Southampton's planned waterfront development to expand Mayflower Park

Daily Echo: Mayflower Park and the Royal Pier Mayflower Park and the Royal Pier

Southampton’s Mayflower Park is to be extended by the size of two football pitches under plans for a £450m redevelopment of the Royal Pier waterfront.

But the grand vision would see some park greenery lost as it is transformed into other public space for leisure and as waterfront for people to walk along.

Plans for the Royal Pier district being worked up by developers Morgan Sindall Investments Ltd would see the park extended by 1.2 hectares, involving the multi-million reclamation of land from the seabed.

The scheme would see the loss of some existing park adjacent to West Quay Road and near the Royal Pier pavilion.

It is part of an overall development of the Royal Pier district described as the most prestigious waterfront opportunity in the country.

Tomorrow council leaders are expected to approve a land ownership strategy during a confidential section of a cabinet meeting in the city.

Initial proposals floated by Morgan Sindall included a luxury hotel rising up from reclaimed land overlooking a new marina flanked by restaurants and bars, offices and possibly a supercasino.

Residents and visitors would be able to enjoy improved access to the waterfront, while the enlarged Mayflower Park would provide a bigger and better home for the Southampton Boat Show, securing its future in the city for years to come.

The council is currently negotiating legal agreements for the development with Morgan Sindall and landowners Associated British Ports and the Crown Estate.

The council will advertise proposals for the appropriation of “public open space” at Mayflower Park and consider any objections when the plans for the overall development are further advanced.

Morgan Sindall has already undertaken initial discussions English Heritage and local interest groups including Southampton Commons and Parks Protection Society, City of Southampton Society, Friends of Town Quay Park and the Old Town Residents Association.

The council would continue to own the freehold of the existing park and a 150- year lease of the newly created park.

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:50am Mon 15 Oct 12

ajw1986 says...

I quite like this idea, i would love to have more attractive space to walk along and enjoy. Its always so dirty looking down there. I just hope that the money isn't going to be taken from something that needs the money more.
I quite like this idea, i would love to have more attractive space to walk along and enjoy. Its always so dirty looking down there. I just hope that the money isn't going to be taken from something that needs the money more. ajw1986

11:29am Mon 15 Oct 12

G0Rf says...

To compare it to Southsea common/southsea sea front - I hope it goes ahead and they do it properly!
To compare it to Southsea common/southsea sea front - I hope it goes ahead and they do it properly! G0Rf

11:33am Mon 15 Oct 12

Portswoodfoke says...

Just hope they will retain the free public access for Anglers, the grumpy ba$tards over at ocean village have banned fishing from all the shore including areas outside the marina. I guess being allowed to fish the Solent can only be done if your an elitist boat owner...
Just hope they will retain the free public access for Anglers, the grumpy ba$tards over at ocean village have banned fishing from all the shore including areas outside the marina. I guess being allowed to fish the Solent can only be done if your an elitist boat owner... Portswoodfoke

11:39am Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

Portswoodfoke wrote:
Just hope they will retain the free public access for Anglers, the grumpy ba$tards over at ocean village have banned fishing from all the shore including areas outside the marina. I guess being allowed to fish the Solent can only be done if your an elitist boat owner...
They might at first, then your rights will slowly be taking away, by using the rules of Public Safety and obstruction laws.
[quote][p][bold]Portswoodfoke[/bold] wrote: Just hope they will retain the free public access for Anglers, the grumpy ba$tards over at ocean village have banned fishing from all the shore including areas outside the marina. I guess being allowed to fish the Solent can only be done if your an elitist boat owner...[/p][/quote]They might at first, then your rights will slowly be taking away, by using the rules of Public Safety and obstruction laws. southy

11:45am Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

This as got to go to a referendum to the city, this park belongs the Southampton Residents as a whole, the council are only guardians of the park for the people of the city.
Rights along the water front will be taking away, first to go would be the rights of 24/7 landing of boats by river users, next will be the right to be able to swim there, then the rights of fishing, you will only be allowed to walk along the water front looking at the private marina.
This as got to go to a referendum to the city, this park belongs the Southampton Residents as a whole, the council are only guardians of the park for the people of the city. Rights along the water front will be taking away, first to go would be the rights of 24/7 landing of boats by river users, next will be the right to be able to swim there, then the rights of fishing, you will only be allowed to walk along the water front looking at the private marina. southy

12:25pm Mon 15 Oct 12

sotonboy84 says...

