BRUG May News Letter 2016

REC LISTING The international architectural organisation, DOCOMOMO, has applied for the Rec to be listed in recognition of its architectural, social and community significance. BRUG is has been consulted by Docomomo and the BRUG Committee supports this application. We believe listing of the Rec will protect its unique architectural features (like the pool, the atrium and sports hall) as well as the huge range of recreational facilities for the future. A listing would celebrate and recognise the vital role the Rec has played in the cultural and social life of Brixton residents, through a history of turbulent change. Listing would ensure that any major changes proposed by the Council are more carefully managed, and would have to be explained and justified publicly. The council have committed to keeping the Rec operational until at least 2022. BRUG wants to know what their plans for the Rec are after 2022. Tell Historic England (the body that recommends listing) why the Rec is important to you. Email Philip.Seely@HistoricEngland.org.uk, with the reference 1434761 copy to recusergroup@btinternet.com. Read Docomomo's application here. BRUG has submitted a statement strongly supporting the listing of the Rec. Read here.

New Brixton Rec Forum BRUG & GLL Rec User Forum held its first meeting in April. The Purpose of the Forum is to take a positive strategic view of the activities, services, and facilities in the Rec. The Forum represents the many different types of Rec Users: gym, swimming, racket sports, bowls, exercise classes, over 55s club, community clubs, as well as BRUG and GLL. 12-15 people will attend regularly, with others invited on particular issues. It will meet quarterly. Darren Pope, Rec General Manager, Geordie Logan, Rec Operations Manager, and Sue Robinson Community Sports Officer attend for GLL and pursue Forum proposals. Main topics for the next 3 meetings: Areas for social interaction, e.g. A cafe Customer service/ customer feedback and communication strategies. Bowls- how to increase participation Read more at here. Council reinstates consultation with BRUG Cllr Jack Hopkins, the new Executive Member for Leisure & Regeneration, has reinstated the regular Rec consultation meetings with BRUG. This follows a positive meeting between him and David Duncan, BRUG Chairperson. The focus of the first meeting in July will be how the rest of the £6m money to make the Rec fit until 2022. The first expenditure was on the new boilers. Studios 1 & 2 are to be refurbished A new false ceiling will be put into studio 2 next to the bowling green. The studios brickwork will be covered by dry lining. Some aspects of lighting and ventilation are in need of attention.  Objections raised to this:  The red brickwork and the wooden floors are both functional, attractive and in good condition. They are important in the overall design of the Rec. Users think changes should be in level 1 studio only which is hot & noisy. Users want a decent silent air con unit. (From Users Survay) We would ask that GLL respect the architectural integrity of the studio spaces Please let us know what you think ASAP so we can pass on to GLL. Email: recusergroup@btinternet.com.

Pics by Simon Kennedy Copyright © 2015, Brixton Rec User Group, All rights reserved. Our mailing address is: recusergroup@btinternet.com

Read More

New Brixton Rec Forum

Studio 2 with fine brickwork and wooden floors

BRUG & GLL have set up the Rec User Forum. 

The Purpose of the Forum is to take a positive strategic view of the activities, services, facilities in the Rec.

The Forum will represent the many different types of Rec Users: gym, swimming, racket sports, bowls, exercise classes, over 55s club, community clubs, as well as BRUG and GLL. 12-15 people will attend regularly, with others invited on particular issues. It will meet quarterly. Darren Pope, Rec General Manager, Geordie Logan, Rec Operations Manager, and Sue Robinson Community Sports Officer attend for GLL and pursue Forum proposals. The inaugural meeting highlighted the following aims.

• Good communication between users and management. 

• Bring the whole of the Rec building together. Users and management. 

• Improving standards. 

• Ways to encourage more young people to use it 

• Opportunities for sports grants. 

• Consultation on changes within the building.

 Main topics for the next 3 meetings are Areas for social interaction, e.g. A cafe Customer service/ customer feedback and communication strategies. Bowls- how to increase participation All meetings will consider Cleaning Maintenance Building developments/ Future Developments Community events 

Studios 1 and 2 will be refurbished. 

A new false ceiling will be put into studio 2 next to the bowling green. The studios brickwork will be covered by dry lining. Some aspects of lighting and ventilation are in need of attention.

Objections raised to this: 

• The red brickwork and the wooden floors are both functional, attractive and in good condition. They are important in the overall design of the Rec. 

