Things are looking quite promising for the best outcome; a pool on the Dartmouth Road site, delivered before the London Olympics. It would be really positive to have a good turn out on Wednesday to show the strength of local feeling, to witness this historic decision for Forest Hill, and to celebrate three years of hard campaigning by many people in Forest Hill and Sydenham.

Even if you can't make it for the 6pm start, join us a little later for a few celebration drinks. Whilst I don't know pubs in Catford very well, I am going to suggest the Goose on the Green - http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s...,,0,-10.52

It was always my impression that the only reason for WW becoming an option was to speed the delivery of pools, as it was the only affordable option in the Feb stakeholder briefing.

Does anyone know what sort of budgets Lewisham work off (as in what sort of % of the total for this kind of capital expenditure is ?12,000,000)? And how does 12 million quid compare to what has been spent on leisure facilities elsewhere in the borough?

My concern is that LBL are claiming WW would potentially cost half of what development in DR would cost - while this is open to dispute you can imagine the scrutiny on the decision from elsewhere on the borough by people who might think the 'spare' 6million quid could be spread around a bit further.

More fingers crossed.

Article in South London Press http://www.southlondon-today.co.uk/tn/News.cfm?id=27695

from the report for item 5 of Wednesday's agenda:

I'm curious to know how different this situation is from that of the Printworks development in Clyde Terrace.

Foresters,

Live/work is a commonly abused concept by developers who seek to build residential on employment land. Unfortunately councils across London have allow poor quality live/work units to be developed far too often and this has had a negative effect on perceptions of live/work developments in general.

The Printworks development in Clyde Vale is not a good example of live/work and does little to enhance the overall development. However, we do have good examples of live/work development in Forest Hill and across the borough - the obvious example being Havelock Walk.

The Forest Hill Society has worked very closely with Jeff Lowe from Havelock Walk to develop a good plan for live/work. We believe that good quality live/work on Willow Way would be beneficial to the community in a number of ways: by providing maximum employment on the site and by building a creative hub and a community at this end of Sydenham. The site is surrounded by warehouses, retail, and residential, and live/work would bring these aspects together in a vibrant and cohesive way.

Ideally we would like to see a change of planning designation for the site to allow for mixed development which would include some residential as well as live/work, but the site could be developed as pure live/work if necessary and this would fit within Lewisham's planning guidance. The specific rejection in paragraph 9.11 rejects the use of the site as live/work but we have demostrated that it actually provides more employment than any other use of this site, this is because a live/work development could be developed to a greater height than any standard employment use. Even with some residential to complement the live/work component, the employment levels are higher than any other use of this land (other than an office block which would not meet the current employment designation either).

Our vision, developed over the last 5 months, is a development with one or two retail units facing onto Willow Way (probably a cafe). Then inside the development would be a small number of large units - twice the size of a normal house which would include living accomodation and a large workspace, ideal for artists with the two elements split across the ground and first floor. A number of additional units would be on the remaining sites on the ground floor, first floor, and second floor (possibly the third floor as well) which would be more suitable for architects, design studios, small Internet based businesses. Then what I would like to see is penthouse flats providing residential on the top of this development. These elements would work well together making it feel like both an employment area during the day, and a nice residential area during the evening and at weekends.

So, completely different from the Printworks development, and designed to allow the best use of this site and not just as a way to get round planning regulations or to safeguard swimming in Dartmouth Road.

Incidentally, if a small proportion of the top floors was allowed for residential units, and prices to return to 2007 levels, I would expect the development to generate ?2m-?3m for the council. This would give the council back about the same amount extra they might put into the pool on Dartmouth Road, from a site that they valued at zero in February!

The South London Press article isn't entirely correct is it? It ends by suggesting this new option costs less than 3 million and is just about refurbishing the existing pools. Which have I misread, the SLP article or the report to the mayor?

The SLP article just isn't really clear what it is saying.

As far as I understand it Option 3 is the same as option 1 but sooner i.e. modern newbuild pool facilitites but the retention of the frontage block for associated uses.

In terms of what the rest of Lewisham might think the key issue is whether the Willow Way option is deliverable as although it may appear cheaper that is meaningless if you can't actually do it or it is very hard to achieve (because of planning policies).

We are told that the february pool costs are based on the going rate for such a facility (in 2008/09) and that the retention of the frontage block doesn't add to the cost over an above an all new facility. We understand the Council used their experience at Wavelengths to review the cost issues.

Which cost at which point any of us might have confidence in is another matter entirely.....

But it is surely a good thing for the whole of Lewisham for them to have top rate swimming facilities to serve as much of the borough as possible, from a fitness, social and economic point of view?

Lets hope the Mayor agrees tomorrow and presses ahead with Dartmouth Road, we can then work together to deliver an excellent facility.

