Hackney Council has been talking to the users of Clissold Leisure Centre and its neighbouring neighborhoods about their encounters of using the centre when it was open up, and exactly how they feel it could be upgraded on reopening. There is a very good respond to the consultation, with an increase of than 60 associates of the general public attending an appointment event on 22nd January and getting involved in workshops to feed in their experience and ideas. Approximately 50 other folks contributed at other conferences. A further 93 people required part in the discussion by mailing the Council detailed comments by e-mail, by letter or by completing the consultation forms highlighted in Hackney Today in February.
Further to the, the Council has performed consultation meetings with participants of the Charedi Orthodox Jewish community, Muslim groupings (arranged by Beliefs in the foreseeable future) and Disability Hackney. The Council also invited Age Matter Hackney and the Stoke Newington Young People's Discussion board to take part in the assessment. The assessment has been publicised through the every month Clissold news upgrade, hand delivered words to every household in Clissold, Lordship and Stoke Newington wards, on the Council's website, in Hackney Today and through reports produces to local and cultural press.
The works to the centre will be split into two categories. The first, is the remedial works that have been identified from the analysis of problems at the Centre and also have been costed at 5. 1m. The general public consultation has managed to get clear that further advancements could be necessary, like the redesign of the changing rooms, that are not essential for the reopening of the centre but would improve the way it works for local people and they are the second group of works. These works will have to be independently costed and cash allocated if appropriate. Both remedial and improvement works are centered on long-term fixes for a fit for goal centre. It is the Council's intention to handle both remedial and improvement works concurrently, and ensure that the necessity for prioritised advancements is well balanced against the need to reopen the centre quickly.
This survey is a summary of the main factors created by local people through the consultation and of the particular Council intends to do to address these issues. The record will not cover every comment that was made but seeks to draw out the prominent issues and react to them.
1. DESIGN
a) Heating, ventilation and dampness:
What you advised us: Many of the problems detailed by centre users described poor heating and ventilation, problems with air conditioning, water temperature and drinking water leakages.
What we can do: One of the main features of the remedial works programme is to tackle these issues which afflicted the gym, dry out areas, poolside, changing rooms and the areas of the building. Their rectification will ensure that the building is fit for goal and comfortable to use.
b) Changing rooms:
What you informed us: The majority of folks who responded to the consultation had grievances about the changing rooms. The general view was that the cubicles were too small, there were not enough facilities for family changing, the lockers were inconveniently located and insecure and that the accessories and accessories were cheap, shoddy and insufficiently durable for sustained public usage. There have been also several responses about lack of basic fittings such as hooks for clothes and towels. The flooring surfaces in the changing room were very slippery but this may be maintenance rather than a design issue. There were many grievances about the showers which were considered to be shoddy and unreliable, often no longer working, or without hot or cold water. The changing rooms in both the pool and gym were poorly heated up. The location of the lockers above changing benches was inconvenient for some users, plus some believed that the lockers were insecure.
What we can do: The alternative of the bathtub heads and fittings will be carried out within the remedial works. The bathtub system has been rectified so the showers will work reliably with consistent temperatures. There will be a review of most fixtures and fittings in the changing rooms and those that need it'll be substituted with high quality alternatives. More hooks for clothes and towels will be provided where needed. The remedial works will dwelling address the warming problems in the building that may suggest the changing rooms will be properly heated.
Given the number of feedback about the design of the changing rooms, the Council has made a decision to commission a redesign job which will improve with the involvement of the centre's individual group. A significant redesign of the changing room area will be independently costed as you won't participate the primary remedial works. Substitution or relocation of lockers may also be costed. Users will be consulted on the likelihood of introducing a little charge for locker use (e. g. 20p) to help account the continuous improvement of the changing areas.
c) Layout:
What you advised us: Nearly all issues brought up about layout concerned the region around working out and toddler swimming pools, particularly in regards to to child basic safety and hygiene. There have been also several concerns expressed about the practicality of the flume and Jacuzzi design. There was a strong feeling indicated by several people that the flume should be removed. Some people also noticed that the a glass walls and wide open plan design led to too little privacy which made them feel shown. The reception area was experienced to be badly organized, with poor security allowing unauthorised access to facilities.
