Managed to find this link that contains more detailed pdfs of the 3 "options"...
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/CouncilAndDe ... sStudy.htm
Forest Hill Pools consultation
-
Muddy Waters
- Posts: 137
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 17:05
Dear Gaz
I am pleased you have at last managed to find the link first flagged up by Annabel McLaren on this thread on 14 July.
"If you follow this link:
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/CouncilAndDe ... HillPools/
you will be able to see the 3 options which have been worked up by Lewisham for the redevelopment of Forest Hill Pools. All 3 involve the demolition of Louise House and the existing pools building.
Scroll down the page and click on the blue lines of text for images relating to Options 1, 2 and 3.
At the foot of the page is a blue line inviting comments."
What is a matter of concern is the fact that "at last" you have found this information on Lewisham's website. This shows how difficult it has been to extract information from Lewisham about their ideas about the development of the pools
Pat Trembath has provided details earlier about the methods adopted by Lewisham in their Public Consultation and about its failure to provide locals with a full opportunity to respond - undelivered or late leaflets, no opportunity to discuss in a public forum the council's preferred options and a follow-up exhibition at Forest Hill library which is not happening.
The consultation is totally farcical BUT of tremendous importance to the future of our area. At the end of this exercise, will democracy have been seen to have had its say
I am pleased you have at last managed to find the link first flagged up by Annabel McLaren on this thread on 14 July.
"If you follow this link:
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/CouncilAndDe ... HillPools/
you will be able to see the 3 options which have been worked up by Lewisham for the redevelopment of Forest Hill Pools. All 3 involve the demolition of Louise House and the existing pools building.
Scroll down the page and click on the blue lines of text for images relating to Options 1, 2 and 3.
At the foot of the page is a blue line inviting comments."
What is a matter of concern is the fact that "at last" you have found this information on Lewisham's website. This shows how difficult it has been to extract information from Lewisham about their ideas about the development of the pools
Pat Trembath has provided details earlier about the methods adopted by Lewisham in their Public Consultation and about its failure to provide locals with a full opportunity to respond - undelivered or late leaflets, no opportunity to discuss in a public forum the council's preferred options and a follow-up exhibition at Forest Hill library which is not happening.
The consultation is totally farcical BUT of tremendous importance to the future of our area. At the end of this exercise, will democracy have been seen to have had its say
Um, thank you for your considered reply, Muddy.
To be fair, I only first looked at this thread yesterday after reading the se23.com forum's views and didn't realise that the link I posted was actually available in the (other) 'Documents' section of the link posted by Annabel on 14 July (when I clicked on Annabel's link I merely looked at the 3 sets of images and thought that was all).
In case others similarly did not realise, in addition to the more detailed plans of the 3 "options", there is also a paper under the 'Documents' link (added 18 July) discussing a possible redevelopment of the buildings into residental use. However, this option does not include a discussion about any pool being built, save for a line that there would be insufficient space. Some on the se23 forum suggested that a pool could be built elsewhere, perhaps near Perry Vale.
Can anyone point me to the Sydenham Society plans that incorporated the existing frontage?
Ta
Gaz
To be fair, I only first looked at this thread yesterday after reading the se23.com forum's views and didn't realise that the link I posted was actually available in the (other) 'Documents' section of the link posted by Annabel on 14 July (when I clicked on Annabel's link I merely looked at the 3 sets of images and thought that was all).
In case others similarly did not realise, in addition to the more detailed plans of the 3 "options", there is also a paper under the 'Documents' link (added 18 July) discussing a possible redevelopment of the buildings into residental use. However, this option does not include a discussion about any pool being built, save for a line that there would be insufficient space. Some on the se23 forum suggested that a pool could be built elsewhere, perhaps near Perry Vale.
Can anyone point me to the Sydenham Society plans that incorporated the existing frontage?
Ta
Gaz
-
kingfisher
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 27 Jul 2008 11:38
- Location: forest hill
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO FOR A SWIM!
