November Newsletter

Lambeth spending £6 million on the Rec 

Lambeth have 'ear marked' up to £6m to upgrade the Rec to ensure that it meets all current fire, safety, mechanical and electrical standards. This spending commitment will cover the estimated 4 - 7 years for the Council to develop detailed plans and secure funding for long term refurbishment works. The Council wants to have no partial or complete closure while this initial work is done. BRUG will be consulted at each major stage. We will keep you updated. The Council has also published a report exploring possible options and costs of major long term reconfiguration of the Rec at http://futurebrixton.org/brixton-central/brixton-rec-2/. Three options are given. Options 2 & 3 include bringing the entrance(s) and main gym to street level, elimination of the bowling green, an outside climbing wall and much more. The need for, or value of many of these changes is not clear. Cllr Jane Edbrooke, Cabinet Member for Culture & Leisure, has told BRUG that the Council has as yet no idea how it might fund the £21m-£45m costs of these. She led BRUG to understand that these options are formulated to explore the scale of works and their overall cost. See a record of our meeting with her here.

 "Brixton Rec one of the best sports centres of all time"

 "The building should be protected" said post war 20C architectural expert Phillip Boyle at the fascinating recent BRUG open meeting. He and some other Architects argue the Rec should be 'listed, to strengthen sustainable sensitive management and provide meaningful consultation over changes to the building. Find out more here.

Culture 2020

The Rec will NOT be included in the Council/GLL scheme to govern the 3 library gyms, a major proposal of the Council's report 'Culture 2020'. Cllr Edbrooke has assured BRUG that GLL will continue to run the Rec under its present contract with GLL until 2022. Report at here.

Disabled Users Team

BRUG wants to set up a small disabled users team to inspect & keep a watch on disabled user needs in the Rec and propose immediate and longer term improvements, like putting a lift in at street level.Contact recusergroup@ btinternet.com to take part.

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

Read More

Lambeth Architecture 1965-99

I have just ordered Edmund Bird's and Fiona Price's new book Lambeth Architecture 1965-99.  It is of particular interest to BRUG as it has quite a bit of information on Brixton Recreation Centre and on it's architect George Finch. So I am really looking forward to receiving my copy.

There is one point relevant to the cost of the rec that is not mentioned in the book, I quote: “...but it took 12 years to complete due to funding crises and labour disputes. The cost of the project spiralled to £25 million – twelve times the original estimate.” The point is that the rec was built through out a period of high inflation. The actual rise in cost for the period (1971 - 1985) was 4.665 times higher. So the real over run was 7% (i.e. 107% of original estimate).

Here are some of the pages from the book that show the Rec.

You can purchase the book from The Herne Hill Society.

Edmund's latest book is his fourth in the series on Lambeth's architectural history since 1900, taking the story on from the creation of the GLC and the enlarged Lambeth borough in 1965, up to the end of the century. It is the first book to assess the work of Ted Hollamby, the borough's chief planner and architect between 1964 and 1981, and his enormous output of council housing, as well as that the major GLC estates of the 60s and 70s. He charts the brief flirtation with high-rise towers such as those on Clarence Avenue and appraises Hollamby's high-density low-rise developments such as Clapham Manor and Gaskell Street. It was also a boom time in the provision of leisure and community buildings, cradle-to-grave social and health care, construction of new schools and of course the completion of the post-war vision of the cultural hub of the South Bank. His book also includes the public art of the period and the growing numbers of buildings of this era that are now no more. Biography: Town Planner and conservation officer in the cities of Lichfield and Bristol before joining Lambeth in the mid 1990s and rising to become Head of Conservation & Urban Design, moving on to the same position at Camden in 2003, and for the last 9 years, Heritage Advisor to the Mayor of London's GLA and TfL. Academia: BA (Hons) Economic & Social British History 1815-1980, MSocSc Urban Planning and MA Town & Country Planning. He has lived in Streatham Hill and Herne Hill for 20 years.

Read More

BRUG Response to Council's Culture 2020 Consultation,

Brixton Rec User Group is discussing how the Rec's future can be secured with a pricing structure that allows affordable access to the whole community.

In our letter to Cllr Edbrooke, Cabinet member for Leisure & Culture, we have given a detailed response to concerns raised in the 2020 Consultation, including the proposed digital hub, affordability and community led activities.

“Architectural Photography by Simon Kennedy;

See below or download the PDF BRUG Response to Council's Culture 2020 Consultation.