What we can do: The flume will be removed and a design review conducted of the region round the young child pool, in appointment with an individual group to ensure best use of space, whilst protecting the need to provide sufficient space for going swimming competitions. There were also issues increased about structure by the Clissold Going swimming Membership and the Council will be working closely with the swimming golf club and the Novice Swimming Association to meet these specific needs. For greater detail on child protection issues see section (1. d) below. Issues around personal privacy have been dealt with through the Council's work with faith organizations (see section (4. a)). The construct of the reception area will be assessed in discussion with the user group and management companies and any necessary alterations costed. Security plans will be improved to avoid unauthorised usage of the centre.
d) Child and family issues:
What you told us: The N16 portion of Hackney has an extremely high proportion of parents with small children. A lot of the reviews from the discussion centered on areas where parents thought that the centre was either unsafe for small children in its design or not family friendly in its operation. Elements of the design of the building, such as razor-sharp corners on concrete steps, insufficient child protection seals on entry doors and sharp ends in changing rooms were a source of matter to parents, as was the design around working out and toddler private pools (see above). Many parents expressed their wish that if the flume cannot be fully operational, it should be removed, as it only served to frustrate children when they couldn't use it. Parents also highlighted having less seating by working out pool for parents to sit watching their children's swimming lessons. Many parents noticed that this particular in the child pool was too cool for very young children. The centre's insurance plan never to allow buggies in the building was a problem for many parents, as was the lack of nappy changing facilities. The lack of family sized cubicles in the changing rooms was also experienced to be always a problem for many users. The actual fact that the centre's crЁche had not been functional frustrated parents who wished to use the service while they attended classes.
What we will do: Hackney Council will perform a complete child protection audit before works to the centre commence. A expert from ROSPA (Royal Culture for preventing Mishaps) and a health and safety officer from the training Trust will travel the building with the technical team and identify any potential child safety issues that may well not have been found during the assessment. Risk areas such as razor-sharp edges, dangerous gates etc will be rectified prior to the centre reopens. A buggy storage space service will be released when the centre reopens and bench style seats will be unveiled at the side of working out pool for parents to observe lessons, assuming health and safety limitations allow it. Cleanliness methods such as compulsory overshoes will be introduced for those wishing to use the poolside seats area. The temperatures in the private pools will be addressed through the primary remedial works program.
2. OPERATIONS
a) CUSTOMER SUPPORT:
What you advised us: The responses given by participants of the public managed to get clear that users were not experiencing a satisfactory level of customer service. Most of the commentary were about terribly trained personnel, long queues at reception, problems booking classes, centre not starting promptly, low staffing levels, poor monitoring of facilities, lack of information and inaccurate information and poor signage. It had been also sensed that there was misuse of facilities. For instance, people who had not paid to utilize the saunas were consistently getting in without being stopped and moreover, there is an anti-social behaviour, such as eating and shaving in medical suite, something that was not being challenged by the management.
There were also responses about poor sanitation and hygiene in many areas of the centre, including swimming and changing areas and squash courts. It had been thought that maintenance of all areas was poor and that the lines of accountability between your Council and the operating company were unclear in this area. There was a great deal of positive reviews about the quality of swimming lessons and exercise classes.
What we can do: The Council is currently under deal to Leisure Link with run most of its Leisure Centres for the total amount of its 15 season contract, which were only available in Feb 2002. The Council and Leisure Interconnection jointly recognise the need to respond to these issues to be able to ensure there can be an much better service not only at Clissold but at most of Hackney's Leisure Centres. More strenuous agreement management and performance monitoring was already put in place at the other leisure centres, and you will be put in place with a modified cleaning regime at Clissold, with a complete deep clean to take place prior to reopening. Clearer lines of accountability will be established to ensure that the builder is fully aware of and complies with its maintenance obligations. Regular inspections will take place as well. We will develop a full personnel training program prior to reopening and customer service specifications will be developed including mobile phone answering times and longing times. These will be drawn up and monitored together with the centre's consumer group that may play a key role in monitoring the contractor's performance on all functional issues. New information leaflets will be produced and placed regularly current, with information available in community dialects and large printing. Signage may also be improved in discussion with the user group.
b) Membership and prices:
What you informed us: The consultation feedback comprised many interesting and useful suggestions about how account and prices should be set up to widen access to the centre. In addition, it revealed that there was very little useful information available about regular membership and getting started with fees. Users were also frustrated by the fact that account was limited by one centre plus they cannot get borough-wide regular membership. There have been several feedback about affordability of account and going swimming lessons, and complaints that even full customers often was required to pay extra for a few classes. It had been believed that concessions should be unveiled for those on benefits or low incomes and that family seat tickets should be accessible for those wishing to bring children. Several respondents advised free or subsided use for pensioners and savings for elderly children/teenagers. There is also significant amounts of support for a 'swim-only' membership that didn't have to include the more costly gym facilities and the idea of one day tickets that included all facilities.