There is no doubt that the long campaign to save Forest Hill Pools has obliged Lewisham Council to provide a more attractive replacement and those who were involved deserve our thanks.
But, we can not always have everything we want and to carry on campaigning to oppose demolition of the Victorian pool buildings when English Heritage decided that unlike the library they do not merit listed building status is going too far. Local people are being deprived of what many said they wanted – a clean, light space with a gym and a pool inside it.
But now it is decision time and people should carefully consider the schemes on offer before making sure that they reply with the only voice that matters - the printed questionnaires or via www.lewisham.gov.uk/foresthillpools before August 8th.
Option 1 is the most realistic, it provides one pool a gym and a valuable social open space. The building allows for natural light over the pool itself and a terrace linking the library to a landscaped town square.
Option 2 gives the council or housing associations permission to build housing between 5 and 7 stories high on the park in order to finance a small training pool, with a new access road behind the library on Thorpewood Avenue. A café’ and some retail space will also provided.
Option 3 This is the largest and most controversial project. It requires even more housing and retailing which could prove too much for other local traders. More gallery space and meeting rooms will decide the fate of ‘difficult sites’ like the Kirkdale or Brockley Rise Adult Centre.
Option 1 with the comment NO HOUSING ON THIS SITE is the positive answer that the council require from us. It will save the park for future development like a Training Pool with a better housing scheme elsewhere.
Two or three buildings are unnecessary, one well designed building has to be more cost effective. This is a challenge to the council to ensure that the final design is popular enough to earn its keep. Over developing the site may not leave room for the people who want to use it.
Delay and rising building costs could result with neither a new pool nor the old Victorian buildings; the commitment to a pool was made by the Mayor whose office ends in 2010. Options 2 and 3 hand the council our permission to develop the whole site for housing after 2010, which may after all be their own preferred option.
So the fight to save swimming in Forest Hill is not over yet. It is up to all of us to cast a careful and critical eye over these schemes and vote before August 8th to make sure that we are able to go for a swim in Forest Hill’s future as well as its past.
There is no doubt that the long campaign to save Forest Hill Pools has obliged Lewisham Council to provide a more attractive replacement and those who were involved deserve our thanks.
But, we can not always have everything we want and to carry on campaigning to oppose demolition of the Victorian pool buildings when English Heritage decided that unlike the library they do not merit listed building status is going too far. Local people are being deprived of what many said they wanted – a clean, light space with a gym and a pool inside it.
But now it is decision time and people should carefully consider the schemes on offer before making sure that they reply with the only voice that matters - the printed questionnaires or via www.lewisham.gov.uk/foresthillpools before August 8th.
Option 1 is the most realistic, it provides one pool a gym and a valuable social open space. The building allows for natural light over the pool itself and a terrace linking the library to a landscaped town square.
Option 2 gives the council or housing associations permission to build housing between 5 and 7 stories high on the park in order to finance a small training pool, with a new access road behind the library on Thorpewood Avenue. A café’ and some retail space will also provided.
Option 3 This is the largest and most controversial project. It requires even more housing and retailing which could prove too much for other local traders. More gallery space and meeting rooms will decide the fate of ‘difficult sites’ like the Kirkdale or Brockley Rise Adult Centre.
Option 1 with the comment NO HOUSING ON THIS SITE is the positive answer that the council require from us. It will save the park for future development like a Training Pool with a better housing scheme elsewhere.
Two or three buildings are unnecessary, one well designed building has to be more cost effective. This is a challenge to the council to ensure that the final design is popular enough to earn its keep. Over developing the site may not leave room for the people who want to use it.
Delay and rising building costs could result with neither a new pool nor the old Victorian buildings; the commitment to a pool was made by the Mayor whose office ends in 2010. Options 2 and 3 hand the council our permission to develop the whole site for housing after 2010, which may after all be their own preferred option.
So the fight to save swimming in Forest Hill is not over yet. It is up to all of us to cast a careful and critical eye over these schemes and vote before August 8th to make sure that we are able to go for a swim in Forest Hill’s future as well as its past.
