Friends of Southampton Sports Centre has called on Southampton City Council to keep the Southampton Outdoor Sport Centre in its entirety

That was the plea from the group established to protect Southampton Outdoor Sport Centre for the people of the city in response to the prospect of parts of it being sold off.

As reported by the Daily Echo, Active Nation, the organisation which runs the centre, has suggested that selling off land for housing could help fund improvements.

Some of the site is in desperate need of refurbishment and the suggestion has come as a way of funding those improvements.

However, the recently established Friends of Southampton Sports Centre (FoSSC) has written an open letter, printed below, in support of keeping the site in its entirety and has called on the city council and Active Nation to work with its members to improve the centre without the need for selling off any of the land.

They said the founder of the centre, Sir Sidney Kimber, would be “turning in his grave” at the prospect of it being sold for housing.

FoSSC has said that rather than focus on the athletics facility, the scope of any improvement plan should encompass the whole of the centre.

Youngsters on the athletics track

Those recommendations were made in a report by Souuthampton Cirty Council which followed a public consultation on what residents would like to see happen at the site, a report which has not been progressed since it was officially submitted six months ago, say the group.

Chairman of FoSSC, Lyn Hand, said: “If you were to speak to anyone who uses the sports centre, they would not want to see that land sold. We do not want that to happen, to be sold off for housing, or anything.

“The land was given to the people of Southampton, if we start selling it off where would that end?”

Southampton City Council was unavailable for comment.

An open letter from the Friends of Southampton Sports Centre

Sir Sidney Kimber must be turning in his grave! The Friends of Southampton Sports Centre (FoSSC) note the article in Wednesday’s Echo “Selling off land will pay for vital repairs” and the accompanying editorial and would like to correct some of the very misleading “facts” included in them.

Everyone agrees that the sports centre needs urgent investment – Southampton City Council, Active Nation, the centre users, including Southampton Athletics Club (SAC) and FoSSC (who are the official, council-recognised community group for the sports centre and who have been trying to work with the council to improve facilities for all users).

A year ago, the council, local Active Nation staff and FoSSC jointly conducted an extensive series of public consultations on the state and needs of the sports centre, with a view to producing an improvement plan for the site which all parties could work together to deliver.

The initial conclusions called for a holistic approach to rejuvenate the sports centre for the benefit of all user groups. That report has sat in council, with no progress, for over six months to the frustration of both FoSSC and SAC as funding opportunities have been lost.

Among the ideas that were widely supported in that consultation was a perimeter walking/jogging /cycling route around the site.

This would go through the peripheral woodland, which is presumably where sports centre land has been identified as potentially saleable for housing. These wooded areas are also widely used by city residents for walking, for cyclo-cross training and competition and for cross country running.

It is misleading to say, as your editorial states, that “those claiming to represent the opinions of local residents” would object.

Sir Sidney Kimber, founder of the Sports Centre

The Bassett Neighbourhood Plan, was drafted with detailed input from all of the Bassett ward residents’ associations (which spans from the Flower Roads in the east to Dale Road in the west) and there was a very clear, strong and unanimous call from across the entire ward for protection of the outdoor sports centre and golf course, and the amenity woodland at its boundary.

These are city resources for all of Southampton’s residents and residents across the ward recognised that fact and drafted the Neighbourhood Plan accordingly. Active Nation’s central management responded to the recent public consultation on the Bassett Neighbourhood Plan, seeking to reverse the sought for protection in order to enable selling off of sports centre land.

From our recent discussions with local Active Nation managers, we understand that they were not aware of the comments made by their higher management.

The feasibility study referred to in your article was only for rebuilding block 2 to provide athletics club facilities.

The rebuild was costed at over £1,000,000 excluding VAT and excluding a very significant number of initial investigations and other essential costs. The proposal also removes the current public toilet facilities at the northern end of the site.

FoSSC has seen the full study and has significant reservations about its brief, scope, vision and cost. We have sent a detailed 14- page critique to the council, which has not been acknowledged.

Contrary to what your article states, the feasibility study makes no mention at all of refurbishing / rebuilding the grandstand, which would be a significant extra cost to refurbish or rebuild.

It is entirely false to state that the cost of renovating the sports centre is £1,000,000 – that sum won’t even fund refurbishment of block 2 for the athletics club.

What about the required refurbishment / rebuild of Block 1 (a much larger building supporting a far larger number of other centre users)?

Top British athlete Darren Campbell inspects the poor state of some of the facilities

What about the derelict boating lake site and whatever is built there at some stage? What about improved drainage, infrastructure etc.? The sports centre needs much, much more than £1,000,000 to bring it back to iconic status and the need for a holistic approach for improving the entire northern end of the centre has clearly been identified in the council’s own consultations.

The Portacabins at the track are the property of the athletic club and it is up to them to maintain them. If they have not done so, that is their responsibility. We regret the comments from SAC – they would appear to be quite happy for multiple parcels of land at the centre to be sold off for housing and for other sports centre users to loose their facilities forever, provided that SAC gets what it wants.

We note and welcome the quote from Councillor Simon Letts, as Cabinet leader, that “no land currently accessible to the public would be sold off”. We take this to include the peripheral woodland and will hold him to that pledge.

The current council nursery site, adjacent to the ski slope is a brown field site which could potentially be sold for appropriate development. We would be surprised if it could only hold 12 houses, given that the nearby site at Vermont Close, which appears to be much smaller, has been given planning consent for a 120-bedroom hall of residence.

However, with a holistic vision in mind, we note that one constant criticism of the sports centre is inadequate car parking, which causes problems on nearby roads.

If the athletics facilities are upgraded to allow regional competitions, the demand for parking will only increase and perhaps it would be more appropriate to consider additional car parking provision at the nursery site? If land is sold and the proceeds invested in the sports centre. Why should SAC have priority over other users? They may be the largest single interest user group, but they are absolutely not the majority of sports centre users and have already received significant investment in their facilities through widening and rebuilding of the track.

It seems that he who shouts most aggressively gets priority.

Our research indicates that the sports centre and golf course lands are held in trust under the Public Health Acts and so are not the council’s to sell. Letters from the City Solicitor in the council’s planning archive support this view.

We hope that city residents will strongly object to any plans to sell off public open space (including amenity woodland) at the sports centre (and at other public parks – we note the concerns of the Friends of Riverside Park, among others, at proposals to fence off and lease part of that public open space).

We call on trhe council to re-engage with FoSSC so that all parties can work together to deliver a renaissance for this once iconic venue and urge city residents to support and join your local Friends groups and help keep Southampton’s green spaces safe for future generations.