Bournemouth's hated Imax to be pulled down (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Bournemouth's hated Imax to be pulled down
12:10pm Wednesday 20th January 2010 in News Exclusive By Andy Martin
Bournemouth's hated Imax to be pulled down
THE hated IMAX is coming down.
In a shock move, Bournemouth’s most controversial building has been purchased by the council in a £7.5m deal and the site will be redeveloped.
The decision to buy the Waterfront complex was ratified by a full meeting of councillors on Tuesday night who knew nothing of the plan in advance.
Contracts were exchanged with the pension fund owners, Nilgos, this morning.
The surprise development, which has been kept closely under wraps while the lengthy negotiations have been carried out, spells the beginning of the end for the Imax.
Leader of the Conservative-controlled council, Cllr Stephen MacLoughlin, told the Daily Echo: “We have listened to Bournemouth’s residents who want to see the seafront rid of the detested Imax building.”
He added: “We have given the existing occupiers enough time to deliver on this site and will not wait any longer.
THERE were years of false starts before a developer finally started building a tourist attraction on the site of Bournemouth’s former swimming baths at Pier Approach in 1998.
Although other businesses in the Waterfront building opened in the autumn of 1999, the IMAX itself was plagued by delays.
It finally opened in March 2002, two years and eight months late.
But visitor numbers were disappointing and in January 2003, the cinema shed jobs and closed four days a week out of season.
The IMAX closed for refurbishment in Easter 2005 and never re-opened.
“This is the first step in the process and there are still a number of hurdles to be overcome before we can bring back some sea views and start redevelopment of the site of an all weather attraction. This will not happen overnight but we know this will have widespread public support.”
Deputy leader John Beesley said: “Solving the Imax problem has been one of the biggest priorities since we came to power in May 2007.”
But he warned: “There is still plenty of work to do before we can achieve out ultimate aim of redevelopment.
“This is arguably the most important site in the heart of Bournemouth and is key to everything we want to do in the town centre.”
He said: “This is a prime seafront location and our aspirations extend simply beyond just getting rid of the eyesore. We want to development a new facility which can accommodate leisure, arts, culture and entertainment attractions for the public to enjoy whatever the weather.”
As much as residents and visitors will be delighted to see the back of the Imax, the decision to purchase the building – for which permission was granted by the council in 1997 – is bound to be hugely contentious at a time of a massive public spending squeeze in both central and local government.
The purchase has been funded through existing capital receipts and prudential borrowing.
Cllr Beesley pledged there would no material effect on frontline services, which are funded from a different pot of money, revenue spending.
He said the council had taken advantage of the recession to make this deal happen with the Waterfront being purchased for around half the £15m it would have cost two years ago, when the council first made enquires The council still needs to secure vacant possession from the remaining sub-tenants.
Businesses still operating include Harbour Lights, KFC and Coyote Ugly.
“I hope we can come to a satisfactory agreement with the remaining sub-lessees through negotiation, but compulsory purchase is also an option,” added Cllr Beesley.
The redevelopment, in whatever form, will be carried out with private money as part of the town centre master vision.
Cllr MacLoughlin said the future development of the site would enhance Bournemouth’s image and reputation as Britain’s premier resort.
• SEVEN pages charting the Imax story and this, the latest chapter, in Thursday’s (January 21) Daily Echo.
Comments(151)
tricky1007
says...
12:19pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Marcus James
says...
12:25pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Has the Echo asked for the full deal price, i.e legal fees, stamp duty etc.
I think the sting in the tail may also be the cost of asking the tenants to surrender their premises for which they will charge the maximum, especially now they now the council has signed the deal, I would have imagined the deal would have been signed subject to vacant possession if this had been done by a diligent developer?
I don’t think its quite the Mega Deal the council think it is??
The biggest problem will be that if the new building is going to be funded by private monies, i.e a developer or new business then they will want to maximise the premises in terms of size and development!
That will mean another large sized building; if the new proposed design is too small then it simply won't have the capacity to make the development viable.
I don’t think the people of Bournemouth should be celebrating just yet, lets see what the final bill comes in at, Surf reef Rip off anyone???
deancourt1899
says...
12:29pm Wed 20 Jan 10
djd
says...
12:33pm Wed 20 Jan 10
GB916
says...
12:34pm Wed 20 Jan 10
SFRA
says...
12:35pm Wed 20 Jan 10
jobsworthwatch
says...
12:36pm Wed 20 Jan 10
jboris
says...
12:36pm Wed 20 Jan 10
gd58
says...
12:42pm Wed 20 Jan 10
TinyLegacy
says...
12:47pm Wed 20 Jan 10
honcho
says...
