A Cotswolds National Park?

Fri 10 Mar 2017, 10:30

I have read with interest the contents of the thread that now appears to focus on the size the building and materials used at the new community centre. These are my comments as an active community member in Charlbury, and do not necessarily represent the views of the Trust, although I give up many hours a week, with other trustees trying to ensure that Charlbury will have an outstanding new community centre.

There are numerous points I can make; however, I will limit these to just three principal considerations

1. Building Site. Richard is correct in stating that currently the area is that of a building site, and I believe it will be in everybody's interest to reserve judgment until the development is completed. The building, in its current format does not include any of the wood cladding, pergola, canopies, stonework to the entrance, external signage and lighting and soft landscaping including trees that are built into the design. These elements are designed to soften the impact of such a large building.

2. Size. The materials used and size are completely consistent with the planning permission and numerous presentations made by the Trust. I do appreciate that the impact of a large building, in the commercial centre of Charlbury, has led to comments regarding the size of the development. The centre includes a 612 m? Sports Hall, which needs to have a minimum playing height 7.5 m. This very much determines the size of the scheme and undoubtedly the element of the development, in question. Sports Halls do not generally have windows for good reason. Witney and Chipping Norton Sports Halls are typical examples.

3. Materials and Cost. The main elements of the thread appear to revolve around the material used to clad the build. Again, the material used is completely consistent with the planning application and will provide a robust, airtight and long lasting covering to the steel frame. I am sure the Trust would have liked or considered other materials as an alternative, but undoubtedly cost was the predominant factor. I appreciate some people would have liked to have the entire sports hall area clad in stone or brick, however the additional cost would have been prohibitive and a barrier to the centre ever being built!

Finally, I implore people to hold judgment until the centre is seen in its entirety, both with all the development work and internal fit out completed. As way of an example, the Spendlove school is held with great affection, but architecturally would probably create comment if it was in the same format today. Everything in life is a balance!

I hope this thread can now return to its original topic, one which I am in great support of.