Traffic warning with six cruise ships due to dock in Southampton

Traffic in Southampton earlier this year

Traffic in Southampton earlier this year

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

MOTORISTS are bracing themselves for traffic chaos as six cruise liners visit Southampton.

Council bosses have warned drivers to expect congestion as more than 12,000 cruise passengers arrive at the port tomorrow.

It follows hours of delays in January due to a combination of extensive roadworks at Central Bridge and five cruise ships in port, with motorists stranded and forced to relieve themselves at the side of the road.

And just two months after the city ground to a halt for the second time in four months when two ships arrived on March 25 leaving hundreds of motorists stranded on gridlocked roads for more than two hours.

Traffic misery also struck Southampton last week with the arrival of Cunard's Queen Mary 2, Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth and in April when the 3,000-berth Azura docked for two days.

Now Southampton City Council is urging drivers to take alternative routes, particularly during the busiest times between 11am and 2pm.

The council say they and contractor Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) have been working to reduce the expected congestion and electronic signs will be put on the main roads into the cities and around Town Quay and Platform Road giving motorists advance warnings of delays.

There will also be improved traffic signalling and more security staff on the dock gates to speed up access to the port and the cruise operators will be staggering the embark and disembark times.

Fred Olsen Cruise Lines' Balmoral and Black Watch will be both arriving in port at 4.30am, MSC Opera will arrive at 4pm and then P&Os MV Aurora and MV Oceana and Royal Caribbean International's MS Independence of the Seas will all join them in the city at 4.30pm.

A Southampton city council spokesman said: “With six cruise ships due in port the council is advising drivers to expect some congestion on the approaches to the waterfront area of the city.

"Peak times for traffic movements in and out of the docks are expected to be between 11am and 2pm and drivers should plan their journey and use alternative routes into the city where possible.”

The number of cruise ships visiting the city has doubled in the last 10 years from 203 visits in 203 to more than 430 expected visits this year, bringing more than 1.6 million passengers into Southampton.

Road works currently taking place in Platform Road and Town Quay are expected to improve access to the docks and support the growth of the container port and cruise terminal, creating 500 new jobs.

Another 20,000 passengers are expected to arrive at the port on May 23 and 24 and a further 25,000 on May 30 and 31.

Comments (79)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:51am Fri 16 May 14

loosehead says...

so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"? loosehead
  • Score: 23

6:00am Fri 16 May 14

aldermoorboy says...

open up all dock roads
open up all dock roads aldermoorboy
  • Score: 16

6:08am Fri 16 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

WARNING TO ALL COMMUTERS ! ! !

If your going to drive through Southampton don't forget to carry your portable Loo or bucket with you ! ! !
WARNING TO ALL COMMUTERS ! ! ! If your going to drive through Southampton don't forget to carry your portable Loo or bucket with you ! ! ! In search of the truth.
  • Score: 11

6:15am Fri 16 May 14

saint61 says...

Both g to do with the cruise ships it's like it everyday. Wherever you go road works are taking place.
Took me 40minutes to get through commercial road on Monday. Do I blame students for the flats being built?
Both g to do with the cruise ships it's like it everyday. Wherever you go road works are taking place. Took me 40minutes to get through commercial road on Monday. Do I blame students for the flats being built? saint61
  • Score: 13

7:21am Fri 16 May 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus.... FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 6

7:45am Fri 16 May 14

Huey says...

Send the ships to Liverpool, we can't cope.
Send the ships to Liverpool, we can't cope. Huey
  • Score: -68

7:59am Fri 16 May 14

YuraNicced says...

I expect to see -

Cars using dock gate 8 instead of DG10 for those going East from those ships in that area and those heading West using DG20 INSTEAD of West Quay Rd. This wont happen because, im guessing, the council have not forced ABP (or whoever needed to be) to improve the doskcs roads WITHIN the docks. ABP, listen, you cant expect to make lots of dollar from cruises and not give a little - the cars should be heading out of DG20. Improve the link from DG20 to the M271. Or how about, take note ABP (little cost, a link from the docks road joining millbrook rd near the millbrook station, across that big car park (loadsa room)

If you wanna earn u gotta learn


I also hope the council, especially Jacqui Rayment, out watching the build up, taking notes and finding ways to improve it all.

Personally i think they have failed with the new lights (more ruddy lights) out side DG4. but time will tell i guess - the hold up will still be the roundabout on WQ rd and the lights (lights lights lights)
I expect to see - Cars using dock gate 8 instead of DG10 for those going East from those ships in that area and those heading West using DG20 INSTEAD of West Quay Rd. This wont happen because, im guessing, the council have not forced ABP (or whoever needed to be) to improve the doskcs roads WITHIN the docks. ABP, listen, you cant expect to make lots of dollar from cruises and not give a little - the cars should be heading out of DG20. Improve the link from DG20 to the M271. Or how about, take note ABP (little cost, a link from the docks road joining millbrook rd near the millbrook station, across that big car park (loadsa room) If you wanna earn u gotta learn I also hope the council, especially Jacqui Rayment, out watching the build up, taking notes and finding ways to improve it all. Personally i think they have failed with the new lights (more ruddy lights) out side DG4. but time will tell i guess - the hold up will still be the roundabout on WQ rd and the lights (lights lights lights) YuraNicced
  • Score: 14

8:00am Fri 16 May 14

davidsouth1 says...

Huey says...

Send the ships to Liverpool, we can't cope.


You can't do that, the ships would be stolen before passengers had boarded!
Huey says... Send the ships to Liverpool, we can't cope. You can't do that, the ships would be stolen before passengers had boarded! davidsouth1
  • Score: 18

8:08am Fri 16 May 14

Daveycrock says...

Why would the peak time for traffic be from 11am & 2pm when, according to the article, four of th ships arrive at or after 4pm? Please check your facts Echo, cruise ships rarely arrive in port during the afternoon and a little research will reveal that they are all actually due to arrive early in the morning.
Why would the peak time for traffic be from 11am & 2pm when, according to the article, four of th ships arrive at or after 4pm? Please check your facts Echo, cruise ships rarely arrive in port during the afternoon and a little research will reveal that they are all actually due to arrive early in the morning. Daveycrock
  • Score: 18

8:40am Fri 16 May 14

News Fanatic says...

I am going on Opera tomorrow. It sails at 4pm - it arrives much earlier than that.
I am going on Opera tomorrow. It sails at 4pm - it arrives much earlier than that. News Fanatic
  • Score: 5

9:05am Fri 16 May 14

THEKILLER says...

Warning, Warning, Southampton Closed again!
Warning, Warning, Southampton Closed again! THEKILLER
  • Score: 9

9:22am Fri 16 May 14

southy says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also southy
  • Score: -10

9:27am Fri 16 May 14

sotonbusdriver says...

YuraNicced wrote:
I expect to see -

Cars using dock gate 8 instead of DG10 for those going East from those ships in that area and those heading West using DG20 INSTEAD of West Quay Rd. This wont happen because, im guessing, the council have not forced ABP (or whoever needed to be) to improve the doskcs roads WITHIN the docks. ABP, listen, you cant expect to make lots of dollar from cruises and not give a little - the cars should be heading out of DG20. Improve the link from DG20 to the M271. Or how about, take note ABP (little cost, a link from the docks road joining millbrook rd near the millbrook station, across that big car park (loadsa room)

If you wanna earn u gotta learn


I also hope the council, especially Jacqui Rayment, out watching the build up, taking notes and finding ways to improve it all.

Personally i think they have failed with the new lights (more ruddy lights) out side DG4. but time will tell i guess - the hold up will still be the roundabout on WQ rd and the lights (lights lights lights)
Your suggestions are right on the point, but the use of Dock Gate 20, wouldn't meet with the good old health and safety rules, as it directs cars towards the container area.
Which means there is a small risk that a car could get lost and find itself driving around on the concrete slab area, where it is compulsory to have an amber flashing light on the roof as straddle cranes cannot see you otherwise...
Plus it would open the docks up to potential terrorist risk, as they could get into areas and hide packages.
The Council relies too much on CARPARK revenue, which is why it encourages drivers to come right into the centre for shopping. So now they after squandering the money, they cannot afford to develop the roads to cope, nor wish too in truth.
Buses in the town cannot cope with the traffic issues at present either. They are getting stuck in the traffic and cannot keep up a reliable service.
[quote][p][bold]YuraNicced[/bold] wrote: I expect to see - Cars using dock gate 8 instead of DG10 for those going East from those ships in that area and those heading West using DG20 INSTEAD of West Quay Rd. This wont happen because, im guessing, the council have not forced ABP (or whoever needed to be) to improve the doskcs roads WITHIN the docks. ABP, listen, you cant expect to make lots of dollar from cruises and not give a little - the cars should be heading out of DG20. Improve the link from DG20 to the M271. Or how about, take note ABP (little cost, a link from the docks road joining millbrook rd near the millbrook station, across that big car park (loadsa room) If you wanna earn u gotta learn I also hope the council, especially Jacqui Rayment, out watching the build up, taking notes and finding ways to improve it all. Personally i think they have failed with the new lights (more ruddy lights) out side DG4. but time will tell i guess - the hold up will still be the roundabout on WQ rd and the lights (lights lights lights)[/p][/quote]Your suggestions are right on the point, but the use of Dock Gate 20, wouldn't meet with the good old health and safety rules, as it directs cars towards the container area. Which means there is a small risk that a car could get lost and find itself driving around on the concrete slab area, where it is compulsory to have an amber flashing light on the roof as straddle cranes cannot see you otherwise... Plus it would open the docks up to potential terrorist risk, as they could get into areas and hide packages. The Council relies too much on CARPARK revenue, which is why it encourages drivers to come right into the centre for shopping. So now they after squandering the money, they cannot afford to develop the roads to cope, nor wish too in truth. Buses in the town cannot cope with the traffic issues at present either. They are getting stuck in the traffic and cannot keep up a reliable service. sotonbusdriver
  • Score: 8

9:45am Fri 16 May 14

Rjhsoton says...