-
Tim Walder
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 4 Jun 2008 21:13
- Location: Forest Hill
The Save the Face of Forest Hill campaign, which seeks support in persuading the Council to keep Louise House and the pools frontage block as part of the new devlopment is winding up a gear.
We currently have 455 supporters on our petition. To add your own you can sign online at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sav ... -hill.html
We are expecting there to be a Public Meeting on this issue shortly.
This is probably the biggest single change in central Forest Hill for about 30 years. There is a clear need to get it right, not simply rush into it as Kingfisher suggests (at some length!). Having done quite a lot of standing around persuading people to sign the petition I can say that a number of things become obvious.
A majority of people are completely unaware of the current plans for the pools. A fair minority think they are still going to be refurbished. There remains a strong feeling among many people that the buildings should be saved as far as possible, and that feeling cuts across all ages and ethnic groups.
We currently have 455 supporters on our petition. To add your own you can sign online at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sav ... -hill.html
We are expecting there to be a Public Meeting on this issue shortly.
This is probably the biggest single change in central Forest Hill for about 30 years. There is a clear need to get it right, not simply rush into it as Kingfisher suggests (at some length!). Having done quite a lot of standing around persuading people to sign the petition I can say that a number of things become obvious.
A majority of people are completely unaware of the current plans for the pools. A fair minority think they are still going to be refurbished. There remains a strong feeling among many people that the buildings should be saved as far as possible, and that feeling cuts across all ages and ethnic groups.
-
kingfisher
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 27 Jul 2008 11:38
- Location: forest hill
Forest Hill Pools
Sadly the campaign to keep the old pool buildings has gone on for so long that some people think its the only possible outcome. The case for listing the pools has been pleaded for 15 years at least, that I am aware of - without success.
A fair minority of 455 does not represent everyone who lives in Forest Hill most of whom have no idea of what the council are up to.
A fair minority of 455 does not represent everyone who lives in Forest Hill most of whom have no idea of what the council are up to.
Re: Forest Hill Pools
It sounds like you are saying that the "consultation" is a sham. It would certainly seem that Lewisham haven't been trying very hard to inform residents (I for example never received anything through the letterbox and only live a few minutes away).kingfisher wrote:A fair minority of 455 does not represent everyone who lives in Forest Hill most of whom have no idea of what the council are up to.
I therefore feel that we should not simply kowtow to the limited plans on display and should lobby for other alternatives; including of course keeping the buildings/facades.
Sounds to me like the 'consultation' is a sham. I haven't received a leaflet about it and FH pools are near where I live.
By letting people choose between 1, 2 or 3 they are trying to trick people into thinking they have an option.
Everyone wants a pool, I'd love a pool, but in this day and age of recycling how come they can't recycle these pools that so much time and care went into building. Its a total waste of resources and in 50 years time it'll be held up as a disgrace that such fine buildings ever got demolished. Think of the money that' it'll cost just to remove them. I don't have one ounce of belief that they'd replace them with anything of such quality.
I like modern architecture, but not as an excuse to chop down a perfectly fine old buildings.
Its like the 60's all over again - crappy development in the name of progress.
By letting people choose between 1, 2 or 3 they are trying to trick people into thinking they have an option.
Everyone wants a pool, I'd love a pool, but in this day and age of recycling how come they can't recycle these pools that so much time and care went into building. Its a total waste of resources and in 50 years time it'll be held up as a disgrace that such fine buildings ever got demolished. Think of the money that' it'll cost just to remove them. I don't have one ounce of belief that they'd replace them with anything of such quality.
I like modern architecture, but not as an excuse to chop down a perfectly fine old buildings.
Its like the 60's all over again - crappy development in the name of progress.
-
Muddy Waters
- Posts: 137
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 17:05
At the last count Admin in the Lawrie Park area was saying he hadn't received a leaflet, - Julwz, too, who doesn't live in the Lawrie Park area, had not been consulted about the proposals on offer.
