Submission
9 year plan feedback
Should we remove 231 Stuart Street (formerly the Fortune Theatre) from the list of strategic assets in the DCC Significance and Engagement policy?
Yes, remove 231 Stuart Street from the list of strategic assets (this is our preferred option)
Do you have any comments about 231 Stuart Street?
Use the proceeds towards further investment in performing arts especially theatre.
Should we charge an entry fee of $20 (incl. GST) for international visitors aged 16 and over, at Toitū and Dunedin Public Art Gallery?
Yes, introduce an entry fee of $20 (incl. GST) (this is our preferred option)
Do you have any comments about the entry fee for international visitors?
It is standard practice overseas and will contribute to the upkeep of those institutions.
Is there anything else you would like to tell us?
In order of priority and timing I advocate for the following short-term / urgent actions: Immediate financial support to be granted for operations of Te Whare o Rukutia. This will require the DCC to reverse its decision to end funding for Te Whare o Rukutia.
The annual Professional Theatre Fund continues, at least at its current level, preferably more.
Financial investment is required for Playhouse Theatre infrastructure. The Playhouse has stated they expect to close in 24 months without this support.
For the 9 year plan we recommend The DCC commits to create and adopt an Ōtepoti Theatre Action Plan - as they have done for our colleagues in the music scene.
Ideally this action plan would include the following mid-term actions on infrastructure development, as recommended by the Performing Arts group (Stage South, the Playhouse, the Athenaeum, the Regent) Statement of Intent.
Support for the Playhouse renovations and refurbishment.
Support for the public/private partnership of Athenaeum development to improve the 90 seat fringe theatre and create a significant new music venue.
Support for a new build, community performing arts centre. This will require DCC land or partnerships with landowners to secure a suitable site.
If a memorandum of understanding for a new build is not secured within 18 months, or in the event that DCC will not support a new build, consideration of the support for new infrastructure for the Regent Theatre.
Any consideration of further investment into The Mayfair is mistaken, it is fundamentally unfit as a 21st century performing arts venue. The building is damp, aged and flood prone, with a limited envelope. The plan put forward by the Mayfair Trust proposes to spend a huge amount of money but retains the many design limitations; small completely inflexible stage, European proscenium arch, poor acoustics for spoken word, inadequate access, poor sightlines, inevitably high running costs and multiple technical design limitations. The single stage business model, and total design proposed doesn’t ensure the multiple income streams required for sustainability. Then there’s the fundamental problem that the venue was designed as a cinema and adapted for traditional European theatre; vaudeville and musicals. It’s inherently unworkable for modern theatre and actively exclusionary to Maori and Pasifika performance with its strong colonial flavour and lack of community space.
The Mayfair Trust doesn’t have the organisational expertise to develop their venue in a way that allows a sound professional theatre business plan. It operates as a volunteer venue and has always relied on this. The Mayfair Trust exists not to further performing arts in Dunedin overall, but because they love their building and the romance of the colonial heritage features. They are unwilling to accept or even discuss its limits and representatives have been notably absent in meetings between Stage South, The Regent, The Playhouse and The Athenaeum over the last 12 months. They have shown no intent to develop a working relationship with this group or engage in the hard discussions. There are a number of local professionals and touring companies who have stated they will never work with the Mayfair Trust or perform in this building again.
The Mayfair has some charming colonial heritage features and is beloved by a few, but putting more funds into this old girl is the definition of throwing good money after bad, from a professional theatre perspective.
Local Water Done Well feedback
Which water services delivery model do you support?
The Council’s preferred option: an in-house delivery model
Why did you choose this option?
Do you have any other feedback related to the proposed water services delivery models?
Supporting information
No associated documents with this submission.
Submitter
Submission id number: 1130898
Submitter name:
Martyn Roberts
Organisation
afterburner