Fred Olsen Cruise Lines' Balmoral and Black Watch will be both arriving in port at 4.30am, MSC Opera will arrive at 4pm and then P&Os MV Aurora and MV Oceana and Royal Caribbean International's MS Independence of the Seas will all join them in the city at 4.30pm.

is this another typo as i thought the ships arrive in the morning and sail back out in evening.
1 arrives am then the rest all arive from 4pm ????????
Fred Olsen Cruise Lines' Balmoral and Black Watch will be both arriving in port at 4.30am, MSC Opera will arrive at 4pm and then P&Os MV Aurora and MV Oceana and Royal Caribbean International's MS Independence of the Seas will all join them in the city at 4.30pm. is this another typo as i thought the ships arrive in the morning and sail back out in evening. 1 arrives am then the rest all arive from 4pm ???????? Rjhsoton
  • Score: 2

10:15am Fri 16 May 14

phil maccavity says...

southy wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also
Southy
Another of your posts without substance.
The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions.
One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also[/p][/quote]Southy Another of your posts without substance. The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions. One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance. phil maccavity
  • Score: 15

10:30am Fri 16 May 14

sotonboy84 says...

I'm always amazed at the incompetence of Letts/Rayment and co that after God knows how many gridlocked days this city has seen recently, absolutely nothing has changed.

"The council say they and contractor Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) have been working to reduce the expected congestion and electronic signs will be put on the main roads into the cities and around Town Quay and Platform Road giving motorists advance warnings of delays."

So why are they putting signs up to tell people the city is going to be busy? What does this achieve? How are they working to reduce the traffic – I've not seen anything? BBLP are just as incompetent as the council, look at the major road closures around Commercial Road and on day one their signalling wasn't working.

Why not do their jobs properly, apply a bit of proactivity and actually get to the route of the problem and sort that. Whatever happened to the council's "emergency plan" after the complete balls up last time?

You can't blame the cruise ships, they don't sneak in when nobody's looking, the council are aware way in advance. They're voted in to do a job and clearly can't so vote them out and give the job to somebody who can.
I'm always amazed at the incompetence of Letts/Rayment and co that after God knows how many gridlocked days this city has seen recently, absolutely nothing has changed. "The council say they and contractor Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) have been working to reduce the expected congestion and electronic signs will be put on the main roads into the cities and around Town Quay and Platform Road giving motorists advance warnings of delays." So why are they putting signs up to tell people the city is going to be busy? What does this achieve? How are they working to reduce the traffic – I've not seen anything? BBLP are just as incompetent as the council, look at the major road closures around Commercial Road and on day one their signalling wasn't working. Why not do their jobs properly, apply a bit of proactivity and actually get to the route of the problem and sort that. Whatever happened to the council's "emergency plan" after the complete balls up last time? You can't blame the cruise ships, they don't sneak in when nobody's looking, the council are aware way in advance. They're voted in to do a job and clearly can't so vote them out and give the job to somebody who can. sotonboy84
  • Score: 13

10:40am Fri 16 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

WARNING TO ALL COMMUTERS ! ! !

If your going to drive through Southampton don't forget to carry your portable Loo or bucket with you ! ! !

It might also help, if you carried a packed lunch and a couple of puzzle books to keep you entertained whilst in the traffic jam ?
WARNING TO ALL COMMUTERS ! ! ! If your going to drive through Southampton don't forget to carry your portable Loo or bucket with you ! ! ! It might also help, if you carried a packed lunch and a couple of puzzle books to keep you entertained whilst in the traffic jam ? In search of the truth.
  • Score: 4

11:05am Fri 16 May 14

elvisimo says...

for such an important part of Southampton's business you would have thought they would just throw some money at the issue and get it resolved - not rocket science.
for such an important part of Southampton's business you would have thought they would just throw some money at the issue and get it resolved - not rocket science. elvisimo
  • Score: 12

11:16am Fri 16 May 14

southy says...

phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also
Southy
Another of your posts without substance.
The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions.
One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.
When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth.
Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also[/p][/quote]Southy Another of your posts without substance. The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions. One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.[/p][/quote]When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth. Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business southy
  • Score: -10

11:18am Fri 16 May 14

southy says...

elvisimo wrote:
for such an important part of Southampton's business you would have thought they would just throw some money at the issue and get it resolved - not rocket science.
It will never be resolved the docks was ok say 30 years ago, but now days the docks are in the wrong location now, and maybe it should be moved down river where there is a lot more space
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: for such an important part of Southampton's business you would have thought they would just throw some money at the issue and get it resolved - not rocket science.[/p][/quote]It will never be resolved the docks was ok say 30 years ago, but now days the docks are in the wrong location now, and maybe it should be moved down river where there is a lot more space southy
  • Score: -13

11:26am Fri 16 May 14

duncan1973 says...

libel and liable, two VERY different meanings...
libel and liable, two VERY different meanings... duncan1973
  • Score: 5

11:28am Fri 16 May 14

duncan1973 says...

The definition of a road in England and Wales is ‘any highway and any other road to which the public has access and includes bridges over which a road passes’ (RTA 1988 sect 192(1)).

It is important to note that references to ‘road’ therefore generally include footpaths, bridleways and cycle tracks, and many roadways and driveways on private land (including many car parks). In most cases, the law will apply to them and there may be additional rules for particular paths or ways. Some serious driving offences, including drink-driving offences, also apply to all public places, for example public car parks.

https://www.gov.uk/u
sing-the-road-159-to
-203/the-road-user-a
nd-the-law
The definition of a road in England and Wales is ‘any highway and any other road to which the public has access and includes bridges over which a road passes’ (RTA 1988 sect 192(1)). It is important to note that references to ‘road’ therefore generally include footpaths, bridleways and cycle tracks, and many roadways and driveways on private land (including many car parks). In most cases, the law will apply to them and there may be additional rules for particular paths or ways. Some serious driving offences, including drink-driving offences, also apply to all public places, for example public car parks. https://www.gov.uk/u sing-the-road-159-to -203/the-road-user-a nd-the-law duncan1973
  • Score: 3

11:31am Fri 16 May 14

loosehead says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
so you agree with me?
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]so you agree with me? loosehead
  • Score: -2

11:35am Fri 16 May 14

loosehead says...

YuraNicced wrote:
I expect to see -

Cars using dock gate 8 instead of DG10 for those going East from those ships in that area and those heading West using DG20 INSTEAD of West Quay Rd. This wont happen because, im guessing, the council have not forced ABP (or whoever needed to be) to improve the doskcs roads WITHIN the docks. ABP, listen, you cant expect to make lots of dollar from cruises and not give a little - the cars should be heading out of DG20. Improve the link from DG20 to the M271. Or how about, take note ABP (little cost, a link from the docks road joining millbrook rd near the millbrook station, across that big car park (loadsa room)

If you wanna earn u gotta learn


I also hope the council, especially Jacqui Rayment, out watching the build up, taking notes and finding ways to improve it all.

Personally i think they have failed with the new lights (more ruddy lights) out side DG4. but time will tell i guess - the hold up will still be the roundabout on WQ rd and the lights (lights lights lights)
have you driven down that dock road? it's a lot wider than the road down past the pier to Godshead tower.
As I've said before my friend had to ask his taxi driver to go the dock gate 20 route which for some reason upset his driver could that be the problem?
Could it be there are no signs advertising traffic to head to dock gate 20?
[quote][p][bold]YuraNicced[/bold] wrote: I expect to see - Cars using dock gate 8 instead of DG10 for those going East from those ships in that area and those heading West using DG20 INSTEAD of West Quay Rd. This wont happen because, im guessing, the council have not forced ABP (or whoever needed to be) to improve the doskcs roads WITHIN the docks. ABP, listen, you cant expect to make lots of dollar from cruises and not give a little - the cars should be heading out of DG20. Improve the link from DG20 to the M271. Or how about, take note ABP (little cost, a link from the docks road joining millbrook rd near the millbrook station, across that big car park (loadsa room) If you wanna earn u gotta learn I also hope the council, especially Jacqui Rayment, out watching the build up, taking notes and finding ways to improve it all. Personally i think they have failed with the new lights (more ruddy lights) out side DG4. but time will tell i guess - the hold up will still be the roundabout on WQ rd and the lights (lights lights lights)[/p][/quote]have you driven down that dock road? it's a lot wider than the road down past the pier to Godshead tower. As I've said before my friend had to ask his taxi driver to go the dock gate 20 route which for some reason upset his driver could that be the problem? Could it be there are no signs advertising traffic to head to dock gate 20? loosehead
  • Score: -1

11:43am Fri 16 May 14

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also
Southy
Another of your posts without substance.
The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions.
One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.
When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth.
Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business
I use to ride over the bridge at Millbrook station down to the dock gate by AC Delco's then along the road past Montague Lemeyers (timber merchants) then past Rank & past solent canners & out of the docks by Mayflower Park.
I never ever saw an accident & I'm sure if this council worked with ABP then the main route alongside the ports(mine was one of them) could be made safer ( no accidents?) & make it easier on all people but then if passengers are going straight out of the city what about Hotel workers? what about Taxi drivers? what about suppliers of hotels?
We need those passengers for jobs.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also[/p][/quote]Southy Another of your posts without substance. The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions. One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.[/p][/quote]When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth. Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business[/p][/quote]I use to ride over the bridge at Millbrook station down to the dock gate by AC Delco's then along the road past Montague Lemeyers (timber merchants) then past Rank & past solent canners & out of the docks by Mayflower Park. I never ever saw an accident & I'm sure if this council worked with ABP then the main route alongside the ports(mine was one of them) could be made safer ( no accidents?) & make it easier on all people but then if passengers are going straight out of the city what about Hotel workers? what about Taxi drivers? what about suppliers of hotels? We need those passengers for jobs. loosehead
  • Score: 8

11:49am Fri 16 May 14

Donald2000 says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
I have had constant discussions with First Hampshire regarding the docks traffic and their routeing of the numbers 1,3,6,11,12,13,X4,4A and 4 which come back into Southampton using the Ocean village route. First of all, there are temporary lights into dock gate 4 which appear to be wrongly phased. Then there is some sort of Dock Gate 4 exit in which the lights are wrongly phased giving access to outgoing docks traffic. So the poor commuter or regular user of the bus services does not get a look in. It doesn't matter how many times I query this routeing, First Hampshire state that this is the recognised route.

We have had chaos on this section of the city traffic system for months and even years and it does not matter how many times we beg and plead with the council; it just goes on,. This council is not for us; it does not understand our needs. I would ask the council on behalf of all of us, for goodness sake, just finish the works off for good and for all instead of just going on and on with it and make your bleating excuses.

