Isn't this the same one sided story three days running? It appears the WCA has influence on the Echo, even if it has little influence on what goes on in Woolston.

As far as I'm aware, Prince Charles is not an elected or paid officer of Southampton City Council, therefore his view is actually less important than the tax-payers of the City.

I am really fed up with all this hysteria the WCA has created. Most people in Woolston are welcoming this and I for one am looking forward to it. They are all pathetic.

They have got to be the worse "artists impression" of what a development may look like I've ever seen. Why cant they show an accurate 3D image of the site? I really hope they dont spoil the redevelopment of the site, I would like to see more ammenities and less flats.

StEmmosFire wrote:
They have got to be the worse "artists impression" of what a development may look like I've ever seen. Why cant they show an accurate 3D image of the site? I really hope they dont spoil the redevelopment of the site, I would like to see more ammenities and less flats.

Including an ice rink!!

I agree an 8 year old could have drawn a better artists impression than than pile of tosh.

Houses and amenities including a sports centre perhaps and NO chuffin flats would be nice.

Has anyone seen the 3D graphics for the development of the Rose Bowl? Can the ECHO please put something like this on the the site for the Woolston Riverside development.

The whole WCA thing is a misnomer.
WRA for residents maybe but they show no interest in the "community" as a whole.

RACHEL wrote:
I am really fed up with all this hysteria the WCA has created. Most people in Woolston are welcoming this and I for one am looking forward to it. They are all pathetic.

Exactly, they claim to represent the Woolston Community yet it would appear they haven't even balloted their own members, let alone spoken to the vast majority who have not joined their association.
Such a shame they weren't so vocal about Woolston Language College closing, but this probably did not effect the committee personally in their Longmore Avenue Ivory Tower.
Just walk the length of Victoria Rd & Portsmouth Rd shops and play spot the WCA Poster, the only one I have spotted is in Obelisk Rd.
Maybe we should scrap the development and go back to heavy industry 24hrs a day with lorries in and out the whole time, with some huge sheds dominating the skyline.
Maybe if the WCA ancestors had taken a similar NIMBY policy a few centuries ago Itchen Ferry Village would still house about 150 people.
Let the developers, do the developing.

StEmmosFire wrote:
Has anyone seen the 3D graphics for the development of the Rose Bowl? Can the ECHO please put something like this on the the site for the Woolston Riverside development.

They can't if it doesn't exist.

StEmmosFire wrote:
Has anyone seen the 3D graphics for the development of the Rose Bowl? Can the ECHO please put something like this on the the site for the Woolston Riverside development.

They can't if it doesn't exist.

The crowd is expected to gather at 4pm at the war memorial before walking to the council buildings to hand in a 75- page document detailing their objections.

One would have expected Echo reporter Sian Davies to refer to the war memorial by it's correct name, the Cenotaph.

I understand the developer will need to pay about 3 million towards improvements in the area should they build this (correct me if wrong) if our area benifits from this money this is great for locals and businesses.

I am not sure if this is the correct scheme as I have not looked into it enough but if the developers walked away and Woolston did not get this money it would be bad for us as a community if we chase every development out of the area we will never regenerate.

Whether or not WCA is democratically elected, representative, or even whether many of heard of them is possibly irrelevant.

I have yet to meet someone who believes this development is reasonable in terms of the intensivity of occupation.

1650 "homes", mostly consisting of flats, luxury apartments, citi-dwellings etc. is entirely disproportionate to the area and it's infrastructure. No one is advocating a return to heavy industry, but this would have been an opportunity to add to the quality of life, and I am sorry, but I simply don't see blocks of flats adding either to the quality of the lives of existing Woolston or Southampton residents, or to those who will buy, rent them out, or live in them.

Flats are springing up everywhere...not the least because the unit cost is much lower than for a house, one roof for a block regardless of size, no unecessary overheads like gardens, car parking simply regarded as something that eats into the developer's profit...and the economies of scale for fitting out and provision of services. And they are unsuitable for families with children.

I am under no illusion, planning permission will be granted regardless of protests, you simply have to look along the entire waterfront, from Woolston to Town Quay to see the spread of apartment blocks.

And if an organisation, like WCA seeks to stem the tide of these anonymous blocks that have little or no interaction with local communities, good on'em... you have my support even if I don't know who you are!

The development is already a couple of years late for various reasons and I would not be surprised if it didn't happen at all if the planning application is rejected or asked to be modified substantially. In which case, Woolston will be dead. We should never let developers have total rule over big projects like this, but this one has had lots of consultation and itteration already, so it's give and take between the community and the development. The WCA seem to want just the nice elements and what THEY want.

This is great for Woolston! More place’s for people to live. More people buying in the shops on the high street. More local job’s which are badly need since VT moved. It will be a huge boost for Woolston. The NOT IN MY BACK YARD lot should think about what they are objecting about. Read the documents and look at the plans. I think it is going to make Woolston a great place to live.

I live in Woolston and have heard nothing about WCA - I would like to attend a meeting and take an active part in the local community - at this time it does not appear to be very inclusive...

You can please some of the people, all of the time.
You can please all of the people, some of the time.
But you will never please all of the people all of the time, especially those who "represent" the view of others.
There has been far too much consultation already, quite why the WCA have waited until this late stage to start moaning I do not know.
Get it built and fast, before the interest generated is lost forever and we are left with a wasteground.

Bob wrote:
The crowd is expected to gather at 4pm at the war memorial before walking to the council buildings to hand in a 75- page document detailing their objections. One would have expected Echo reporter Sian Davies to refer to the war memorial by it's correct name, the Cenotaph.

They are other war memorials in the city, other than the Cenotaph.

From the Cenotaph to the Council offices is about a 15 second walk, so it wouldn't be a very impressive march, would it, so I imagine they are not meeting there.

Mr Middleton He said: "We have got to keep fighting for it, make the community rise up to their greed."

Yet in previous articles, part of the WCA argument has been possible devaluation of their property.

Kettle, pot, black ?

Hazeleigh Avenuer wrote:
You can please some of the people, all of the time.
You can please all of the people, some of the time.
But you will never please all of the people all of the time, especially those who "represent" the view of others.
There has been far too much consultation already, quite why the WCA have waited until this late stage to start moaning I do not know.
Get it built and fast, before the interest generated is lost forever and we are left with a wasteground.

Most sensible post to date on the whole subject.

SecretSquirrel wrote:
The whole WCA thing is a misnomer. WRA for residents maybe but they show no interest in the "community" as a whole.

Maybe the Woolston Traders Association should start a counter campaign.

The intrusion of many flats, albeit no parking spaces for even visitors, would be a very big worry. The possible ghettos intruding on the Woolston community, a very big worry because the whole structure of Woolston would be destroyed. This is happening in every area of Hampshire. May I say that the selling off of all council houses, albeit now called Housing Association has a devastating affect on the shortage of properties for families not able to save enough to buy. All this suggests a desperation for the Council to draw in more cash, thus leaving a perfectly well run area to disintergrate. Believe me - it's greed and who care about the future - which we are now reaping.

Yours faithfully
CLAIR

Hazeleigh Avenuer wrote:
You can please some of the people, all of the time. You can please all of the people, some of the time. But you will never please all of the people all of the time, especially those who \"represent\" the view of others. There has been far too much consultation already, quite why the WCA have waited until this late stage to start moaning I do not know. Get it built and fast, before the interest generated is lost forever and we are left with a wasteground.

With respect, the 'Planning sub-committee' of the WCA have been meeting on this very subject for well over a year now. The meetings have invited a wide range of interested representatives.
The response has been written having reviewed all the plans.
The planning sub-committee of WCA has only voiced their concern at this stage as it's during the planning consultation phase. It would be rather pointless submitting docuemtns at any other time.

SecretSquirrel wrote:
The whole WCA thing is a misnomer. WRA for residents maybe but they show no interest in the "community" as a whole.