What we can do: The Council has commissioned an assessment of costs and membership at all its leisure facilities. This is expected to include options to introduce saver and family tickets, a revised borough-wide Leisure Card and a full review of development across the borough. Negotiations with Leisure Connection are underway to improve the options for account and ticketing at Clissold. The costs and membership review is expected to report back in the autumn when there are opportunities for general public consultation and work with user groupings. The Council intends with an improved costs and membership framework in place when Clissold reopens.
c) Parking and cycling:
What you advised us: Many people indicated concerns about having less car parking facilities at the centre. This offered specific problems for impaired users, large categories using minuscule bus transfer and users who find public move difficult, for example users of the Charedi community who frequently have very large households. The Council was asked if it would be possible to set up car parking at Stoke Newington University, as have been advised when the centre originally exposed. Several respondents informed us that there were insufficient cycle racks and a higher level of circuit thefts.
What we will do: An initial meeting has already taken place with the headteacher of Stoke Newington School who has indicated his willingness to work with the Council to find a auto parking solution for Clissold Leisure Centre by allowing use of the school carpark outside school time. The Council will continue to work with the school to ensure an arrangement can be come to by the time the centre reopens next year. At the same time, the Council will ask the London Cycling Campaign to review facilities for cyclists at the centre.
d) User group:
What you informed us: There's been significant amounts of interest from people wishing to participate a Consumer Group at the Leisure Centre to oversee its operation. During the discussion, more than 30 people portrayed interest in being part of this group.
What we can do: The Council intends to constitute the group for its first meeting in-may 2005, following a commencement of works to the centre. Given the high level appealing in regular membership of the group, it can be essential for a nomination and election process to take place, in order to keep the group to a workable size. It is proposed that the group should include representatives of the following groups:
- Pool users
- Gym/health collection users
- Sports hall/dry side users
- Parents and young children
- Charedi Orthodox Jews
- Muslim communities
- Handicapped users
- Stoke Newington group
- Young people (probably SNS university council)
- More aged people
The Consumer Group will play a significant role in growing development and monitoring management agreements. When the User Group is constituted it'll be asked to choose a consultant to sit on a new borough wide proper leisure centre end user group, which will also include reps from an individual sets of other Hackney centres, the neighborhood Primary Attention Trust, the Learning Trust and other partners.
3. GYM, DRY FACILITIES AND Activities HALL
What you informed us: Remarks about these facilities often shown wider customer service issues, such as an unreliable reservation system for badminton and nets not being released at the start of procedure. The time-consuming and recurring arranging system for classes was also a problem for most users. Fitness center users expressed a sense that there was a lack of fitness expertise amongst the staff, who have been mainly very young and that they sensed unsupported in using the equipment. It was sensed that fitness experts should be on hand, both for health and safety reasons, and for assisting users in enhancing their fitness. Other issues arose from design related problems, like the poor ventilation in the exercise rooms to the overheating in the fitness center, water leakages in to the activities hall and crumbling plaster in the squash courts.
What we will do: Customer service issues relating to booking, programming, regular membership and staff training will be resolved in the wider review of these issues detailed in the sections on customer support and account and charges (see areas (2. a) and (2. b)). The user group will have a significant input into development to ensure it matches the needs of local areas and that arranging systems are user-friendly. The problems with ventilation, home heating and water damage will all be resolved through the main programme of remedial works to the centre.
4. ACCESSIBILITY
The Council has endeavoured to add all parts of the city in its consultation on Clissold Leisure Centre, and needs to ensure that the centre is accessible to all those who wish to use it. Before the centre reopens, all staff will be completely be given full equality and diversity training to ensure that they recognise and respond to the needs of all Hackney's communities.
a) Faith Groups:
What you informed us: Hackney's Charedi Jewish Community accocunts for a very substantive area of the inhabitants of N16 with an increase of than 20, 000 community members living in the area. This community has experienced problems in using the centre because of the necessity for single-sex consumption for both people and children and the personal privacy problems caused by the available plan dynamics of the centre. Charedi community users cannot participate in or watch mixed-sex use of the centre but there is a very real desire locally to work with the centre, especially to teach children to swim. Many Muslim users of the centre have similar needs around gender segregation and level of privacy.