These things make us go down as a city which is not worth it, instead of a city to be proud of, which I and others would want. Thank you for listening.
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]I have had constant discussions with First Hampshire regarding the docks traffic and their routeing of the numbers 1,3,6,11,12,13,X4,4A and 4 which come back into Southampton using the Ocean village route. First of all, there are temporary lights into dock gate 4 which appear to be wrongly phased. Then there is some sort of Dock Gate 4 exit in which the lights are wrongly phased giving access to outgoing docks traffic. So the poor commuter or regular user of the bus services does not get a look in. It doesn't matter how many times I query this routeing, First Hampshire state that this is the recognised route. We have had chaos on this section of the city traffic system for months and even years and it does not matter how many times we beg and plead with the council; it just goes on,. This council is not for us; it does not understand our needs. I would ask the council on behalf of all of us, for goodness sake, just finish the works off for good and for all instead of just going on and on with it and make your bleating excuses. These things make us go down as a city which is not worth it, instead of a city to be proud of, which I and others would want. Thank you for listening. Donald2000
  • Score: 2

11:54am Fri 16 May 14

Saint Botley says...

Huey wrote:
Send the ships to Liverpool, we can't cope.
The cruise industry is vital to Southampton's economy and we cannot afford to lose it. As has been mentioned above, the problem doesn't lie with the cruise ships but with the council. Poorly scheduled roadworks and a policy of picking the cheapest contractor to do a shoddy job means that the roads are in need of constant attention. As Central Bridge will testify. And the road next to Guildhall Square. If done properly, the cobbles there should last hundreds of years. As it is, they're falling apart after about eighteen months. As always with Soton City Council, they go with the short term saving and next year's budget can deal with the consequences.
[quote][p][bold]Huey[/bold] wrote: Send the ships to Liverpool, we can't cope.[/p][/quote]The cruise industry is vital to Southampton's economy and we cannot afford to lose it. As has been mentioned above, the problem doesn't lie with the cruise ships but with the council. Poorly scheduled roadworks and a policy of picking the cheapest contractor to do a shoddy job means that the roads are in need of constant attention. As Central Bridge will testify. And the road next to Guildhall Square. If done properly, the cobbles there should last hundreds of years. As it is, they're falling apart after about eighteen months. As always with Soton City Council, they go with the short term saving and next year's budget can deal with the consequences. Saint Botley
  • Score: 7

12:43pm Fri 16 May 14

SFC4EVA says...

The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation.

I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.
The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation. I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference. SFC4EVA
  • Score: 5

1:14pm Fri 16 May 14

S!monOn says...

SFC4EVA wrote:
The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation.

I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.
If you could.... you'd work for the highways agency.

How about waiting and seeing if it does improve the situation, rather than condemning it before it's had a chance.
[quote][p][bold]SFC4EVA[/bold] wrote: The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation. I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.[/p][/quote]If you could.... you'd work for the highways agency. How about waiting and seeing if it does improve the situation, rather than condemning it before it's had a chance. S!monOn
  • Score: 2

1:43pm Fri 16 May 14

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
southy wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also
Southy
Another of your posts without substance.
The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions.
One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.
When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth.
Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business
I use to ride over the bridge at Millbrook station down to the dock gate by AC Delco's then along the road past Montague Lemeyers (timber merchants) then past Rank & past solent canners & out of the docks by Mayflower Park.
I never ever saw an accident & I'm sure if this council worked with ABP then the main route alongside the ports(mine was one of them) could be made safer ( no accidents?) & make it easier on all people but then if passengers are going straight out of the city what about Hotel workers? what about Taxi drivers? what about suppliers of hotels?
We need those passengers for jobs.
Loose 355 mores days by the way
You only pass though a short stretch, Dock rules is that the Container port road is for container traffic only any other dock related traffic that pass though do so at there own risk, and your self cutting though you do so at your own risk there is no come back to the docks or any one who are meant to be there.
another word if you had an accident your at fault right away.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also[/p][/quote]Southy Another of your posts without substance. The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions. One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.[/p][/quote]When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth. Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business[/p][/quote]I use to ride over the bridge at Millbrook station down to the dock gate by AC Delco's then along the road past Montague Lemeyers (timber merchants) then past Rank & past solent canners & out of the docks by Mayflower Park. I never ever saw an accident & I'm sure if this council worked with ABP then the main route alongside the ports(mine was one of them) could be made safer ( no accidents?) & make it easier on all people but then if passengers are going straight out of the city what about Hotel workers? what about Taxi drivers? what about suppliers of hotels? We need those passengers for jobs.[/p][/quote]Loose 355 mores days by the way You only pass though a short stretch, Dock rules is that the Container port road is for container traffic only any other dock related traffic that pass though do so at there own risk, and your self cutting though you do so at your own risk there is no come back to the docks or any one who are meant to be there. another word if you had an accident your at fault right away. southy
  • Score: -7

2:21pm Fri 16 May 14

SFC4EVA says...

S!monOn wrote:
SFC4EVA wrote:
The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation.

I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.
If you could.... you'd work for the highways agency.

How about waiting and seeing if it does improve the situation, rather than condemning it before it's had a chance.
No thanks, wouldn't work for a public agency if it could be avoided!
[quote][p][bold]S!monOn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SFC4EVA[/bold] wrote: The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation. I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.[/p][/quote]If you could.... you'd work for the highways agency. How about waiting and seeing if it does improve the situation, rather than condemning it before it's had a chance.[/p][/quote]No thanks, wouldn't work for a public agency if it could be avoided! SFC4EVA
  • Score: 0

2:24pm Fri 16 May 14

country bird says...

Who ever agreed that this was a good and safe idea, are complete idiots.
Who ever agreed that this was a good and safe idea, are complete idiots. country bird
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Fri 16 May 14

andysaints007 says...

Daveycrock wrote:
Why would the peak time for traffic be from 11am & 2pm when, according to the article, four of th ships arrive at or after 4pm? Please check your facts Echo, cruise ships rarely arrive in port during the afternoon and a little research will reveal that they are all actually due to arrive early in the morning.
Check the departure times you numbnuts. And while you are at it, maybe you should check your facts too ;-)
[quote][p][bold]Daveycrock[/bold] wrote: Why would the peak time for traffic be from 11am & 2pm when, according to the article, four of th ships arrive at or after 4pm? Please check your facts Echo, cruise ships rarely arrive in port during the afternoon and a little research will reveal that they are all actually due to arrive early in the morning.[/p][/quote]Check the departure times you numbnuts. And while you are at it, maybe you should check your facts too ;-) andysaints007
  • Score: -1

3:13pm Fri 16 May 14

IronLady2010 says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
I'm always amazed at the incompetence of Letts/Rayment and co that after God knows how many gridlocked days this city has seen recently, absolutely nothing has changed.

"The council say they and contractor Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) have been working to reduce the expected congestion and electronic signs will be put on the main roads into the cities and around Town Quay and Platform Road giving motorists advance warnings of delays."

So why are they putting signs up to tell people the city is going to be busy? What does this achieve? How are they working to reduce the traffic – I've not seen anything? BBLP are just as incompetent as the council, look at the major road closures around Commercial Road and on day one their signalling wasn't working.

Why not do their jobs properly, apply a bit of proactivity and actually get to the route of the problem and sort that. Whatever happened to the council's "emergency plan" after the complete balls up last time?

You can't blame the cruise ships, they don't sneak in when nobody's looking, the council are aware way in advance. They're voted in to do a job and clearly can't so vote them out and give the job to somebody who can.
I share your view.

I often wonder wether the cruise Companies do this on purpose to force the Council to make major improvements to our infrastructure.

If the cruise industry is growing, things can only get worse until we improve our road network.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: I'm always amazed at the incompetence of Letts/Rayment and co that after God knows how many gridlocked days this city has seen recently, absolutely nothing has changed. "The council say they and contractor Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) have been working to reduce the expected congestion and electronic signs will be put on the main roads into the cities and around Town Quay and Platform Road giving motorists advance warnings of delays." So why are they putting signs up to tell people the city is going to be busy? What does this achieve? How are they working to reduce the traffic – I've not seen anything? BBLP are just as incompetent as the council, look at the major road closures around Commercial Road and on day one their signalling wasn't working. Why not do their jobs properly, apply a bit of proactivity and actually get to the route of the problem and sort that. Whatever happened to the council's "emergency plan" after the complete balls up last time? You can't blame the cruise ships, they don't sneak in when nobody's looking, the council are aware way in advance. They're voted in to do a job and clearly can't so vote them out and give the job to somebody who can.[/p][/quote]I share your view. I often wonder wether the cruise Companies do this on purpose to force the Council to make major improvements to our infrastructure. If the cruise industry is growing, things can only get worse until we improve our road network. IronLady2010
  • Score: 1

3:33pm Fri 16 May 14

speedicut says...

Cruise traffic is indeed being directed down Dock Gate 20 this weekend.
Cruise traffic is indeed being directed down Dock Gate 20 this weekend. speedicut
  • Score: 0

4:33pm Fri 16 May 14

S!monOn says...

country bird wrote:
Who ever agreed that this was a good and safe idea, are complete idiots.
What are you referring to? The road works? Driving into town? Cruise ships? Humans?
[quote][p][bold]country bird[/bold] wrote: Who ever agreed that this was a good and safe idea, are complete idiots.[/p][/quote]What are you referring to? The road works? Driving into town? Cruise ships? Humans? S!monOn
  • Score: 4

4:41pm Fri 16 May 14

vag says...

Balfour Beatty, should have finished the worst of the roadworks by now, they haven't, god help those of us who live by this completely unacceptable balls up.
Balfour Beatty, should have finished the worst of the roadworks by now, they haven't, god help those of us who live by this completely unacceptable balls up. vag
  • Score: 3

5:47pm Fri 16 May 14

bigfella777 says...

You've been warned that 6 ships will be in, either avoid town or get caught up in it, go and shop out of town at Whitely or something. Surely it's better than not being told. When the shops revenue really starts falling maybe things will change.
You've been warned that 6 ships will be in, either avoid town or get caught up in it, go and shop out of town at Whitely or something. Surely it's better than not being told. When the shops revenue really starts falling maybe things will change. bigfella777
  • Score: 5

6:31pm Fri 16 May 14

Nearly an OAP says...

