Town Hall Site

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29239, 24 June 1960, Page 3

Town Hall Site

Sir,—That you support the confiscation of the Canterbutj 21ub for town hall purposes is surprising. Undoubtedly the ■itizens desire a worthy buildin.i for functions, etc., whether they >vant heavy expenditure on civic idministration offices, is doubtul. The present municipal chambers are satisfactory and tht Civic Theatre and yard covei uture expansion. They would jnly realise a peppercorn price if sold. Money collected plu r easonable assistance from coun oil funds, wotild provide a worthy building for functions Latimer square would permit thousands to witness receptions etc. which could never occur or the club site because of rive> proximity. Surging crowds nea' the river could be dangerous, suggest a large modern hal eight feet above street level witl a large frontal concourse fron which receptions, etc. could be witnessed from Latimer square with a revenue-earning basemen for public parking.—Yours etc ' H. E. RADLEY. June 21, 1960.

Sir, —Would not an appropriate solution to the problem of providing a suitable alternative site for the Canterbury Club be to build a town hall with five or six floors and install the Canterbury Club as honoured guests in the top floor. In this way the rights of the minority and the necessities of the majority would be reconciled. In addition a fivestorey town hall would utilise such a valuable site economically. —Yours, etc., , B.K. June 22, 1960.

Sir,—l suggest that “Practical Matters” is a propagandist bemoaning the loss of club buildings and strutting arguments for the drab, cluttered Civic Theatre vicinity. The Canterbury Club site has been selected after careful consideration of available sites. The magnificent elevated Limes site was presumably ruled out for smallness, shallowness and street reasons; the representative expert committee recommended and the council decided on the club site. It is an area of special tradition; has river detachment from traffic hurly-burly; is adequate in size; the few affected buildings are decrepit; its inner central area is almost a slum; the architect will have a scope unfettered by problems of costly demolition or harmonising with existing structures; the location has atmosphere, convenience, and Avon-side bpauty. It may be sad for club members to lose their site, but gentlemen receiving full compensation will bow with dignified resignation to the best interests of millions who will live here.—Yours, etc., MORE PRACTICAL. June 19, 1960.