What we can do: A tour of the centre has been established for a mature Rabbi, customers of the Jewish Health Company and Jewish going swimming team organisers in in order to explain the issues the community experienced in using the centre. The design team will, where possible, build up cost effective solutions to the issues, in consultation with the Charedi and Muslim areas, for implementation in time for the centre's reopening. Both trust communities will be invited to truly have a representative on an individual Group to ensure that the centre's management and program will take their needs into account.
b) Impairment:
What you told us: The Council achieved with associates of Disability Hackney to discuss the procedure and design of the centre. Several concerns about impairment access were lifted specifically car parking, handrails to assist entry and exit from working out pool, and problems using the disabled facilities in the changing rooms.
What we can do: Before building works commence, Hackney Council will arrange for a qualified Access Officer to visit the centre, with staff of Disability Hackney and associates of the specialized design team to carry out an audit of facilities at the centre and identify what activities can be taken to improve gain access to. To use it on parking see section (2. c).
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Hackney Council expands its because of all users of the public who took part in this assessment and specifically Impairment Hackney, Interlink, Trust in the Future and Clissold Going swimming Club for his or her input. Thanks a lot also to Stoke Newington School for allowing use of the school for consultation events.
6. FUTURE COMMUNICATIONS
The Council will continue to produce monthly communications changes on the improvement towards reopening the centre. If you do not already receive this and would like to achieve this, please call 020 8356 3323 or e-mail
As the works to the building progress, the Council will produce photography updates of the inside of the building which is published online and displayed outside the leisure centre site. The Council will continue to work with local residents, schools and businesses to ensure that any disruption brought on by the building works are minimised.
Information was source by:
- http://www. architectsjournal. co. uk/clissold-leisure-centre-was-choice-of-riba/181650. article
STUDY OF THE LOOK TEAM
The Project
The London Borough of Hackney contacted Stephen Hodder to create them a leisure centre in 1996 as London Borough of Hackney would be the client and Stephen Hodder to become the main architect. The brand new Leisure Centre was funded by London Borough of Hackney (10 million), Lottery Funding Sports Great britain, with Hackney Borough Council acting as your client. Numerous consultations this was then delivered to planning that was approved on the 30th July 1997 for the erection of a fresh Leisure Centre.
The area of Hackney was in need of help, therefore the design of the Clissold Leisure Centre was the council's try to increase Hackneys reputation and community spirits also to embrace the new millennium. The look embodied a gleaming aluminium roof. The complexity of this design became an anatomy for catastrophe numerous issues untested or researched carefully.
It commenced with a budget of 7 million pounds which escalated to the expense of 32 million when the centre finally exposed.
The Leisure centre opened in February 2002, but was later shut down in November 2003 due to many problematic conditions that the centre possessed.
Then, legal action was taken by London Borough of Hackney resistant to the Architect, QS, Consulting Designers and Companies.
There were many problems that might have been avoided at the look level such as:
The primary problem was the roof structure, leaking almost across its complete span.
The children's changing rooms were located next to the two 2. 00m deep end of the pool.
The changing village which catered for different religions, such as Jewish and Muslim site visitors failed.
Ventilation and air conditioning should have been design and calculated correctly.
The correct type of bathtub drains should have been given (as these blocked and allowing dusty water to stream on to the pool)
Avoid taking the shear building tolerance to the maximum (creating many cracking issues)
Not making a complex roof which created a remarkable upsurge in building cost
POOL design as this increased during development.
A report in Building magazine as early as 1999 hinted at that which was to follow, declaring: "The primary staircase, where stairs and landings are cantilevered off, a lean 400mm-thick central wall membrane is an integral example of framework working at the border of tolerance. " This resulted in large cracks showing up all around the building.
In December 2004, the 'Clissold Scrunity Review -panel' directed to help re start the Clissold centre successfully and keeping the community informed. The reported all the problems with the centrtre plus they figured the London Borough of Hackney acquired to keep to communicate with Stoke Newington populace about the Clissold Leisure Centre. The had to regularly post items on the councils website and produce monthly newsletters. The mentioned that public executive and architectural information relating to the faults should we made general population via the councils website. There is no direct reference to the architects responsibilities.
Stephen Hodder - Architect
Stephen Hodder has been in practice since 1983.
In 1992, Hodder Associates was created and received the Royal Fine Art Percentage/Sunday Times Building of the entire year Award for Colne Pool in Lancashire later that calendar year.
He was afterwards selected as one of six architects to represent the growing generation of English Architects in an exhibition at the Architectural Institute of Japan in Tokyo with the Biennalle at Sao Paulo in Brazil.