It would make good sense to send some of these ships to Liverpool to give poor old Southampton motorists their city roads back. Don't worry though as the Mayor of Liverpool was on television a few weeks ago up here in the North West stating that the Council had bought the cocooned Cunard Building -- it really is magnificent -- covering ten acres and building work was going ahead on a purpose built shipping terminal which should be ready by 2015. Why should passengers in the north and Scotland have to travel hundreds of miles to Southampton when Liverpool is far more accessible? Southampton's problem will soon be solved.
It would make good sense to send some of these ships to Liverpool to give poor old Southampton motorists their city roads back. Don't worry though as the Mayor of Liverpool was on television a few weeks ago up here in the North West stating that the Council had bought the cocooned Cunard Building -- it really is magnificent -- covering ten acres and building work was going ahead on a purpose built shipping terminal which should be ready by 2015. Why should passengers in the north and Scotland have to travel hundreds of miles to Southampton when Liverpool is far more accessible? Southampton's problem will soon be solved. Nearly an OAP
  • Score: -6

7:00pm Fri 16 May 14

Lone Ranger. says...

Usual nut jobs moaning about traffic hold ups that havent even happened yet.
.
There again perhaps they are just reacting to the usual scaremongering of the NEGATIVE Echo ........ Does this newspaper EVER print ANYTHING POSITIVE about this City .......
.
I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan
.
I have never read such pathetic cr*p from posters who supposedly live in Southampton and cant avoid a few INEVITABLE delays.
.
Get a life will you ....... or live somewhere else if you really cant cope
Usual nut jobs moaning about traffic hold ups that havent even happened yet. . There again perhaps they are just reacting to the usual scaremongering of the NEGATIVE Echo ........ Does this newspaper EVER print ANYTHING POSITIVE about this City ....... . I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan . I have never read such pathetic cr*p from posters who supposedly live in Southampton and cant avoid a few INEVITABLE delays. . Get a life will you ....... or live somewhere else if you really cant cope Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 4

7:18pm Fri 16 May 14

phil maccavity says...

southy wrote:
phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Points well made, sir.

Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....
Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also
Southy
Another of your posts without substance.
The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions.
One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.
When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth.
Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business
Southy
Dock Gate 8 has not been open to through traffic for many years so presumably you have not worked in the Docks for many years
Whoever 'warned' you was wrong.
It is irrespective whether my neighbour was on 'docks business' or not.
Normal rules of the road apply
btw what is your interpretation of 'docks business'?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Points well made, sir. Motorists reading this, ought to '(un)brace' themselves for 'road chaos' by taking alternative measures like using other routes, staying at home, cycling, taking the bus....[/p][/quote]Using Dock gate 20 means you are entering a private road, have an accident on that road and you will be libel for your own repairs and if another car is involved who is meant or allowed in the docks would mean you are libel for there repairs also[/p][/quote]Southy Another of your posts without substance. The Dock Road's may be private but they are subject to the normal Road Traffic Acts and Insurance provisions. One of my neighbours was involved in a small collision with a van on the Docks Road and all was settled in the normal way under insurance.[/p][/quote]When I was working in the docks we was warned driving though 8 to 20 any accidents on the Container port road we would be libel for any damage, We was not even meant to go though dock gate 20 to get to 104 berth. Was your neighbour in the docks on docks business[/p][/quote]Southy Dock Gate 8 has not been open to through traffic for many years so presumably you have not worked in the Docks for many years Whoever 'warned' you was wrong. It is irrespective whether my neighbour was on 'docks business' or not. Normal rules of the road apply btw what is your interpretation of 'docks business'? phil maccavity
  • Score: 5

7:25pm Fri 16 May 14

SOULJACKER says...

Yeah, so Southampton City Council do so much to help the traffic flow & it is all the cruise ships faults.
Three words Southampton city councillors:
COBDEN 'FRIGGIN' BRIDGE you morons!
Every time you get to sort the roads in our city you BALLS IT UP!
Leave the roads alone!!!!!!
And to the man says Hmmm, I say Hmmmmmm!
Yeah, so Southampton City Council do so much to help the traffic flow & it is all the cruise ships faults. Three words Southampton city councillors: COBDEN 'FRIGGIN' BRIDGE you morons! Every time you get to sort the roads in our city you BALLS IT UP! Leave the roads alone!!!!!! And to the man says Hmmm, I say Hmmmmmm! SOULJACKER
  • Score: 0

7:34pm Fri 16 May 14

Tom Liverpool says...

i really do find this ongoing debate about the cruises in Southampton to be quite irrational. Southampton complained in what was almost the most offensive manner about the new facility in Liverpool. Now you are moaning about having too many ships, it doesn't make sense.
The cruise industry is massive in your city, and very important economically, and your council and A.B.P should do everything to keep it there, investment is the answer to the problem, new roads and terminals are essential, without this you WILL lose a major part of that industry. don't attack other cities do something to solve the problem.
i really do find this ongoing debate about the cruises in Southampton to be quite irrational. Southampton complained in what was almost the most offensive manner about the new facility in Liverpool. Now you are moaning about having too many ships, it doesn't make sense. The cruise industry is massive in your city, and very important economically, and your council and A.B.P should do everything to keep it there, investment is the answer to the problem, new roads and terminals are essential, without this you WILL lose a major part of that industry. don't attack other cities do something to solve the problem. Tom Liverpool
  • Score: -3

7:36pm Fri 16 May 14

Tom Liverpool says...

loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Loosehead. Don't you sleep?
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Loosehead. Don't you sleep? Tom Liverpool
  • Score: -2

7:38pm Fri 16 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

Lone Ranger. said................
.........

I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan.

....................
....................
..................

Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt.

Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors
throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These
visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc.................
.......

If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.
Lone Ranger. said................ ......... I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan. .................... .................... .................. Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt. Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc................. ....... If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can. In search of the truth.
  • Score: -4

7:40pm Fri 16 May 14

lisa whitemore says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
Usual nut jobs moaning about traffic hold ups that havent even happened yet.
.
There again perhaps they are just reacting to the usual scaremongering of the NEGATIVE Echo ........ Does this newspaper EVER print ANYTHING POSITIVE about this City .......
.
I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan
.
I have never read such pathetic cr*p from posters who supposedly live in Southampton and cant avoid a few INEVITABLE delays.
.
Get a life will you ....... or live somewhere else if you really cant cope
Wow we are touchy today, Lone take a chill pill, FFS! Everyone's allowed to have an opinion !! Take a holiday maybe as it seems you are a little stressed..
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Usual nut jobs moaning about traffic hold ups that havent even happened yet. . There again perhaps they are just reacting to the usual scaremongering of the NEGATIVE Echo ........ Does this newspaper EVER print ANYTHING POSITIVE about this City ....... . I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan . I have never read such pathetic cr*p from posters who supposedly live in Southampton and cant avoid a few INEVITABLE delays. . Get a life will you ....... or live somewhere else if you really cant cope[/p][/quote]Wow we are touchy today, Lone take a chill pill, FFS! Everyone's allowed to have an opinion !! Take a holiday maybe as it seems you are a little stressed.. lisa whitemore
  • Score: -3

7:53pm Fri 16 May 14

sotonboy84 says...

In search of the truth. wrote:
Lone Ranger. said................

.........

I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan.

....................

....................

..................

Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt.

Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors
throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These
visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc.................

.......

If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.
You omitted that Liverpool received hundreds of millions of pounds of EU and taxpayers money to create what Liverpool is today. Southampton didn't because it's a successful city in its own right and from private investment.

The council in Southampton do a poor job at managing traffic, not the end of the world and the city certainly won't ever be losing it's cruise industry, no matter how many stories you tag onto.
[quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: Lone Ranger. said................ ......... I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan. .................... .................... .................. Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt. Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc................. ....... If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.[/p][/quote]You omitted that Liverpool received hundreds of millions of pounds of EU and taxpayers money to create what Liverpool is today. Southampton didn't because it's a successful city in its own right and from private investment. The council in Southampton do a poor job at managing traffic, not the end of the world and the city certainly won't ever be losing it's cruise industry, no matter how many stories you tag onto. sotonboy84
  • Score: 1

7:57pm Fri 16 May 14

sotonboy84 says...

Nearly an OAP wrote:
It would make good sense to send some of these ships to Liverpool to give poor old Southampton motorists their city roads back. Don't worry though as the Mayor of Liverpool was on television a few weeks ago up here in the North West stating that the Council had bought the cocooned Cunard Building -- it really is magnificent -- covering ten acres and building work was going ahead on a purpose built shipping terminal which should be ready by 2015. Why should passengers in the north and Scotland have to travel hundreds of miles to Southampton when Liverpool is far more accessible? Southampton's problem will soon be solved.
Is that the same mayor of Liverpool that's prepared to lose World Heritage status for the city's waterfront to allow a load of flats to be built?

Passengers in the North don't have to travel to Southampton, they can travel to you if it offers them what they want.

It's not a case of Southampton sending cruise ships anywhere as it's down to the ships owners and they choose Southampton. Says it all really.
[quote][p][bold]Nearly an OAP[/bold] wrote: It would make good sense to send some of these ships to Liverpool to give poor old Southampton motorists their city roads back. Don't worry though as the Mayor of Liverpool was on television a few weeks ago up here in the North West stating that the Council had bought the cocooned Cunard Building -- it really is magnificent -- covering ten acres and building work was going ahead on a purpose built shipping terminal which should be ready by 2015. Why should passengers in the north and Scotland have to travel hundreds of miles to Southampton when Liverpool is far more accessible? Southampton's problem will soon be solved.[/p][/quote]Is that the same mayor of Liverpool that's prepared to lose World Heritage status for the city's waterfront to allow a load of flats to be built? Passengers in the North don't have to travel to Southampton, they can travel to you if it offers them what they want. It's not a case of Southampton sending cruise ships anywhere as it's down to the ships owners and they choose Southampton. Says it all really. sotonboy84
  • Score: 6

8:03pm Fri 16 May 14

Lone Ranger. says...