The current consultation is very flawed as was the one in 2005 when the questions were slewed towards demolition and rebuild. The same Lewisham Mayor (Steve Bullock) at that time understood the feeling of the pools users at two public meetings which were held and came down in favour of a refurbishment.
No such public meeting has been on offer to local residents residing in SE23/6 to openly debate the pros and cons. Our publicly elected councillors and Mayor, not to mention MP - due, I am sure they know, for re-election in 2010, should be listening to their electorate. Where is the open forum for this debate?
We are back to the same point, raised 12 years ago (in 1996) before the first Save Forest Hill Pool campaign began.
Lewisham Council is not trusted - decisions were taken when The Bridge was offered in 1994 in exchange for permisson to build housing on the BP playing fields at Bell Green - and Forest Hill Pools were considered surplus to requirements. Some people have very, very long memories of the earlier campaign.
Once again, housing seems to have the upper hand
The current consultation is very flawed as was the one in 2005 when the questions were slewed towards demolition and rebuild. The same Lewisham Mayor (Steve Bullock) at that time understood the feeling of the pools users at two public meetings which were held and came down in favour of a refurbishment.
No such public meeting has been on offer to local residents residing in SE23/6 to openly debate the pros and cons. Our publicly elected councillors and Mayor, not to mention MP - due, I am sure they know, for re-election in 2010, should be listening to their electorate. Where is the open forum for this debate?
We are back to the same point, raised 12 years ago (in 1996) before the first Save Forest Hill Pool campaign began.
Lewisham Council is not trusted - decisions were taken when The Bridge was offered in 1994 in exchange for permisson to build housing on the BP playing fields at Bell Green - and Forest Hill Pools were considered surplus to requirements. Some people have very, very long memories of the earlier campaign.
Once again, housing seems to have the upper hand
Actually Muddy - I did receive one eventually - see: http://sydenham.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?p=17574.
You may have noticed that ST has not done a news report on this issue. Not because it isn't important or even that I have not had enough time - but the lack or one sidedness of information that has come my way. There is no way I could write anything that could be objective and fair. IMHO there are too many people riding horses that are not, in the first instance, in the interests of delivering a speedy, quality & efficient swimming service to Forest Hill & Sydenham. There are too many other agendas into which I have no wish to become entangled.
So there you are - I have probably upset all sides now. I hope at least equally. So I shall say no more other than encourage people to state what *they* think here and why. And for the confused to examine and question all sides and make up their own minds.
Admin
You may have noticed that ST has not done a news report on this issue. Not because it isn't important or even that I have not had enough time - but the lack or one sidedness of information that has come my way. There is no way I could write anything that could be objective and fair. IMHO there are too many people riding horses that are not, in the first instance, in the interests of delivering a speedy, quality & efficient swimming service to Forest Hill & Sydenham. There are too many other agendas into which I have no wish to become entangled.
So there you are - I have probably upset all sides now. I hope at least equally. So I shall say no more other than encourage people to state what *they* think here and why. And for the confused to examine and question all sides and make up their own minds.
Admin
Thanks Admin. Rather than just post here I also completed the Council's comments form (http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/CouncilAndDe ... HillPools/) taking care not to tick any of the 3 options given and have stated my reasons for not doing so on the form.admin wrote: So I shall say no more other than encourage people to state what *they* think here and why. And for the confused to examine and question all sides and make up their own minds.
Admin
I'd also like to point out that if it wasn't for this site and SE23.com, I would not know of the "consultation" or plans for the pools as I did not receive any leaflets or canvessing.
-
Tim Walder
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 4 Jun 2008 21:13
- Location: Forest Hill
The Save the Face of Forest Hill Campaign is now motoring along quite nicely.
We have contacted over 1,000 potential supporters with a copy of our leaflet and a poster: so look in those front windows in SE23 and SE26. We will be holding a Supporters' Meeting shortly and are in the process of printing 4,000 leaflets and distributing them locally in the coming days. Look out for articles in the local press.