12:50pm Wed 20 Jan 10
jobsworthwatch
says...
12:52pm Wed 20 Jan 10
honcho wrote:Dont pull it down, turn it into a multi-storey carpark!
car park better and far more useful than an imax
suab0871
says...
12:53pm Wed 20 Jan 10
BmthNewshound
says...
12:57pm Wed 20 Jan 10
The Councils record on major projects is appalling. The Winter Gardens project died a death and is now a car park, West Central is now in doubt so the chances are that'll we'll simply see another derelict site being used as a car park.
I think the Council should come clean and let us know what other secret talks underway. The former Roko sports centre cost us £6.9m following secret talks, the Imax will be costing us £7.5m thats more than £14m spent following "secret talks" - Good to see democracy is alive and kicking in Bournemouth
Maggie69
says...
12:58pm Wed 20 Jan 10
jobsworthwatch
says...
1:02pm Wed 20 Jan 10
oversixty wrote:Pulling it down wont cost anything because the whole population of Bournemouth will be down there pulling it down with their bare hands!
Where is the money coming from to do this ? There have been massive budget cuts across Council departments and Council leaders saying how little Goverment funding they get ! Is this to appease residents with next years elections coming up I ask ?
I wonder if the jobswworths that will approve its removal are the same ones that approved its construction in the first place?
The irate commuter
says...
1:03pm Wed 20 Jan 10
stephen magill
says...
1:06pm Wed 20 Jan 10
rudderz
says...
1:08pm Wed 20 Jan 10
ben111
says...
1:10pm Wed 20 Jan 10
ben111
says...
1:13pm Wed 20 Jan 10
ben111
says...
1:14pm Wed 20 Jan 10
ben111
says...
1:16pm Wed 20 Jan 10
frarog
says...
1:17pm Wed 20 Jan 10
claireyfairy1
says...
1:20pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Instead of wasting money redeveloping it, the Imax should be reopened. Avatar has changed the way movies are made, presented and enjoyed. I went with six of my friends all the way to London to the Imax in order to view Avatar and probably will do the same to see Alice in Wonderland. The quality of cinemas in Bournemouth is unbelievably poor. The Odeon and ABC are not only uncomfortable, but disgusting, with poor facilities and a lot of dirt. A reopened Imax would be well received at this juncture, create healthy competition between the cinemas and provide us with the opportunity to see the wealth of upcoming movies that are intended to be viewed in an Imax. The people that don't understand that just haven't been following the movie industry in the last year.
Imax share prices are increasing because of Avatar and the changing attitudes towards 3D. Now that movies have finally developed this technology to be something outstanding, it is a travesty that Bournemouth is not campaigning to retain this Imax and have it reopened.
ben111
says...
1:20pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Glashen
says...
1:21pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Vincent Lauderdale
says...
1:22pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Goffee
says...
1:32pm Wed 20 Jan 10
cooperman
says...
1:47pm Wed 20 Jan 10
no way I am backing that one and ultimately it is me that pays for it in my taxation
born2bongo
says...
1:49pm Wed 20 Jan 10
As to the news, I'm not complaining about it coming down, but I am worried about what goes up in its place.
When you have a view like Bournemouth Bay, less is more
Percy Tatlock
says...
1:51pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Yes times, people and their values change but it's essential that we keep a little heritage.
I've chatted to a few people who remember what it was before who have fond memories spent there.
The potential is here to create a facility that serves and benefits the people of Bournemouth in an ideal location.
Account Suspended
says...
1:52pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Hickery
says...
1:56pm Wed 20 Jan 10
A few years ago I'd have been on the 'knock it down' bandwagon, but times are changing and I fear the council have got their timing wrong on this decision.
claireyfairy1
says...
2:03pm Wed 20 Jan 10
The building is already there. I see no point in wasting resources to pull it down. It should never have been built there in the first place, but that is a different discussion.
As for Tower Park - you're just showing ignorance at the difference between an Imax experience and an experience in a regular cinema. They are vastly different and movies made for Imax resolution (as is becoming more popular) have their picture cut for a regular cinema meaning you lose about 30-40% of the picture on the screen. Added to this the sheer size of an Imax screen and the sound/image quality and you have the reason why people go to an Imax...and why some people would like to see it reopened in Bournemouth.
jobsworthwatch
says...
2:04pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Goffee wrote:...miss the wacky wharehouse... Hopefully a replacement can be found. How about the town hall!
I'll miss the wacky warehouse - my kids love it and it is one of the only child-friendly indoor places in the town. Hopefully a replacement can be found.
LifeonMars
says...
2:05pm Wed 20 Jan 10
djd
says...
2:07pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Support the cinemas that are in the town and nearby now and they will improve the facilities to show films for the future.
