![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Many performances at Savannah Center are sold out despite the fact that the folding chairs are uncomfortable and because the floor is flat the view of the performers is often blocked by the heads of persons on front of you.
We may not need a full fledged performing arts center. But a venue the size of Savannah but with a sloping type floor and permanent seating should not be unaffordable. It's just like a movie theater, only bigger. Many colleges or universities have large lecture halls of this capacity. And the population base is smaller than the Villages. Why would this not work. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Good enough is sometimes Good Enough. As you can see I am a fiscal conservative. |
An old boss used to say, "Never let perfect get in the way of better!" IMHO, the proposed retrofit of Church on the Square would have been better than the Savannah Center. Was it a perfect solution? No! And the residents would have had their regional rec center returned to them for its original purpose. As it turned out, we'll get nothing like PALMS in our lifetime. The Savannah Center was fine when TV was at 50-60K but we'll soon be over 100K. If the demand is really there Vesco may ultimately decide to schedule a show for four performances instead of two. Doesn't appear that Willie Nelson is selling out the house in April but that may stem from less demand after April 1st or as others have said, the cost of the tickets.
|
Quote:
|
From my experience virtually all PACs are money pits requiring government bail out or subsidies. Be ready for higher fees or taxes." There's no such thing as a free lunch"
|
Am I Understanding Correctly?
I thought Mark Morse made the proposal for the construction of a performing arts center, expanding the Church on the Square and utilizing the "park" next door for expansion. I thought the plan was to expand the capacity, improve the staging, lifghting and acoustics, provide for more comfortable stadium seating, etc.
As I'm recalling, the Amenities Committee for the area north of CR 466 was to be a party to the interlocal agreement, and they voted the proposal down. If I'm recalling correctly, the AAC didn't want to sacrifice the COS in favor of a PAC. Now the Morse proposal has resurfaced. If I'm reading it correctly, the AAC isn't included as a party to the interlocal agreement, therefore won't be able to veto the proposal. Am I understanding this correctly? |
Quote:
|
Not In My Lifetime
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.