If you agree with us, sign the online petition at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sav ... -hill.html
You can find out more and how to help us at http://sites.google.com/site/savethefac ... thill/Home
We have contacted over 1,000 potential supporters with a copy of our leaflet and a poster: so look in those front windows in SE23 and SE26. We will be holding a Supporters' Meeting shortly and are in the process of printing 4,000 leaflets and distributing them locally in the coming days. Look out for articles in the local press.
If you agree with us, sign the online petition at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sav ... -hill.html
You can find out more and how to help us at http://sites.google.com/site/savethefac ... thill/Home
I went along to Forest Hill library to look at the exhibition of the plans - not the best laid out exhibition in the world but well worth a look, especially the scale model of the buildings - but this is due to finish on Friday. When I was there I picked up a consultation form, which I had not received by post (I live in Upper Sydenham, probably 15 minutes walk to the pool) and will send it to the Council in the next couple of days.
I agree with concerns raised by the Sydenham Society and support the retention of Louise House and the frontage of the pool building. Although there clearly is a need for a new pool, I think that this could be done whilst retaining the frontage of the pool building. I also have real doubts about the homes to be built under options two and three - have any developers expressed any firm interest in building up to 60 new-build flats in the area? We could quite easily end up in a situation where the old buildings are demolished whilst the new ones remain very firmly on the drawing board (which is what has happened with the old "The Duke" pub on Wells Park Road over the last year or so).
I agree with concerns raised by the Sydenham Society and support the retention of Louise House and the frontage of the pool building. Although there clearly is a need for a new pool, I think that this could be done whilst retaining the frontage of the pool building. I also have real doubts about the homes to be built under options two and three - have any developers expressed any firm interest in building up to 60 new-build flats in the area? We could quite easily end up in a situation where the old buildings are demolished whilst the new ones remain very firmly on the drawing board (which is what has happened with the old "The Duke" pub on Wells Park Road over the last year or so).
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Public Meeting 7pm Thursday 21 August
Public Meeting 7pm Thursday 21 August at the Forest Hill Methodist Church and Centre on Normanton Rd SE23
As a recap - in February 2008 the Mayor of Lewisham approved the redevelopment of the Forest Hill Pools and Louise House site in order to bring new leisure facilities to the area. The Stakeholder Group (an inclusive Group of the key stakeholders including representatives from the Sydenham and Forest Hill Societies, swimmers, schools, residents and traders) held their first meeting in May. At the June meeting the group considered how we can redevelop the space next to Forest Hill's Grade II listed library and considered the feasibility and housing options from the consultants, HLM. The Council is currently consulting local residents on the three concepts that have been produced for the development of a new leisure centre including a six-lane 25-metre pool, learner pool and associated dry leisure and community facilities.
An exhibition was on display at People's Day on 12 July and the full exhibition was outside Forest Hill station on Friday and Saturday 18-19 July following the delivery of 20,000 flyers to homes in Forest Hill, Perry Vale and Sydenham wards. You can view the background papers and options online and take part in the survey at http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/foresthillpools. The exhibition was running at Forest Hill library until 8 August with residents providing feedback on the printed forms on the three options, range of facilities and other comments.
Focus groups are taking place with 'seldom heard groups' in accordance with the Council's consultation strategy, and further active consultation is taking place with local schools, businesses, and swimming clubs. Council officers have offered to meet with representatives from both the Forest Hill and Sydenham Societies in addition to their ongoing involvement with the Forest Hill Pools Stakeholder Group.
As an adjunct to the consultation programme a public meeting has been arranged for Thursday 21 August at the Forest Hill Methodist Church and Centre on Normanton Rd SE23. The meeting will run from 7pm to 9pm.
The evening will include a presentation on the background to the Mayor's decision and will give local residents the opportunity to speak to local councillors and leisure officers about the current proposals. The exhibition which details the three development options will be available, and Council staff will be present to answer queries and to gather feedback on the options that have been presented as part of the consultation.
