and again we are hardly struggling for them and neither are they falling into disrepair at this precise moment.

 

Maintence coems under another budget if im nto mistaken.

 

Public transport.. cant argue on that one.. shetland does need a far better public transport system

 

Roads.. hmm again not a huge need for roads. yes there is still a few areas that need upgrades but not that many.

[JohanofNess]

That's what I was thinking, you've got about 22k people on Shetland, if there was a significant demand for a cinema then why haven't one of the chains put one up?.

 

Because it would not make a return on the investment.

The Mareel analysis has them making enough income to more or less cover the running costs. A business setup would want to cover the running costs, it's £9M mortgage payments and a healthy profit before they would look at it.

 

 

That's the point I was making there isn't one because a cinema isn't financially viable in an area where the population is so small and scattered. So tacking on a heap of other facilities to make it all things to all people is the other way of approaching it, then you lose focus as to what it is there for. Is it a cinema, is it a concert hall, is it an arts centre. If those things become muddled and compromised to gain the maximum funding from the lottery etc etc then you can end up with a place that doesn't really cater properly for anyone but is built nonetheless by Contractors happy to take your money.

[JohanofNess]

schools we are hardly strugglign for schools as it is, yes AHS but that is already accounted for in other ways.

 

Care homes onyl benifit one age group not all and again we are hardly struggling for them and neither are they falling into disrepair at this precise moment.

 

Maintence coems under another budget if im nto mistaken.

 

Public transport.. cant argue on that one.. shetland does need a far better public transport system

 

Roads.. hmm again not a huge need for roads. yes there is still a few areas that need upgrades but not that many.

 

You're not struggling for schools but does it not make sense to create an improved learning environment?. Improve the facilities and equipment within the schools.

 

Care homes don't just benefit the old, they benefit the families who are unable to care for those people, we all get old so ultimately it serves us all if we need to use it.

 

Who is talking about individual budgets, some person says lets spend anything between 7-10m on an arts centre the big pot of money it comes from gets reduced by 7-10m so the other departments in the council lose out while this supposedly long overdue and much needed arts centre gets built. The SIC may not be funding all of it but they are funding some of it and they aren't spending that money elsewhere.

 

Yeah shetland does need a much improved public transport system and what does it run on?.

 

Roads, it's fair to say that Shetland has some of the best maintained roads in Britain, I should know I've been involved in a few but at the same time I've been on plenty of roads in Shetland that need looking at.

 

I'm not saying Shetland doesn't need improved arts facilities but 8m you have to be bloody joking. Just need to take a look at Archaeolink in Aberdeenshire, the council should have been taken out and shot for approving that place, public money spent on a facility that far exceeded in design what it needed to do.

[Jordan]

Economic determinism is no way to address how Shetland provides for and develops its culture. Why when it comes to the arts do all the cynics emerge? I doubt that all of Shetland's sporting and recreation facilities are profitable. For example, we have dozens of leisure centres dotted around the isles, managed by the massive SRT. Don’t you people think that these cost a fortune to run? A fortune that I’m sure is not accounted for in till sales. The Council also spends lots of money on a Sport’s Development service, employing people to do such things as organise islands games teams and football matches, etc. Now, I think this is all good, but the same must be applied to the arts and culture in Shetland.

 

Shetland Arts is a minuscule agency in comparison to the SRT. It deserves to be recognised for the crucial role it has in the whole of the Shetland community and for its future vitality. I don’t want to see my home become a tourist town come retirement home, which I fear is the way it will go if Councillors like Mr Duncan get their way. When I have children I want to be able to take them to the cinema, be able to learn in the music facility, access workshops, learn to appreciate art etc. I also want to go to concerts and go to the cinema myself..This is not much to ask, and without these and other cultural facilities, I think it very likely that many people will simply leave Shetland for a better life elsewhere.

[Ghostrider]

^^ This cynic is omnipresent, regardless of whatever pie in the sky scheme emerges. I have no interest in sport, I signed the petition against Clickimin, that went round back in the day before it was built. It started the ball rolling with the building of massive frivolities. As far as I'm concerned none of the sports facilities should have been built, and they could bag them all up tomorrow and cart them away and it wouldn't be a day too soon.