It wasnt that long ago that Willow way was being advocated as a Backwater so out of the way as to be virtually in another borough.Now it is the be all to end all with some Forest Hill Businessman/Artist riding to the rescue on his big white steed.Im always suspicious of property developers
taking over council land to line their own pockets.
Im also very wary of future political candidates using such matters as a means to feather their own nests.This whole pools matter was never intended to be political but tell that to the LIB/DEMS.
A new acronym has arrived on the scene "SOE's" or "Save our Eyesores"
These SOE's are turning up all over the place and whos at the forefront?
Your right!!Its the Lib/Dems.

Dont be fooled by the holier than thou attitudes of the so called "Do Gooders" in and around Forest Hill.I believe that the expression "Self Glorification"comes to mind when reading some of the over-the-top
pontification emanating forth from these people.They have too much time on their hands and cannot find anything constructive to do with it.Ergo they become SOE's

Is it just me or does anyone else have any idea what Davhel52 is going on about?

davhel52, once again talks a load of nonsense on this issue and fails to address any of the substance of the issues regarding where is the best place for swimming/housing/employment in the local area. Instead this person is full of bitterness and bile regarding the people who have successfully fought for the best outcome for the area - not for their personal benefit and not for their political benefit, but because it is the right thing to do.

His/her accusations against me, my friends and colleagues who have worked hard so that the mayor may arrive at the right solution, are disingenuous and quite hurtful. I do not have huge amounts of time on my hands to do all these things, but I believe that the time we have spent safeguarding swimming in the best location in Forest Hill is time well spent for the future of the community.

Davhel52, we live in a democracy last time I checked - and if Michael wants to stand as a Libdem, you dont have to vote for him.

I've never seen Jeff Lowe on a horse of any hue.

Michael, are you standing for office? I must be years behind with the news.

Ginger.You dont know the half of it.
It takes more to be a representative of Forest Hill than just having money.
There are many diverse groups in the Ward who would probably be ignored if the LIB/DEMS have there way.The Pools issue was just a political tool in their plans to stay in power and has less to do with amenities.If I truly wished to spout Bile then Im sure this web site would not be so engaging.If one followed the wheeling and dealing in the background then a true picture of the Pools issue would be seen.Its not the fact that the Pools are going to stay on the old site that Galls its the underhanded way that it was done.The very same people that were saying Willow way was a backwater dump and wasnt even in Forest Hill are now advocating that that dump be used for the building of Live/work units.A right old Volte Face
if ever there were one.
I still believe that a new complex in Willow Way would have given the area a much needed facility that would have Catered for a diverse section of the local population in a far better way than that which provided a Small pool with the remains of an ugly building stuck on the outside.Too often in the Borough of Lewisham local misguided groups
come out in force to protect what can only be described as Eyesores
led by a LIB/DEM group who jump at the opportunity to use these moments to their advantage.
When you say."What is davhel52"talking about.Remember I am just as passionate about the Forest Hill Pools as the next person and have as much right as Michael- with all his contacts- to have my say on this travesty.The problem is that my kind wont go away.

I would just like to point out, davhel52, that the group actively involved with the KSFH campaign has a significant number of labour party supporters and maybe even a Tory or two. Our personal political views (and differences) played no part part in the campaign.

I guess I should make it clear that I have no current intensions of standing for public office, although I think that davhel52 does have.

Willow Way is a great site for a employment and possibly for a little housing if developed in the right way. It is not a good site for leisure. The two views are not contradictory. It is not a 'backwater dump', it is a backroad and an employment zone.

davhel52, you are welcome to have your say. You are not welcome to accuse me or others of lining our own pocket or feathering our own nests. Such accusations are without substance and a slur on the reputations of some hard working individuals.

Look at post no 72 from Foresters.If there has not been an about face regarding Live/Let on Willow way then what is it?

I think something personal has spilt over into the website!

I see no contradiction is thinking WW an unsuitable location for a swimming pool but suitable for live / work unit. The current site is much better for a public facility as it is near what passes for FH centre and will help other local businesses.

Live work units do not need to be near FH centre.... so what's the issue?

As for the listing, I liked the old pools (and unlike many with opinions I did use them several times a week) and would have preferred a restoration which adds facilties by making much better use of adjacent land. If this is not an option, then something with decent facilities on the same site is the priority.

PVP.My point is being missed.

According to Post 72.

The council deemed willow way an innapropriate place to put Live/lets as the land is deemed not fit for Habitation.Now all of a sudden they have changed their minds and for a large input of cash from a business man Willow way is now deemed appropriate.The Land has not changed so why this sudden change of decision.The whole Pools option depended on this issue.Whether or not you support one option or the other is irrelevant.We all want to see pools built but at what cost morally.This is what I mean about nefarious wheeling and dealing with Lewisham Council.
Either the Planning laws say you can build on the Land or they dont.You cannot chop and change things around because someone turns up with a bundle of money.One Councillor called it Tweaking the System.I call it wrong.Having said this PVP I am with you regarding the Pools I am no fool and know what it means to the local people but in the long run Honesty and Transparency must rule.