Max,
I understand your argument about the economics of four pools rather than five, but I think you are taking the wrong approach. The Bridge is remarkably close to the borough boundary, with Beckenham pools not far away. While Forest Hill is closed lots of people like BB have been travelling to Beckenham, going right past The Bridge.

What makes sense is to have a new pool that best caters for the residents of Lewisham. Building on the Willow Way site, close to Crystal Palace, does not do this, nor does the site make much sense. It is further away from a train station and in down a back street in the middle of a commercial estate. It would be preferable to have the pool close to a town centre and tube connections (a much more frequent service than Lower Sydenham station).

So if you are resigned to the closure of The Bridge, the answer is to build the replacement pool on the existing site of the Forest Hill pool. This will better serve people in Lewisham including Honor Oak, many parts of Sydenham, Forest Hill and possibly Brockley. The Bridge is hardly needed by Lewisham residents for dry leisure as there are dry leisure facilities in Bellingham, Downham, and one day maybe in Forest Hill too. Wouldn't The Bridge make an ideal site for housing?

Of course I do not want the pool to be built at the expense of other local communities, but I do not feel that your argument in favour of the Willow Way site is an honest one. The difference in distance from The Bridge to Forest Hill compared to Kirkdale is less than 0.1 miles (as the crow flies).

btw, I am not in favour of closing The Bridge to finance Forest Hill Pool. I know many people in Lower Sydenham would be appalled by the suggestion, I am only contemplating the idea to make my point to Max who seems to want the closure of one of Lewisham's pools after he fought so hard and admirably for Ladywell pool.