 

Sport existed fine and well long before any over-expensive purpose built facilities were ever thought about, and I really fail to see how the massive investment has been worthwhile. There may have been some "improvement" overall, but it's level set against the investment, when compared to previous standards which had no investment, is wholly disproportionate.

 

I am actually far more supportive of this proposal than just about any other "leisure" development that's ever been mooted, I just think it's an expensive wasted opportunity. Hopefully I'm wrong, but what I'm seeing happening is a few years down the line after it's built, 50% of the intended users will be boycotting the place, simply because of who and what the other 50% are, and if there's anything left in the kitty by then, they'll be whining to have some place more suitable to their needs built elsewhere.

[peeriebryan]

^ well said Jordan

 

I'm not sure where they got a figure of £8.3 million from as the construction contract will depend on the tenders received. The QS estimate is £9.3 million, but that includes many other costs such as statutory permissions, various professional fees, land purchase etc

I'm not sure where peeriebryan got the figure of £9.3 million from. Shetland Arts' own propaganda from July last year quotes £7.1 million, rising to £7.58 million by May 2008. Is the extra £2 Million how much extra it cost to stick the Shetland Arts offices in? Nice view over the harbour I hear!

As I stated, the figure of £9.3 million is the current total estimate from the QS.

 

I'm not sure what the figures you quote are for, but the stage 2 application that was submitted in April last year was costed at £8.76 million in total.

 

Since the stage 2 application was submitted there has been additional costs of around £300,000 to develop the second floor, plus inflation (particularly the rising costs of steel and timber). Thus, the figure of £9.3 million.

 

For the sake of clarity, £4.2 million will come from external funders, which is a substantial investment into Shetland. This investment would be lost of Mareel should not go ahead.

 

There was a proposal for Shetland Arts to have office space in the second floor but after consultation it was decided that the space would be developed for educational and creative industry use.

 

 

A new cash negative establishment that only provides better facilities than we currently have is economic suicide

The current projected operating costs are as follows

 

year 1: a deficit of £43,500 (the Charatable Trust has offered up to £100,000 to cover a first year deficit)

year 2: a deficit of £17,000 (this will be absorbed into Shetland Arts running costs)

year 3: breakeven or a modest surplus

 

These figures are subject to scrutiny by several agencies including the Scottish Arts Council's independent assessors and the Charitable Trust

 

It should be noted that these are projections which are constantly revised and updated. Don't expect these figures to remain static!

 

 

 

Then there's the economic benefits that developing Shetland's creative industries will bring....

 

 

 

I have to admit when I first started reading about this I was a little puzzled about everything they're trying to pack into the building

The number of different roles intended for the building has always been something I've always been concerned about the sanity of. Seems to me this has been designed to be "everything to everyone", and since when did one of those ever work out perfectly.....

 

....The diversity that's been shoved all together on to the one site just will not mix, certain things need a certain amount of space, and they're not getting it here.

There are many reasons to have a multi use building serving several closely related purposes. For example, take the An Lanntair Arts Centre in Stornoway - http://www.lanntair.com/ and read an interview with the director and programmer of An Lanntair - http://www.hi-arts.co.uk/april-2008-venue-profile-an-lanntair.html%20

 

In terms of music, most mid size venues, especially in rural locations, offer a wide range of programming. I know of few such venues which specialise in only one type of music or audience.

 

...and most people I know in Shetland have broad taste in both music and film.

 

From an educational point of view it makes sense to have several strands of the creative industries under one roof due to the many synergies between film, music, digital media etc.

 

Then there are savings from an operational point of view as the building will be in constant use.

 

I suspect there is major 'spin' going on here.

 

So what we have is a cinema which is clearly not viable, and a variety of arty facilities and off course expensive arts trust headquarters.

I'll state again, it is not the intention that Shetland Arts will be using the building for offices. This was suggested at the end of last year and after consultation the proposal was decided against.

 

you lose focus as to what it is there for. Is it a cinema, is it a concert hall, is it an arts centre. If those things become muddled and compromised to gain the maximum funding from the lottery etc etc then you can end up with a place that doesn't really cater properly for anyone but is built nonetheless

It's neither unusual nor a difficult concept to grasp that different areas of a building can be used as a cinema and a music venue. I fail to see how one aspect would negatively impact the other. Quite the opposite in fact.

