Phase 1 of the New Pavilion

At the October 1962 AGM, shortly after the purchase of the ground from the Huntroyde Estate, the Chairman drew the attention of members to the importance of ‘development of the ground’.  His statement that the purchase of the ground ‘would not be the end, but only the beginning, and all members had an equal responsibility in making the ground purchase worthwhile’ proved over time, to have been entirely appropriate.  He was referring to, not just the playing area, but the overall facilities, and without doubt, included in his vision was the need for a new pavilion.

He explained that most of the Premium Bonds prize money would be expended on the ground purchase and therefore the further developments would ‘have to be obtained by hard work’.  Club members bought into this strategy in the ensuing years, recognising the need for a prioritisation of the various improvements envisaged.

By November 1962, it had been established that financial assistance for the building of a new pavilion may be forthcoming from the National Playing Fields Association (NPFA). Shortly afterwards it emerged that a better grant may be obtainable from the Ministry of Education than from the NPFA.  It was noted that a grant from the Ministry of Education was likely to be 60% of the total cost. It was recognised that work on the pavilion would have to be done in stages, as cash became available, and the order of precedence would have to be decided.

In March 1963 Mr C H Frankland reported that a satisfactory new pavilion comprising dressing rooms, toilets and refreshment room would cost approximately £2 000 and some suggestions were made for minor alterations to the initial plan for the proposed building.  By February 1964, however, the estimated cost for the pavilion had risen to £5 892, this being the first element of an overall Club development programme envisaged to be of the order of £15 000.  It was decided that a request for a grant be submitted to the Ministry of Education and at the same time an enquiry about financial support also put to the NPFA. It was hoped that it may be possible for building work to commence at the end of the 1965 Season.  A site visit by a Ministry of Education Inspector in July 1965 gave the Club some optimism that grant aid would be forthcoming.

In August it was decided to apply for a NPFA loan of £2 000, repayable over a 3 year period.  Unfortunately, by February 1966, not only were loans subject to a maximum of £750, but the award of Ministry of Education Grants had been suspended for an indefinite period.  However, the suspension period was short-lived, but resumption of grants was expected to be on a limited scale. The Club accepted an offer from the NPFA of 3 year loan of £750.

By April 1966 it became clear that the Club’s application for a Ministry of Education Grant was not included in the ‘first’ list of applications to be considered, but encouragement was taken from the fact that it was included in the ‘second’ list.  The Club was advised by its agent Mr Forbes that, in order to qualify for a grant, the planned ‘social area’ would have to be omitted or re-designated. A revised plan, omitting the social area had the benefit of reducing the estimated cost from £6 000 to £4 000, without precluding the possibility of identifying the building of a social area extension as a future project.  It then became apparent that a ‘tea-room’ as opposed to a ’social area’, could be included in a grant application. In March 1967 a £5 000 plan including a tea-room was under consideration by the Ministry of Education.

The fact that the condition of the existing timber pavilion was reported to be such that it could not be expected to last beyond the 1967 Season, served to highlight the desperate need for progress on the financial front.  Mindful of the need to avoid any possible further delay to construction of a new pavilion, and the critical need for contractor vehicular access across the Common Land for delivery of materials, work commenced on creating a suitably firm surface across the Common Land for delivery vehicles.

In May 1967 the Club received confirmation from the Department of Education and Science of the award of a grant of £2 322 towards the new pavilion, payable by instalments.  The Club’s current financial position meant that the project could proceed immediately.

The Pavilion Specification prepared by the Club’s architect was issued to five potential contractors, seeking tender submissions. By July 1967, Cort and Holden, who had submitted the lowest tender, was selected as the company to build what turned out to be Phase 1 of the new pavilion.

Disappointing though it was that the social area had necessarily been omitted from the revised plans, it was recognised that it could be identified as a potential future project. Reconsideration of priorities established that reconstruction of the ground should remain the next priority, and take precedence over an extension to the pavilion.