lisa whitemore wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Usual nut jobs moaning about traffic hold ups that havent even happened yet.
.
There again perhaps they are just reacting to the usual scaremongering of the NEGATIVE Echo ........ Does this newspaper EVER print ANYTHING POSITIVE about this City .......
.
I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan
.
I have never read such pathetic cr*p from posters who supposedly live in Southampton and cant avoid a few INEVITABLE delays.
.
Get a life will you ....... or live somewhere else if you really cant cope
Wow we are touchy today, Lone take a chill pill, FFS! Everyone's allowed to have an opinion !! Take a holiday maybe as it seems you are a little stressed..
Touchy !!! ...... No not me Ms Whitemore ....... Perhaps a bit of realism is just a bit too much for some people to handle .......
.
As regards YOUR QUOTE:- "Everyone's allowed to have an opinion" !! ..... I suggest that you would do well to remember that yourself !!
[quote][p][bold]lisa whitemore[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Usual nut jobs moaning about traffic hold ups that havent even happened yet. . There again perhaps they are just reacting to the usual scaremongering of the NEGATIVE Echo ........ Does this newspaper EVER print ANYTHING POSITIVE about this City ....... . I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan . I have never read such pathetic cr*p from posters who supposedly live in Southampton and cant avoid a few INEVITABLE delays. . Get a life will you ....... or live somewhere else if you really cant cope[/p][/quote]Wow we are touchy today, Lone take a chill pill, FFS! Everyone's allowed to have an opinion !! Take a holiday maybe as it seems you are a little stressed..[/p][/quote]Touchy !!! ...... No not me Ms Whitemore ....... Perhaps a bit of realism is just a bit too much for some people to handle ....... . As regards YOUR QUOTE:- "Everyone's allowed to have an opinion" !! ..... I suggest that you would do well to remember that yourself !! Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 4

8:53pm Fri 16 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
Nearly an OAP wrote:
It would make good sense to send some of these ships to Liverpool to give poor old Southampton motorists their city roads back. Don't worry though as the Mayor of Liverpool was on television a few weeks ago up here in the North West stating that the Council had bought the cocooned Cunard Building -- it really is magnificent -- covering ten acres and building work was going ahead on a purpose built shipping terminal which should be ready by 2015. Why should passengers in the north and Scotland have to travel hundreds of miles to Southampton when Liverpool is far more accessible? Southampton's problem will soon be solved.
Is that the same mayor of Liverpool that's prepared to lose World Heritage status for the city's waterfront to allow a load of flats to be built?

Passengers in the North don't have to travel to Southampton, they can travel to you if it offers them what they want.

It's not a case of Southampton sending cruise ships anywhere as it's down to the ships owners and they choose Southampton. Says it all really.
Liverpool has been attracting visitors to these events for years :-

The Grand National has been running since 1839.

International Music Festival ( formerly known as the Mathew Street Festival ) has been running since 1992.

Royal Liverpool Golf Club ( Hoylake ) was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1897.

Royal Birkdale Golf Club was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1954.

These events were attended by masses of people , years before any so called E.U investment.
The trouble with Southampton is that it has history but that history is hidden by bad planning which hides the walls and ruins the view. It has unfortunately become nothing more than a collection of cruise ship bus stops. When people come down to Southampton all they want to do is get on the ships and cruise. When they get back from their cruise all they want to do is get out of Southampton like a bat out of hell .
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nearly an OAP[/bold] wrote: It would make good sense to send some of these ships to Liverpool to give poor old Southampton motorists their city roads back. Don't worry though as the Mayor of Liverpool was on television a few weeks ago up here in the North West stating that the Council had bought the cocooned Cunard Building -- it really is magnificent -- covering ten acres and building work was going ahead on a purpose built shipping terminal which should be ready by 2015. Why should passengers in the north and Scotland have to travel hundreds of miles to Southampton when Liverpool is far more accessible? Southampton's problem will soon be solved.[/p][/quote]Is that the same mayor of Liverpool that's prepared to lose World Heritage status for the city's waterfront to allow a load of flats to be built? Passengers in the North don't have to travel to Southampton, they can travel to you if it offers them what they want. It's not a case of Southampton sending cruise ships anywhere as it's down to the ships owners and they choose Southampton. Says it all really.[/p][/quote]Liverpool has been attracting visitors to these events for years :- The Grand National has been running since 1839. International Music Festival ( formerly known as the Mathew Street Festival ) has been running since 1992. Royal Liverpool Golf Club ( Hoylake ) was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1897. Royal Birkdale Golf Club was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1954. These events were attended by masses of people , years before any so called E.U investment. The trouble with Southampton is that it has history but that history is hidden by bad planning which hides the walls and ruins the view. It has unfortunately become nothing more than a collection of cruise ship bus stops. When people come down to Southampton all they want to do is get on the ships and cruise. When they get back from their cruise all they want to do is get out of Southampton like a bat out of hell . In search of the truth.
  • Score: -4

8:57pm Fri 16 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
In search of the truth. wrote:
Lone Ranger. said................


.........

I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan.

....................


....................


..................

Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt.

Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors
throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These
visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc.................


.......

If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.
You omitted that Liverpool received hundreds of millions of pounds of EU and taxpayers money to create what Liverpool is today. Southampton didn't because it's a successful city in its own right and from private investment.

The council in Southampton do a poor job at managing traffic, not the end of the world and the city certainly won't ever be losing it's cruise industry, no matter how many stories you tag onto.
Sorry about that.


I meant to tie my comment to your comment shown above.



Liverpool has been attracting visitors to these events for years :-

The Grand National has been running since 1839.

International Music Festival ( formerly known as the Mathew Street Festival ) has been running since 1992.

Royal Liverpool Golf Club ( Hoylake ) was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1897.

Royal Birkdale Golf Club was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1954.

These events were attended by masses of people , years before any so called E.U investment.
The trouble with Southampton is that it has history but that history is hidden by bad planning which hides the walls and ruins the view. It has unfortunately become nothing more than a collection of cruise ship bus stops. When people come down to Southampton all they want to do is get on the ships and cruise. When they get back from their cruise all they want to do is get out of Southampton like a bat out of hell .
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: Lone Ranger. said................ ......... I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan. .................... .................... .................. Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt. Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc................. ....... If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.[/p][/quote]You omitted that Liverpool received hundreds of millions of pounds of EU and taxpayers money to create what Liverpool is today. Southampton didn't because it's a successful city in its own right and from private investment. The council in Southampton do a poor job at managing traffic, not the end of the world and the city certainly won't ever be losing it's cruise industry, no matter how many stories you tag onto.[/p][/quote]Sorry about that. I meant to tie my comment to your comment shown above. Liverpool has been attracting visitors to these events for years :- The Grand National has been running since 1839. International Music Festival ( formerly known as the Mathew Street Festival ) has been running since 1992. Royal Liverpool Golf Club ( Hoylake ) was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1897. Royal Birkdale Golf Club was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1954. These events were attended by masses of people , years before any so called E.U investment. The trouble with Southampton is that it has history but that history is hidden by bad planning which hides the walls and ruins the view. It has unfortunately become nothing more than a collection of cruise ship bus stops. When people come down to Southampton all they want to do is get on the ships and cruise. When they get back from their cruise all they want to do is get out of Southampton like a bat out of hell . In search of the truth.
  • Score: -5

9:15pm Fri 16 May 14

sotonboy84 says...

In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
In search of the truth. wrote:
Lone Ranger. said................



.........

I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere.
.Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan.

....................



....................



..................

Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt.

Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors
throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These
visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc.................



.......

If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.
You omitted that Liverpool received hundreds of millions of pounds of EU and taxpayers money to create what Liverpool is today. Southampton didn't because it's a successful city in its own right and from private investment.

The council in Southampton do a poor job at managing traffic, not the end of the world and the city certainly won't ever be losing it's cruise industry, no matter how many stories you tag onto.
Sorry about that.


I meant to tie my comment to your comment shown above.



Liverpool has been attracting visitors to these events for years :-

The Grand National has been running since 1839.

International Music Festival ( formerly known as the Mathew Street Festival ) has been running since 1992.

Royal Liverpool Golf Club ( Hoylake ) was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1897.

Royal Birkdale Golf Club was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1954.

These events were attended by masses of people , years before any so called E.U investment.
The trouble with Southampton is that it has history but that history is hidden by bad planning which hides the walls and ruins the view. It has unfortunately become nothing more than a collection of cruise ship bus stops. When people come down to Southampton all they want to do is get on the ships and cruise. When they get back from their cruise all they want to do is get out of Southampton like a bat out of hell .
You evidently know very little about Southampton then. It's a great city, steeped in history, surrounded by many other historic cities, the beautiful Hampshire countryside, the New Forest national park as well as quick and easy links to Europe and an hour away from London, to name just a few things. Useless short lived councils and traffic congestion cannot take his away.

If Liverpool has such great attractions then the city should use them. But happy to give up world heritage site status for the development of flats is not a tourist attraction. You should be passionately commenting on your own Daily Echo and praising what you have as a city, not try and belittle a city that has what you want.

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.
[quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: Lone Ranger. said................ ......... I would challenge any City to cope with the arrival and departure of some 20,000 passengers, without having traffic issues somewhere. .Then you get the usual ..... "I sat in a queue for 20 mins", "well i sat in a queue for an hour" ..... FFS all pathetic ..... You have been advised enough times to avoid certain areas because of the problems ...... But no .... they just want to sit at their keyboards and moan. .................... .................... .................. Heaven help the people of Southampton if it ever became a truly popular tourist destination and attracted really large numbers of visitors ( in excess of 100,000 or so) , it would grind to a complete halt. Here in sunny Liverpool , we regularly welcome large crowds of visitors throughout the year, ranging from 25,000 to as much as 500,000. These visitors come for football, the Grand National, the British Open Golf Matches, the Mersey River Festival , Liverpool International music Festival etc, etc, etc................. ....... If you can't deal with the little bit of extra traffic that 12,000 people and some roadworks then your council is truly a disgrace. If you can't cope , look-out because other places can.[/p][/quote]You omitted that Liverpool received hundreds of millions of pounds of EU and taxpayers money to create what Liverpool is today. Southampton didn't because it's a successful city in its own right and from private investment. The council in Southampton do a poor job at managing traffic, not the end of the world and the city certainly won't ever be losing it's cruise industry, no matter how many stories you tag onto.[/p][/quote]Sorry about that. I meant to tie my comment to your comment shown above. Liverpool has been attracting visitors to these events for years :- The Grand National has been running since 1839. International Music Festival ( formerly known as the Mathew Street Festival ) has been running since 1992. Royal Liverpool Golf Club ( Hoylake ) was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1897. Royal Birkdale Golf Club was first used for the British Open Golf Championship in 1954. These events were attended by masses of people , years before any so called E.U investment. The trouble with Southampton is that it has history but that history is hidden by bad planning which hides the walls and ruins the view. It has unfortunately become nothing more than a collection of cruise ship bus stops. When people come down to Southampton all they want to do is get on the ships and cruise. When they get back from their cruise all they want to do is get out of Southampton like a bat out of hell .[/p][/quote]You evidently know very little about Southampton then. It's a great city, steeped in history, surrounded by many other historic cities, the beautiful Hampshire countryside, the New Forest national park as well as quick and easy links to Europe and an hour away from London, to name just a few things. Useless short lived councils and traffic congestion cannot take his away. If Liverpool has such great attractions then the city should use them. But happy to give up world heritage site status for the development of flats is not a tourist attraction. You should be passionately commenting on your own Daily Echo and praising what you have as a city, not try and belittle a city that has what you want. The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. sotonboy84
  • Score: 4

9:36pm Fri 16 May 14

loosehead says...

