The Save the Face of Forest Hill campaign is ongoing in its opposition to the demolition of the frontage block of the Pools and Louise House. As a reminder, you can sign the petition at:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sav ... -hill.html
With the online petition and the paper petitions we currently have about 900 signed up supporters. You can also visit our website at:
http://sites.google.com/site/savethefac ... thill/Home
to get details of the campaign.
We are also urging all interested parties to attend the Council organised Public Meeting to discuss the pools plans at Forest Hill Methodist Church, Normanton Street, Forest Hill, London SE23 at 7pm on Thursday 21st August 2008 to air their views.
Forest Hill Pools consultation
-
Tim Walder
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 4 Jun 2008 21:13
- Location: Forest Hill
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
The next stage in the development of Forest Hill Pools will be decided at the Mayor and Cabinet meeting on the 25 February. The report will contain the three options presented to the Forest Hill Pools Stakeholder meeting on the 5 February and will include feedback from the various groups represented. The Council commissioned three architects to provide a 25-metre main pool, a separate learner pool, as well as a gym and a café. Three options to be presented in the new report will all cost between £11-13 million to build. Making them affordable requires associated housing or commercial development. Subject to planning policy, all three options will make use of the former Housing Office site on nearby Willow Way, either to provide revenue from development to offset the costs of the scheme, or to provide an alternative site for the new pools themselves. Two of the options preserve the Victorian frontage of the old Forest Hill pools.
Public consultation carried out last year showed no overall consensus among the local community and users of the pool in their expectations about the site’s redevelopment. However, residents who responded to the consultation indicated they wanted a replacement two-pool facility as soon as possible. They also acknowledged the need for the development of limited additional housing on the site to provide the necessary funding that would offset the cost of the replacement leisure facilities.
The plans for redevelopment of the site had to be postponed in August 2008 when Louise House received a Grade II listing by English Heritage. The listing meant the Council needed to reconsider proposals already drawn up for redevelopment of the site as a leisure centre. The last report to Mayor and Cabinet was in September
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres ... er2008.PDF and the presentation to the Stakeholder Group can be found here
http://www2.lewisham.gov.uk/lbl/documen ... 050209.pdf.
Any views on the use of the Willow Way site?
Public consultation carried out last year showed no overall consensus among the local community and users of the pool in their expectations about the site’s redevelopment. However, residents who responded to the consultation indicated they wanted a replacement two-pool facility as soon as possible. They also acknowledged the need for the development of limited additional housing on the site to provide the necessary funding that would offset the cost of the replacement leisure facilities.
The plans for redevelopment of the site had to be postponed in August 2008 when Louise House received a Grade II listing by English Heritage. The listing meant the Council needed to reconsider proposals already drawn up for redevelopment of the site as a leisure centre. The last report to Mayor and Cabinet was in September
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres ... er2008.PDF and the presentation to the Stakeholder Group can be found here
http://www2.lewisham.gov.uk/lbl/documen ... 050209.pdf.
Any views on the use of the Willow Way site?
Thanks for posting this, Chris.
Firstly, I think that all 3 options are superior to the previous 3 designs (of demolition including Louise House) and I wouldn't mind any of these to become reality.
Some comments on them though:
1. This may look disjointed being a new build next to the Library & Louse House. Looks good viewing from FH station, but the height of the Pools/residential complex is a worry. Nice to keep the pools on existing site though and residential development of Willow Way causes no issues for me.
2. Not too sure that the mix of Victorian & new build pools building works that well from the pics given (even more disjointed from option 1). View from FH is bold but bland. Nice to keep the pools on existing site though and use of the existing building for Pools use is a plus (and residential development of Willow Way causes no issues for me) - although this option will probably have the most expensive maintenance costs.
3. Probably my preferred option. May be most controversial as moving the pools away from FH into Syd - although in reality only a few mins walk away - and that the old site will be housing (although to be fair, it retains the whole frontage most sympathetically). The other buildings on the FH pools site don't seem too large or out of context to me and there is the benefit of a total newbuild in Willow Way which would be most convenient.
