screwed up paper

Owner and Fundraiser give views on former Rivoli Cinema planning outcome

OnTheWight reported yesterday on the decision by the planning committee to allow demolition of the former Rivoli Cinema.

We contacted both the owner of the building and the group who had tried to convert it back into a cinema – for their reaction to the decision.

Fundraiser: “deeply saddened”
Bruce Webb, who spearheaded the Save the Rivoli Campaign told OnTheWight,

“We are deeply saddened by the imminent loss of such an iconic building after two years of fundraising and campaigning to save the building and turn it back into the picture palace it once was.

“As you are aware we believe the building is in good condition and could have easily and cheaply put back to this use as a place for the families of Sandown to go and be entertained.”

Conservation area “not worth the paper it is written on”
Bruce went on to add,

“What this decision does show is the conservation area in Sandown is not worth the paper it is written on, and that if you have a high enough asking price on your property so it above the market average, or you leave it empty or derelict you will be able to demolish it no matter the architectural, cultural or social significance or importance your building has to the town you live in.”

Owner “not willing to work with us” claim
Looking back over the campaign to save the former cinema from demolition, the Isle of Wight based filmmaker went on to say,

“What was clear from the start of the campaign, in our view, was that the owners fully intended to demolish the building as they could make more money from an empty plot rather than the existing building.

“They were not willing to work with us to obtain a mortgage through renting the building to us or when we had succeeded in raising £140,000 of the £160,000 target were they willing to drop the price or offer to do a deal to save the building.

“The price recently increased by another 50% when we brought new investors into the campaign.

“In the owner’s communications with the press, they always stated the building was not worth saving and even when we brought investors round, we were told by them, the owner had attempted to put them off buying the building.”

Owner: “fighting a losing battle trying to sustain this Victorian building”
OnTheWight contacted Tony Wright (owner of the premises). He told us,

“The warehouse has been on the market for three and a half years. In this time, only one offer was received for £160,000 which was considerably below the market value. We accepted this offer and took it off the market for six months to allow the individual time to raise the funds. Once the funds were not raised, an offer was received to rent the property, however due to circumstances, it was not possible for our family to be landlords and be responsible for an aging building.

“We were fighting a losing battle trying to sustain this Victorian building which is why we had to move our business to other premises. If it would have been viable for us to stay, we would have. It is just a shame that no one has found a use for this building, like we did for over 20 years.

“It was interesting to see that nobody attended the planning committee meeting to raise any objections and there were also more comments in support of the application than against on the Council website. The planning committee and Sandown Town Council agreed that it was of no asset to Sandown as a derelict building. The building still remains on the market for purchase.”

Massive thanks to supporters
The campaign had received a huge response, both on Indigogo and otherwise. Bruce finished by saying,

“We would like to take the opportunity to thank the thousands of supporters who have signed up to the campaign or given money.

“We have had a huge amount of Sandown residents offer their help with the restoration and we are very sad we failed to succeed in our aims.

“We will be returning all the crowdfunding money before Christmas (minus the Indigogo fees) and will have a vote on what any funds left over should be spent on.”

Image: rubberdragon under CC BY 2.0