The Scrutiny Committee has asked for a report to enable them to consider how the Council can improve the profile and accessibility of the Town Hall. This is an opportunity for the Committee to note the work that is already underway, and make any comments and recommendations as necessary.

Lead member: Councillor Susan Brown, Board Member for Customer and Corporate Services

Officer Contact: David Hunt, Commercial Manager, Community Services

The Scrutiny Committee had asked for a report to enable it to consider how the Council can improve the profile and accessibility of the Town Hall.

David Hunt, Commercial Manager, Community Services introduced the report. There had been recent audit of the building’s accessibility, the final report of which was not yet available. The audit had been conducted by a team with experience of addressing the challenges of access in listed and otherwise historically valuable college buildings in the city. The Town Hall, as a Grade 2 listed building, presented some interesting challenges when it came to matters of access and some pragmatic decisions had to be made about the extent of some otherwise desirable changes whether on grounds of cost or the limitations imposed by listed status.  There was agreement however on the desirability of treating those rooms available to the public as a priority.

The recently confirmed programme of a £3m refurbishment of the museum would help affirm the Town Hall as a cultural hub for the City. The imperative of accessibility had been “baked into the process” of its development to ensure the highest levels of participation once open. Thought was being given as to how the attraction of the new museum could be used, in turn, to promote other aspects of the Town Hall. Cllr Simm noted that thought was being given to linking the new museum with the City’s other museums and so generating the idea of a “Museum Quarter.”

The balance to be struck between generating income through lettings; free use by community groups (which have a positive impact on Oxford’s residents); and use to meet the Council’s meeting and other needs was always a difficult one. It was “difficult to turn away bookings.” David and his colleagues were in touch with members of the communities team about how best to promote the use by community groups.

In a wide ranging discussion about accessibility concerns were raised about the practice of charging for the Town Hall’s voice enhancers and of levying a £5 per capita charge for groups wishing to bring their own food. There was a strong view that residents in some part of the City did not regard the City centre (and therefore the Town Hall) as ‘their’ town centre, gravitating, rather, to Templars Square for example. It was noted that the new Museum was being developed in a way which deliberately sought to break away from the customary ‘town and gown’ model with a much more inclusive approach which embraced all parts, aspects and communities of the City, past and present. It was hoped that this would encourage more local people to engage with the museum than hitherto.

It was noted that the agreement for letting the Town Hall flat was subject to a break clause which was being exercised to bring it back under Council control with effect from July 2019 to allow the necessary museum work to take place. This break would provide an opportunity to consider a new arrangement that might provide better value.  

There was a strong perception in some quarters that the Town Hall was not seen a welcoming, notably by the BAME community. The comparable practice in some other towns and cities (eg Luton and Birmingham) was seen as much more inclusive.  It would be useful to see a breakdown of lettings by users. The Commercial Manager said that all groups were welcome;  feedback forms reflected a 72% “Excellent” response to the service provided; and that all complaints were followed up. 

In conclusion it was agreed that the following recommendations should be put to the

City Executive Board:

1.  That the charging schedule for rental facilities in the Town Hall be reviewed to ensure that it does not discriminate against any person with a disability or impairment. For example, there should be no charge for the use of voice enhancers;

2. That data should be collected on the number, type and proportion of community groups using the Town Hall, relative to the number of private and council bookings. These data should be used to analyse what barriers might exist to different user groups, and targeted promotional activities should be undertaken to engage more effectively with those underrepresented. These data should include:

a)        The type of user groups using the Town Hall;

b)        Where the user groups are geographically based; and 

c)         How often each user group books rooms at the Town Hall

3.That consideration be given to how key public spaces within the Town Hall can be made equally accessible for all visitors.

It was also agreed that the access audit report should come back to the Committee when complete.