 

 

 

Any project of this scale will have it's objectors but I think recent accusations of "spin", "propaganda" and unfounded allegations of removing negative comments from the Bebo and MySpace websites are uncalled for. All the information regarding Mareel is in the public domain and no-one is attempting to hoodwink anyone.

 

 

 

Hopefully I'm wrong

I hope so too

[WiiMan]

And your previous identity on Shetlink was???

 

As far as I was aware 9.3 million was the figure being quoted by Shetland Arts. I recall an earlier eight point something which didn't have the second floor developed in educational spaces as is planned but I don't remember seeing the 7.1 million - what piece of 'propaganda' as you put it did this appear in?

 

Note to MOD: Perhaps it might be worth checking the votes to see how many people on both sides have been re-registering under different names.

 

Ha! Sadly for TeeAyBee I haven't been chucked off and have never had a 'previous identity' on Shetlink (or anywhere else for that matter). I had heard that people were being chucked off and blocked so I thought I would join and find out for myself.

 

I'm still here so either it wasn't true......or they know that they've been rumbled!

 

The 'propaganda' referred to is the design report released by Shetland Arts at the end of July last year. No doubt Goebbels is about to tell me it wasn't fair to base my argument on this document.

 

I certainly seem to have touched a raw nerve in this debate, I'm astounded that someone could be so up tight as to accuse me of having voted twice. No doubt my motive was to sway the vote in this poll which, with a hundred and twenty-odd participants, is only slightly more representative than one of Captain Calamity's 'Muckle Polls!'

[JohanofNess]

^ well said Jordan

 

It's neither unusual nor a difficult concept to grasp that different areas of a building can be used as a cinema and a music venue. I fail to see how one aspect would negatively impact the other. Quite the opposite in fact.

 

 

 

Any project of this scale will have it's objectors but I think recent accusations of "spin", "propaganda" and unfounded allegations of removing negative comments from the Bebo and MySpace websites are uncalled for. All the information regarding Mareel is in the public domain and no-one is attempting to hoodwink anyone.

 

I wasn't patronising you so I would expect the same courtesy in return.

 

I grasp the concept the point I made firmly shows I did, the point I made is that "compromise" has been made between the cinema and the music venue to achieve both. The cinema won't be a full blown cinema and the music hall won't be a dedicated music hall. In compromising both facilities you can be left with one that doesn't tick all the boxes.

 

I am a QS and my concern is that figures bandied about of between 7-9m have to come from somewhere and then I read that you're looking for contractors to tender, just who did project the cost. It sets pound signs ringing up in my head just thinking about it. All the main materials in building have gone up considerably in the last 6 months and whoever figured out the current budget needs to start adding 20% to concrete, 20% to aggregates, 15% to steel, 35% to tar, then the rises in labour rates that hit at the end of June. The extra lump of cash required could make enough people think twice about it and that is reason to ask the question is it worth having the place at 20% more than the original budget.

 

Is it?.

[Fjool]

The cinema won't be a full blown cinema and the music hall won't be a dedicated music hall. In compromising both facilities you can be left with one that doesn't tick all the boxes.

Which I suppose is fine, considering what other posts have said. If we cannot afford a dedicated and massively expensive building for each, why not save some money, combine the two and make the compromises needed for the project to be realistic?

 

Mareel will be excellent, I am sure. It doesn't need to be the best cinema, nor the best music venue, however, to be an enormous improvement over the current facilities. Would it be more prudent to build individual, superior facilities and be unable to maintain or fully utilise them? As has been pointed out, we are a small rural community, not a bustling metropolis.

 

It just looks to me that the project has already compromised to make plans realistic, and this is the wise thing to do.

 

I continue to have my doubts as to whether this is most appropriate use of Shetland's funds (irrespective of which 'pot' the money comes from; a philosophically moot point if you ask me) but I can see that there are many benefits to the existing proposal.

[peeriebryan]

I wasn't patronising you so I would expect the same courtesy in return.

My appologies. I didn't mean to be patronising to you. I was meaning that I don't think the concept would be difficult to grasp or be "muddled" by the general public

 

The cinema and music venue are separate areas of the building. They share amenities, the foyer and the cafe bar but I don't believe that this compromises their design in a detrimental way

 

I don't have the figures regarding building trade inflation available at the moment, but I'll try my best to get back to you ASAP