New Café in Central Park

http://plymouthnewsroom.co.uk/centralparkcafe/

Quote :

The proposed new Central Park café has taken a major step towards reality after designs were submitted for planning permission.

The café is one of the flagship projects of the Central Park Masterplan, which sees a £9 million investment in one of Plymouth’s most popular green spaces.

Located adjacent to the clock tower, one of the busiest and most visible points of the park, the cafe will overlook a brand new play area and be close to new tennis courts, bowling greens and the refurbished skatepark.

With a grass roof, large amount of glazing and canopy-covered external seating area, the high-quality design aims to reflect and take advantage of the natural landscape and stunning views in the park.

It will be an ideal spot for all ages and provide a base for families to enjoy refreshments while being able to watch children playing.

Patrick Nicholson, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategic Transport, Housing and Planning, said: “Submitting the plans for the café is a major milestone and the icing on the cake for the Central Park project.

“I’m really impressed with the designs and hope that eventually, when the café is built, it will stand as a reminder to the hard work and dedication that so many have put into ensuring that Central Park is enjoyed by generations to come.”

Inside, the café will seat around 25 people with the outdoor seating area providing extra capacity in better weather.

There will also be new toilets, which will be open to all park users during the café’s opening hours.

In the New Year, the Council will be seeking an operator for the café leasehold who has the experience and desire to provide a unique venue and offer that promotes healthy eating and environmental sustainability within an affordable price range.

The café is just one part of the Central Park Masterplan which includes path upgrades, four new tennis courts, new cricket, rugby and junior football pitches complete with improved changing facilities, a new skateboarding facilities and improvement to drainage across the park.

More here: https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/parksnatureandgreenspaces/findpark/centralpark/centralparkimprovements

why is it needed when Brent has permission to build one?

I've been to a meeting or two about this. Politics as ever when there's a lot of "funding to be had"
Basically, the council want this to be a self funding cafe. No problem with that, apart from the fact it won't be, because they've got the position wrong, and are not offering enough food for a wide enough number of park users. Maybe they don't want competition with the supposed chains queuing up for Brent's pie in the sky, who knows.
Anyway, one can only guess why they think a "cafe" will succeed there when it will be nothing more than a parent and toddler viewing station of the play area. The same viewing station thing has been opened at the Victoria Park Lodge next to the kids playground, and  the cafe is already struggling to get the custom, even though it is run by the same folk who run the Devonport Park cafe. People have complained about the positioning of the new central park cafe proposed, and the ever growing concentration of activity/funding at the life centre concrete jungle area, compared to the rest of the park. But the council is determined to ignore any public comment in the "consultation" process in this regard. They are obsessed with the footfall thing around the Life Centre and the rest of the park can whistle. Hopeless, no vision.
There are 4 tennis courts to go up funded by the LTA behind the bowling green pavilion a little way away, and FOCP and many other users want that pavilion building to be a park "hub" and it would make sense to be the new cafe. On top of that, no funding is earmarked for the booking and running of the new tennis courts/hub et al, so one would have thought a functioning business/cafe/hub at the existing pavilion was the obvious answer to cover cost. Maybe they think the courts will self book in the way the courts down at West Hoe are continually empty. LOL.  Sadly, many council decisions these days are made on what capital funding is available rather than what is the logical step forward for a council leisure asset.
Still, who are we to argue with the economic logic of the council and their £25m Plymouth Pavilions and the subsequent yearly losses and eventual successful sale for £1 to the new park squire ?

You're straying into the private provision works better than public (for some functions) realm there.
Why was the Pavillions losing so much money that it made sense for Tudor to get rid and put two million pounds in Brents pocket?

Lovely place to sit and sip your cafe latte while you gaze at the overflowing bins full of dog shit.

Have to agree with the two above, this could be really good, you could showcase local food all cooked on the premises. For an excellent example of what can be done check out Suphas next to the China House. What well get is part baked pastries and bread baked 'fresh today" Argyle type coffee (Lyndhurst not Lounge obvs) and some massed produced pasty product all outrageously priced.
I hope I'm proved wrong but very much doubt it.

PatDunne wrote:

You're straying into the private provision works better than public (for some functions) realm there.
Why was the Pavillions losing so much money that it made sense for Tudor to get rid and put two million pounds in Brents pocket?

I believe the losses mostly came from heating the water in the swimming pool and once the pool was closed the losses fell away.

Not good PR for a Labour council to close a public swimming pool, is it? Nor is it good for a cash-strapped council to be running something that is always going to lose money. So it was sold on.

Not really Pat. I'm trying to keep away from public/private in this case and just comment on what makes sense. The council are going to have a cafe in central park in any event. That's a good thing, no one would argue with that, and I don't care whether it is privately or publicly managed. I just think it should be in the right place and not slap bang next to the life centre etc that already has cafe provision. The existing bowling green pavilion, earmarked for tennis development among other things is the obvious place, although, I personally feel there is a market for a more "eco oriented" cafe down near Barn park going down the old stream that might be re employed in a proper sustainable drainage system.
Private or public is no difference here. It's a case of whether the council want to encourage more footfall/interest at the concrete life centre area or to spread the charm of the park more widely.
The Council are already planning an eco centre at the new municipal park being developed at the bottom of Novorrosik Rd/ Forder Valley, so why not a similar small encouragement in Central Park ? These are one time opportunities to get the policy right. The money won't be available again for a long time.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

You're straying into the private provision works better than public (for some functions) realm there.
Why was the Pavillions losing so much money that it made sense for Tudor to get rid and put two million pounds in Brents pocket?

I believe the losses mostly came from heating the water in the swimming pool and once the pool was closed the losses fell away.

Not good PR for a Labour council to close a public swimming pool, is it? Nor is it good for a cash-strapped council to be running something that is always going to lose money. So it was sold on.

Of course they could always invest in solar and ground source heating haven't heard about any renewables being used in either the life centre or the HHP scheme not a good example to set.

eco- oriented, allotments, digging up concrete for grass, I'm all for that, but the x factor/Apple generation 'consume' they want Nandos, Starbucks et al, and there's far more of 'them'
it's a sad joke when the anti capitalists protestors favourite food stop is MDs and shopping site of choice Amazon.
Maybe one day grass will only be seen behind a glass case......

Earwegoagain wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

You're straying into the private provision works better than public (for some functions) realm there.
Why was the Pavillions losing so much money that it made sense for Tudor to get rid and put two million pounds in Brents pocket?

I believe the losses mostly came from heating the water in the swimming pool and once the pool was closed the losses fell away.

Not good PR for a Labour council to close a public swimming pool, is it? Nor is it good for a cash-strapped council to be running something that is always going to lose money. So it was sold on.

Of course they could always invest in solar and ground source heating haven't heard about any renewables being used in either the life centre or the HHP scheme not a good example to set.

I believe there's a large solar array on top of the life centre?

You're right earwig.
But fore shore Brent will use the opportunity of a south facing new grandstand roof, details not yet issued, to introduce solar panels to help the club's overheads. A perfect opportunity to comply with bulk standard present building practice and economic sense. Even he wouldn't pass that up, would he ?

From what I can remember, the plan is for the grandstand and ice rink will make heavy use of renewables, both solar and air-source from memory, exceeding the minimums laid out by the current regs. Of course, those plans can always be scaled back.

Pat is right - the life centre roof has a big PV array.

Let's hope they do.

I agree with most of beesrus threads, but I am out of Cetral Park and I been asked to join in with the new eco centre at the new municipal park being developed at the bottom of Novorrosik Rd/ Forder Valley combine with Efford Mashes,

whats the point in having 3 cafes are in touching distance from each other.

I love the idea of a proper community cafe, cakes and snacks from small suppliers/college students. Artwork by locals displayed on the walls, being served by students on work experience and those requiring sheltered employment. I've never understood the craze for taking children to any of the numerous chains for an overpriced burger or bowl of hot crisps, crammed in for optimum profit.

Never took my kids to any of those places, the sea, a river, the woods, camping anything that involves water a fire and a wood roasted free range chicken will keep any kids amused all day.

Surprised there’s been no comment on yer about the piece in today’s Herald reference an accident in the Pavilions car park and Brent not carrying out repairs to the surface that caused the accident.

Graiser wrote:

Surprised there’s been no comment on yer about the piece in today’s Herald reference an accident in the Pavilions car park and Brent not carrying out repairs to the surface that caused the accident.

Another letter today about outstanding lighting repairs and CCTV cameras looking upwards, need Deliah posting on here!

Graiser wrote:

Surprised there’s been no comment on yer about the piece in today’s Herald reference an accident in the Pavilions car park and Brent not carrying out repairs to the surface that caused the accident.

Why would an accident at the Pavilions spark a reaction from someone on a thread about a cafe in Central Park?

Czarcasm wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Surprised there’s been no comment on yer about the piece in today’s Herald reference an accident in the Pavilions car park and Brent not carrying out repairs to the surface that caused the accident.

Why would an accident at the Pavilions spark a reaction from someone on a thread about a cafe in Central Park?

The OP is certainly about the CP cafe, although in true ATD style it veered slightly off course with reference to the Pavilions further back in the trail.
Perhaps in hindsight a new thread would’ve been better

Dingle wrote:

I love the idea of a proper community cafe, cakes and snacks from small suppliers/college students.  Artwork by locals displayed on the walls, being served by students on work experience and those requiring sheltered employment. I've never understood the craze for taking children to any of the numerous chains for an overpriced burger or bowl of hot crisps, crammed in for optimum profit.

You're not the only one Dingle. I've been to a couple of meetings where just such a park amenity was certainly wanted by all, but bar the council, who I'm guessing have to dance to strings attached to the funding. It certainly seem that way.
Maybe something will come out of the community hub at the bowling pavilion and new tennis courts. I'm aware that the guy who has taken over the pitch and putt might well be happy to run a proper refreshment outlet at the bowling green, rather than the cups of tea at present. I think that would work, and as yet the council have no idea how the tennis courts are going to be managed as they have no intention whatsoever of funding tuppence there themselves, including booking the courts. Could be a business that might just work, incorporating the tennis and pitch and put management. Nice little spot away from the din of the Tom Daley legacy and Brentworld.

Don't understand the point about tennis courts when the council closed most of the courts in the city during the nineties. As for the cafe, whilst the idea is not necessarily a bad one, why provide seating for only 25 when the plan is to increase numbers?