In 1995 the practice was granted the Grand Prize at the Royal Academy Summertime Exhibition, for the sections presented as part of the submission for the Manchester City Art Gallery Competition.
In 1996 it received the RIBA/Sunday Times Building of the entire year Award and the inaugural Stirling Prize for the Centenary Building, University of Salford.
He was given Honorary Degree from Manchester Metropolitan School.
He is one of several top notch designers who've helped Manchester go into the premier little league of architectural locations in Europe.
He was awarded the subject Doctor of Arts at a diploma service for the Faculty of Fine art and Design at Bridgewater Hall, Manchester.
Professor David Dernie, Head of Manchester University of Architecture, said: "Stephen Hodder is one of the country's primary architects and MSA is recognising him for his contribution to architecture locally, nationally and internationally and his use the Royal Institute of Uk Architects, the Manchester World of Structures and the guts for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE). "
A success of the RIBA/Sunday Times 'Building of the Year Award' (1996) which is the most important award in United kingdom architecture for a single building. His Centenary Building at the School of Salford is described as "a fusion of design and technology".
Hodder Associates has won 25 accolades, most recently the Roses grand Prix Award and the RIBA Honor for Berners Pool, Grange-over-Sands.
Other work: a stunning extension to St Catherine's College or university, Oxford / the organization Neighborhood Footbridge built following the 1996 IRA bomb / the National Wildflower Centre, Knowsley.
Professionally he has been chief executive of the Manchester Culture of Architects
RIBA North Western Chairman
Member of the CABE design review panel.
Awarded with an MBE for services to structures in 1998.
He remaining the Building design relationship by the middle 90's and created his own practice in Manchester.
In the same calendar year he acquired the stirling reward for his 400 scholar faculty in Salford and invited 2 councillors to the service who had just lately asked him to design the Clissold park leisure centre. Through the design of the project he opened his new office in Greta Portland road. He admits there were faults with the look process that were unreported at that time and he was acquiring positive press at that time off the trunk of his stirling honor he had already triumphed in. He openly admits the particular one of the key lessons he has learned is the fact "I will have been stronger instead of revealing people what they wanted to hear and stopped the job for three of four months and done some market trials. I should took a more powerful series. Now I'll say if I'm concerned about whether i can deliver a task. "
Hodder had arranged a lump amount payment and was paying for earnings and overheads during the hold off. He lost over 25 % of an million pounds and for 1. 5 years was working for nothing.
He seems that the claims were made about him were personal in some news documents by people he previously not dealt with during the development of the job and experienced no knowledge of his professionalism and reliability.
In 2002 Hodder close his London office so when two associates focusing on the Clissold park leisure centre remaining to open there own practice. Worse, still by the end of 2002, the mounting stress needed its toll on his marriage and subsequently divided from his better half.
Other projects by Stephen Hodder include: L'Homme, mens shop, Manchester, 1986 / Colne POOL, Lancashire, 1991
wich is the building that basically launched Stephen Hodder in to the mainstream architectural press, though the later University of Salford building was the one which proven the practice's reputation and received some significant accolades.
The Design Team's working method
Stephen Hodder encountered problems early on in the task with the great changes in the council's workers, with the chief executive leaving and the council's internal project administrator was transformed. The council acquired poor management and no proper management control, which created a lack of continuity with the project. Therefore induced problems of communication between the consumer and the architect. Along with the task being rushed by the customers due to VAT reasons, opened up serious problems to get the job complete.
Stephen Hodder then opened up a new practice in Great Portland Street, London which would deal with the Clissold Leisure Centre. Out of 21 personnel, he previously appointed 6 staff to focus on the Clissold Leisure Centre by themselves. But through the problems of the task, two of the key architects who had been overseeing the job, left to set up their own practice whilst all the problems was not fully dealt with. This in turn created the London office to then be shut down.
Stephen Hodder had to take the project over to ensure it was completed. It started out with communication between the architect and the council/general public meetings, in the beginning of the task; to becoming between the architect and the council/general population meetings/Sports Britain.
With all the increased investments from other people such as Sports activities Great britain creating more issues as more folks started voicing their judgment and the architect to check out through with the views rather than his.
The architect should have used more control upon the project, which he admitted and regrets, a dictatorship methodology would have preserved the project. The design being too complicated and not tested also played out a major role, in which the architect wished he allowed more time to test the design more vigorously.
Many items were pointed out in previous conferences but never put on the design such as orthodox changing rooms etc, so whether the architects were at the appointment or not, that could have affected the ultimate design.
