As you will all know, the parking situation in Clifton is likely to become very difficult in the near future with the probable introduction of the Residents’ Parking Scheme. Regular Wednesday evening attendees will also have noticed that on more than one occasion we have come close to a capacity audience. As a result of these problems, Council has been actively looking for alternative premises; this has not been an easy task as many suitable properties are either outside of our price bracket or would be affected by other proposed Residents’ Parking Schemes.

We have, however, found one property which Council believes is suitable and we now need to hear the opinions of the membership with regard to this particular property.

The property is what might be called a “starter unit” and is situated on a small industrial estate in Montpelier, very close to the Bristol branch of Calumet. It comprises two floors with offices on the ground floor and a large open area on the first floor. We would propose using the first floor for Wednesday meetings and the various ground floor areas for studio use, meeting & coffee areas and display areas. Being a private estate, there is no risk of parking restrictions being introduced by the City Council and, although the property only has half a dozen private parking spaces, the estate is largely unoccupied during the evenings, meaning that parking shouldn’t be a problem.

 

There are pros and cons attached to this property which the membership should be fully aware of before they respond to this email and any final decision is made by Council:

Pros

1. No parking problems
2. Members would probably have to pay an additional £2-£3 per evening to park in Clifton, this would not be the case in Montpelier.
3. The property is large enough to hold meetings for up to 100 members (at present we are limited by the Fire Authority to 60).
4. We would be able to have separate studio and meeting areas.

Cons

1. Cost - With the purchase price and necessary alteration works to make the property suitable for a camera club, the BPS reserves would be considerably depleted, probably costing getting on for £325,000 in total.
2. Increased running costs (compared with West Mall), rates would be higher and we would have to pay nearly £1,000 per year in service charges (estate maintenance).
3. Being a larger building, services (gas, electricity etc) would cost more.
4. Although we hope for an increase in membership and therefore subscription income it is possible, because of the increase in costs, that the annual membership fee might need to be increased to, say, £75. However this would be offset for many members by the fact that you won’t have to pay parking fees.

Because we are not the only people interested in the property, Council needs to move very quickly on this matter if they are to proceed. We therefore need to know if the membership would be prepared for the Society to make this move. Would you please therefore email me with answers to the following questions within the coming week:

1. If the consensus is for the society to move to these new premises in Montpelier would you continue to be a member? Yes/No
2. If your answer to question 1 is No, could you please give your reasons.
3. Would you be prepared to pay an increased annual BPS membership fee?
4. If the parking scheme does increase your costs of your attendance at BPS meetings would you continue to be a member?

We are consulting members at the first opportunity; a great deal of work remains to be done to ensure that a move to Montpelier is viable but that if this proves to be the case and that it is clear that a majority of members are in favour of the move then we hope it would be early next year.

As we need to act quickly, would you please email your answers to the above questions to newsletter@bristolphoto.org.uk as soon as possible; please put NEW PREMISES in the subject line. If you have any questions not covered by the above, please feel free to email me and I will try to answer them for you. Please do not telephone your answers or queries as we require written responses to enable Council to compile a record of members’ responses.

 

Pete Howell