Dear Cllr Edbrooke,

BRUG Response to Culture 2020

I write to submit our comments and questions on Culture 2020, largely in respect of the Rec. The issues overlap importantly with the future design and functions of the Rec, as implied or expressed in parts of the (Rec building) Feasibility Study on which we have commented, separately.

We address the proposed community digital hub; the Rec pricing policy based on ‘fairness’; the apparent policy that the Rec be ‘self-sustaining’ with no subsidy;> the Sport Innovation Fund; and the user and public consultation process on the future Rec.

On the proposed community digital hub, BRUG questions whether the ‘much needed additional study space’ is at least partly the result of actual or proposed closure of other facilities – at Lambeth College, and more immediately, those libraries marked for closure by the Council in the Culture 2020 proposals. We cannot agree to a digital hub in the Rec as a poor substitute for college or library facilities. Nor can we agree that the Rec becomes a (necessarily second class) substitute educational facility. This would also reduce facilities otherwise available for recreation, sport, leisure and community led initiatives in the Rec.

Pricing policy. 40% of the 1000+ people who completed the Council Rec User 2014 survey thought the prices too high. BRUG is especially concerned that the cost of the Pay As You Go card, £37.75 for those aged 16+ not eligible for concessions, and some PAYG activity prices actively deter the non or low, perhaps not very fit nor accustomed to physical activity person, from trying or continuing any such activity. We understand Lambeth policy is to encourage greater participation of these people, e.g. the proposal for older men’s physical activities. PAYG card and activity prices which deter participation can only undermine the achievement of these aims.

The Council’s reply that its policy is based on ‘fairness’, begs far more questions than it answers. It immediately raises comparisons in many minds with 'affordable' housing which in reality is not affordable for many people. At BRUG's request, two years ago GLL, prepared information on Rec prices and how annual increases were determined. BRUG now requests a detailed examination of the Council's 'fairness' policy and how it has or will be applied to determine the comparative and absolute price levels for the activities in the Rec. We want this to commence with the annual cost of PAYG cards, together with the charges for each major activity such as gym, exercise classes, over 55 club and swimming. Our second priority is to examine the charges for community activities and how these are determined in line with the 'fairness' policy. BRUG asked if 'self sustaining ' meant whether the Council would no longer subsidise the Rec or leisure centres generally.

We find the Council's answer incomprehensible: 'Setting costs within the existing management contract aside the building does not currently operate on a subsidy basis. Applying the principle of self-sustaining allows the Council to establish whether the building operates at a surplus or loss and thereby builds an appreciation of its relative financial position.... ' as the Council contributes considerable amounts to the maintenance and upkeep of the Rec. We learnt from an FOI request, that the Council paid directly £531k for the recent Rec refurbishment and new gym equipment, plus its share of the £208k of the LBL/GLL joint development fund established under the current contract.

We request written details of the items and funds to which the Council has contributed to the Rec over the past 10 years, to see how it would change if the 'the principle of self-sustaining' is applied 'to establish whether the building operates at a surplus or loss'. Summary of key risks in Culture 2020 lists two identified risks and actions should the risks transpire, in respect of the Rec.

1. ' Unable to negotiate a cost neutral contract' which, if this happens, the Council action would be 'Soft market testing of leisure operators', BRUG requests explanations of the 'cost neutral contract' being sought and the 'soft market testing' that might follow.

2. 'the Council are unable to meet the full capital costs for the proposed refurbishment,'in which case the Council would 'Explore alternative options for funding the capital programme including mixed use for the site and external investment linked to the new leisure management contract.'

BRUG requests to be kept fully informed and consulted as the capital programme unfolds.

As you know, access to facilities at reduced rates for Lambeth based community led sports and recreation groups and clubs is one of BRUGs central aims. We therefore would like to explore the Sports Innovation Fund with you. Issues to pursue include how it is to be funded. LBL has linked it recently to pricing policy and a 'self-sustaining' Rec, does this mean Rec users to pay more, and/or some of GLL surplus from the Rec to go to the Sports Innovation Fund rather than improvements at the Rec? What should be the aims of the Fund? Who should run and control its grants/support in kind? The three priorities outlined in Culture 2020, while laudable, do not appear to derive from a coherent policy. The first is setting up a Lambeth Active Women and Girls Programme; the second supporting clubs to achieve Sport England and FA Standards to enable access to external funding; and the third an Active Walks Programme. It is not clear, e.g. whether and how much the first and third priorities are generated by community-led groups, or are top down Council initiatives.