The building work progressed well and was completed prior to the commencement of the 1968 Season, along with demolition of the old timber pavilion.  This major milestone was marked by a cricket match between past and present players on Easter Monday 15 April 1968.  The Club Minutes reveal that a film showing the opening of the new pavilion and ‘action pictures’ of play during the 1968 Season would be shown at the AGM.

The final overall cost of the first phase of the pavilion project was £5 311 of which £2 322 was covered by the grant.

Phase 2 of the New Pavilion

Phase 2 of the pavilion did not materialise until 10 years later, in part, as a consequence of the decision to give priority to the ground reconstruction over a pavilion extension, and only after several design iterations, principally associated with difficulties associated with identifying the best approach to meeting the Club’s need for improved storage facilities.

In 1973 a decision was made that a new storeroom should be incorporated into the new pavilion, rather than be contained within a new Scorebox.  Plans for this were submitted to the Blackburn Rural District Council (RDC), which not too surprisingly, resulted in the RDC insisting that matching brickwork would be required.  An application for a grant towards the cost of the above storeroom had been rejected, which resulted in a sub-committee being appointed with the remit: ‘to review the storeroom needs and siting thereof, bearing in mind possible extensions of dining and toilet areas, and in so doing to seek as wide a view as possible’.

In April 1974, the sub-committee recommended that an integral storeroom should be the aim and it was agreed that outline planning and building regulations approval should be sought. A target building date of March/April 1975 for the proposed pavilion extension was set, with priority to be given to a storeroom, other extensions to be delayed if necessary to ensure storeroom completion in readiness for the 1975 Season.

A possible plan, prepared by Riley Burwat, was rejected because it failed to meet the first priority, relating to adequate additional equipment storage area. The Committee decided therefore to revert to the original plan and Mr Cort and one other builder were requested to submit estimates with a clear breakdown of costs of various elements, of which the storeroom was one such element.

In November 1974 it was agreed that planning permission be sought for the full scheme of pavilion extension, but in three stages:  1 storeroom, 2 end of bar, 3 the remainder; with every effort to be made to avoid possible delay in respect of the storeroom.

However, on further reflection, it was accepted that building a storeroom behind the pavilion would make any additional building more difficult in view of restricted access. In order to overcome this potential problem, it was agreed that the necessary storeroom should be achieved by a double garage in the corner of the field near to the pavilion. It was further agreed that the building of a bar and appropriate extension should be discussed at the AGM, to establish the extent of likely support and demand.

Mr Dickinson reported the fact that the Planning Authority had expressed an unwillingness to approve the proposed plan for a double garage, probably influenced by the likelihood of objections being submitted by residents of the Hazels, but he was requested to press hard to get support for the Club’s proposal at an imminent site meeting with an officer of the Planning Authority.

Taking all factors into consideration in February 1975, it was finally concluded that a single application should be submitted for a double garage directly behind the pavilion close to the ground access gate. This proved to be acceptable to the Planning Authority and the eventual planting of climbing plants helped to screen the double garage.

At the beginning of 1976, Messrs Wharton and Dickinson were requested to draw up a revised plan for a relatively modest pavilion extension based on a seating capacity of approximately twenty. This resulting plan had an estimated cost of £7 000 and would provide an additional area of approximately twice the size of the existing ‘dining’ area.  Several potential uses of the proposed extension, in addition to match day use, were identified, including for example activities for Junior members such as table tennis.

It was agreed in principle to proceed with revised plan, subject to receipt of a satisfactory quotation and being able to raise the necessary finance. Towards the end of 1976, having established that a loan of up to approximately £5 000, repayable over a 10 year period if required, was likely to be available, the Committee felt able to back the initiative, provided a second quote indicated that the quote of approximately £6 000 supplied by Mr Cort was a fair one.

