Maritime Museum to close doors (From Daily Echo)

Another asset of the city being sold off, all because of Hannides and Smith's folly.

"Another asset of the city being sold off, all because of Hannides and Smith's folly."

"...restaurant or gallery under a commercial lease" lease means not sold.

A lovely old building. I had the pleasure of working in there on and off some years ago. I only hope if it does become a bar the alchoholics don't vandalise it... I won't be holding my breath though! Using it for a cafe would be much nicer and make it accessible to more people. But come on Echo, stop scaremongering! It's not being "sold off"! It'll be under lease!

Portswoodfoke wrote:
"Another asset of the city being sold off, all because of Hannides and Smith's folly."

"...restaurant or gallery under a commercial lease" lease means not sold.

I failed to see the commercial lease part of the story, either way, an asset for the people of Southampton will be lost to another pub chain, cafe or bistro that no one really wants or needs.

I'm so glad you didn't defend the building of the Sea City Museum or I should call it Hannides Expensive Folly

Seeking the truth I don't agree where they're putting the sea museum ( should be by the sea) but at least this council are trying to attract tourists & visitors to the city with all the extra jobs it could bring ( cultural sector) If enough people had visited this museum then we wouldn't have to subsidise it to such an extent.at least by leasing it we get some income from the building & it's kept in good repair.In todays world you either use it or lose it,I've been in this museum & sorry I wouldn't go in there if I had to pay & too many people think that way.If any other company can come up with the viable use for this building the council was interested but no ones come forward

Seeking the Truth wrote:
Another asset of the city being sold off, all because of Hannides and Smith's folly.

Sold off? It's going to be leased out. You clearly need to read things more carefully. SCC won't lose anything by doing this- they'll retain a historic building and get a rental income from a pub chain.

Condor Man wrote:

Seeking the Truth wrote:
Another asset of the city being sold off, all because of Hannides and Smith's folly.

Sold off? It's going to be leased out. You clearly need to read things more carefully. SCC won't lose anything by doing this- they'll retain a historic building and get a rental income from a pub chain.

You need to read my second post at 11.31 am.

What else could it be used for? I would rather it used for licensed premises than left to rot and decay because nobody cares.

loosehead wrote:
Seeking the truth I don't agree where they're putting the sea museum ( should be by the sea) but at least this council are trying to attract tourists & visitors to the city with all the extra jobs it could bring ( cultural sector) If enough people had visited this museum then we wouldn't have to subsidise it to such an extent.at least by leasing it we get some income from the building & it's kept in good repair.In todays world you either use it or lose it,I've been in this museum & sorry I wouldn't go in there if I had to pay & too many people think that way.If any other company can come up with the viable use for this building the council was interested but no ones come forward

I think they need to do a lot more to attract people to the city, I think the cultural quarter will be another folly, I'm sorry to sound negative but I really don't believe in this council.

We have had the debacle over the Spitfire statue, the glass cenotaph, the half million pound garden, the sea city folly, strikes, what little faith I did have is draining away.

If this council really wanted to attract visitor & tourist they should work in partnership with the private sector/owners to bring the Royal Pier back to it's former glory, contracts have been dished out to the likes of Kier Southern worth millions, surely a financial contribution to doing up the pier could have been a condition of those contracts.

This is a disgraceful abuse of power.

Whose side is this council on? Certainly not the people they are supposed to be representing.

Seeking the Truth wrote:

loosehead wrote:
Seeking the truth I don't agree where they're putting the sea museum ( should be by the sea) but at least this council are trying to attract tourists & visitors to the city with all the extra jobs it could bring ( cultural sector) If enough people had visited this museum then we wouldn't have to subsidise it to such an extent.at least by leasing it we get some income from the building & it's kept in good repair.In todays world you either use it or lose it,I've been in this museum & sorry I wouldn't go in there if I had to pay & too many people think that way.If any other company can come up with the viable use for this building the council was interested but no ones come forward

I think they need to do a lot more to attract people to the city, I think the cultural quarter will be another folly, I'm sorry to sound negative but I really don't believe in this council.

We have had the debacle over the Spitfire statue, the glass cenotaph, the half million pound garden, the sea city folly, strikes, what little faith I did have is draining away.

If this council really wanted to attract visitor & tourist they should work in partnership with the private sector/owners to bring the Royal Pier back to it's former glory, contracts have been dished out to the likes of Kier Southern worth millions, surely a financial contribution to doing up the pier could have been a condition of those contracts.

Seeking the truth The Cultural Quarter is receiving high praise from many quarters inside & outside of the city so if it's a true reflection on that area it should be successful. As for the Pier I think you'll find out that ABP owns a big chunk of it if not all that land & have stopped previous plans put forward to develop that area but there is a development plan they've accepted which will see Mayflower Park expanded & the Boat Shows future in the city secured for now Also the moving of the red funnels to the front of the expanded area,this is/was the place for the Spitfire statue unless I missed it & it's been stopped there was two pages in the Echo showing the project .the trouble this city has is it would love to open up the waterfront but it's owned by the docks & the docks are a working docks & the land they've released wouldn't allow us to build that much any way so I might not like the sea city Museum ( where it is) but where could you build it ensuring the maximum amount of visitors? You say your disillusioned with the council? could you please tell me the good things that previous councils have done? Could you please read the posts on the Industrial action as there's more in that story than to just point the finger at the council but that is a different article.I have constantly said use our historic buildings to create jobs by bringing in visitors but this museum wasn't so how do you preserve it & bring in revenue?

Perhaps it could become an upmarket restaurant? At least then this gorgeous building wouldn't be trashed!

If you're interested in the people and places involved with Titanic and its fateful journey, visit the Titanic Stories website for information, stories, pictures, videos, facts and details about Titanic and how it is being commemorated:

http://www.the-titan
ic.com