To qualify my comments, I live on Wells Park Road/Kirkdale.
Gaz
Firstly, I think that all 3 options are superior to the previous 3 designs (of demolition including Louise House) and I wouldn't mind any of these to become reality.
Some comments on them though:
1. This may look disjointed being a new build next to the Library & Louse House. Looks good viewing from FH station, but the height of the Pools/residential complex is a worry. Nice to keep the pools on existing site though and residential development of Willow Way causes no issues for me.
2. Not too sure that the mix of Victorian & new build pools building works that well from the pics given (even more disjointed from option 1). View from FH is bold but bland. Nice to keep the pools on existing site though and use of the existing building for Pools use is a plus (and residential development of Willow Way causes no issues for me) - although this option will probably have the most expensive maintenance costs.
3. Probably my preferred option. May be most controversial as moving the pools away from FH into Syd - although in reality only a few mins walk away - and that the old site will be housing (although to be fair, it retains the whole frontage most sympathetically). The other buildings on the FH pools site don't seem too large or out of context to me and there is the benefit of a total newbuild in Willow Way which would be most convenient.
To qualify my comments, I live on Wells Park Road/Kirkdale.
Gaz
Last edited by Gaz on 23 Feb 2009 02:58, edited 1 time in total.
Number 3 gets my vote, I think.
Using Willow Way for the pools seems to mean more exciting (and probably better designed) architecture on both sites.
It seems this option is more financially viable and there's less risk of overcrowding (and an over-dominating building) on the pools site.
I know that it'd be ideal to keep the pools site for public space but you can't have everything i suppose.
I like number 2 as well mainly because the pools site remains a pool, but I think they could've made more effort with the visualisations. I feel a little bit like we're being steered towards 3 by the superiority of the pictures!
Using Willow Way for the pools seems to mean more exciting (and probably better designed) architecture on both sites.
It seems this option is more financially viable and there's less risk of overcrowding (and an over-dominating building) on the pools site.
I know that it'd be ideal to keep the pools site for public space but you can't have everything i suppose.
I like number 2 as well mainly because the pools site remains a pool, but I think they could've made more effort with the visualisations. I feel a little bit like we're being steered towards 3 by the superiority of the pictures!
I had a peek at se23.com and they are up in arms about the 3 options (well, especially option 3). It seems that an extra 3/4/5 minutes walk is too much for some people to get to an exercise venue! 
They do make the point though that option 3 may mean the closure of the Bridge pool (although again, I can't see why a pool being located some 400m away from the existing site would have much more effect on the Bridge).
They do make the point though that option 3 may mean the closure of the Bridge pool (although again, I can't see why a pool being located some 400m away from the existing site would have much more effect on the Bridge).
Well I think I might change my mind anyway, perhaps Option 2 is better because it does keep the pools on that site, though I can't see how option 3 would impact on the Bridge pool in any way at all.
I just think they could've drawn those Option 2 plans up better so we get a better idea of what it'd really look like materials-wise. I don't have any problem with modern next to old in fact I think it looks great.
I just think they could've drawn those Option 2 plans up better so we get a better idea of what it'd really look like materials-wise. I don't have any problem with modern next to old in fact I think it looks great.
Indeed. My views on Option 2 above had been heavily influenced by the published pics. I didn't realise these (option 2) architects were those behind the Horniman extension which was a big success.
My remaining worry on 2 is therefore the cost & timescale - and that because this option uses the existing buildings pools buildings the maintenance costs will be higher.
My remaining worry on 2 is therefore the cost & timescale - and that because this option uses the existing buildings pools buildings the maintenance costs will be higher.
Option 2 would be more of a challenge for the architects perhaps, but really they're just putting a box behind a Victorian entrance, so really not so different from Option 3 after all?? The architecture doesn't look very daring on 2 but I suppose it doesn't matter.
