As plans to sell York's Barbican Centre thrust the controversial venue back into the spotlight, political reporter Adam Nichols tracks its troubled ten years
RAIN-soaked teenagers snaked around the concrete block of the Barbican couldn't praise the controversial venue enough. The first rate concert hall could pack in 1,800 music fans, the only place in York capable of drawing big name bands.
For the adoring Boyzone fans who camped outside to buy tickets in 1999, that had to be welcomed.
Since the auditorium hosted the Royal Gala Performance as its first live event, its reputation as a magnet for big-name acts to a city they previously ignored began to be made.
Huge stars including gyrating Welsh sex god Tom Jones, heart-throb Robbie Williams and Spice Girl Mel C have all played the Barbican during its ten-year history.
Paul Ingle punched his way to the European featherweight crown by dropping Sunderland's Billy Hardy in front of a Barbican crowd in 1998.
Only last month, Britain's greatest snooker players kept city fans entranced as the venue hosted the UK championship.
On paper, it appears an indisputable success. In reality, it's very different.
On September 17 1991, the Duchess of Kent ended years of discussion about the need for such a centre in the city by declaring it open.
"You are lucky to have a place like this in York - and you deserve it," she said.
But the £10 million venture, originally costed at £400,000 in 1983, quickly began losing cash. Only a year after it was opened, documents leaked to the Evening Press showed running costs had spiralled to £300,000 more than had been expected. Its first seven months cost the council £780,000.
Although some big name acts were drawing the fans, others weren't. Rock star Rick Wakeman played to about 200 people, while small audiences turned out for bands including All About Eve and Big Country.
The situation became so desperate that, only three years after it was built, the Liberal Democrat manifesto for the city council elections branded the Barbican "ill-conceived" and suggested it should be sold.
The situation hasn't drastically changed. Figures being discussed by City of York Council this week show the auditorium is more than two-thirds full on only 25 nights every 12 months, and the centre receives subsidies of £660,000 a year.
And it seems the sell-off called for by 1994's Liberal Democrats is about to happen.
City of York Council has received 11 bids for the site. It is expected to whittle them down to five when it meets today.
Most propose building homes on the site. The ten-year-old building is expected to be demolished, with the loss of the sports centre and the bowling green.
But an auditorium, profit-making gym facilities and swimming pool are expected to continue under council orders.
Swimming provision on the site is known to be a big loss-maker.
User numbers are nowhere near enough to fund it. Major renovation of the existing pool is essential and will incur a multi-thousand pound bill. But bidders have been told it must remain.
Council leader Rod Hills revealed proposals to close the pool two years ago, saying: "The message seems to be crystal clear. Municipal swimming is dying a death."
It sparked one of the biggest protests ever launched against City of York Council, led by the Evening Press's Save Our Swim campaign.
Opposition proved so strong that Coun Hills and his colleagues backed down and the people of York were guaranteed swimming would remain.
But the promise came at a cost and, with the council facing a budget shortfall of £4.7 million this year, that had to be found from somewhere.
That is one of the main reasons why the Barbican has been put up for sale.
Its future is far from certain.
It is guaranteed that a 25-metre swimming pool will be open to the public on the site for at least a quarter of a century. It is expected an auditorium will remain, although its size is not known.
But, until detailed bids are submitted and made public, the rest of the site's future is hazy to say the least. Liberal Democrat leader Steve Galloway says housing is likely to take up part of the site. Demolition of the existing building is expected, which means a new swimming pool and auditorium would need to be built.
Council officers are already considering relocating sport facilities, the bowling green and the Kent Street coach park, elsewhere in the city.
Short-listed bidders are expected to draw up more detailed plans after the council's executive meets today. It has been guaranteed that Barbican users and other interested parties will be consulted on them.
Planning permission for whichever scheme is successful is not expected to be given before August next year. It is unlikely that full details will be known long before that.
But whatever happens, the dream leisure centre which opened in 1991 looks almost certain to be facing a major change.
What they said about the Barbican...
"The fact that York is the only city of its size without a multi-purpose sports and entertainment centre is a tribute to ten years of Tory neglect" - York City Council Labour leader Coun Rod Hills, 1987
"We are not going to put up a building that in 15 years we're going to be cursed for" - Coun Hills, 1988
"The Barbican represents the new heart of York, not physically but metaphorically" - Coun Hills, 1989
"We are building the Barbican because the people of York told us that was what they wanted" - Coun Hills, 1991
"The Barbican will transform the range of leisure opportunities available to the residents of York"
- York City Council Labour Councillor Ken King, 1989
"York has got something to be proud of" - Murray Edwards, general manager of York City Council's leisure facilities, 1990
"This is a building for the next century which will extend the historical buildings in York and quickly become a landmark of the future" - Barbican architect Bill Cowan
"We need facilities close to centres of population, not this white elephant stuck in a horrendous traffic jam with the worst carbon monoxide levels in the city" - Tory Councillor Paul Milling, 1990
Updated: 10:30 Friday, January 11, 2002
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article