The Stakeholder Group will be meeting at the end of August to review the feedback from the consultation. Comments from the Stakeholder Group will be included in the report to Mayor and Cabinet on 17 September which is an open meeting starting at 6.30pm at the Town Hall in Catford. The tender for the architects is running in parallel with the consultation so that work on the design can progress once the option is agreed.
We look forward to seeing you on 21 August. If you have any queries about the meeting please contact Hilary Renwick on 8314 6359 - hilary.renwick at lewisham.gov.uk or contact myself or Cllr John Russell who will be co-chairing the public meeting.
As a recap - in February 2008 the Mayor of Lewisham approved the redevelopment of the Forest Hill Pools and Louise House site in order to bring new leisure facilities to the area. The Stakeholder Group (an inclusive Group of the key stakeholders including representatives from the Sydenham and Forest Hill Societies, swimmers, schools, residents and traders) held their first meeting in May. At the June meeting the group considered how we can redevelop the space next to Forest Hill's Grade II listed library and considered the feasibility and housing options from the consultants, HLM. The Council is currently consulting local residents on the three concepts that have been produced for the development of a new leisure centre including a six-lane 25-metre pool, learner pool and associated dry leisure and community facilities.
An exhibition was on display at People's Day on 12 July and the full exhibition was outside Forest Hill station on Friday and Saturday 18-19 July following the delivery of 20,000 flyers to homes in Forest Hill, Perry Vale and Sydenham wards. You can view the background papers and options online and take part in the survey at http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/foresthillpools. The exhibition was running at Forest Hill library until 8 August with residents providing feedback on the printed forms on the three options, range of facilities and other comments.
Focus groups are taking place with 'seldom heard groups' in accordance with the Council's consultation strategy, and further active consultation is taking place with local schools, businesses, and swimming clubs. Council officers have offered to meet with representatives from both the Forest Hill and Sydenham Societies in addition to their ongoing involvement with the Forest Hill Pools Stakeholder Group.
As an adjunct to the consultation programme a public meeting has been arranged for Thursday 21 August at the Forest Hill Methodist Church and Centre on Normanton Rd SE23. The meeting will run from 7pm to 9pm.
The evening will include a presentation on the background to the Mayor's decision and will give local residents the opportunity to speak to local councillors and leisure officers about the current proposals. The exhibition which details the three development options will be available, and Council staff will be present to answer queries and to gather feedback on the options that have been presented as part of the consultation.
The Stakeholder Group will be meeting at the end of August to review the feedback from the consultation. Comments from the Stakeholder Group will be included in the report to Mayor and Cabinet on 17 September which is an open meeting starting at 6.30pm at the Town Hall in Catford. The tender for the architects is running in parallel with the consultation so that work on the design can progress once the option is agreed.
We look forward to seeing you on 21 August. If you have any queries about the meeting please contact Hilary Renwick on 8314 6359 - hilary.renwick at lewisham.gov.uk or contact myself or Cllr John Russell who will be co-chairing the public meeting.
Thanks Chris. I have added the event to the Sydenham Diary here: http://www.sydenham.org.uk/diary.html
Sadly you will see it clashes with the Midsummer Night's Dream at the Dolphin so many of us can't attend. And with the invitation to the previous consultation not being sent out until after the event - it is getting a little frustrating. I hope this will be taken into consideration when the responses are counted.
Meanwhile I will try and do the online version. I am not asking for a third chance as I would think the consensus is to avoid any delay in getting quality swimming facilities operational for SE23/SE26.
Admin
Sadly you will see it clashes with the Midsummer Night's Dream at the Dolphin so many of us can't attend. And with the invitation to the previous consultation not being sent out until after the event - it is getting a little frustrating. I hope this will be taken into consideration when the responses are counted.
Meanwhile I will try and do the online version. I am not asking for a third chance as I would think the consensus is to avoid any delay in getting quality swimming facilities operational for SE23/SE26.