I'd be very happy with either, though I'm definitely now keener on 2. Maybe 2 will take longer to build as you say Gaz but it'll keep a heck of alot more people happy and it'd be fabulous if it was the public walking through those Victorian pool doors rather than a few private residents (as in Option 3). Studying the plans in more detail the pools layout of Option 2 looks better, or less crammed in than Option 3, though its a bit hard to tell for sure.
I think that either way its great that they've found another nearby site potentially for the housing/pool (Willow way) rather than cram it all onto the current pools site.
Can't see change of use being a problem (willow way being changed to residential) , its the council that decides that anyway so they're hardly going to thwart their own plans are they? Or maybe I'm ignorant of how these things work!
I'd be very happy with either, though I'm definitely now keener on 2. Maybe 2 will take longer to build as you say Gaz but it'll keep a heck of alot more people happy and it'd be fabulous if it was the public walking through those Victorian pool doors rather than a few private residents (as in Option 3). Studying the plans in more detail the pools layout of Option 2 looks better, or less crammed in than Option 3, though its a bit hard to tell for sure.
I think that either way its great that they've found another nearby site potentially for the housing/pool (Willow way) rather than cram it all onto the current pools site.
Can't see change of use being a problem (willow way being changed to residential) , its the council that decides that anyway so they're hardly going to thwart their own plans are they? Or maybe I'm ignorant of how these things work!
Bear in mind that the drawings are not final designs. They are no specs for materials etc. They are studies for how the sites COULD look. Option 3 at the moment incredibly ugly, but it probably wont look like that (I hope not!). The designs will change a lot from what you see here (and will end up being designed by committee if Lewisham council has anything to do with it!).
-
Nickerbockers
- Posts: 228
- Joined: 31 Oct 2007 13:04
- Location: Sydenham
Can I also add (and bear in mind I may be mssing some information), that re-use of the land behind the pools frontage was subject to findings of investigative works. What I'm getting at, is that the existing pools have been leaking for some time. Therefore the bearing capacity of the site (i.e. foundation design) may well be affected. I do not have any details of the investigation results, and the last I heard, there was also some speculation that maybe even the frontage was at risk.
Now is an opportune moment for anyone with additional details to post.
Ali B
Now is an opportune moment for anyone with additional details to post.
Ali B
-
Tim Walder
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 4 Jun 2008 21:13
- Location: Forest Hill
Option 1 demolishes all of the old pools, including the frontage block. They are replaced with an ugly and low quality design featuring tall blocks of housing on Dartmouth Road at the front and overlooking Derby Hill Crescent to the rear.
Option 3 moves the pools to the Willow Way former Council depot. This site is in Sydenham, SE26 (NOT Forest Hill) and has constricted road access, poor public transport links and leaves the new pools hidden down a backstreet. Although the pools frontage block would be preserved in theory, the pools site in Dartmouth Road would be turned over for housing development. There would thus be a loss of community facilities in Dartmouth Road and the pools frontage block would almost certainly not survive the years of delay and neglect before the housing market picks up.
Option 2 retains and reuses the pools frontage block as part of a new leisure centre designed by Allies and Morrison (who did the Horniman Museum extension). The design is high quality, attractive and low impact and crucially, retains the pools in Forest Hill. Everybody wins.
The Save the Face of Forest Hill campaign group, in line with the Forest Hill Society, the Sydenham Society, the Tewkesbury Lodge Estate Residents Association and a Forest Hill Ward Councillor, think that Option 2 is the best and the only acceptable option.
The Mayor and Cabinet will decide on 25th February 2009 which of the options to pursue. At the moment the Mayor appears to be wobbling towards Option 3. In the South London Press on Friday 13th February he describes all options as "excellent" but stresses affordability and speed of delivery. He describes Willow Way as "potentially quite exciting" and goes on to state, "My preferred option is to get a pool open as soon as possible. Retaining the frontage block is likely to be the most expensive and difficult option."