Tom Liverpool wrote:
loosehead wrote:
so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works?
Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20.
if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads?
Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?
Loosehead. Don't you sleep?
Tom I go to sleep about midnight I get up at 05.20 go to the gym.
I'm not in any way a supporter of our Labour council but until today I was using a Gym in the town right next to our Central train station.
I saw no traffic problems when ships were in dock gates 8-20 but in the old part of the docks we have a single lane road leading to a very busy toll bridge.
this goes up to dock gate 4 where the road is as wide as your strand but then goes back to a bottle neck.
Cunards terminal is at dock gate 4 so you only have to use your brain look & see what ships are in & what berths they're in & go around the city but some people won't & think it's their god given right to use those roads & then moan about the cruise ships?
We have road works so you'd have thought they would want to avoid them but no blame the council & don't forget the cruise ships?
I can't see this being any different if these ships were in Liverpool with Liverpool 1 being so close to the docks where as our car parks are a bit further away from our docks compared to yours.
I would love to see Liverpool thrive but not at the expense of others but through new cruise companies or new routes which won't ships from other ports.
[quote][p][bold]Tom Liverpool[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: so another article blaming the cruise ships but only a mention of road works? Not all of these ships are going to dock gate 4 so the docks traffic can use dock gate 20. if they don't why not? as drivers have been pre warned why head to those dock roads? Why don't this paper say "Drivers refusing to take alternative routes cause gridlock"?[/p][/quote]Loosehead. Don't you sleep?[/p][/quote]Tom I go to sleep about midnight I get up at 05.20 go to the gym. I'm not in any way a supporter of our Labour council but until today I was using a Gym in the town right next to our Central train station. I saw no traffic problems when ships were in dock gates 8-20 but in the old part of the docks we have a single lane road leading to a very busy toll bridge. this goes up to dock gate 4 where the road is as wide as your strand but then goes back to a bottle neck. Cunards terminal is at dock gate 4 so you only have to use your brain look & see what ships are in & what berths they're in & go around the city but some people won't & think it's their god given right to use those roads & then moan about the cruise ships? We have road works so you'd have thought they would want to avoid them but no blame the council & don't forget the cruise ships? I can't see this being any different if these ships were in Liverpool with Liverpool 1 being so close to the docks where as our car parks are a bit further away from our docks compared to yours. I would love to see Liverpool thrive but not at the expense of others but through new cruise companies or new routes which won't ships from other ports. loosehead
  • Score: 1

10:21pm Fri 16 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................
....................
.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool
warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks In search of the truth.
  • Score: -2

2:07am Sat 17 May 14

BeyondImagination says...

Stay home and watch the cup final or head for the beach. Simple. After about 10 there won't be a problem getting out of the city.
Stay home and watch the cup final or head for the beach. Simple. After about 10 there won't be a problem getting out of the city. BeyondImagination
  • Score: 1

6:54am Sat 17 May 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................

....................

.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool

warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
You make some fair points about Liverpool's resilience, scally.Southampton too responded to calamity and diversity following the sinking of the Titanic and the attention visited on us by the Luftwaffe. I think both our cities have a proud maritime, trading and industrial heritage. I have to confess, though, that you may a slight edge over us in terms of popular culture and sporting achievement.

However, you demean your argument case by slagging off Southampton.

I disassociate myself from those here taking cheap political pot shots at Liverpool's mayor and (by implication) the people. Its this 'little Englandism' that fuels bigotry and will - especially if UKIP enjoys success in the elections this week - lead to the break up of the union.
[quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks[/p][/quote]You make some fair points about Liverpool's resilience, scally.Southampton too responded to calamity and diversity following the sinking of the Titanic and the attention visited on us by the Luftwaffe. I think both our cities have a proud maritime, trading and industrial heritage. I have to confess, though, that you may a slight edge over us in terms of popular culture and sporting achievement. However, you demean your argument case by slagging off Southampton. I disassociate myself from those here taking cheap political pot shots at Liverpool's mayor and (by implication) the people. Its this 'little Englandism' that fuels bigotry and will - especially if UKIP enjoys success in the elections this week - lead to the break up of the union. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 2

7:23am Sat 17 May 14

sotonboy84 says...

In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................

....................

.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool

warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now.

I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton.

Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it.

You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks[/p][/quote]This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now. I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton. Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it. You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton. sotonboy84
  • Score: 1

7:33am Sat 17 May 14

sotonboy84 says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................


....................


.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool


warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now.

I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton.

Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it.

You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.
And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London.

Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks[/p][/quote]This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now. I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton. Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it. You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.[/p][/quote]And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London. Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged. sotonboy84
  • Score: 0

7:56am Sat 17 May 14

loosehead says...

This article isn't about us versus Liverpool it's about people's inability to use the brain they were born with & avoid one section of town!
There are those who seem to think they have more right to use this stretch of road than anyone else but seem to forget every road user pays for those roads.
As I've said previously I wish Liverpool all the best & hope they find new cruise ships & hope they don't in any way effect us but this isn't a problem caused by Liverpool it's by our own people.
Dock gate 4 has cruise ships in so use Northam bridge or go around the city & come in through the west.
8-20 has cruise ships use Shirley High Street or Hill lane or come down the Avenue why must it be the dual carriageway?
This article isn't about us versus Liverpool it's about people's inability to use the brain they were born with & avoid one section of town! There are those who seem to think they have more right to use this stretch of road than anyone else but seem to forget every road user pays for those roads. As I've said previously I wish Liverpool all the best & hope they find new cruise ships & hope they don't in any way effect us but this isn't a problem caused by Liverpool it's by our own people. Dock gate 4 has cruise ships in so use Northam bridge or go around the city & come in through the west. 8-20 has cruise ships use Shirley High Street or Hill lane or come down the Avenue why must it be the dual carriageway? loosehead
  • Score: 2

8:17am Sat 17 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................



....................



.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool



warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now.

I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton.

Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it.

You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.
And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London.

Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.
Your grasp of history is quite appalling, you should study a little more.

FACT !!!

Liverpool was the most heavily bombed area of the country, outside of London, due to the city, along with Birkenhead, having the largest west coast port and its consequent importance to the British war effort. The government was concerned to hide from the Germans just how much damage had been inflicted upon the docks, so reports on the bombing were kept low-key. Around 4,000 people were killed in the Merseyside area during the Blitz. This death toll was second only to London, which suffered 30,000 deaths by the end of the war.

Liverpool, Bootle and the Wallasey Pool were strategically very important locations during the Second World War. The large port on the River Mersey, on the North West coast of England, had for many years been the United Kingdom's main link with North America, and this would prove to be a key part in the British participation in the Battle of the Atlantic. As well as providing anchorage for naval ships from many nations, the Mersey's ports and dockers would handle over 90 per cent of all the war material brought into Britain from abroad with some 75 million tons passing through its 11 miles (18 km) of quays. Liverpool was the eastern end of a Transatlantic chain of supplies from North America, without which Britain could not have pursued the war.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks[/p][/quote]This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now. I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton. Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it. You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.[/p][/quote]And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London. Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.[/p][/quote]Your grasp of history is quite appalling, you should study a little more. FACT !!! Liverpool was the most heavily bombed area of the country, outside of London,[1] due to the city, along with Birkenhead, having the largest west coast port and its consequent importance to the British war effort. The government was concerned to hide from the Germans just how much damage had been inflicted upon the docks, so reports on the bombing were kept low-key. Around 4,000 people were killed in the Merseyside area during the Blitz.[1] This death toll was second only to London, which suffered 30,000 deaths by the end of the war. Liverpool, Bootle and the Wallasey Pool were strategically very important locations during the Second World War. The large port on the River Mersey, on the North West coast of England, had for many years been the United Kingdom's main link with North America, and this would prove to be a key part in the British participation in the Battle of the Atlantic. As well as providing anchorage for naval ships from many nations, the Mersey's ports and dockers would handle over 90 per cent of all the war material brought into Britain from abroad with some 75 million tons passing through its 11 miles (18 km) of quays. Liverpool was the eastern end of a Transatlantic chain of supplies from North America, without which Britain could not have pursued the war. In search of the truth.
  • Score: 0

8:51am Sat 17 May 14

southamptonadi says...

SFC4EVA wrote:
The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation.

I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.
Really, at half six I traveled from showing to the far end of Shirley via toll bridge and that took me less than half an hour to travel further.
[quote][p][bold]SFC4EVA[/bold] wrote: The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation. I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.[/p][/quote]Really, at half six I traveled from showing to the far end of Shirley via toll bridge and that took me less than half an hour to travel further. southamptonadi
  • Score: 1

9:04am Sat 17 May 14

southamptonadi says...

andysaints007 wrote:
Daveycrock wrote:
Why would the peak time for traffic be from 11am & 2pm when, according to the article, four of th ships arrive at or after 4pm? Please check your facts Echo, cruise ships rarely arrive in port during the afternoon and a little research will reveal that they are all actually due to arrive early in the morning.
Check the departure times you numbnuts. And while you are at it, maybe you should check your facts too ;-)
Exactly Davey you need to research first too.

Just because a cruise ship arrives early does not mean everyone is of in minutes.

You get an allocated time to disembark, you then collect your bags and go through customs, this can take hours.

