On Behalf of Gayle Night - Page 15

Gayle · 31-03-2005, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

According to the Telegraph 28/02/04) £1,000,000 was originally budgeted for the Panopticons Scheme. If all six projects cost £50,000 each, what happens to the remaining £700,000?

I think the key phrase in this one is 'according to the Telegraph'.

I will reiterate that the budget for each one is £50,000 - that includes artists fees. The Telegraph keep printing that £1m figure - I can only assume that they are factoring estimates from what other funding will bring in. As it's already brought in extra £300k in Rossendale, I suppose £1m is a reasonable estimate for the entire project.

Gayle · 31-03-2005, 15:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

Just a quick thought.....if the Panopticons scheme, is in fact, a single scheme (although multi-site) then I would assume that under public sector tendering rules that this was advertised in the OJEC? (Offcial Journal of the European Community).

To those of you who are not aware, all government procurements wth a capital value just above 100,000pds have to be advertised in this weekly journal to allow for competitive tendering thoughout the EU. If this ain't been done, and the Panopticons combined are a single scheme, then to go ahead without abiding by EU rules would make it illegal.

Any comments?

I can't really comment on this because I wasn't around at the beginning of the project. Perhaps you should write to NWDA or ELP if you want to investigate this further.

Gayle · 31-03-2005, 15:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

On the subject of Access for the Disabled.........would you enlist the opinions and advice from people who understand the needs of the disabled ?..........especially wheelchair users.
My mum is a wheel chair user and I have been to some places that have advertised ease of access for wheelchairs and it has been a joke.........I need muscles in my spit to get the chair into some places that show the wheelchair icon

As I said earlier the funding for paths etc is being applied for by Friends of Arden Hall and although is part of the wider scheme, it is not technically part of the Panopticon project per se so 'we' meaning Mid Pennine Arts would not be putting the final plans together. Therefore, I can't answer that but I agree it would be a good idea to get input from groups and organisations who have knowledge in this area.

Sweet.F.A. · 31-03-2005, 16:51

Thanks for all the time you have put in answering all the questions Gayle.Before I started reading this thread I was very anti-panopticon, but having read the views and questions in some of the posts I have changed my point of view. This, may I say, has nothing to do with any answers that you have given. It is down to some of the bigoted comments contained in the thread. Its almost enough to make one vote Conservative in the next election.

Uncle Mick · 31-03-2005, 16:53

On the question of drainage, how much will this cost and is it coming out of the £50000. The Quote about 3 to 4 inches of standing water is quite alarming. Children have been drowned in ponds of that depth and kids love to explore away from their parents........

Doug · 31-03-2005, 17:06

I’m sorry to be the one to p*** people off, but in regard to the safety aspects of between 4 and 6 ins of standing water. Are there not two bloody great big reservoirs over other side of the hill? My other thoughts are that young children who are of an age to be at risk shouldn’t be up there unsupervised, further more natural drainage should be possible without incurring costs…….

Gayle · 31-03-2005, 17:09

Does anyone have any statistics for the number of children that have drowned in the trenches that are already up there?

Uncle Mick · 31-03-2005, 20:38

I don`t think that the trenches or the lodges were put there to encourage visitors with children. Oh and no, natural drainage is not an option as drains were put in all around the Coppice about ten years ago. Go ask the residents of Pinewood Drive about drainage!! By the way, Gayle I hope you were joking.

Doug · 31-03-2005, 20:53

Lodges, that’s a word lost in my past. Uncle Mick I have to admit that it's a long time since I was up there, but I can remember that their was always a bit of standing water around during the wet season, which was almost anytime back then. I know where people are coming from but I think it’s easy to loose the gist of the point. Risks are all around us all the time and sometimes action must be taken to protect youngsters, but in an open semi wild environment like the coppice it shouldn’t be an issue. Like you point out the lodges are already there and it is unlikely that people would want to see them fenced off, filled in or cover over. Fighting against standing water in man made ditches is a bit like gilding the Lilly when there’s already so much around. By the way I lost two very young neighbours in the canal at church back in the early 60s and another mate to a drowning accident years later, When we where kids we use to swim in the lodge up Fern Gore almost every week without incident. So its not that I don’t understand or don’t care. I do Very much…….

Doug · 31-03-2005, 20:59

I know I’m a cheeky sod, but is their anybody will to go up there with a camera a take a wide range of shots so that those lazy bu**ers amongst us can see how thing are today. I think some of those trees could come down an all. If HBC or the Forestry Commission where going to plant for ascetics they should have planted broad leaf native species

Bagpuss · 31-03-2005, 21:58

It's too late now Doug but I will get you some pics if nobody beats me to it.

Uncle Mick · 31-03-2005, 23:00

I agree with you Doug, I don`t like the nanny state and it`s rules and regulations. I`ve enough scars to show I was a reckless youth once, however the Park at the bottom has had all it`s dangerous rides taken away ( Anyone remember the umbrella) and child friendly surfaces laid down. Its the law, its heath and safety. So if you are going to build a structure and you hav`nt considered the safety aspects with regard to the children you are trying to attract, then you are doing a very poor job indeed. Young children love exploring and so while the parent is admiring the magnificent view.... it might never happen but standing water ina steep sided ditch is not an ideal playground for children.

Doug · 01-04-2005, 01:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagpuss

It's too late now Doug but I will get you some pics if nobody beats me to it.

You sir are a gentlaman. Thanks Bagpuss remind me to buy you a pint....

Doug · 01-04-2005, 01:25

I concur Uncle Mick, Risks and Health and Safety are very much part of my working life, but a risk, but everyone, even children should be allowed to take reasonable risks. Jesus the Umbrella, I was scared s***less of that beast for years, Nobody I know in Blackpool knows what one is. I was 12 when I got to grips with it. I remember a friend of ours from Church lost her front teeth on Milnshaw Park after being hit by a swing. I wish my son had my opportunities to find out for himself the pain of a real childhood rather than sitting on his a***with a number of game consoles and bloody computer games. I digress I know. Yes I agree we must insure there safety today, but I do have to say, if this structure is supposed to encourage and support nature the little ****** shouldn’t be allow to play in it.

Doug · 01-04-2005, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagpuss

It's too late now Doug but I will get you some pics if nobody beats me to it.

Well I suppose I beat you there Bagpuss...Hello Gayle, Uncle Mick. There’s is quite a bit off standing water up around some of the trenches, but it's not to bad, I enjoyed what was a brief walk, about an hour on top. But well worth it. Maybe we should openly invite HBC up of an historical trip in time and Nature trail, before they destroy it altogether.