I think this is an awful idea. It would be lovely for a pier to be re-built in a city lucky enough to have so much water frontage but reclaiming the water would put an end to that and why do we need more parkland when we have some of the best listed parks in any city?
This is more about greed and what money can be made from building on the land. And if this goes ahead, I assume that there will be no buildings along the waterfront to block the view of the water from Bugle Street? Developers had plans for more waterfront flats along that part of the waterfront a few years ago but these were fortunately refused for many reasons but one of the most important being that a view of the water has been possible from Bugle Street for many hundreds of years and this view needed to be preserved owing to the history of the area. I hope this still stands and no developments are allowed to block this view.
The last thing Southampton needs is yet another hotel and bars on the waterfront. This is the old part of town with many lovely old buildings still standing. Over-developing this area and reclaiming even more of the water for the sake of a bigger home for the boat show and a hotel will spoil this area forever.
I think this is an awful idea. It would be lovely for a pier to be re-built in a city lucky enough to have so much water frontage but reclaiming the water would put an end to that and why do we need more parkland when we have some of the best listed parks in any city? This is more about greed and what money can be made from building on the land. And if this goes ahead, I assume that there will be no buildings along the waterfront to block the view of the water from Bugle Street? Developers had plans for more waterfront flats along that part of the waterfront a few years ago but these were fortunately refused for many reasons but one of the most important being that a view of the water has been possible from Bugle Street for many hundreds of years and this view needed to be preserved owing to the history of the area. I hope this still stands and no developments are allowed to block this view. The last thing Southampton needs is yet another hotel and bars on the waterfront. This is the old part of town with many lovely old buildings still standing. Over-developing this area and reclaiming even more of the water for the sake of a bigger home for the boat show and a hotel will spoil this area forever. sotonboy84

12:33pm Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.
Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks. southy

12:47pm Mon 15 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Another good Tory idea helping improve our city for it's people. Well done the Tory Party for such a gift to the people of the city
Another good Tory idea helping improve our city for it's people. Well done the Tory Party for such a gift to the people of the city loosehead

12:48pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

All that shines ‘may’ not be gold.

On the face of it proposal to redevelop area around Mayflower Park may look attractive. But con tricks played in Ocean Village project should not be repeated.

Carrot of public access to water was also dangled when Ocean Village was first proposed. Yes some of us fell for that. But developers and some in Council had different agenda for long term. So bit by bit they have managed to create social exclusion of ordinary people and turned Ocean Village into paradise for the rich. Even Tasman Court that was built as part of social housing has now become virtually letting for executives.

In late 1980s or early 1990s Labour run Council of that time also floated similar to current ideas for area around Mayflower Park. Posh hotels and other expensive facilities would have been built and idea was going to be sold to people under the name of ‘People’s Park’, which in reality would have meant beautiful gardens and facilities to be maintained by tax payers but in reality they would have been beneficial for those hotels and few other upper class users.

Thankfully at that time Labour Group could not even secure the backing of Labour Party. But I have the feeling that pen pushers who really run the Council have not given up their agenda. So naturally due to past experiences I should be forgiven for being suspicious and requesting others to consider this with great care.

Yes this area needs improving, but new development should have the environment in which ordinary folks should also feel comfortable and not socially excluded.
All that shines ‘may’ not be gold. On the face of it proposal to redevelop area around Mayflower Park may look attractive. But con tricks played in Ocean Village project should not be repeated. Carrot of public access to water was also dangled when Ocean Village was first proposed. Yes some of us fell for that. But developers and some in Council had different agenda for long term. So bit by bit they have managed to create social exclusion of ordinary people and turned Ocean Village into paradise for the rich. Even Tasman Court that was built as part of social housing has now become virtually letting for executives. In late 1980s or early 1990s Labour run Council of that time also floated similar to current ideas for area around Mayflower Park. Posh hotels and other expensive facilities would have been built and idea was going to be sold to people under the name of ‘People’s Park’, which in reality would have meant beautiful gardens and facilities to be maintained by tax payers but in reality they would have been beneficial for those hotels and few other upper class users. Thankfully at that time Labour Group could not even secure the backing of Labour Party. But I have the feeling that pen pushers who really run the Council have not given up their agenda. So naturally due to past experiences I should be forgiven for being suspicious and requesting others to consider this with great care. Yes this area needs improving, but new development should have the environment in which ordinary folks should also feel comfortable and not socially excluded. Paramjit Bahia

12:59pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Martin Titaniconian says...

As long as we can still get close as we are at the moment and see the ships in 106 & 101 berth and see the ships leave the better
As long as we can still get close as we are at the moment and see the ships in 106 & 101 berth and see the ships leave the better Martin Titaniconian

12:59pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Martin Titaniconian says...

As long as we can still get close as we are at the moment and see the ships in 106 & 101 berth and see the ships leave the better
As long as we can still get close as we are at the moment and see the ships in 106 & 101 berth and see the ships leave the better Martin Titaniconian

1:29pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
Another good Tory idea helping improve our city for it's people. Well done the Tory Party for such a gift to the people of the city
Wonder how much this so-called Tory idea would have cost the taxpayers ......... Not as much as the Sea Museum i hope.
.
But there again this project has been on and off the drawing boards for a few years now ...... Great that the Tories dont get to put their grubby little hands on it when it comes to fruition.
.
Wont go on anymore or else you will think i am bullying you
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: Another good Tory idea helping improve our city for it's people. Well done the Tory Party for such a gift to the people of the city[/p][/quote]Wonder how much this so-called Tory idea would have cost the taxpayers ......... Not as much as the Sea Museum i hope. . But there again this project has been on and off the drawing boards for a few years now ...... Great that the Tories dont get to put their grubby little hands on it when it comes to fruition. . Wont go on anymore or else you will think i am bullying you Lone Ranger.

1:53pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Mr E says...

How long before the plan is altered for 'Essential Business Reasons' or whatever and we end up with a tiny park space and a clone copy of the dreadful high density development that is currently being built on the old Vospers Site in Woolston.
How long before the plan is altered for 'Essential Business Reasons' or whatever and we end up with a tiny park space and a clone copy of the dreadful high density development that is currently being built on the old Vospers Site in Woolston. Mr E

2:20pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Nicole23 says...

We've heard it all before, every year we get this story, when are we going to get the ice rink back or some public toilets.
We've heard it all before, every year we get this story, when are we going to get the ice rink back or some public toilets. Nicole23

2:31pm Mon 15 Oct 12

phil maccavity says...

southy wrote:
Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.
Southy
Was that you outside of Sainsburys on Saturday with the Oaklands petition?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.[/p][/quote]Southy Was that you outside of Sainsburys on Saturday with the Oaklands petition? phil maccavity

2:31pm Mon 15 Oct 12

phil maccavity says...

southy wrote:
Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.
Southy
Was that you outside of Sainsburys on Saturday with the Oaklands petition?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.[/p][/quote]Southy Was that you outside of Sainsburys on Saturday with the Oaklands petition? phil maccavity

2:43pm Mon 15 Oct 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?
Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy? OSPREYSAINT

2:50pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Lone Ranger. says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?
I am sure that you read the answer to your fisrt question..... but anyhow here goes ....................
.. Quote from paragraph 8 :- .................. Residents and visitors would be able to enjoy improved access to the waterfront, while the enlarged Mayflower Park would provide a bigger and better home for the Southampton Boat Show, securing its future in the city for years to come.
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?[/p][/quote]I am sure that you read the answer to your fisrt question..... but anyhow here goes .................... .. Quote from paragraph 8 :- .................. Residents and visitors would be able to enjoy improved access to the waterfront, while the enlarged Mayflower Park would provide a bigger and better home for the Southampton Boat Show, securing its future in the city for years to come. Lone Ranger.

3:30pm Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?
I am sure that you read the answer to your fisrt question..... but anyhow here goes ....................

.. Quote from paragraph 8 :- .................. Residents and visitors would be able to enjoy improved access to the waterfront, while the enlarged Mayflower Park would provide a bigger and better home for the Southampton Boat Show, securing its future in the city for years to come.
At what cost to the residents of the city, and also at what cost to the Environment to the River, remember this is a feeding ground for Trout heading back up river, as well as the normal fish that feed there like mullet, bass, Eels ect, it is also a place for Rag, clams, cockles and many other types mud living creatures that are vital to a healty River, This river as lost to much tidal ground all ready, it can not afford to lose any more unless you want a lifeless dead river
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?[/p][/quote]I am sure that you read the answer to your fisrt question..... but anyhow here goes .................... .. Quote from paragraph 8 :- .................. Residents and visitors would be able to enjoy improved access to the waterfront, while the enlarged Mayflower Park would provide a bigger and better home for the Southampton Boat Show, securing its future in the city for years to come.[/p][/quote]At what cost to the residents of the city, and also at what cost to the Environment to the River, remember this is a feeding ground for Trout heading back up river, as well as the normal fish that feed there like mullet, bass, Eels ect, it is also a place for Rag, clams, cockles and many other types mud living creatures that are vital to a healty River, This river as lost to much tidal ground all ready, it can not afford to lose any more unless you want a lifeless dead river southy

3:33pm Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

phil maccavity wrote:
southy wrote:
Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.
Southy
Was that you outside of Sainsburys on Saturday with the Oaklands petition?
Which Sainsburys as there was stalls out in other parts of the city, at the same time and day.
But yes I was at a stall on Sat and out a Sainsbury.
[quote][p][bold]phil maccavity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Its all about looking after well off out siders taking prime spots and pushing the locals about because they can, Money Talks and Rightness Walks.[/p][/quote]Southy Was that you outside of Sainsburys on Saturday with the Oaklands petition?[/p][/quote]Which Sainsburys as there was stalls out in other parts of the city, at the same time and day. But yes I was at a stall on Sat and out a Sainsbury. southy

3:36pm Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?
Well a fair amount, but it out weights the cost if this is develope, once develope that is it, it will be lost for good. , there be no getting back
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?[/p][/quote]Well a fair amount, but it out weights the cost if this is develope, once develope that is it, it will be lost for good. , there be no getting back southy

3:42pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Vonnie says...

I tend to agree with most of the cynic's comments above. There is a hidden commercial agenda here, methinks. Selling off, renting out, more of the family silver comes to mind. It is also just a rehash of what Royston Smith put forward in 2009 (google This is Hampshire Sunday 10th May 2009 )and the recently scrapped "snowdome on the waterfront" scheme ditto.
If I am not mistaken, the land of Mayflower Park is covenanted for the leisure use of Southampton residents in perpetua. It would, I think, take an Act of Parliament for that Covenant to be totally removed, for whatever reason. However, that has not stopped SCC from deliberately ruining what was once a lovely open space and Pier, simply by neglect and for the " commercial needs" of the Boat Show.
The rubbish that is being spouted about improved access to the waterfront etc. is just that. Rubbish. If this plan goes ahead as is, then before you know it, using the excuse of business reasons, there will be even less FREE access to the waterfront than there is now.

I would be very interested to know what the Southampton Commons and Parks Protection Society as well as the Old Town Residents Association have to say.
I tend to agree with most of the cynic's comments above. There is a hidden commercial agenda here, methinks. Selling off, renting out, more of the family silver comes to mind. It is also just a rehash of what Royston Smith put forward in 2009 (google This is Hampshire Sunday 10th May 2009 )and the recently scrapped "snowdome on the waterfront" scheme ditto. If I am not mistaken, the land of Mayflower Park is covenanted for the leisure use of Southampton residents in perpetua. It would, I think, take an Act of Parliament for that Covenant to be totally removed, for whatever reason. However, that has not stopped SCC from deliberately ruining what was once a lovely open space and Pier, simply by neglect and for the " commercial needs" of the Boat Show. The rubbish that is being spouted about improved access to the waterfront etc. is just that. Rubbish. If this plan goes ahead as is, then before you know it, using the excuse of business reasons, there will be even less FREE access to the waterfront than there is now. I would be very interested to know what the Southampton Commons and Parks Protection Society as well as the Old Town Residents Association have to say. Vonnie

4:11pm Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

Yes Vonnie your right, it would be interesting to hear what the Commons and Parks Protection Society as to say about the matter
Yes Vonnie your right, it would be interesting to hear what the Commons and Parks Protection Society as to say about the matter southy

5:30pm Mon 15 Oct 12

cantthinkofone says...

I must have seen at least a dozen 'plans' for Mayflower park reported in the Echo since moving back here some years ago. The only people to benefit from them seem to be the people that draw pictures of the concepts.

Southampton has an estuary and two rivers, yet very little accessible waterfront. It would be nice if the council's big-picture planners focused their efforts on rectifying this instead. A trip to Bristol would be educational.
I must have seen at least a dozen 'plans' for Mayflower park reported in the Echo since moving back here some years ago. The only people to benefit from them seem to be the people that draw pictures of the concepts. Southampton has an estuary and two rivers, yet very little accessible waterfront. It would be nice if the council's big-picture planners focused their efforts on rectifying this instead. A trip to Bristol would be educational. cantthinkofone

6:04pm Mon 15 Oct 12

elvisimo says...

Nicole23 wrote:
We've heard it all before, every year we get this story, when are we going to get the ice rink back or some public toilets.
Get in there! Most bizarre ice rink link for at least a week.
[quote][p][bold]Nicole23[/bold] wrote: We've heard it all before, every year we get this story, when are we going to get the ice rink back or some public toilets.[/p][/quote]Get in there! Most bizarre ice rink link for at least a week. elvisimo

6:47pm Mon 15 Oct 12

Fatty x Ford Worker says...

The new Container Port ideal location!
The new Container Port ideal location! Fatty x Ford Worker

7:19pm Mon 15 Oct 12

cantthinkofone says...

elvisimo wrote:
Nicole23 wrote:
We've heard it all before, every year we get this story, when are we going to get the ice rink back or some public toilets.
Get in there! Most bizarre ice rink link for at least a week.
I demand a single-issue ice-rink party candidate to vote for in the next local elections.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nicole23[/bold] wrote: We've heard it all before, every year we get this story, when are we going to get the ice rink back or some public toilets.[/p][/quote]Get in there! Most bizarre ice rink link for at least a week.[/p][/quote]I demand a single-issue ice-rink party candidate to vote for in the next local elections. cantthinkofone

7:33pm Mon 15 Oct 12

southy says...

cantthinkofone wrote:
I must have seen at least a dozen 'plans' for Mayflower park reported in the Echo since moving back here some years ago. The only people to benefit from them seem to be the people that draw pictures of the concepts.

Southampton has an estuary and two rivers, yet very little accessible waterfront. It would be nice if the council's big-picture planners focused their efforts on rectifying this instead. A trip to Bristol would be educational.
That it would cantthinkofone.
[quote][p][bold]cantthinkofone[/bold] wrote: I must have seen at least a dozen 'plans' for Mayflower park reported in the Echo since moving back here some years ago. The only people to benefit from them seem to be the people that draw pictures of the concepts. Southampton has an estuary and two rivers, yet very little accessible waterfront. It would be nice if the council's big-picture planners focused their efforts on rectifying this instead. A trip to Bristol would be educational.[/p][/quote]That it would cantthinkofone. southy

8:41am Tue 16 Oct 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?
I messed that question up, what I wanted to know is that during the various stages of redevelopment could the Boat Show be accomodated or would it have to move until the site is completed, attending an exhibition in the middle of a building site doesn't make a lot of sense.
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: Will it be designed to accomodate the Boat Show or will that have to go elswhere? It is obvious now why Red Funnel were looking for a new jetty and the loss of the Maritime Museum. How much would your referendum cost us Southy?[/p][/quote]I messed that question up, what I wanted to know is that during the various stages of redevelopment could the Boat Show be accomodated or would it have to move until the site is completed, attending an exhibition in the middle of a building site doesn't make a lot of sense. OSPREYSAINT

12:23pm Tue 16 Oct 12

loosehead says...

The boat show was considering leaving this city as Mayflower Parks was considered to small.
The then Tory council saw an opportunity to give more land & views of our docks whilst keeping a success story in the city.
ABP were a stumbling block which held the project up but just before the local elections ABP & the city council came to an agreement & the above scheme is the result of it.
More park, more access to our waterfront good news or so you would have thought but NO not for the left wing idiots on this site.
I didn't agree with the design of Sea City Museum but once inside found it to be a good museum yet some idiots still say if it wasn't for it the refuse workers could have been paid more?
people have told them where the moneys came from but still they go on.
now you lot are saying the same type of thing about this development?
What we shouldn't develop or modernise our city but just let it looked run down?
Why not just tell all the ships & boat show to go to Liverpool?
The boat show was considering leaving this city as Mayflower Parks was considered to small. The then Tory council saw an opportunity to give more land & views of our docks whilst keeping a success story in the city. ABP were a stumbling block which held the project up but just before the local elections ABP & the city council came to an agreement & the above scheme is the result of it. More park, more access to our waterfront good news or so you would have thought but NO not for the left wing idiots on this site. I didn't agree with the design of Sea City Museum but once inside found it to be a good museum yet some idiots still say if it wasn't for it the refuse workers could have been paid more? people have told them where the moneys came from but still they go on. now you lot are saying the same type of thing about this development? What we shouldn't develop or modernise our city but just let it looked run down? Why not just tell all the ships & boat show to go to Liverpool? loosehead

12:30pm Tue 16 Oct 12

G0Rf says...

Will there be any amusement arcades or anything else similar that would attract pople to "the sea side" ?
Will there be any amusement arcades or anything else similar that would attract pople to "the sea side" ? G0Rf

12:55pm Tue 16 Oct 12

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
The boat show was considering leaving this city as Mayflower Parks was considered to small.
The then Tory council saw an opportunity to give more land & views of our docks whilst keeping a success story in the city.
ABP were a stumbling block which held the project up but just before the local elections ABP & the city council came to an agreement & the above scheme is the result of it.
More park, more access to our waterfront good news or so you would have thought but NO not for the left wing idiots on this site.
I didn't agree with the design of Sea City Museum but once inside found it to be a good museum yet some idiots still say if it wasn't for it the refuse workers could have been paid more?
people have told them where the moneys came from but still they go on.
now you lot are saying the same type of thing about this development?
What we shouldn't develop or modernise our city but just let it looked run down?
Why not just tell all the ships & boat show to go to Liverpool?
Correction The Park area would be tiny bit smaller the reclaim land and the what is left of the Royal Pier would be an area for Business, closing off a full river view stand on the water edge, A walkway around around the business area would not be part of the park.
As for the Boat Show it will not move out off Southampton (because they know if they did apart from the PSP would lose there best Boat Show, The local Rivers Association would put a Boat show in it place and would become free to enter again, just like how the Boat Show started in the first place before business took it over).
One of the places that the PSP was looking at to stage the boat show was at Netley Abby and old hospital grounds and the water frontage.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The boat show was considering leaving this city as Mayflower Parks was considered to small. The then Tory council saw an opportunity to give more land & views of our docks whilst keeping a success story in the city. ABP were a stumbling block which held the project up but just before the local elections ABP & the city council came to an agreement & the above scheme is the result of it. More park, more access to our waterfront good news or so you would have thought but NO not for the left wing idiots on this site. I didn't agree with the design of Sea City Museum but once inside found it to be a good museum yet some idiots still say if it wasn't for it the refuse workers could have been paid more? people have told them where the moneys came from but still they go on. now you lot are saying the same type of thing about this development? What we shouldn't develop or modernise our city but just let it looked run down? Why not just tell all the ships & boat show to go to Liverpool?[/p][/quote]Correction The Park area would be tiny bit smaller the reclaim land and the what is left of the Royal Pier would be an area for Business, closing off a full river view stand on the water edge, A walkway around around the business area would not be part of the park. As for the Boat Show it will not move out off Southampton (because they know if they did apart from the PSP would lose there best Boat Show, The local Rivers Association would put a Boat show in it place and would become free to enter again, just like how the Boat Show started in the first place before business took it over). One of the places that the PSP was looking at to stage the boat show was at Netley Abby and old hospital grounds and the water frontage. southy

2:40pm Tue 16 Oct 12

phil maccavity says...

Southy
Correction
PSP have never looked at staging a Boat Show at Netley Victoria Park
PSP are current sponsors not organisers
National Boat Shows (who are a subsidiary of the British Marine Federation) are the organisers of the Soton & London Boat Shows.
As for the local Rivers Association putting on a replacement event to the current Boat Show!!! Good luck there then!!!
Southy Correction PSP have never looked at staging a Boat Show at Netley Victoria Park PSP are current sponsors not organisers National Boat Shows (who are a subsidiary of the British Marine Federation) are the organisers of the Soton & London Boat Shows. As for the local Rivers Association putting on a replacement event to the current Boat Show!!! Good luck there then!!! phil maccavity

3:37pm Tue 16 Oct 12

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The boat show was considering leaving this city as Mayflower Parks was considered to small.
The then Tory council saw an opportunity to give more land & views of our docks whilst keeping a success story in the city.
ABP were a stumbling block which held the project up but just before the local elections ABP & the city council came to an agreement & the above scheme is the result of it.
More park, more access to our waterfront good news or so you would have thought but NO not for the left wing idiots on this site.
I didn't agree with the design of Sea City Museum but once inside found it to be a good museum yet some idiots still say if it wasn't for it the refuse workers could have been paid more?
people have told them where the moneys came from but still they go on.
now you lot are saying the same type of thing about this development?
What we shouldn't develop or modernise our city but just let it looked run down?
Why not just tell all the ships & boat show to go to Liverpool?
Correction The Park area would be tiny bit smaller the reclaim land and the what is left of the Royal Pier would be an area for Business, closing off a full river view stand on the water edge, A walkway around around the business area would not be part of the park.
As for the Boat Show it will not move out off Southampton (because they know if they did apart from the PSP would lose there best Boat Show, The local Rivers Association would put a Boat show in it place and would become free to enter again, just like how the Boat Show started in the first place before business took it over).
One of the places that the PSP was looking at to stage the boat show was at Netley Abby and old hospital grounds and the water frontage.
Please explain to me why you & your fellow left wingers are so Anti any modernisation of our city?
I'm all for highlighting our history & having historical re-enactments.
I'm also very proud of this cities history but you knock it at every chance you can get why?
Plymouth boasts about the Pilgrim Fathers but we don't why not? anyone who does you try calling them liars.
We build a Sea City Museum where all our history could be shown Starting way back to the Saxons showing how this city was once the capital of Wessex before Winchester ( says it in the Great Hall) yet you all knock that museum.
Now a development of a dilapidated Pier & the extension of Mayflower park & yet again you lot knock it why?
You must know Mayflower Park belongs to ABP or the sign on the main gate is wrong.
Abp could put more docks there couldn't they?
I love this development & can't wait to see the new Fruit & Vegetable market!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The boat show was considering leaving this city as Mayflower Parks was considered to small. The then Tory council saw an opportunity to give more land & views of our docks whilst keeping a success story in the city. ABP were a stumbling block which held the project up but just before the local elections ABP & the city council came to an agreement & the above scheme is the result of it. More park, more access to our waterfront good news or so you would have thought but NO not for the left wing idiots on this site. I didn't agree with the design of Sea City Museum but once inside found it to be a good museum yet some idiots still say if it wasn't for it the refuse workers could have been paid more? people have told them where the moneys came from but still they go on. now you lot are saying the same type of thing about this development? What we shouldn't develop or modernise our city but just let it looked run down? Why not just tell all the ships & boat show to go to Liverpool?[/p][/quote]Correction The Park area would be tiny bit smaller the reclaim land and the what is left of the Royal Pier would be an area for Business, closing off a full river view stand on the water edge, A walkway around around the business area would not be part of the park. As for the Boat Show it will not move out off Southampton (because they know if they did apart from the PSP would lose there best Boat Show, The local Rivers Association would put a Boat show in it place and would become free to enter again, just like how the Boat Show started in the first place before business took it over). One of the places that the PSP was looking at to stage the boat show was at Netley Abby and old hospital grounds and the water frontage.[/p][/quote]Please explain to me why you & your fellow left wingers are so Anti any modernisation of our city? I'm all for highlighting our history & having historical re-enactments. I'm also very proud of this cities history but you knock it at every chance you can get why? Plymouth boasts about the Pilgrim Fathers but we don't why not? anyone who does you try calling them liars. We build a Sea City Museum where all our history could be shown Starting way back to the Saxons showing how this city was once the capital of Wessex before Winchester ( says it in the Great Hall) yet you all knock that museum. Now a development of a dilapidated Pier & the extension of Mayflower park & yet again you lot knock it why? You must know Mayflower Park belongs to ABP or the sign on the main gate is wrong. Abp could put more docks there couldn't they? I love this development & can't wait to see the new Fruit & Vegetable market! loosehead

5:02pm Tue 16 Oct 12

phil maccavity says...

Loosehead
Whilst sharing your sentiment about the proposed development of Mayflower Park, I think you will find it is the City Council that have the responsibility for the Park.
If I remember correctly, the area was originally owned by Soton Borough Council until it became part of the Millbrook Bay infill in the 1920/30's which created the Western Docks and all the land behind it (up to Millbrook Road)
You just wonder if that scheme had been proposed now how many 'Nimby's' would have been against it!!!!!!!!!!.
Without it Southampton, and surrounding area, would have remained a relatively insignificant back water.
Anyway Mayflower Park is covered by legislation ie the 'Hampshire Act' of 1983 which covers access to public spaces in the whole of the city.
Part of this Act (section 60) was amended by the Southampton International Boat Show Act of 1997 which extended permission to use the Park for 10 days every year (rather than 9 previously) to allow for the Boat Show to be open over two successive weekends.
Loosehead Whilst sharing your sentiment about the proposed development of Mayflower Park, I think you will find it is the City Council that have the responsibility for the Park. If I remember correctly, the area was originally owned by Soton Borough Council until it became part of the Millbrook Bay infill in the 1920/30's which created the Western Docks and all the land behind it (up to Millbrook Road) You just wonder if that scheme had been proposed now how many 'Nimby's' would have been against it!!!!!!!!!!. Without it Southampton, and surrounding area, would have remained a relatively insignificant back water. Anyway Mayflower Park is covered by legislation ie the 'Hampshire Act' of 1983 which covers access to public spaces in the whole of the city. Part of this Act (section 60) was amended by the Southampton International Boat Show Act of 1997 which extended permission to use the Park for 10 days every year (rather than 9 previously) to allow for the Boat Show to be open over two successive weekends. phil maccavity

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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