AS a performer at last weekend’s official opening of the controversial Ulumbarra Theatre at the site of the historic 1860s Bendigo Gaol, I feel I must make some comment on the building’s incompleteness and some of the unfavourable comments I witnessed.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Firstly, with all the media hype leading up to the opening one would’ve have been expected to read city futures director Stan Liacos leading the charge with the City of Greater Bendigo completing a project “on time and within budget”... but alas, the silence was deafening.
There was a large notice situated in the council’s reception area that I observed on April 10 that stated, and I quote: "Work will begin on the theatre in mid-2012 and is expected to be completed in 2014”.
Even if one stretches this to the last day of 2014... that was almost four months ago.
The building is still about two months away from full completion and at what cost?
Considering ratepayers contributed about 20 per cent of the overall budgeted $25.8 million to this three-way partnership in initial capital, one has to ask: who foots the ongoing expenses?
Is it the three-way partnership of federal, state and local government?
Or is it 100 per cent from Bendigo ratepayers?
While the façade and all the public areas appear complete, that delusion does not cover the rear entrance to the staging area, both outside and inside.
Outside a rough gravel path leads to the rear entrance, unmarked, while pallets of pavers, tradesmen's tools, their morning tea, discarded coffee cups and food wrappings litter the surface and futile attempts at roping off the area have been made.
Inside... well, lack of proper signs, no power in the dressing room (at least #3 anyway), showers incomplete still awaiting completion, “exit” signs that are not lit (an OHS issue in itself in the event of an evacuation), exposed steel framework, electrical wiring strung through framework but not complete, no lighting except a temporary light in one corner connected by an electrical lead across the room to perhaps the only socket wired up and live, various obstructions in the loading bay area where performers were assembled before going on stage - to name but a few of the traps and trippings that one would need to question as to the performers' safety.
Among all this the project received its Certificate of Occupancy only four hours before Friday evening’s opening. However, was it fit to occupy?
Consider that performers backstage are also occupants, not just the front of stage public attending the theatre.
Lastly, heading to the theatre I overhead a couple complaining about not knowing they had to have “free" tickets for entry to the theatre collected from The Capital... but of course they had come up from Geelong and were peeved to read the “sold out” sign out the front.
Worse was to come.
When on stage the curtain opened to reveal about 185 people seated in the mooted 1000-seat theatre that really only has 953 seats... if one takes their time to count them.
On stage, noise could be overhead from performing musicians outside the theatre when the theatre doors were opening/closing between our presentation on stage, detracting from our performance.
Not a professional image one likes to witness.
What's your opinion?
Do you have some thoughts on this issue? Click here to send a letter to the editor.
Preference is given to letters of no more than 350 words.