Citizen engagement in consultation on complex issues such as in the Rec Feasibility Study, and far more with the on line documentation on Culture 2020, is very difficult, even for those who attended the events. On Culture 2020, BRUG decided we could reasonably only distribute your cover letter to us, and the Brixton Buzz summaries, so as not to alienate supporters. Brixton Blog & Bugle recently published a critical commentary on the process. Even among our dedicated committee, several attended some events but only one read the full 1200 pages.
In the Rec, we have many from a very diverse and large potential group, who will participate if approached face to face on the premises. This was well demonstrated by the 2014 user survey when BRUG members on tables in the foyer at crucial times more than doubled user input. Many users are also active in their children's schools, on local estates etc. We have positive lessons from the documentation and workshop on the Feasibility study.

BRUG wants to effectively involve the maximum number in the consultation on the Future Rec. We therefore want to be involved immediately in the discussions on, setting up of the consultation process, including any selection of a consultation specialist.

Robyn Dasey,
BRUG Secretary

Read More

BRUG supporting the "Save Brixton Arches" campaign

BRUG supporting the "Save Brixton Arches" campaign. 25th April 2015

 Photograph Caroline Christian

 Photograph Emma Calder Banner Coco Cripps

Stellas, one of the shops that is threatened with eviction by Network Rail Photograph Emma Calder

This video was just posted on the Brixton Buzz web-site. Here's what they say about it:

"The 10 minute video posted by Latin Brixton explores the issues of the day, interviews traders and locals affected by the changes and reflects on an event that was – for the vast majority of people – totally peaceful and, importantly, fun."



Video from a short series of art films/promos, by CSM Art Foundation Student Coco Cripps, Bringing awareness of the proposed wholesale and insensitive redevelopment of Brixton.
This films shows the positive energy of Saturday 25th April 2015 in Brixton.

The song that Coco used for part of the Soundtrack, was being sung as we marched around. It is a Japanese nursery rhyme called Furusato which means hometown. Underneath Coco has looped elements from the Samba band that was playing on the day.

Read More

The Rec is Changing

Please join the Brixton Recreation Centre User Group for a meeting to meet the architects Stride Treglown. See the models of the Rec and have your say.

“Architectural Photography by Simon Kennedy;”

Read More

Improving the Brixton Rec for everyone

BRUG is actively pursuing Councillor Lib Peck’s commitment, made on behalf of the Council, to improve the facilities at the Brixton Rec and not demolish it.

This is our chance to push what Brixton Rec users want.

The main and most immediate issues that BRUG is raising with the Council and GLL/Better, who run the Rec, include:

• Making the ramp more welcoming
• Making the outside of the Rec more contemporary looking, informative and interesting with, for example, displays, flags and artwork
• Installing display boards inside
• Seeking disabled people’s views on their needs at the Rec
• Using planters in the internal atrium
• Celebrating and marketing the Rec more in the community

For the longer term, BRUG would like the Council and GLL/Better to consider:

• Introducing new activities (eg, boxing)
• Conducting a high standard energy audit
• Opening up the rooms on front entrance level/balcony (eg, a café)
• Introducing a Lambeth sports development programme for 12 to 16 year olds

We want and need all Brixton Rec users to participate in helping to build better facilities and services at the Centre. Would you like to work with us on any of the above or other issues relating to improving the Rec? If so, email brixtonbrug@gmail.com with your ideas.

Read More

Councillors listen to the views of Brixton Rec users

On 10 December 2012, more than 120 Brixton Rec users came together in what was a lively meeting to put forward their views on the potential threat to close the Brixton Recreation Centre.

The notes below outline the main points and concerns made during the meeting.

Ellen Lebethe, the Chairperson, opened with a few personal words. She said the Rec may be in danger. Users of the Rec had not been consulted. Lambeth is now a Cooperative Council and citizens are at the heart of Lambeth. They should have input in the process. Brixton Rec is more than just a Rec it is a Community hub.

David Duncan, for the BRUG committee, added that the Rec is a unique place. All ages and races make friendships there. It has a huge range of activities and social activities. Rec users were not consulted about the future of Rec.

Contributions from the floor and responses from Councillors.

The Rec has cultural significance and if it was in Mayfair the Council would not think of pulling it down.

Someone said he was representing the unspoken voice of the community. He said the facilities at the Rec for football/ basketball helped prevent youth going into crime.