Admin
Re: Public Meeting 7pm Thursday 21 August
Errm - just tried - I see no obvious link to a survey there nor in the 'consultation finder'. Can you help guide us to the page?Chris Best wrote: You can view the background papers and options online and take part in the survey at http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/foresthillpools
Admin
-
Tim Walder
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 4 Jun 2008 21:13
- Location: Forest Hill
I do not believe that rushing into any of the options being presented will necessarily mean that the people of Forest Hill get swimming facilities any quicker. Options 2 and 3 are dependent on housing and this gamble may not pay out with the current credit crunch. We might very well end up with the pools and Louise House demolished and a hoarding site until the housing market turns in 3? 4? years time.admin wrote: I am not asking for a third chance as I would think the consensus is to avoid any delay in getting quality swimming facilities operational for SE23/SE26.
Admin
In my view the best option is to preserve the best and most viable of what we have and build an affordable facility behind.
Last edited by Tim Walder on 18 Aug 2008 19:53, edited 1 time in total.
Tim,
The one thing I thoughts that everybody involved in the pools discussions agreed on was for the need for quality swimming facility in Forest Hill at the earliest possible opportunity. I had thought that this included the 'Save the Face of Forest Hill Pools' campaign, at least as a secondary concern after preserving the frontage of two buildings. Is this not the case?
The one thing I thoughts that everybody involved in the pools discussions agreed on was for the need for quality swimming facility in Forest Hill at the earliest possible opportunity. I had thought that this included the 'Save the Face of Forest Hill Pools' campaign, at least as a secondary concern after preserving the frontage of two buildings. Is this not the case?
Admin is an honest journalist!
Tim W:
I'm not sure either on what basis Admin assesses the consensus. Like you, I don't want the Victorian streetscape demolished, and neither do I think demolishing it the quickest way to get swimming back to Forest Hill. But is our view, or any view that opposes us the consensus? Hard to say. Much better to explain the case against demolition, and work to persuade Admin and others, so that we can more confidently say that our view is the consensus. For (some of) the case against demolition, see the Sydenham Society latest newsletter http://www.sydenhamsociety.com/FHPoolsAutumn08.html
Although not a professional journalist, I think Admin approaches what he does with this site very honestly. Of course he has opinions, and in this case I do not agree with him, if what he is saying is 'get on and demolish them'.
Admin:
Is this what you are saying?
I'm not sure either on what basis Admin assesses the consensus. Like you, I don't want the Victorian streetscape demolished, and neither do I think demolishing it the quickest way to get swimming back to Forest Hill. But is our view, or any view that opposes us the consensus? Hard to say. Much better to explain the case against demolition, and work to persuade Admin and others, so that we can more confidently say that our view is the consensus. For (some of) the case against demolition, see the Sydenham Society latest newsletter http://www.sydenhamsociety.com/FHPoolsAutumn08.html
Although not a professional journalist, I think Admin approaches what he does with this site very honestly. Of course he has opinions, and in this case I do not agree with him, if what he is saying is 'get on and demolish them'.
Admin:
Is this what you are saying?
Tim,Tim Walder wrote:I really have no idea on what basis you have arrived at this view of the "consensus". It seems to me that admin has maintained a bias against the Save the Face of Forest Hill Campaign based on his own view. This has been under the guise of impartiality.
Still, the truth is out now about his real views.
I have to say I'm shocked and dismayed at your comments. You have no idea of my opinion on the matter as I have shared them fully only with my partner. I have tried to report anything on the Pools in as balanced way as I can. If I have failed then it is by fault and not by bias.
And I would be the first to want to correct any error. If you could specify then I can respond. The 'consensus' I referred to was I witnessed and reported at the original consultation. I think it says something that members of your campaign commented to me that it was a very fair report.
By your comments you are seeking to undermine the whole basis on this site. I have never, knowingly, met you and must presume this to be a personal attack and not that of the Campaign.
I have indeed been in contact with leading members of your campaign over how to present the issue in a balanced way. I think you should be talking to them.
At least I can now take comfort that this site has been attacked from both sides. Maybe that says something ...
Sadly, Admin