Izola’s mayor, Milan Bogatič, in a press release, repeated his assessment that the Istrian Cultural Center project is too big for Izola. He advocates the construction of a new building on the site of the current cultural center.
The SD’s Izola committee announced today that they still support construction in the area of Mala opreme.
An idea for an EPK, but the title slipped through his fingersThe project of the cultural center, which would be located on the site of the former Mala oprema factory and would meet the needs of the coastal-karst region, was created when four coastal municipalities competed for the title of European Capital of Culture. Since this project was acquired by Gorica and Nova Gorica, in Izola they can no longer count on the state to cover more than half of the investment, and in Koper, Piran and Ankaran they do not intend to co-finance the project, explained the municipality of Izola.
They are considering a new locationThe new municipal management also has concerns about the flood safety of the Mala opreme area. They support the construction of a new cultural venue, but it would be placed on the site of the current dilapidated cultural center or on another location that is not directly by the sea.
The SD party, which has two representatives in the municipal council, expressed surprise at this decision. As they wrote, a wider discussion should be initiated about the fate of such an important space. They recalled that in the past they had discussed various options for the location of the cultural center and that several documents for the project had been approved by the municipal council. They emphasized that the chosen solution of Ark Arhitekture Krušec in the architectural competition is the result of many years of work by experts.
“It is possible to find a cheaper solution”At the presentation of the concept, architect Tomaž Krušič said that the location “one of the best you could imagine”, as it is not in the old city center, but in the immediate vicinity, between the sea and the city avenue. He’s sure it is “ideal for a large public building with public outdoor space”.
They wrote that the mayor of the location “cannot arbitrarily mark as inappropriate and suggest moving to another location” and yes “the flood threat argument does not hold up, as the competitive solutions had to follow the clear guidelines of the Water Institute”. At the same time, they added that they would not “stubbornly persisted” with the chosen solution and that a cheaper solution can be found.