Councillor Lib Peck (Council leader) responded:

There had been a lot of consultation on the Brixton Town Centre plus workshops, and online. (Heckling – ‘get to the point’ and ‘what is the hidden agenda?’) She said that this had all been started by rumours. There was pride in Brixton. (More heckling – ‘get to the point’.) She insisted the Council wanted the best leisure facilities for Brixton. But there were issues of access for disabled (more heckling ‘get to the point ‘and the Council want to sell off (the Rec) to make money’). Councillor Peck stated that there is no hidden agenda and the Council wanted to improve facilities but there are issues of disability access and energy sustainability. The rumours had started with the consultation on the Brixton  Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). She urged people to sign up to Future Brixton. The draft SPD was due to be published this week but this had been pushed back. Now formal consultation may not start until February. She is now Leader of Council but was previously the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing. This post is taken over by Councillor Pete Robbins.

More heckling: ‘The Rec was iconic and a lifeline for people’.

Chair intervened saying people had the right to speak and to take their turn. Chair said that this was about improving Rec. What is important is to keep the Rec.

Councillor Peck said she was sorry there was anxiety about selling the Rec.

A woman asked Councillor Peck to categorically say whether the Rec site is to be sold. Many interjections from floor saying ‘answer the question’. Chair said that questions would be answered in turn. Three questions from each side of room, then answers. People from floor interjected saying ‘no more questions until the lady at the back’s question is answered’. Someone from floor asked is the Rec underused? It is in prime position for retail. What is going on?

Councillor Peck replied that developers are interested in Brixton. But the Council would only want to work with developers who put money into the community as well. Consultation showed that people did not want any more big chain stores; they wanted to retain the character of Brixton. The Rec is not underused. There was a large investment in it 5 years ago. Greenwich Leisure had a good impact on running the centre. But there are concerns about disability access and energy efficiency.

Someone asked if the Rec building needed to be demolished. Councillor Peck answered no but a serious level of investment was needed and that the meeting should start a ‘shopping list’ of improvements, along with GLL.

Someone said the Council had not put notices about the recent consultation in the Rec. Councillor Peck said that it had been a mistake not to do this and have a separate meeting on the Rec. Councillor Peck repeated there was no ‘hidden agenda’. This issue of hidden agenda was repeatedly raised by the floor. She said the Council wished to work with people on options and that residents should make decisions.

A user said that the draft Brixton SPD was not in line with the Brixton Masterplan and the Lambeth Core Strategy, which specifically protect the Rec and,0 unless it was changed, the Rec would be under threat in the future. Questioner twice asked for assurance that the wording of the formal consultation document on the Brixton SPD would protect the Rec. Councillor Peck did not give the assurance but said the Rec would be kept as the feeling of the community was so strong.

A man said that the consultation had been an insult. This was not being done in Brixton’s name.

The Cabinet Member for Leisure, Councillor Sally Prentice, said the Council had to think about the energy crisis and energy costs of the Rec. Also the Council would not be getting any more money from central Government. The 1930s Clapham Leisure Centre had been closed as it was no longer fit for purpose and completely rebuilt. Disabled access and underuse of areas in Rec needed to be looked at.

Interjection from floor – you are paid to sort these things out. Put some new lights on the access areas.

Councillor Prentice said that the Council was not a soft touch with developers.

A boy comes to front to speak. Said he had used the Rec since he was 3. Now here for 5 years. So the Rec was important to him.

The Chair proposed a discussion on the way forward, summarised below.

There needs to be a policy to get Brixton a world class athlete.

The Roller Girls said they are world class team as they are European Champions. Number 11 in world ranking. The Rec is the only place in London where they can practice using the roller skates as other recreation centres do not like roller skates on their floors. If the present Rec went, they did not know what they would do.

Longer opening hours were suggested.

Refurbishment yes, replacement no.

If there is refurbishment, do it around people, not close Rec for ages.

Go back to original architect’s vision for the Rec.

Rec is used by church groups as well.

In the ramp, open up the windows which are now covered.

Another child spoke. They had used the Rec since they were 2 years old when they started swimming. They were now level 8.

Chair said that older people use the Rec. As an older person she said it was important for people’s wellbeing and health. Doctors refer patients to the Rec.

The new Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing is Councillor Pete Robbins. He was present and he had been listening to everything that had been said. He had only been in post for 3 days.

Brixton Energy could look at putting in solar panels and green energy.

It was pointed out that ‘Better Games’ for the over 55s had been televised in Brixton Rec. It would be good to have ‘Better Games’ for younger people.

Councillor said that everyone present should go on the BRUG email list for further consultation.

The meeting ended. The Chair thanked everyone for coming and the lively debate. She thanked the Council for the reassurance that the Rec would not be demolished.

Read More