Sid & Ham
You are clearly intent on trying to drag the current administration at LBL through the dirt on this issue.
You are so intent on making mud stick that you now make the outrageous claim that half the current site will be given over for development. If you have a single piece of evidence to back this up, let's hear it.
Forest Hill Pools
If the new pools are open by 2010 I will eat my hat.
The original consultation on the pools was supposed to be ready in 2005. That's' almost 3 years ago!
Heard of Lewisham 2000? It was the regeneration of the town centre. IT's still in discussion.
Bell green ring any bells? the brockley common project? Brockley Cross project? Sydenham gateway? Lots of expensive consultation, not much action. Lots of red tape.
Ladywell pools is still open, despite a decision being made to close it (just after an expensive refit!). The replacement will be on loampit vale. It isn't built. The loampit vale site will open in 2010 also. Perhaps it's a case of buy one get one free?
Unfortunately new development sanctioned by Lewisham Council seems to be of no architectural merit (I don't see anyone trying to save the Police Station in Lewisham if it were under threat).
I'd love to have a swimming pool I can use, but I'd rather have one in a building that the borough can be proud of, both in facilities and in the way it looks. I don't think the latter is a priority for the council.
I really hope I'm wrong.
The original consultation on the pools was supposed to be ready in 2005. That's' almost 3 years ago!
Heard of Lewisham 2000? It was the regeneration of the town centre. IT's still in discussion.
Bell green ring any bells? the brockley common project? Brockley Cross project? Sydenham gateway? Lots of expensive consultation, not much action. Lots of red tape.
Ladywell pools is still open, despite a decision being made to close it (just after an expensive refit!). The replacement will be on loampit vale. It isn't built. The loampit vale site will open in 2010 also. Perhaps it's a case of buy one get one free?
Unfortunately new development sanctioned by Lewisham Council seems to be of no architectural merit (I don't see anyone trying to save the Police Station in Lewisham if it were under threat).
I'd love to have a swimming pool I can use, but I'd rather have one in a building that the borough can be proud of, both in facilities and in the way it looks. I don't think the latter is a priority for the council.
I really hope I'm wrong.
-
LivesNearby
- Posts: 47
- Joined: 21 Feb 2008 11:44
- Location: Forest Hill
If I look at Option 8 of the 2005 Capita report (page 9 of this pdf), which considered the possibility of building a two pool solution on the site of Louise House, while keeping the pool running, it would appear that the residual site is approximately 53x31m. That's big enough for an 18x33m hall I think.Sid & Ham wrote:The site isn't big enough for what you desire.
If you stole 2/3m from the park, you could even put it across the back of the plot
Lee - I'd agree with you that there have been many delays in building projects in Lewisham in the past.
I think this scheme will be different because the council have stated publicly and clearly that 2010 is the proposed opening date. To fail in this would be highly dangerous for them politically.
If you don't believe me, here is the view of the local Lib Dem party agent in a recent posting on SE23:
Even if the council have been slow to work out what needs to be done and have commissioned a series of useless reports and consultations that failed to get to the key issues of suitability of the existing building, their hearts are in the right place and, like everybody else, they wish to see swimming in Forest Hill.
2010 is an election year for the local councillors and Mayor. They will do everything they can to deliver on their commitments in this timescale if they want to continue in their jobs.[/i
I think this scheme will be different because the council have stated publicly and clearly that 2010 is the proposed opening date. To fail in this would be highly dangerous for them politically.
If you don't believe me, here is the view of the local Lib Dem party agent in a recent posting on SE23:
Even if the council have been slow to work out what needs to be done and have commissioned a series of useless reports and consultations that failed to get to the key issues of suitability of the existing building, their hearts are in the right place and, like everybody else, they wish to see swimming in Forest Hill.
2010 is an election year for the local councillors and Mayor. They will do everything they can to deliver on their commitments in this timescale if they want to continue in their jobs.[/i
Hello nasaroc,
I did not make an outrageous claim as I merely asked an obvious question based on the scheme presented by Capita and approved by the Mayor.
In the official report to the Mayor it looks at the three sites as a whole…
In addition if the land is sold for £2-3m will that be a factor in the type and number of homes a developer will build?
I did not make an outrageous claim as I merely asked an obvious question based on the scheme presented by Capita and approved by the Mayor.
Possibly Cllr. Best could confirm what is stated at the top of this thread and that only the open space will be sold for development and only that site used for providing housing?I don't know how the site will be carved up but could it be the pool slides towards the library leaving the remaining half for a developer?
In the official report to the Mayor it looks at the three sites as a whole…
If only the open space is to be sold and used for housing and the new pools are a similar size to the existing pools, that leaves an area the size of Louise House. It may be proposed to rotate the pools 90 degrees and use the space that way, thus leaving room along Dartmouth Road for the proposed new landscaping?Option 2 retains the existing building frontage with a new modern
facility to the rear of the frontage…..access during the build process
would be problematic, restrict what can be done with the overall site
and would in particular restrict the potential of cross subsidy from
land receipts for housing. It may not be affordable as a consequence.
In addition if the land is sold for £2-3m will that be a factor in the type and number of homes a developer will build?
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Thanks for the update.Chris Best wrote:We are setting up a meeting with members of the Forest Hill and Sydenham Societies to talk about the site in more detail. There are no agreed plans on the footprint of the new building and the area that will be sold. Once we have met I am sure there will be further views exchanged!
How confident is the council that it can begin building by January 2009?
As an example. Wavelengths additional 25m pool where no consultation was required and I don't think an EU notice was needed, from approval for a feasibility study to building work beginning took 20 months.
Is there a reason why the Forest Hill project will be quicker to start?
Ah, I thought it looked like Forest Hill pools.
I don't understand why the front of the building can't be retained, according to the survey it just needs the roof re-tiled, replacement windows and repointing.
That could be done with the money saved not demolishing it and the cost of building a new reception.
I was amazed to see in the Capita reviews how much it costs to demolish a building.
I don't understand why the front of the building can't be retained, according to the survey it just needs the roof re-tiled, replacement windows and repointing.
That could be done with the money saved not demolishing it and the cost of building a new reception.
I was amazed to see in the Capita reviews how much it costs to demolish a building.
I smell a rat in all this.
Now the challenge is for the council to actually build something well designed, sustainable and beautiful. It must also be cheap to run and it must be delivered on time, otherwise the council will have shown to all that it cannot be trusted and we have lost yet another fine historic building to 'progress',
Personally I don't think the council is capable of all that, but I would love to be proven wrong.
Now the challenge is for the council to actually build something well designed, sustainable and beautiful. It must also be cheap to run and it must be delivered on time, otherwise the council will have shown to all that it cannot be trusted and we have lost yet another fine historic building to 'progress',
Personally I don't think the council is capable of all that, but I would love to be proven wrong.