The city backflipped Monday on a controversial pool rule that belly flopped with parents.

A tidal wave of outrage washed over London after the city recently posted signs at public pools and to the city’s Facebook page saying children over the age of three aren’t allowed inside change rooms for the opposite gender.

The controversial rule — a practice the city has adopted over the years — was a response to pool-users voicing concern over the presence of children of the opposite sex in change rooms, said a city official.

But parents blasted the city over the decree, saying they didn’t want to send their children into change rooms alone, and anyone made uncomfortable by children’s nudity should change into their bathing suit somewhere else.

Amid the escalating fallout Monday — the story made a big splash on social media, where hundreds of people weighed in on the issue — the city abandoned the rule after discovering it clashed with its own policy.

“The signs were wrong,” said Bill Coxhead, London’s director of parks and recreation.

Under a city bylaw, children 12 and under are allowed into change rooms and washrooms of the opposite gender as long as they’re accompanied by a parent or guardian.

“The signs were a practice that emerged over time,” Coxhead said, adding the city has removed them from its pools.

Ward 3 Coun. Mo Salih lauded the move to scrap the unofficial rule.

“I think it’s exactly what should be done,” said Salih.

“(The signs) should have never went up.”

The now-dropped rule drew scorn from Jeremy McCall, a father of three and co-founder of Dad Club London, who contacted several councillors to raise questions.

“Why am I being punished for being a parent?” said McCall.

McCall, who has two daughters ages two and three, dismissed the city’s previous suggestion that pool staffers could escort youngsters through the appropriate change room to the swimming area.

“My two-year-old has to hold my hand wherever we go,” he said.

“When it’s wet . . . she’s going to run, she’s going to slip, she’s going to fall. So what’s going to happen when a 17-year-old doesn’t know that and lets her run through the shower and she cracks her head open?”

Ward 7 Coun. Josh Morgan, a father of three, questioned why an existing bylaw was ignored and replaced with a ban on kids four and older going into opposite gender change rooms.

“Sometimes things get missed,” said Morgan.

“Is that acceptable? No.

“You need to have the ability to be with your kids when you need to be with your kids, especially younger ones.”

London has four indoor pools, 12 outdoor pools, 11 wading pools and 14 spray pads — many of them outfitted with universal change rooms designed to accommodate users of all genders and ages.

Coxhead said new facilities are being built with universal change rooms, but a handful of older ones, like Thames Pool in Old South, have only men’s and women’s change rooms.

“Ideally, our facilities would have universal washrooms, universal change rooms . . . that takes some money and time, and we’ll work to that over years,” Coxhead said.

dcarruthers@postmedia.com

Social media reaction

“City of London parents still deserve an explanation as to how such a ludicrous and ill-thought-out rule was allowed to see the light of day.”

— Rebecca Baranowsky Coyne

“Pretty stupid if you ask me. If you don’t have universal change rooms at all the facilities you shouldn’t enforce this. I would never let my three-year-old out of my sight.”

— Sucram Rebot

“This is hilarious to me. Violate a city bylaw, offend so many families, and three days later you make it sound like our feedback is what made you guys remove those signs. . . . Now you’re scrambling to save face.”

— Ash Gibbs

“How (was) such a rule was put in place going against city bylaws in the first place! Did no one in the head office check local legislation before approving these signs to be posted?”

— Evie Marie

“You will still be losing our business. . . . This whole incident has just been a circus ride. We will be going elsewhere . . . where the safety of the children are No. 1 priority.”

— Ashley S. Hughes