By February 1977, Local Authority Planning Approval had been gained, but some concerns remained about financing the project, resulting in a possible stage-by-stage approach, but at the same time noting Mr Blackman’s urging to achieve maximum floor area.

A sub-committee in the summer of 1977 recommended that a stage-by-stage approach be adopted to avoid the risk of putting the Club into heavy debt. It was acknowledged that there may need to be some minor alterations but understood that the overall scale of the project should remain unchanged.  The issue of a veranda was discussed, the outcome of which was that an outdoor veranda was the preferred choice, even though this obviously didn’t maximise the internal floor area. The adoption of the plan including a veranda, meant that the existing front line of the building was retained. Mr Cruse was appointed Clerk of Works for the pavilion extension.

By April 1978, the base had been laid (twelve inches below the existing pavilion floor level) at a cost of £620 and it was agreed that the sooner the walls and roof were built, the better. Securing of a loan, if necessary up to £800 was agreed, so that it would enable this further work to be carried out at an estimated cost of approximately £1 500. Work on the roof, glazing and asphalting of the floor were given the go-ahead in July.  It was also agreed to have a timber inset floor area.

Including furniture, carpet tiles, joinery, electrical work and decorating, the overall cost was expected to be approximately £7 000. The extended pavilion was judged to have a safe capacity of 70 people.

Following a number of previous discussions with the Matthew Brown Brewery, and a request for them to reconsider the terms of their most recent loan offer, it was agreed that a loan of £1 500 should be sought, pending a financially successful Gala Day event, with the final decision regarding the loan being made after the Gala Day. In the light of the successful Gala Day Event generating a profit of £800, a loan of £1 000, repayable over 2 years was agreed.

From the commencement in 1962 of plans for a new pavilion, to completion of Phase 2, had taken more than fifteen years, but this project proved to be just as important to the Club as the initial purchase of the ground and the major reconstruction of the playing area.

Members of the Club, many of whom were still active playing members, had worked extremely hard to overcome a whole range of obstacles and challenges that arose, in pursuit of these permanent major improvements, being at all times prudent in respect of avoiding jeopardising the Club’s financial status.  For those of us involved, it was a great privilege to have been involved in this stage of the Club’s development, and an immense pleasure to work in a highly committed team of volunteers helping the Club achieve its long-term aims.

Repairs and Improvements   

By 1982 it became apparent that the roof was in need of repair, but it wasn’t until 1991 that a major repair project became absolutely essential, costing in excess of £6 000 including VAT, minor repairs it seems having sufficed in the meantime.

A serious blockage was identified in 1984 in a section of sewer pipe running from the pavilion and passing through the garden of No 21 The Hazels.  Also, the presence of unacceptable smells in the vicinity of the old septic tank led to the recognition that possibly one of the pavilion discharge pipes had not been correctly linked in with the pipework leading to the sewer.  This eventually proved to be the case and the problem of the sink waste discharge pipe not having been properly connected to the sewer pipework, was rectified.

Improvement of the ladies’ toilet facilities was identified as a high priority in 1984, the existing situation being described as ‘grossly inadequate’. The agreed solution was to relocate the storage garage from its position adjacent to the pavilion, so as to enable an extension to the pavilion to be built.  Planning Approval for the re-siting of the storage garage was given early in 1985, but the quotes received, based on the plans produced for the ladies’ toilet improvement project, incorporating also a storeroom, were considered to be unaffordable in 1987.

The acquisition of a snooker table for the pavilion in 1991 was a further enhancement of facilities.

In the nineties several aspects of the pavilion and its facilities became in need of repair, replacement and refurbishment, the first of which was the framework of the large window in the pavilion. In 1996 necessary bar renovations were completed.

In 1994 an architect was engaged to produce drawings in respect of a further extension to the pavilion, quite probably concerned with improvement of ladies’ toilet facilities and storeroom, but not specified in the minutes.

Rewiring became necessary in 2001, in part at least because of vermin access.