Why anyone would want to ist cooped up watching a film so close to that wondeful natural view is beyond me.
Open up the area so the view may be enjoyed by all. If not, give us something useful for everyone, not just a few.
Xchurch-man
says...
2:13pm Wed 20 Jan 10
teeheehee
says...
2:18pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Xchurch-man wrote:**** you beat me to it:):):)
Perhaps they will use the space to build several hundred surf pods?
Or maybe turn it into a massive cannabis factory at least that way we will see some revenue from the site
Adrian XX
says...
2:24pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Xchurch-man
says...
2:24pm Wed 20 Jan 10
fartycat
says...
2:31pm Wed 20 Jan 10
And is it environmentally sound to just pull it down and build something else? Wouldn't it make more sense to find a use for it and lease it out?
I make Newshound right. This council has an awful record on projects (just where is our arts centre promised when the loved Winter Gardens was pulled down?). So I won't be holding my breath over what is to be put there. No doubt it will be another concrete and glass structure with little design merit.
suab08 asks why everyone is reacting so stringly to this news. Well maybe it's because we have a council whose leader looks at **** and whose cabinet frequently fails to deliver what it promises?
wintonbusinessman
says...
2:45pm Wed 20 Jan 10
alumchineboy2
says...
2:49pm Wed 20 Jan 10
I'd imagine that there will be some sort of kiss me quick food outlet for all the chav's and northerners to get excited about .
My point is that at least when the baths were there then they could be used by the people of Bournemouth. A lot of people will be upset if its just another tourist attraction for out of town stag and hen groups.
Saying all this, I am happy its going to change but lets get something of quality not something thats going to be tatty within a short while.
Neo-sapian
says...
2:53pm Wed 20 Jan 10
You lot really do suffer from the 'magpie effect' (oohhh, pretty shiney thing, I want).
Gastines
says...
3:11pm Wed 20 Jan 10
HughJarse
says...
3:24pm Wed 20 Jan 10
boardstiff
says...
3:26pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Let's hope, then, that it's the Bournemouth residents who have the say in what replaces it.
(Security word: mass-when)
bournemouth lover
says...
3:26pm Wed 20 Jan 10
tt52
says...
3:32pm Wed 20 Jan 10
LuckyStar
says...
3:39pm Wed 20 Jan 10
>
(1) From what I hear it is the head lease that the council has purchased, and not the freehold (hence why Beesley refers to the current occupiers as sub-lessees). This means that any change of use or redevelopment of any kind would need the permission of the head leaseholder (whoever that may be - echo confirm?), and would mean that the council only hold the right to receive income from the building, which would be for a determinate amount of time.
>
(2) The 'compulsory purchase' options available will mean that vast sums of compensation will need to paid to the existing sub-lessees, and could include loss of revenue and relocation costs along with the market value of the lease ebing acquired; a considerable amount owing to the footfall and location - it would be prudent for the Echo to ask the objective advice of a chartered surveyor specialisng in compulsory purchase and compensation.
>
(3) Beesley has indicated that any development will be carried out with via private funding, which will mean a PFI PPP initiative. Such initiatives have been used for infrastructure suh as the NHS and public schools, and has been widely criticised as the majority of control lies with the financier, and means that the public body (in this case BC) are tied into a contract typically lasting 25 years. If BC had been in this situation from the start, it would have meant taxpayers paying for an unused facility until the contract expires.
>
This leads me to mirror what someone else has said on here - that there would be no way that the building would be reduced in massing, as this would reduce internal areas and serve no business purpose for either the council, developer or potential occupiers.
>
(4) I would query the reasoning behind such a swift decision to use such a mssive amount of public funds without proper public consultation and scrutiny that seems almost knee-jerk to counter recent bad publicity that the council has received from many areas of its operation. I believe that this move may be used purely to paper over the cracks and appear to be 'public champions' to help get them through the next local elections, when only then will the true costs and implications be revealed.
>
So whilst I agree that Imax situation has been a thorn in the side of the council and Bournemouth as a whole for many years (why planning permission was every granted in the first place remains a mystery to me); far more details on the proposed scheme and cost implications (above and beyond the alleged £7.5m head lease purchase price) need to be presented by the council before their fanfare of trumpets can be acknowledged.
LuckyStar
says...
3:41pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Mediclogan5
says...
3:43pm Wed 20 Jan 10
crane
says...
3:43pm Wed 20 Jan 10
frarog wrote:I agree with frafrog...."what is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stand and stare"....at the wonderful views that are the best feature of Bournemouth.
Excellent news - but don't build anything else; lets have a decent view back again.
Bob49
says...
