|
Parent Article: RFU and Media Production Space Proposal |
|
A modest proposal |
by Donovan
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
04 Oct 2005
|
 |
I'm truly sorry that I can't be at the meeting tonite, as I have a lot of strong feelings on this issue, yet am still quite open to hearing reasoned arguments about other folks' feelings. In the absence of my own flesh and blood attendance tonite, I'm gonna outline a few things that I think should be taken into account in the discussion.
1. Based on the discussions here and the HEATED debates at the walk-thru of the PO building last week, I fear that RFU is getting a reputation (undeserved) of wanting more than their fair share of space vis-à -vis other parts of the IMC, such as print and video production. This may be true, but running a radio station, in fact, takes space – broadcast equipment, the board, storage for CD’s and other accessory items, space for (multiple) guests, etc. in addition to concerns about wheelchair access, security, and other non-trivial issues that make this a thorny planning problem. If we want RFU to have more space than some people think we deserve, then they are entitled to that opinion, but I think I speak for most of the RFU contingent when I say that we just want a radio station that will be able to handle and facilitate all of the things we want it to be able to do, and I will say again, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, that my personal opinion is that if we build a tiny, cramped, inconvenient facility that’s incapable of hosting panel discussions for talk shows, live acoustic music sessions, or whatever, then we are idiots, because this building has more space than we know what to do with at this point.
2. However, there is an argument – a valid one, I agree – that the visibility of a radio station would be a
great tool in encouraging community interaction and putting a public face on the IMC. Likewise, having print, video production, etc on the first floor would be nice, so that they have some visibility. I will continue to argue, however, that having any of these uses (radio station, print prod, video prod) may in
fact become HIGHLY undesirable to users when a concert is going on in the main room and there is work being done. All of the walls adjoining the performance space, not just the IMC, need to be well soundproofed or I suspect that everyone will be begging to move to the basement after the first event in the performance space. In some ways I question why any of the outreach uses (radio, video, print) even want to be on the first floor.
3. I see a few options, including moving RFU or production, or both, to the basement, cutting out some of the performance space for other uses, or dealing with what we have. In all cases, compromises will have to be made and hard choices debated: space vs. visibility, access vs. quiet working conditions, etc. Someone has got to be willing to compromise here, or consensus is a fleeting dream.
4. Concerning the size and space of the RFU studio. I agree that we should spend as frugally as possible. I agree that public visibility has benefits. I agree that angled walls and fewer windows will create a better sounding studio. I agree that angled walls cost more. I agree that windows cost more. I agree that we want and can use a lot of space. I agree that other stations make do with much less space. I agree that if we continue to not be able to reach some agreement that we should seriously think about moving one or more of the proposed first floor uses to the basement. Guess what? All of these things are not going to come to fruition because some of them contradict each other. But all of them are valid arguments, and it’s perfectly reasonable that RFU would want a lot of space, and that we should save money, and that we should build the best studio we can now so that we don’t have to spend more money later, etc etc. So what do we do? Something has to give.
5. At this point I’m gonna propose the following new scheme. I’m tired of the debate and I don’t care where the windows are or how many there are, even though I think that having windows on both the west and south walls of the studio is overkill and I don’t think that the entry hall (aka south wall of the studio) will feel intimidating without windows on it. I have re-read every post, every rationale, looked at every proposed design, and visited the space last week. My plan below, I think, requires very little demolition, preserving as many of the existing partition walls and doors as possible. It requires construction of just a couple new walls, at 90 degree angles. It takes a few feet away from the performance space, which I think is reasonable, given its size and shape. It gives production more room than they were originally allotted and gives RFU more room as well, plus access to the vault for music storage. There may be some doors or walls that need to move or windows that need to be added (this design is more conceptual than complete). I’m not trying to throw a wrench in the system, but I feel like this is a design that addresses just about every concern that has been raised (expect the west and south windows) by RFU and production, and creates a pretty good radio facility with minimal demolition and new construction.
I wish you all the best of luck tonite.
donovan |