If you support Option 2 write to Sir Steve Bullock at the Town Hall or email him at steve.bullock at lewisham.gov.uk
Option 3 moves the pools to the Willow Way former Council depot. This site is in Sydenham, SE26 (NOT Forest Hill) and has constricted road access, poor public transport links and leaves the new pools hidden down a backstreet. Although the pools frontage block would be preserved in theory, the pools site in Dartmouth Road would be turned over for housing development. There would thus be a loss of community facilities in Dartmouth Road and the pools frontage block would almost certainly not survive the years of delay and neglect before the housing market picks up.
Option 2 retains and reuses the pools frontage block as part of a new leisure centre designed by Allies and Morrison (who did the Horniman Museum extension). The design is high quality, attractive and low impact and crucially, retains the pools in Forest Hill. Everybody wins.
The Save the Face of Forest Hill campaign group, in line with the Forest Hill Society, the Sydenham Society, the Tewkesbury Lodge Estate Residents Association and a Forest Hill Ward Councillor, think that Option 2 is the best and the only acceptable option.
The Mayor and Cabinet will decide on 25th February 2009 which of the options to pursue. At the moment the Mayor appears to be wobbling towards Option 3. In the South London Press on Friday 13th February he describes all options as "excellent" but stresses affordability and speed of delivery. He describes Willow Way as "potentially quite exciting" and goes on to state, "My preferred option is to get a pool open as soon as possible. Retaining the frontage block is likely to be the most expensive and difficult option."
If you support Option 2 write to Sir Steve Bullock at the Town Hall or email him at steve.bullock at lewisham.gov.uk
A couple of points to respond to Tim's post above:
Option 3 would provide a new-build pool less than 5 minutes walk away from the existing site, is well served by the bus routes and is about a 10 minute walk from both FH and Syd stations. I don't believe the road access is any more constricted than that of the current site and I don't believe the Pools frontage would be left to rot until the market picks up as the two sites would be worked on concurrently.
This option seems to satisfy what I thought were the primary objectives of saving the Pools frontage whilst supplying, in a timely manner, a 2-pool complex. I have to ask, is your real concern that the pool would have a new post-code?
Option 2 looks nice but would be the most expensive to build & maintain and would take the longest to realise. It would also require the subsidy of developing the above-denigrated Willow Way site into residential units.
Don't get me wrong, I like Option 2, I just don't think it is the most realistic option. I also take umbrage that with the potential pool having a SE26 post-code (especially when in reality it is only minutes away) implies such a bad thing for residents!
Option 3 would provide a new-build pool less than 5 minutes walk away from the existing site, is well served by the bus routes and is about a 10 minute walk from both FH and Syd stations. I don't believe the road access is any more constricted than that of the current site and I don't believe the Pools frontage would be left to rot until the market picks up as the two sites would be worked on concurrently.
This option seems to satisfy what I thought were the primary objectives of saving the Pools frontage whilst supplying, in a timely manner, a 2-pool complex. I have to ask, is your real concern that the pool would have a new post-code?
Option 2 looks nice but would be the most expensive to build & maintain and would take the longest to realise. It would also require the subsidy of developing the above-denigrated Willow Way site into residential units.
Don't get me wrong, I like Option 2, I just don't think it is the most realistic option. I also take umbrage that with the potential pool having a SE26 post-code (especially when in reality it is only minutes away) implies such a bad thing for residents!
-
Pat Trembath
- Posts: 613
- Joined: 2 Oct 2004 10:54
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Please click the link to see the report being presented to the Mayor and Cabinet meeting next Wednesday 25 February - meeting starts at 6.00pm at the Town Hall - http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres ... ry2009.PDF.
The recommendations to the Mayor are consultation on the options - to postpone the project until 2012 when a decision can be made as to the allocation of additional resources from the Council's capital programme (making option 2 affordable) or carry out more work on Willow Way to deliver a new leisure centre as soon as possible with cross subsidy from new housing on the existing pools site.