• We would ask that GLL respect the architectural integrity of the studio spaces

Darren said he will take these concerns to senior management and report back to Forum, the refurbishment of studios will mean a “fresh new look”. studio 2 looked dark and dated, this is the GLL corporate look for all the centres it manages.

Read More

Statement in support of application no: 1434761 to list the Brixton Recreation

Statement in support of application no: 1434761 to list the Brixton Recreation Centre, 
27 Brixton Station Road, London SW9 8QQ.

photo Sean Macintosh

Brixton Recreation Centre Users Group(BRUG) supports this application for the listing of the Centre (locally called the Rec).

We request that Historic England considers our support summarised below, in conjunction with this application. BRUG is an independent voluntary organisation of Rec users : - established in 2007 in response to threatened closure; - recognised by Lambeth Council and GLL, the current management; -in 2012 Lambeth Council’s Brixton Central plan suggested possible sale and demolition of the Rec by developers; - after a BRUG led campaign and public meeting in December 2012, the Council leader Lib Peck committed to securing the future of the Rec; - The Council and GLL agreed to regular consultation with BRUG. Social and Community Significance of the Rec: - Brixton Recreation Centre is a vital hub providing a focus for a cohesive and vibrant community; - it is located in the heart of Brixton; - well served by all forms of public transport; - adjacent to well patronised market and eating / entertainment venues; - many diverse communities use the Rec - Afro-Caribbean / British /Latin American and many more; - the Rec is the only place where everyone can meet and interact to develop personal interests and friendships; - the opening of the Rec following the enquiry by Lord Scarman into the riots in the 1980’s, was seen as addressing the lack of sports and leisure provision in Lambeth, especially for young people; - Nelson Mandela visited the Rec in 1996 to address the local community. Upon his death a huge outpouring of thanks and sorrow from all communities was recorded in books of condolence BRUG submitted to the South African High Commission; - several community sports clubs are based in the Rec providing routes to personal growth and sporting success to mostly disadvantaged local kids - Afewee Training Centre run football and boxing activities and several of their young people have represented England in football (Nat Clyne and Rinsola Babajide) and others play for professional clubs; - Topcats Basketball club had many players in Team GB at the 2012 Olympic Games and others have gone on to play in the American NBA; - Xpozure Dance group have had dancers go on to the Royal Ballet, Ballet Rambert and the Brits School. A Local Community Asset : - the Rec is a safe and happy meeting space in an otherwise deprived community; - it is heavily used with on average 76,000 visits every month; - is spread over 6 levels, activities include bowls, 3 gyms, 3 pools, many exercise and dance studios, a huge sports hall,a football pitch, squash courts and nursery and soft play spaces for toddlers; - all the spaces radiate from a light filled central atrium; - the versatility of the design enables spaces to be adapted for a multiplicity of uses - the football pitch becomes a mosque and a Christian church group use a dance studio, while the sports hall has the basketball ,roller derby and racket sports and exam students.

Robyn Dasey (Secretary of BRUG) David Duncan (Chairperson of BRUG)

Read More

DOCOMOMO's application to Historical England Brixton Recreation Centre

DOCOMOMO's application to Historical England

Brixton Recreation Centre

Historical Context

The history of the social and physical change in Brixton during the post war welfare

state period is unique because of the scale of immigration, social stress and the

physical decay of existing buildings. Redevelopment was designed and built in response

to perceived needs, sometimes misplaced, sometimes under resourced.

Also unique was the level of ambition by both politicians and architects in striving for a

level of quality for solutions, with sometimes inadequate resources, against and within

a sometimes hostile and ignorant London and National context.

The combination has left a heritage that is flawed but rich in diversity and

achievement. The achievement is there, and it should be celebrated and nourished.

Listing of buildings has a part to play in ensuring that the quality of ambition and scale

is properly recognised despite or because of previous neglect and misunderstanding.

The idea that peoples needs, physical and mental health, education and cultural

pursuits, needed to be addressed by common agreement and action grew through the

19th and early 20th century so that by 1937 (in nearby Peckham) the first Health Centre

came into being. By the 1960s with increased population and the founding of the

Welfare State, the need for Recreation and Exercise in high density deprived urban

areas lacking open space was recognised. Attention was given to swimming and other

forms of exercise that could be done in a confined space and internal recreation with

easy access should receive public investment for the public good.

