|
|
 |
| |
Sobell Centre, built in 1973 |
My Sobell vision: new swim pool, high-rise flats... and no bulldozers
Architect’s alternative to £20m redevelopment plans would save existing sports centre
IT’S a new design for the Sobell sports centre – but with a big difference. Instead of the much-loved Finsbury Park building being demolished, it is retained, refurbished and becomes the central point of the development.
Barnsbury architect James Dunnett has produced a plan he believes is more in tune with what many residents and users want.
He has adapted drawings produced by Islington Council to illustrate its plans for a £20million redevelopment of the centre. Significantly, the Dunnett scheme includes 150 high-rise homes, half as many as in the council project.
But it manages to keep the current green area around the building – something that would go in the council version – and even includes a new indoor swimming pool.
“I wanted to show what could be achieved with a bit of creativity,” Mr Dunnett said this week. “None of the redevelopment designs for the Sobell offered by the council during last year’s consultation provided refurbishment as an option.
“I’m not saying mine is the perfect design. I’m just suggesting there are other ways of doing a job, and refurbishment rather than demolition needs to be assessed.”
Mr Dunnett, a founder member of the Islington Society, and other campaigners oppose the demolition of the Sobell, designed by Richard Seifert in 1973, on the grounds that it is unnecessary.
In addition, Mr Dunnett argues that the building is an important example of the Seifert architectural school and should be protected.
Islington Council says the centre is in a poor state and would be too costly to repair. It favours demolition and rebuilding.
Mr Dunnett’s plan puts most of the new homes on the car park. The council has already said there is only need for limited parking as most centre users will not come by car.
He said: “As far as I know no one has done a study of refurbishment. It is possible and should be a lot cheaper than the rebuild option.
“We know that the floor surface of the main hall needs replacing. The main plant is 35 years old and needs renewing. There’s a need for a substantial investment in the infrastructure but until someone has studied it we don’t know what works need to be done.”
Gordon Kerr, director of England Squash, who is campaigning to save the Sobell from demolition, warned: “There is a large risk that in the current climate the centre will be demolished, the local authority will run out of funds and nothing will be built.
“We’ve estimated that the centre can be refurbished for as little as £12million. Best of all, it will mean minimal interruption to facilities.”
Green councillor Katie Dawson said it was important to keep all options open. “A refurbished scheme is very attractive because you keep the Sobell open most of the time during the work,” she added. “Demolition means it is shut for two years and no one wants that.
“I’m not sure about the number of houses included in Mr Dunnett’s scheme. Personally, I would like to see more green space and outdoor facilities so that the Sobell becomes a real destination sports place.”
Lib Dem leisure chief Councillor Ruth Polling said that the Sobell was one of the largest sports centres in the country when it was built, but its structural condition has become a cause for concern.
“The centre has a leaking roof and the heating, lighting and ventilation systems all need replacing,” she added.
“It has become too expensive to do patchwork repairs. So this is a golden opportunity to do something really radical and exciting for the 500,000 people who use it each year.“
Cllr Polling denied that housing would eat up space for sports and leisure. |
 |
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