Please come along to hear the discussion.
The recommendations to the Mayor are consultation on the options - to postpone the project until 2012 when a decision can be made as to the allocation of additional resources from the Council's capital programme (making option 2 affordable) or carry out more work on Willow Way to deliver a new leisure centre as soon as possible with cross subsidy from new housing on the existing pools site.
Please come along to hear the discussion.
The conclusions in the document (p22) state:
Although I do like Option 2, it really seems that if we want a pool in FH (area), Option 3 is the only way forward...
Which is a bit scary as if Option 1 or 2 is the preferred choice (as it seems to be), the recommendation is that the project is put on hold until 2012 and then reviewed again to see if it is affordable. Of course there is no guarantee that it will be any more affordable then and in the meantime the Pools site will be left pretty much to the elements.Two possible options have emerged from the further
feasibility work, as follows:
- to postpone the project until 2012, at which point a decision
can be made as to the allocation of additional resources from the
Council's capital programme. If sufficient additional resources are
available at that time, and market conditions are appropriate, to
proceed with feasibility option 2 (A&M) or feasibility option 3 [they obviously mean option 1 here] (HLM), to
be completed by 2015.
- to proceed now with feasibility option 3 (PTEa), providing a
new leisure centre on Willow Way, cross-subsidised by a housing
development on the current pools site on Dartmouth Road. The leisure
centre in this option could be completed by late 2011.
Although I do like Option 2, it really seems that if we want a pool in FH (area), Option 3 is the only way forward...
Whilst I too support Option 2 I think the massive time delay means Option 3 should be given more consideration by alot of people who have up to now rejected it.
Not many people have pointed out the positive aspects of having the pools on the Willow way site. But there are definite benefits:
The public facilities will be more spread-out rather than having them bunched together (ie library, pool/gym) , therefore benefiting a wider area. Plus less crowding and parking in one area etc.
In particular, the area of the roundabout at the junction of dartmouth road and kirkdale is not exactly the thriving hub it once apparently used to be and bringing public facilities closer to it would be a boost to this area.
Another plus point - In the illustrations of the designs for the residential development of the pools site the site looks pleasant and green and the architecture of good quality. So Option 3 would have the benefit of avoiding the overdevelopment of this site and producing the opportunity for some high-quality housing.
I'm sure there are other benefits but these are the ones that spring to mind.
I've just been reading in the report that the earliest Option 1 or 2 could be built is 2015, if at all!
On the basis of this it's got to be Option 3.
Not many people have pointed out the positive aspects of having the pools on the Willow way site. But there are definite benefits:
The public facilities will be more spread-out rather than having them bunched together (ie library, pool/gym) , therefore benefiting a wider area. Plus less crowding and parking in one area etc.
In particular, the area of the roundabout at the junction of dartmouth road and kirkdale is not exactly the thriving hub it once apparently used to be and bringing public facilities closer to it would be a boost to this area.
Another plus point - In the illustrations of the designs for the residential development of the pools site the site looks pleasant and green and the architecture of good quality. So Option 3 would have the benefit of avoiding the overdevelopment of this site and producing the opportunity for some high-quality housing.
I'm sure there are other benefits but these are the ones that spring to mind.
I've just been reading in the report that the earliest Option 1 or 2 could be built is 2015, if at all!
On the basis of this it's got to be Option 3.
-
Tim Walder
- Posts: 28
- Joined: 4 Jun 2008 21:13
- Location: Forest Hill
People in SE26 should have a look at the poll on se23.com to see what the SE23 people think of the options. Mmmm.
There are fuller and more detailed plans of the proposals available now by following this link, they also give a better idea of the rationales behind the schemes:
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/LeisureAndCu ... HillPools/
There are fuller and more detailed plans of the proposals available now by following this link, they also give a better idea of the rationales behind the schemes:
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/LeisureAndCu ... HillPools/