I have just spoken to someone called Philip Seeley in the Designation Dept of EH. Apparently a member of the public wrote to EH on 1st March in respect of this asking for urgent consideration of Louise House for listing. The formal decision, as we know, was made on 20th August- by the Secretary of State who was as we also know, in Bejing at the time promoting London 2012. Of course this probably was done by one of her staff in her absence but it does for me pose an interesting question and I would have thought could be potentially embarrassing for Ms T Jowell as it would appear to conflict with the aims and objectives of the 2012 games.

Anyway, the point of all this is that there is an Appeals process. I have asked for the paperwork urgently and propose to start up a separate thread on this point. Clearly submitting an Appeal of any kind will require a bit of work! I am not sure whether the Council are considering such an Appeal as they are best placed to submit one however it may carry more weight if its seen to be done by members of the public.

All may not be yet lost, therefore!

Hello Roz
I am member of EH and against the listing. Would it do any good for me to mail them or is that a waste of time

Thanks

Roz

I oppose the listing too, and will give you any support I can.

The decision by the Mayor to maintain swimming in Forest Hill is an extraordinarily good deal for the neighbourhood, taken against officer advice which has for years held that there is no real need.

Listing Louise House (and now a campaign to maintain the frontage of the pools) will make it much more difficult to create a successful facility suitable for local residents who are alive here now, and which will have long-term viability.

I thought Max's balanced and considered post on the pools thread was excellent, by the way, and I hope that those who think that listing is a step forward will read it carefully.

I wasn't aware that riding roughshod over responsible, accountable governance and impartial views over the local built environment was one of the aims of the 2012 Games, but thanks for your edifying contribution Roz.

I'm a little ambivalent about the listing of Louise House but can't help but feel that Lewisham only has itself to blame for the listing being slapped on it as this stage as a result of its ill-considered (or just plain inept) approach to this whole affair.

Surely the effort should be in making sure we get pools AND keep our historic buildings. I'd at least like to see what options the council can put forward in corporating LH. This appeal will just prolong the whole process even more Thanks Roz.

Quite. It no doubt rather suits Lewisham to stall any decisions (and hence any expenditure) as long as possible.

How long did it take from deciding a new pool was needed at Downham until opening it?

Downham Pool closed in 1996.

Bullock promised a replacement would be open by 2004.

The new pool finally opened in 2007, millions of pounds over budget.

This is the track record of the clowns we are dealing with - so I would say that the new FH pool(s?) may be open in 2013. Giving an excuse for another six-month hiatus as the appeal is considered may make a positive contribution to this extraordinary extended timeline - well done!

I forgot to add that the reason why Downham Pool closed is because... its roof collapsed.

You couldn't make it up.

There's a stakeholder meeting tonight - will be interesting to hear what the current state of play is...

As local opinion seems evenly divided guess we ought to leave our good Mayor to make the best decision for all of us.

You're joking, right?

Only partly. We seem so divided over this issue not sure where it can go.
I believe our Good Lord Mayor lives in F Hill Ward so hopefully will have our interests at heart.
All this bickering will delay any pool we may get and not help the preservation.
Only my humble opinion

Brian, your faith in the integrity of politicians is touching. Perhaps now is not the time to drop the bombshell about tooth fairies and Father Christmas.

Was it residents' bickering behind the 11 year period it took to rebuild Downham? Behind the 3 years that have so far elapsed with Forest Hill? Was it bickering that caused the roof to fall in at Downham or the astonishing decision then to be taken a few years later that no maintenance would be undertaken at Forest Hill... so the roof nearly fell in?

The blame for this farce lies fairly and squarely at the foot of Lewisham and Lewisham alone, and they must sort it out.

If that means more funds for some sort of solution incorporating the existing buildings then so be it. More funds beyond those estimated for the "all new" solution would no doubt have to have been found anyway - given their track record on cost control (still less prudent asset management that would have prevented the whole farce at minmum cost) it seems essentially pointless to talk of the cost of this option or the other at this stage in any case.