If a ship departs at four when do you think they start boarding. Plus some will arrive early so yes peak time will be ten till two when you also factor in normal bust hours of traffic as we'll.
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Daveycrock[/bold] wrote: Why would the peak time for traffic be from 11am & 2pm when, according to the article, four of th ships arrive at or after 4pm? Please check your facts Echo, cruise ships rarely arrive in port during the afternoon and a little research will reveal that they are all actually due to arrive early in the morning.[/p][/quote]Check the departure times you numbnuts. And while you are at it, maybe you should check your facts too ;-)[/p][/quote]Exactly Davey you need to research first too. Just because a cruise ship arrives early does not mean everyone is of in minutes. You get an allocated time to disembark, you then collect your bags and go through customs, this can take hours. If a ship departs at four when do you think they start boarding. Plus some will arrive early so yes peak time will be ten till two when you also factor in normal bust hours of traffic as we'll. southamptonadi
  • Score: 0

9:04am Sat 17 May 14

andysaints007 says...

In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................




....................




.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool




warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now.

I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton.

Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it.

You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.
And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London.

Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.
Your grasp of history is quite appalling, you should study a little more.

FACT !!!

Liverpool was the most heavily bombed area of the country, outside of London, due to the city, along with Birkenhead, having the largest west coast port and its consequent importance to the British war effort. The government was concerned to hide from the Germans just how much damage had been inflicted upon the docks, so reports on the bombing were kept low-key. Around 4,000 people were killed in the Merseyside area during the Blitz. This death toll was second only to London, which suffered 30,000 deaths by the end of the war.

Liverpool, Bootle and the Wallasey Pool were strategically very important locations during the Second World War. The large port on the River Mersey, on the North West coast of England, had for many years been the United Kingdom's main link with North America, and this would prove to be a key part in the British participation in the Battle of the Atlantic. As well as providing anchorage for naval ships from many nations, the Mersey's ports and dockers would handle over 90 per cent of all the war material brought into Britain from abroad with some 75 million tons passing through its 11 miles (18 km) of quays. Liverpool was the eastern end of a Transatlantic chain of supplies from North America, without which Britain could not have pursued the war.
Now you really are becoming a boring individual.
[quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks[/p][/quote]This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now. I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton. Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it. You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.[/p][/quote]And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London. Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.[/p][/quote]Your grasp of history is quite appalling, you should study a little more. FACT !!! Liverpool was the most heavily bombed area of the country, outside of London,[1] due to the city, along with Birkenhead, having the largest west coast port and its consequent importance to the British war effort. The government was concerned to hide from the Germans just how much damage had been inflicted upon the docks, so reports on the bombing were kept low-key. Around 4,000 people were killed in the Merseyside area during the Blitz.[1] This death toll was second only to London, which suffered 30,000 deaths by the end of the war. Liverpool, Bootle and the Wallasey Pool were strategically very important locations during the Second World War. The large port on the River Mersey, on the North West coast of England, had for many years been the United Kingdom's main link with North America, and this would prove to be a key part in the British participation in the Battle of the Atlantic. As well as providing anchorage for naval ships from many nations, the Mersey's ports and dockers would handle over 90 per cent of all the war material brought into Britain from abroad with some 75 million tons passing through its 11 miles (18 km) of quays. Liverpool was the eastern end of a Transatlantic chain of supplies from North America, without which Britain could not have pursued the war.[/p][/quote]Now you really are becoming a boring individual. andysaints007
  • Score: 3

9:04am Sat 17 May 14

southamptonadi says...

southamptonadi wrote:
SFC4EVA wrote:
The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation.

I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.
Really, at half six I traveled from showing to the far end of Shirley via toll bridge and that took me less than half an hour to travel further.
From sholing even
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SFC4EVA[/bold] wrote: The ships, whilst not solely to blame, clear don't help the situation. I had to go from Woolston to West Quay (the old out-doors part) last night at 7pm. Took me 35 minutes to get there what with all the traffic lights and road works. I honestly can't see how the changes they are making will make any difference.[/p][/quote]Really, at half six I traveled from showing to the far end of Shirley via toll bridge and that took me less than half an hour to travel further.[/p][/quote]From sholing even southamptonadi
  • Score: 2

9:28am Sat 17 May 14

SOULJACKER says...

Holy cow, that has to be one of the most 'BORING' threads I have ever read!
Holy cow, that has to be one of the most 'BORING' threads I have ever read! SOULJACKER
  • Score: 2

11:19am Sat 17 May 14

southy says...

Just had a traffic report of sister in Totton traffic is built up along the A36 going into Totton from the north
Just had a traffic report of sister in Totton traffic is built up along the A36 going into Totton from the north southy
  • Score: -2

11:45am Sat 17 May 14

loosehead says...

These posts are becoming ridiculous! This isn't an article about the "Evil" Liverpool or about who got bombed the most in the second world war.
But this is a post about some of the residents of the city & beyond who can't use the brains they were born with & check on road works check when cruise ships are in & what berths/docks they're in at & either change their days of going to town or finding alternative routes into the town.
Yes Southampton has the problem but to the west of the city we have a dual carriageway & a superb docks road so if people can't use these routes plus many more to come in from the west of the city with out traffic jams then it's not the ships or road traffic that's the problem it's the people.
Liverpool has a great road but give them the amount of ships we have with the main shopping centre so close to the docks & you'll get people complaining so it's not about us & them it's about people's inability to think ahead & not just think I want to go that way so I will attitude.
These posts are becoming ridiculous! This isn't an article about the "Evil" Liverpool or about who got bombed the most in the second world war. But this is a post about some of the residents of the city & beyond who can't use the brains they were born with & check on road works check when cruise ships are in & what berths/docks they're in at & either change their days of going to town or finding alternative routes into the town. Yes Southampton has the problem but to the west of the city we have a dual carriageway & a superb docks road so if people can't use these routes plus many more to come in from the west of the city with out traffic jams then it's not the ships or road traffic that's the problem it's the people. Liverpool has a great road but give them the amount of ships we have with the main shopping centre so close to the docks & you'll get people complaining so it's not about us & them it's about people's inability to think ahead & not just think I want to go that way so I will attitude. loosehead
  • Score: 3

12:07pm Sat 17 May 14

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
These posts are becoming ridiculous! This isn't an article about the "Evil" Liverpool or about who got bombed the most in the second world war.
But this is a post about some of the residents of the city & beyond who can't use the brains they were born with & check on road works check when cruise ships are in & what berths/docks they're in at & either change their days of going to town or finding alternative routes into the town.
Yes Southampton has the problem but to the west of the city we have a dual carriageway & a superb docks road so if people can't use these routes plus many more to come in from the west of the city with out traffic jams then it's not the ships or road traffic that's the problem it's the people.
Liverpool has a great road but give them the amount of ships we have with the main shopping centre so close to the docks & you'll get people complaining so it's not about us & them it's about people's inability to think ahead & not just think I want to go that way so I will attitude.
Our problem is that our councils thrown every thing into one area and yes that includes the Tory Council who was the biggest offender pushing all the traffic into a tiny area, what else do they expect was going to happen, its not for the people of Southampton its for people to come into Southampton and pushing Southampton people out, they have driven away as much business as they have bought in.
Our Councils need to realise that its a V shape and throwing every thing in the bottom of that V is going to cause major traffic problems, they need to think of spreading it out into other shopping areas like Portwood, Shirley, Woolston.
The Docks ok was in a good location once and work well, but not now the Docks need to move down river, down to the River Hamble to the River Test tributary River Itchen, they then can connect the docks directly to the m27 and bring in a rail line.
But they will not do that our council will not allow it because it would benefit the people of Southampton and not big business
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: These posts are becoming ridiculous! This isn't an article about the "Evil" Liverpool or about who got bombed the most in the second world war. But this is a post about some of the residents of the city & beyond who can't use the brains they were born with & check on road works check when cruise ships are in & what berths/docks they're in at & either change their days of going to town or finding alternative routes into the town. Yes Southampton has the problem but to the west of the city we have a dual carriageway & a superb docks road so if people can't use these routes plus many more to come in from the west of the city with out traffic jams then it's not the ships or road traffic that's the problem it's the people. Liverpool has a great road but give them the amount of ships we have with the main shopping centre so close to the docks & you'll get people complaining so it's not about us & them it's about people's inability to think ahead & not just think I want to go that way so I will attitude.[/p][/quote]Our problem is that our councils thrown every thing into one area and yes that includes the Tory Council who was the biggest offender pushing all the traffic into a tiny area, what else do they expect was going to happen, its not for the people of Southampton its for people to come into Southampton and pushing Southampton people out, they have driven away as much business as they have bought in. Our Councils need to realise that its a V shape and throwing every thing in the bottom of that V is going to cause major traffic problems, they need to think of spreading it out into other shopping areas like Portwood, Shirley, Woolston. The Docks ok was in a good location once and work well, but not now the Docks need to move down river, down to the River Hamble to the River Test tributary River Itchen, they then can connect the docks directly to the m27 and bring in a rail line. But they will not do that our council will not allow it because it would benefit the people of Southampton and not big business southy
  • Score: -2

6:07pm Sat 17 May 14

Lone Ranger. says...

Quote:- "Peak times for traffic movements in and out of the docks are expected to be between 11am and 2pm and drivers should plan their journey and use alternative routes into the city where possible.”
.
.
Drove down the Avenue at 1-15pm towards the South Hants .... No traffic .. No Queues ...... Drove on towards Dock Gate 4 ..... short queue.
.
Returned via same route NO QUEUES.
.
Perhaps the Echo can put up a "library picture" just to remind us of what happened on ONE OCCASION ....
Quote:- "Peak times for traffic movements in and out of the docks are expected to be between 11am and 2pm and drivers should plan their journey and use alternative routes into the city where possible.” . . Drove down the Avenue at 1-15pm towards the South Hants .... No traffic .. No Queues ...... Drove on towards Dock Gate 4 ..... short queue. . Returned via same route NO QUEUES. . Perhaps the Echo can put up a "library picture" just to remind us of what happened on ONE OCCASION .... Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 3

7:42pm Sat 17 May 14

Tom Liverpool says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
In search of the truth. wrote:
sotonboy84 says...

The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant.

....................



....................



.........

Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool



warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA.

After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ).

Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site.

It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive.

Do I want anything from Southampton ?

Answer ... No thanks
This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now.

I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton.

Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it.

You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.
And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London.

Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.
Your assessment of the bombing is sadly inaccurate, the cities you mention were severely damaged but as previously stated by a previous poster, Liverpool WAS the second most damaged, after London, for example Bootle a Borough 3 miles north of Liverpool (4 square miles in total) suffered 531 raids in one month alone. Winston Churchill personally suppressed this information in an attempt to stop the Germans from finding out how successful they had been. The docks being the reason for the severity of the attacks. So please don't try to downplay facts it does you no credit. If you think I'm exaggerating use your PC to check the facts.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]In search of the truth.[/bold] wrote: sotonboy84 says... The EU and taxpayer investment that Liverpool received was because it was run down and needed redeveloping so before the investment it had very little going for it so it's not irrelevant. .................... .................... ......... Liverpool was the most bombed city outside of London, during the Second World War, it was also the nerve centre for the Battle of the Atlantic ( you can visit and look around the Western Approaches Museum , which consists of 50 underground rooms situated beneath the city centre, http://www.liverpool warmuseum.co.uk ) and was the port that kept this country going throughout WW2 with vital food and military supplies from Canada and USA. After WW2 the government was only interested in rebuilding London and totally ignored Liverpool and other vast area's of Britain ( the UK is the most capital city, centric country in the world ). Despite the destruction during WW2 , Liverpool has more listed buildings than any other city outside of London , has more Georgian buildings than Bath, has the largest Grade 1 listed building in the UK ( The Albert Dock and has 6 area's within the city centre that make up its World Heritage Site. It has hundreds of attractions ( go and see Tripadvisor if you don't believe me ). It has 149,970 reviews about hotels and attractions in Liverpool most of which are very, very positive. Do I want anything from Southampton ? Answer ... No thanks[/p][/quote]This is going a little off track now. The whole country was affected by the war and large parts of it were destroyed and took many years to be rebuilt. Southampton was being rebuilt decades after the war ended. Claiming that Liverpool was ignored is just finger pointing. How do you think the rest of the country rebuilt itself? Just because Liverpool has received hundreds of millions of millions of pounds now, does not mean other city's did to rebuild themselves in the past. Most were dependent on private investment, just as most are now. I believe you, I'm sure Liverpool has a lot going for it so celebrate it. You make some valid points but then belittle your own argument with your cheap snipes at Southampton. Regarding World Heritage Site status. Your mayor should appreciate what an asset this is and not be prepared to lose it in favour of waterside flats. I've brought this point up with you on here before and seem to remember you too agree with it. You want the cruise industry or some of to move from Southampton to Liverpool, so eye I believe you do want something from Southampton.[/p][/quote]And on your point of bombed cities, I forgot add, Coventry was the most damaged city outside of London. Birmingham, Hull, Plymouth and Liverpool were all equally severely damaged.[/p][/quote]Your assessment of the bombing is sadly inaccurate, the cities you mention were severely damaged but as previously stated by a previous poster, Liverpool WAS the second most damaged, after London, for example Bootle a Borough 3 miles north of Liverpool (4 square miles in total) suffered 531 raids in one month alone. Winston Churchill personally suppressed this information in an attempt to stop the Germans from finding out how successful they had been. The docks being the reason for the severity of the attacks. So please don't try to downplay facts it does you no credit. If you think I'm exaggerating use your PC to check the facts. Tom Liverpool
  • Score: 0

8:30pm Sat 17 May 14

Huffter says...

Close the docks down - Southampton would be much quieter then!
Close the docks down - Southampton would be much quieter then! Huffter
  • Score: -1

10:36pm Sat 17 May 14

WoolstonSean says...

Huffter wrote:
Close the docks down - Southampton would be much quieter then!
I take it your taking the ****!
[quote][p][bold]Huffter[/bold] wrote: Close the docks down - Southampton would be much quieter then![/p][/quote]I take it your taking the ****! WoolstonSean
  • Score: 0

12:45am Sun 18 May 14

southy says...

Tom Liverpool
south coast ports where hit hardest, bombers not all ways find there targets so they hit secondary targets and that was any military targets or ports on there run back, fact is and it was suppress at the times for every day London was bomb Southampton or Portsmouth was bomb also they was also hit by V-1 Bombs Liverpool was not as they could not reach that far, All the ports on the south coast was hit hard in prelude to the invasion that never happen in the end, and they became targets for the lead up to the d-day landings.
Tom Liverpool south coast ports where hit hardest, bombers not all ways find there targets so they hit secondary targets and that was any military targets or ports on there run back, fact is and it was suppress at the times for every day London was bomb Southampton or Portsmouth was bomb also they was also hit by V-1 Bombs Liverpool was not as they could not reach that far, All the ports on the south coast was hit hard in prelude to the invasion that never happen in the end, and they became targets for the lead up to the d-day landings. southy
  • Score: -2

9:52am Sun 18 May 14

southy says...

Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.
Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain. southy
  • Score: 1

9:49pm Sun 18 May 14

southamptonadi says...

southy wrote:
Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.
Minus votes haha, really

Coz I wanna know the answer now.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.[/p][/quote]Minus votes haha, really Coz I wanna know the answer now. southamptonadi
  • Score: 0

11:39pm Sun 18 May 14

southy says...

southamptonadi wrote:
southy wrote:
Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.
Minus votes haha, really

Coz I wanna know the answer now.
The answer is
It happen just out side Whitehouse Garage Cafe, Millbrook. Southampton. A bomb aim at the dry dock over shot its target and landed in Millbrook road
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.[/p][/quote]Minus votes haha, really Coz I wanna know the answer now.[/p][/quote]The answer is It happen just out side Whitehouse Garage Cafe, Millbrook. Southampton. A bomb aim at the dry dock over shot its target and landed in Millbrook road southy
  • Score: 0

11:44pm Sun 18 May 14

In search of the truth. says...

southamptonadi wrote:
southy wrote:
Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.
Minus votes haha, really

Coz I wanna know the answer now.
James Isbister - first civilian casualty of WWII

James William Isbister was born in 1913 in Orkney to John and Jane Isbister of Upper Onston, Stenness. At the age of 25 Jim met and courted Lillian Fraser Tait of Buttquoy Place, Kirkwall and they were married. They set up home at Brig o'Waithe in Stenness. By December 1939 they were blessed with a baby boy they named Neil and despite the war were no doubt looking forward to a long and happy future together.

It was still the early days of the war but already Goering’s Luftwaffe were wreaking havoc on the home fleet in Scapa Flow, and 16 March 1940 would be a date that the people of Orkney would never forget.

For more details read :-

http://www.scapaflow
.co/index.php/histor
y_and_archaeology/th
e_20th_century/war/j
ames_isbister_the_fi
rst_civilian_casualt
y_of_the_second_worl
d_war

--------------

Southy you are wrong and here are the facts to prove it. I would also suggest that you go back to school and learn about spelling and grammar as your grasp of the English language is abysmal to say the least.

For the facts see :- http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Liverpool_B
litz
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Tom Liverpool - Here some thing else for you to think about and do some researching, Where was the first civilian causality in WW2 in Britain.[/p][/quote]Minus votes haha, really Coz I wanna know the answer now.[/p][/quote]James Isbister - first civilian casualty of WWII James William Isbister was born in 1913 in Orkney to John and Jane Isbister of Upper Onston, Stenness. At the age of 25 Jim met and courted Lillian Fraser Tait of Buttquoy Place, Kirkwall and they were married. They set up home at Brig o'Waithe in Stenness. By December 1939 they were blessed with a baby boy they named Neil and despite the war were no doubt looking forward to a long and happy future together. It was still the early days of the war but already Goering’s Luftwaffe were wreaking havoc on the home fleet in Scapa Flow, and 16 March 1940 would be a date that the people of Orkney would never forget. For more details read :- http://www.scapaflow .co/index.php/histor y_and_archaeology/th e_20th_century/war/j ames_isbister_the_fi rst_civilian_casualt y_of_the_second_worl d_war -------------- Southy you are wrong and here are the facts to prove it. I would also suggest that you go back to school and learn about spelling and grammar as your grasp of the English language is abysmal to say the least. For the facts see :- http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Liverpool_B litz In search of the truth.
  • Score: 0

1:13am Mon 19 May 14

southy says...

Attacks on South coast ports had all ready started late 1939 in the 7 mths Phoney war attacks was being made to hinder the BEF and supplys to the BEF, and in the English channel shipping was attack, but early in 1940 a bomb fell in Millbrook killing a police officer, another early one was a French woman in 1939 the ship she was travelling on was attack she badly wounded she died on English soil.
I did not realise that there was so many early deaths, the earliest causality not a death but an injury I found was a school boy at a RC school in 1939 a false alarm air raid sounded and doing what they had been practising for a number of weeks before hand the boy fell over and broke a bone that happen in September 1939
Attacks on South coast ports had all ready started late 1939 in the 7 mths Phoney war attacks was being made to hinder the BEF and supplys to the BEF, and in the English channel shipping was attack, but early in 1940 a bomb fell in Millbrook killing a police officer, another early one was a French woman in 1939 the ship she was travelling on was attack she badly wounded she died on English soil. I did not realise that there was so many early deaths, the earliest causality not a death but an injury I found was a school boy at a RC school in 1939 a false alarm air raid sounded and doing what they had been practising for a number of weeks before hand the boy fell over and broke a bone that happen in September 1939 southy
  • Score: -1

6:24am Mon 19 May 14

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
Attacks on South coast ports had all ready started late 1939 in the 7 mths Phoney war attacks was being made to hinder the BEF and supplys to the BEF, and in the English channel shipping was attack, but early in 1940 a bomb fell in Millbrook killing a police officer, another early one was a French woman in 1939 the ship she was travelling on was attack she badly wounded she died on English soil.
I did not realise that there was so many early deaths, the earliest causality not a death but an injury I found was a school boy at a RC school in 1939 a false alarm air raid sounded and doing what they had been practising for a number of weeks before hand the boy fell over and broke a bone that happen in September 1939
Southy as you've gone off track on this article answer me this. Does a councillor have to live with in that authorities boundaries or not?
If so why haven't you attacked the Peckham councillor who lives here?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Attacks on South coast ports had all ready started late 1939 in the 7 mths Phoney war attacks was being made to hinder the BEF and supplys to the BEF, and in the English channel shipping was attack, but early in 1940 a bomb fell in Millbrook killing a police officer, another early one was a French woman in 1939 the ship she was travelling on was attack she badly wounded she died on English soil. I did not realise that there was so many early deaths, the earliest causality not a death but an injury I found was a school boy at a RC school in 1939 a false alarm air raid sounded and doing what they had been practising for a number of weeks before hand the boy fell over and broke a bone that happen in September 1939[/p][/quote]Southy as you've gone off track on this article answer me this. Does a councillor have to live with in that authorities boundaries or not? If so why haven't you attacked the Peckham councillor who lives here? loosehead
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree