Voices from the meeting (The laptop was passed around and every one at the meeting had the opportunity to have a say).

“1. The proposed kitchen means destroying a mature cherry tree
2. It will block out light from our downstairs hall
3. The main income from EOCC is from exercise classes: these will be jeopardised by construction of kitchen in this place
4. If kitchen were sited next to social club could use that space during the day for healthy living groups /drop in centre for families etc instead of creating dual use for existing hall
5. Toilets in EOCC are a disgrace: not very encouraging to healthy living groups”
Anna Sandham, Treasurer EOCC

“This was deemed the only viable space for the kitchen to go. Yes, it does take up space, but what do we need more- a viable way of teaching our children to eat healthily and a subsidised food source, or a mature cherry tree. If it could be put in the bar area, then I would support that. If it has to be at the front of the building or not at all, then I support it.” Sarah Gardner

“I would hate to see this building be ruined – it is part of the heritage of the Cowley
Road. Many residents have memories of this being a school and a significant landmark in the area. We are rapidly losing places like this. I don’t think residents in the wider community have been consulted on this. There seems to be good will to compromise on the kitchen being moved to a different area in the building thus keeping the original building which I hope happens. Then everybody can benefit from this.” Annie Skinner

“I think any investment into the centre is welcome. It is seriously in need of all kinds of work and I hope this will be the start of more long term improvement. The grounds & exterior are a disgrace as is the toilets and bar. My only fear is that the improved kitchen will show up the terrible state of the rest of the building even more. I’m sure after the temporary disruption, the new kitchen would be well used and a welcome resource for the community. It has been such a long time coming, it would be a shame to have to go back to the drawing board, get new architects, new plans, planning permission etc etc and waste more public money when any new plans are just as likely to meet with more objections it seems.” Tara Stewart – fusion Oxford’s Community Arts Agency

“The project sponsors have continually ignored complaints about issues of siting of the project and the need for the project. I feel the attitude to the centre was that it was unused and any project would be a good thing. In fact the centre is quite well used there are many groups of dance, martial arts, morris dancers, and the centre should have been redeveloped with this in mind. Turning the hall into a restaurant will effect the use of the hall. Dual use is not the most effective use of the space it would be better to site it on the bar because that space is already full of seating and it would add to the use of this space. It is bound to impact on the hall use even though the project sponsors say it wont they are not going to build a kitchen there and not use it are they?” Cathy Spiers trustee