It was also recognised that the grouping of different facilities together also encourage

interaction, by sharing of facilities, flexibility for change and response to changing

needs. Transport links and the more casual benefits of a welcoming environment with

easy access were recognised. Given the racial nature of much immigration in Brixton, a

physical forum that recognised diversity was a high priority.

2. Location

The lack of available open space combined with the proximity of overhead railways in

central Brixton were problems which led to the ambitious idea for locating the

proposed Recreation Centre at high level next to the railway.

High level location with a ‘safe’ (from cars) pedestrian walkway linking buildings was a

fashionable idea in the sixties stemming from a misreading of Le Corbusier’s planning

ideas (in his schemes he invariably place the vehicles in the air, and left plenty of space

on the ground for the pedestrians) being misapplied to the problems of existing city

centre areas. Here the ambition to link to future high-rise housing that did not

materialise was unfortunate. Where sufficiently large areas are served by walkways (as

at the Barbican) were achieved and maintained they worked well, here in Brixton the

walkways being blocked off have become a contradictory cause of security risk with all

the problems that follow.

However, there are reasons to be optimistic at Brixton. There are multiple means of

both pedestrian and vehicle access/escape to and from the complex which for

understandable reasons have remained blocked and ‘protected’ wit security fences and

gates to maximise access. The proximity of the Police Station to the rear and the

history of the unfortunate social disorder and riots has left its mark and clearly

‘strangled’ the Recreation Centre for far too long and are a hangover from the past

that should now be re-addressed so that inherent potential for accessible flexible

diversity is released.

The expansion of the adjoining and thriving street market is a clear sign of

regeneration confirmed by recent interest for economic redevelopment. The similar

Borough market at London Bridge and Camden Lock Market have become expanding

areas of regeneration. The Social, Integrated, Diverse population has caught up with

Social,Integrated,Diverse nature of the original architecture of the Recreation Centre.

This is a reason for the opening up and positive reuse of the Recreation Centre along

the line of ambition originally intended, for a new and diverse increased use.

At long last it has the potential to realise its use and not be subjected to removal or

demolition. The modifications needed could be carried out for a fraction of the cost of

demolition and consequent unsustainable energy loss avoided by reopening and

modifying access at many locations on and beyond the perimeter.

External Layout

The high proportion of complex external surface (walkways and walls) some covered,

others uncovered, have inherent problems. However, technology has advanced since

the initial completion and what is now required is imaginative management combined

with imaginative detail design, using many of the surface materials, lighting and

equipment now available which were unavailable or not even invented when the

original scheme was built. Again, the cost of such modifications is a fraction of that

entailed in demolition and rebuilding. Removal of large unnecessary signage and the

introduction of small-scale helpful signs and user-friendly surface materials can

transform a building of the necessary complexity.

Internal Layout

Despite the external misfortunes that have afflicted the outside, many of the diverse

activities within have clearly prospered and are valued by many. The triangular, top-lit

atrium which provides internal circulation while common in building types such as

hotels and shopping malls where a lavish budget in order to impress has a beneficial

pay back, is here robustly softened with brickwork and planting which if maintained,

can eliminate differential humidity and acoustic problems, to achieve a relaxing

balance to active nature of the surrounding physical activities. While falling a bit short

of such a masterpiece as FLW Guggenheim in NYC, the spatial quality of the atrium here

is as good or on a par with that of the listed Crystal Palace Sports Pool atrium and is a

reason for listing BRC.

Materiality

The use of monolithic vibrant contrasting material combinations was again fashionable

when this building was designed, the question is how appropriate and what skill in

deployment was there her? The differing sizes of volume for the differing recreational

uses are deliberately assembled and clearly expressed in a ‘neo-constructivist’ manner

as in the celebrated and listed Leicester Engineering Building 1961 (architects Stirling

and Gowan)

What is significant here is the lack of rhetoric in ‘shape making’ and the simplicity of

the multiple orthogonal shapes which are gathered and mixed in a subtle arrangement

which yields multiple views integrated with the surrounding, while at the same time

clearly a separate ensemble with its own strong identity. It is this characteristic that

gives the total building including the office block part (which on its own has little

individual character) its specific character within the whole. In comparison with

celebrated Economist Buildings, St James’ Street 1961 (by the Smithsons) the

deployment of blocks is tight and vibrant. And this characteristic merits listing for this

achievement.

Read More