The WCA thing hasn't really been reported accurately. This group is in fact a sub group of the WCA – The Development Sub Committee I think?? (as I think may have been pointed out?). Whilst they are linked to the WCA they are not representative of the entire membership of the WCA.
That said, I think that these people have a right to voice their concerns over the development. Their levels of achieved publicity are no fault of theirs and I believe they’re running their campaign in the right and proper manner (regardless of the rights and wrongs of the argument)

What good will it do getting Jug Ears involved? Unless, of course, one of his free-loading sons was to crash his helicopter into it

Me wrote:
I live in Woolston and have heard nothing about WCA - I would like to attend a meeting and take an active part in the local community - at this time it does not appear to be very inclusive...

It's a shame Me. Meetings have been publicised through local doorstep mailings and with posters throughout Woolston Centre.
The WCA Development Section meets every two weeks in the Community Centre on Church Road and is open to everyone. The next meeting will be on Tuesday 27 May at 7.30pm. Look forward to seeing you there.

Malcolm wrote:

SecretSquirrel wrote: The whole WCA thing is a misnomer. WRA for residents maybe but they show no interest in the \"community\" as a whole.

The WCA thing hasn\'t really been reported accurately. This group is in fact a sub group of the WCA – The Development Sub Committee I think?? (as I think may have been pointed out?). Whilst they are linked to the WCA they are not representative of the entire membership of the WCA. That said, I think that these people have a right to voice their concerns over the development. Their levels of achieved publicity are no fault of theirs and I believe they’re running their campaign in the right and proper manner (regardless of the rights and wrongs of the argument)

So they not only fail to represent the community of Woolston, they fail to even represent the members of their own community association!!!

Confused Woolstonite wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

SecretSquirrel wrote: The whole WCA thing is a misnomer. WRA for residents maybe but they show no interest in the \\\\\\\"community\\\\\\\" as a whole.

The WCA thing hasn\\\\\\\'t really been reported accurately. This group is in fact a sub group of the WCA – The Development Sub Committee I think?? (as I think may have been pointed out?). Whilst they are linked to the WCA they are not representative of the entire membership of the WCA. That said, I think that these people have a right to voice their concerns over the development. Their levels of achieved publicity are no fault of theirs and I believe they’re running their campaign in the right and proper manner (regardless of the rights and wrongs of the argument)

So they not only fail to represent the community of Woolston, they fail to even represent the members of their own community association!!!

With respect, I don't think they've ever claimed to represent anyone other than themselves.
They're simply a group of people expressing their views in the best way they see fit. It seems that they're making quite a good job of it too given the fact that we're now talking about it.

Henry wrote:

Me wrote: I live in Woolston and have heard nothing about WCA - I would like to attend a meeting and take an active part in the local community - at this time it does not appear to be very inclusive...

It's a shame Me. Meetings have been publicised through local doorstep mailings and with posters throughout Woolston Centre. The WCA Development Section meets every two weeks in the Community Centre on Church Road and is open to everyone. The next meeting will be on Tuesday 27 May at 7.30pm. Look forward to seeing you there.

Thanks for letting me know - but when do the whole association meet? when is their AGM? until this development reached planning commmitte we knew nothing about them...

I will attend the meeting on 27th...

It's the first time I've read this trail. Depressing isn't it?
As I recall, the WCA Developemnt Section was formed to represent the views of Woolston residents, and as far as I can tell, that's what they have done. I haven't been to as many meetings as I should have, but I can't recall anyone coming to any of their open meetings and saying what a wonderful idea the development is. However I hope and believe that if they had they would have been listened to with respect, and not labelled as 'pathetic' or any of the other rather abusive terms used above.
Most of the people I speak to really want to see the site developed, but in a way that would benefit the local area. Most believe that this development is far too intensive, will completely change the local area, and will create traffic and parking problems for miles around. 3 tower blocks looking over Woolston is a particular point of contention, which most seem to intensely dislike.
If Woolston Traders (for example) believe that this is a wonderful development that will benefit them, then they're perfectly welcome to express that view and even mount a campaign of their own.
As for saying that there has been "too much consultation", I confess to being a bit puzzled. Yes there was an exhibition, and 4 or 5 descriptive leaflets delivered to Woolston homes (which was very good and to be welcomed), but the only thing of substance that has actually changed as a result of this consultation is that the number of flats packed into the site has increased.
City planners and the developers seem determined to impose this development on us and, realistically, they'll probably succeed - they have all the time. money and other resources to ram it through in one way or another. But I don't think that's an excuse to say and do nothing to try and exert some influence to make the development better, or at least to try and limit the amount of damage it will, in my opinion, cause.
If that's pathetic, then I plead guilty.

"If that's pathetic, then I plead guilty."

Good, now that's cleared up lets build it.

Woolston Resident wrote:
It's the first time I've read this trail. Depressing isn't it? As I recall, the WCA Developemnt Section was formed to represent the views of Woolston residents, and as far as I can tell, that's what they have done. I haven't been to as many meetings as I should have, but I can't recall anyone coming to any of their open meetings and saying what a wonderful idea the development is. However I hope and believe that if they had they would have been listened to with respect, and not labelled as 'pathetic' or any of the other rather abusive terms used above. Most of the people I speak to really want to see the site developed, but in a way that would benefit the local area. Most believe that this development is far too intensive, will completely change the local area, and will create traffic and parking problems for miles around. 3 tower blocks looking over Woolston is a particular point of contention, which most seem to intensely dislike. If Woolston Traders (for example) believe that this is a wonderful development that will benefit them, then they're perfectly welcome to express that view and even mount a campaign of their own. As for saying that there has been "too much consultation", I confess to being a bit puzzled. Yes there was an exhibition, and 4 or 5 descriptive leaflets delivered to Woolston homes (which was very good and to be welcomed), but the only thing of substance that has actually changed as a result of this consultation is that the number of flats packed into the site has increased. City planners and the developers seem determined to impose this development on us and, realistically, they'll probably succeed - they have all the time. money and other resources to ram it through in one way or another. But I don't think that's an excuse to say and do nothing to try and exert some influence to make the development better, or at least to try and limit the amount of damage it will, in my opinion, cause. If that's pathetic, then I plead guilty.

I think you and I agree!

Unfortunately it seems that participants in this string would rather criticise the WCA than getting to the nub of the matter, which is; Is the proposed development which includes an additional 1650 "homes" appropriate to the site and the local surroundings and can the local infrastructure support it, and to which my answer is a heartfelt "No!"

The residential towers are the best part of the scheme for me. They are a statement, will be pleasing on the eye and will make Woolston one of THE places to live in Southampton.

Southampton is lagging behind most regional cities who already have residential towers much taller than the ones planned here and as far as I have read, the new wave of hi-rises have brought prosperity to previously run down areas of cities, much like Woolston.

The plans state the towers will be fronting onto the Itchen and looking towards the City Centre, so the existing houses are not going to be overlooked or deprived sunlight.

Anyway, what have the WCA got to hide if they are so worried about new residents looking at them !?!

These towers will not be built like the Weston ones. They will be steel and glass constructions, not pre-fad concrete. I very much doubt the new occupants of those flats will be from low income families (nothing wrong with that by the way).

I get the strong feeling the WCA would protest about this development even if it fully complied with all their wishes.

But the developers are not just sticking up 1650 homes, they have carried out extensive feasibility reports and have come to the conclusion that the surrounding infrastructure can cope with the demand. Improvements to the road network will be made inconjunction with the development itself over the next few years until completion in 2015.(although this is looking more like 2018 as work still has not even begun.)

With all due respect, I personally value the experts opinions higher than those of the NIMBY's.
As someone stressed above you will never please everyone, but something has to be done soon, as the longer this drags on, the more likely Crest Nicholson are to up sticks and leave a ugly blot on the landscape.
The argument that there are too many flats, and that only family homes should be built does not hold water as there is a demand for these type of dwellings, not everyone either has a family or wants a family home with garden. There are many professional people who work in the area who are looking for somewhere to live, and there will be more as the Palmer Johnson business starts coming in, some of their 800 workforce will not need to drive to work.
Just because the flats are not somewhere you personally would care to live, does not hold sway with any form of objection.

So we will have 1650 more flats, that will also mean probably 1500 or more extra cars, probably 2000 or more people, plus children, sure after the problems of the 1960'70 with so many children being brough up in Flats, surely it would make a little more sense to reduce the number of flats and increase the parking and green areas. I'm all for the development, but lets be reasonable, maybe build it two phases and see what the overall effect on the area will be..

Concerned wrote:
So we will have 1650 more flats, that will also mean probably 1500 or more extra cars, probably 2000 or more people, plus children, sure after the problems of the 1960'70 with so many children being brough up in Flats, surely it would make a little more sense to reduce the number of flats and increase the parking and green areas. I'm all for the development, but lets be reasonable, maybe build it two phases and see what the overall effect on the area will be..

Sounds like someone Probably plucking figures out of thin air. I agree with realist and would rather listen to the fisability studies.

I find it funny that the WCA Development Committee do not even represent the WCA, are they like the Peoples Front of Judea? Splitters!!

"Realist" said; "But the developers are not just sticking up 1650 homes, they have carried out extensive feasibility reports and have come to the conclusion that the surrounding infrastructure can cope with the demand."

I would remind you that similar extensive studies proved that West End could cope with the "minimal" demand on local roads brought about by the additional traffic caused by the Rose Bowl, and look how that turned out!

It is my experience that feasibility studies by developers only prove what the developer wants them to!

Plum Pudding wrote:
"Realist" said; "But the developers are not just sticking up 1650 homes, they have carried out extensive feasibility reports and have come to the conclusion that the surrounding infrastructure can cope with the demand." I would remind you that similar extensive studies proved that West End could cope with the "minimal" demand on local roads brought about by the additional traffic caused by the Rose Bowl, and look how that turned out! It is my experience that feasibility studies by developers only prove what the developer wants them to!

Would that be the same Rose Bowl which will soon almost double in size as for most of the time it runs smoothly.

Realist wrote: The argument that there are too many flats, and that only family homes should be built does not hold water as there is a demand for these type of dwellings, not everyone either has a family or wants a family home with garden. There are many professional people who work in the area who are looking for somewhere to live, and there will be more as the Palmer Johnson business starts coming in, some of their 800 workforce will not need to drive to work.

Quite right,
I keep reading "we need family homes", "more family homes" etc etc.
Do people not realise that these developers actually know what they are doing. They have to make a profit, the only way they will make one is by selling what they build. If there was sufficient demand in the area for family homes then that is what they would be building. If there was insufficient demand for the number of flats being built they wouldn't be building so many.
It's simple logic really - like with any development of this size - they will have spent millions already ascertaining what is needed and what will sell etc.

To paraphrase Reggie Perrins old boss " I didn't get where I am today by building flats that nobody wants "

Please do not come here with simple logic it confusles people, and spoils their arguments.

I went to a presentation of the plans in Victoria Road. I asked the the developers, planners and Seeda representatives if there was going to be space made available for Southamptons Aviation and Martime collections.

I informed them that the previous Southampton City Council adminstrations had little or no interest in Southamptons glorious past and that this would help address the balance. I told them that Southampton Hall of Aviation (Solent Sky) and the Historical Small boats collection at Hythe/Marchwood had been forced to move or were in the process of being forced out, with no other suitable location being offered.

I said that these collections together with a planned library could be combined together on the site as museums and librarys are both places in which to gain knowledge.

It became quite clear that the suited representatives were not actually listening to anyone and that it was just a public relations initiative. Why should they show any interest in Southamptons heritage!!!!!

There is only one thing that is driving this development and that is ££££££££££££££.

They have very little interest in peoples views on this matter.

Gawd!!! This is getting boring now, writing to Prince Charles - WOW!!! great idea, who thought of that one. LOL

Southampton needs more homes, the Vosper Thorneycroft land is a good place now it is demolished so Southampton City Council go in there and build.

With more homes in the area Woolston might come alive once again.

Well, it seems there are a lot of people in support as well, including local residents, so get your point across - support the application online today before it closes:

http://www.southampt

on.gov.uk/building-p

lanning/planning/onl

ine-planning.asp#0

Application Number 08/00389/OUT