Actually, given the point on the amazing collapsing roofs it is clear that the best solution for Lewisham is actually a LIDO. When Frank Spencer seems to be their collective role model it's about all they can really be trusted with.

I suggest a suitable field be found and a large hole be dug.

Mayo Park or the fairly redundant traingle of grass opposite the Horniman should do.

Hill Top
It would be different if we all felt the same but the posts are , I would say , about 60/40 in favour of presevation. If you allow for the majority ( who have no idea about this site etc ) probably a majority for new build, but all this is guessing.
The Council may very well be responsible up to now , but need to move from now to a result. I suspect the preservation options will mean that the pool will not be built, again my view. I personally would not use a pool but feel sure the youngsters would appreciate one.
I have just stood outside Provender and looked at both buildings. Do we really want to preserve them at this stage.
I have suggested a compromise but was mostly ignored.
There used to be a Lido on Bampton Rd attached to F Hill School. I had to contribute tins of fruit in the 60's to raise money for it. The site is still there. Added benefit the children on site for school times.
Then the 2 buildings could be renovated , but as what.??

This issue is clearly a divisive one but it is hadly fair to accuse Roz of riding roughshod over anything. There is an appeals process and she is going to look into it - I for one would be wholly in support of an appeal.

I think that both Louise House and the pools are hideously ugly buildings that add nothing to the local environment. I know that this opinion is shared by many and also disputed by many - an appeal is surely therefore a perfectly reasonable use of process rather than an abuse of it?

It is Lewisham that I think could be accused of riding roughshod.

I agree that an appeal is a reasonable use of process but there is a potential irony in pursuing that route in the hope that it will remove an obstacle, when in fact it may well lead to further delay, uncertainty and prevarication.

There is also an aspect in which it seems a bit childish and "tit for tat". Just because you don't like it doesn't mean its wrong. It's an impartial opinion and not a status conferred lightly. I suggest that a degree of respect be accorded to what is presumably an expert view and we move forward from here, but surprise surprise there doesn't really seem to be any real contingency plan because Lewisham apparently didn't really have the wit to foresee this.

Opinion is always going to be divided over the aesthetic merits of the existing buildings but what has been lacking is a convincing vision of the future. There will always be disagreements and this is why it is all the more necessary to study the problem thoroughly and honestly, develop a high quality solution (preferably solutions) and build consensus. As I have said before it is an appalling lack of leadership and it is very sad that we now see the results in the divisions it has created in the community.

I dont think too many people would mind a new building if it was sympathetically done and well thought through - I personally would have accepted that. But the options given to us were not great or particularly insipiring. The Council and Mayor of Lewisham are fully to blame for this mess - let's not forget! and by dismissing the option (just an option) of refurbishment, they have alienated half the community. Frankly the whole thing has stunk from the beginning and the fact that LH has been listed at least gives us some breathing space from the threat of bull dozers and the real possibility of a gaping emply plot of land for the next 2 years. There's no money available from the building sector which is evident from the Berkley Homes problem. How will the Council fund the pools if their business plan is flawed? This is what we need to be asking, no demanding.

For those who really want a pool, the Appeals process will delay things further and give the Council wriggle room to spend nothing.

Save The Face of Forest Hill - The Movie
this was on the Sydenham Forum:
http://www.sydenham.org.uk

But they haven't *just* dismissed the option of refurbishment. They went for it, and then a survey found it wasn't possible. And option one doesn't require extra funding. The funding is there. The design of the new building is fine. An architectural competition would've been great, but in the absence of that, what we've got is low key, pleasant and attractive. Unlist Louise House and build option one.

But it didn't. You appear to have just accepted what Bullock has said. Others saw through it. That itchy feeling round your head? That'll be the wool being pulled over your eyes.Everyone needs to go and read the surveys and form their own opinion on whether it was possible to refurbish the pools before they form their opinions on whether it was desirable.

What about the option of facade retention or retention of elements of the building, rather than refurbishment?

And how about a full design and a signed contract before they demolish anything?

And how about an explanation and an apology for the time that's already been wasted?