Rob Winton has summed up this situation perfectly. As a Father with a 3 year old daughter myself, I had already considered Option 2 would provide us with a reasonable (if not perfect) facility. Not everyone will be pleased with whatever outcome transpires, but it is clear that any short term endeavours may end up on the back burner. Like FH Central across the way, it is clear building costs will not be met if there is a cash shortfall caused by dithering, protest and a declining economy.

My daughter loves swimming, and we live a couple of minutes walk from the train Station. I would love to be able to take her swimming more often, even in the evenings when I return from work, but presently, each occasion requires a walk to Sydenham and then a bus journey. Typically a 70-80 minute trip each way as opposed to a few minutes walk. Whilst I appreciate that many would consider it a luxury to have a decent facility on your doorstep, we are fortunate enough to be on the threshold of potentially getting just that, or perhaps, we were on the threshold. A decent, local child friendly pool is all I want and I am sure many share this view. If my daughter could swim 2 or 3 times a week rather than just once or twice a month as at present I would be very happy.

I have a keen interest in architecture and have seen many great buildings disapear before their time. I try to take a balanced view of such situations and feel the site has only a minor historical value. In my mind, the site does not warrant listing status, and this "win" simply means the building is now a pawn to protect the existing pool as none of the plans offered can proceed without clearance of both sites.

Many locals are growing tired of waiting and simply want the convenience of local, modern, working facilities. I suspect that this building will now simply become a great weight around our collective necks.