In the eye of the general public and council, it failed greatly. This is scheduled to numerous reasons, but communication and dictatorship was the significant cause, if this is stronger the task might have been more lucrative.
Judgements
Our initial judgments are that the look team failed, with two of the key architects working on the project departing mid stream. The fact that Stephen Hodder was the key architect on the task, his minor type, and control over the complete project created issues and when he toke the project completely over, it was too later to prevent the problems. Dictatorship could have been the key for the success of the task, as he'd have strong type and leadership to regulate the main element players overlooking the task.
In the sight of the public and council, it failed greatly.
It was quite surprising that the trivial source that Stephen Hodder acquired upon the project cost him the London practice and 250, 000 of his own money, even though when he toke the task over, he put in 1. 5 years of unpaid work to salvage the centre from disaster.
Ensuring a strong communication is presented between all associates of the job, from consumer to architects to companies, with every reaching, ensuring the factors mentioned are followed through. These weren't done, the council created major issues with this as their poor management and change in staff result the communication between both people.
Many items were brought up in previous conferences but never applied to the final design such as orthodox changing rooms just to name a few which had shown the public displeasure and anguish.
There must have been poor communication between Stephen Hodder and his staff who were working with the job at hand, in any other case he might have known of the problems that complicated and created problems after the centre.
Having many items transformed during building is a financial gamble, as it's easier to provide changes at design stage rather than during structure, which in this case demonstrated costly.
Being very wary of highly complicated design ideas, that is not carefully tested.
The design being too complicated rather than tested possessed also played a significant role.
The roof got problems, which isn't too astonishing as the complexity of the design, but the advanced of problems it triggered is slightly having to worry. Following this quotation from the sales director of the roofing product used Flag-Soprema's sales director, Steve Greaves, said: "The brand new roofing at Clissold still offered problems which enabled us to verify the company's willingness to work in what must have been one of the most challenging roofing projects the united kingdom has observed in the past 20 years. ", it puts into perspective that wasn't just a standard depth that wasn't detailed correctly and that there surely is also proof that there have been issues with site teams approach to installing the roof covering.
So as a team, I feel they failed with communication from the drawings to on site.
Specify the incorrect type of materials or not being placed where needed, including the wrong type of drain or missing membrane which put into the other issues the architect had, which could have been solved when specifying or just ensuring the builder had installed the right one. So the lack of the look team inspecting the project went hand in hand to the real design work.
Conclusion
After such a guaranteed start dreamed for the Clissold Leisure Centre, where achieved it all go wrong? Being hailed as the " a reflection of the united kingdom on the verge of the 21st century" by the Culture Secretary Chris Smith and being included as "a model of the near future leisure centre" on a world travel in the 12 for 2000. Building the Millennium exhibition, it is now referenced known as 'the notorious Clissold Centre' and 'The pool that sank'.
The centre was shut down down in 2004 which was hardly surprising given verification of 59 serious defect recognized and the council were left declaring that Clissold future experienced the bulldozer. Maintenance priced at 11. 5 million and before it could think of reopening, yet another 1. 5 million was allocated to additional improvements. It has an exceptionally negative influence on the community as tax payers, who firmly protested up against the centre at the planning stage, found their money being quite practically tossed down the drain.
Even although Clissold Leisure centre is currently open to the public which is safe, its reputation is still tarnished.
We've looked into the study of the design team and the initial background of the centres history, we will now continue to explore the aims on how the task actually sent by all the several parties involved.
The design team failed, with two of the primary architects working on the project, remaining middle stream.
The design being too complicated and not analyzed was also a played out a major role.
Many items were mention in earlier conferences but never applied to the design such as orthodox changing rooms etc. Being somewhat wary of highly complicated design ideas, that has not been carefully tested, as this may end in disaster towards the cost and additional complications.
Even though the design team split, it will have been fixed with better organisation. There should have been better control upon Stephen Hodder on his design team, he should have had higher command towards them. His communication to the design team was rather weak rather than resolving the issues when these were first recognised.
Ensuring a strong communication is placed between all associates of the job, from customer to architects to contractors. Whether or not personnel changes with the client, this will be tackled quickly plus more productively.
With every of a gathering, ensuring the items pointed out and carefully considered in case valid, they are adopted through.
Information was source by:
- http://www. building. co. uk/story. asp?storycode=3101681
- http://www. guardian. co. uk/artanddesign/2004/mar/01/architecture