3:52pm Wed 20 Jan 10
How coincidental that this announcement has been made at the same night that " Mr Weight was due to address a full council meeting at the Town Hall on Tuesday,January 19. " regarding the 'tweaking' of the surf reef.
How long before it is revealed that the proposed new development includes a 'few' flats ?
If it does finally get permission await the all too predictable handwringing ( and brown envelope swapping) when it's found that the developent is higher than first agreed.
Syd Poumen
says...
4:19pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Here comes their chopper to chop off my block!
Security word 'rich-poor' ....once again, rich dash poor!
spikejrt
says...
4:35pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Is there any pleasing some people?!
merrycherry
says...
4:44pm Wed 20 Jan 10
merrycherry
says...
4:44pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Hooky
says...
4:49pm Wed 20 Jan 10
boardstiff
says...
4:58pm Wed 20 Jan 10
tt52 wrote:Why do you want the surf reef to be blown up?
GREAT NEWS, lets hope that what ever the council decide to do with the site they consult with the people who live here first instead of coming up with another of their dumd ideas, now all we need is for the surf reef to be blown up.
Lord Spring
says...
4:59pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Aviewoneverything
says...
5:04pm Wed 20 Jan 10
t attraction(s) that are unique to Bournemouth. I have always said a smaller version of Disney's 'Disney Quest' indoor attraction found in Orlando would be ideal and provide an attraction for both adults and children that can be used in all weathers. I don;t know what the council do with it but for once I would like to say well done and wish them well for their future plans with this site....but don't bugger it up!
casperella
says...
5:15pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Sal2
says...
5:15pm Wed 20 Jan 10
We had a great view before the Imax was built, all I want is the sea viewsto come back. If the council will allow for another leisure complex to be built, then please do not block the view we use to have!!!
oscardoombug
says...
5:16pm Wed 20 Jan 10
charley farley west parley
says...
5:17pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Meanwhile, another Honeycombe Chine flats development at Pier Approach anyone ?
Willcoxbelle
says...
5:24pm Wed 20 Jan 10
ekimnoslen
says...
5:30pm Wed 20 Jan 10
jrheaven
says...
5:39pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Seeing that 3D films are now becoming the norm, especially in the IMAX format, Bournemouth Council should look for another company to invest in the current complex and reopen the IMAX so the council can recoup the cost of buying the building instead of passing the multi-million pound cost on to the council tax payers of Bournemouth!!!
haveigotnewsforyou?
says...
5:40pm Wed 20 Jan 10
gujelsnap
says...
5:40pm Wed 20 Jan 10
EGHH
says...
5:42pm Wed 20 Jan 10
wickerman
says...
5:44pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Emulated
says...
5:46pm Wed 20 Jan 10
tt52
says...
5:57pm Wed 20 Jan 10
boardstiff wrote:Because it cost far too much to serve a very small amount of people.
tt52 wrote:Why do you want the surf reef to be blown up?
GREAT NEWS, lets hope that what ever the council decide to do with the site they consult with the people who live here first instead of coming up with another of their dumd ideas, now all we need is for the surf reef to be blown up.
12 million should have been spent to serve everybody not just a few surfers.
It was just another imax only a few years later/ lets not forget we will have to continue paying to have this surf reef policed by health and safty wierdo's and lifeguards just for a select few.
I-H-S
says...
6:03pm Wed 20 Jan 10
psal
says...
6:19pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Ramos
says...
6:29pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Megnom
says...
6:30pm Wed 20 Jan 10
I have never believed in the spoilt view theory. where can you stand to see this lost view? I doubt if many will stand opposite the Royal Bath, or the entrance to the Pavilion rear car park--that will go when the Casino is built.
The view is lost if you travel by car--thats about 10 seconds.
Lets have a public vote.
Bob49
says...
6:33pm Wed 20 Jan 10
wickerman wrote:Whe it was first conceived then built it appeared commercially viable and something that would enhance the area. As it rose up it was clearly neither of the above, The council merely wrong their hands and said there was nothing they could do.
how was this place ever built in the first place, a few brown envelopes handed around im sure. the people of bournemouth were never informed that this dull grey building was going up and how permission granted to build it i will never know. hopefully someone with a bit of vision and imagination will come up trumps but lets keep the views which we have not had for years
The same happened with the Moneycombe scam on Boscombe seafront. I have photos of the artists im pressions of what it would look like. The front was open to the public and it DID NOT blot out the view across to the Purbecks. There were also shops and cafes on the pier.
What happened when that proved to be false. NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING save the all too predictable crocodile tears from the usual suspects ( and most likely beneficiaries). So don't hold your breathe that whatever is proposed will be built as stated.
This will be, once again, about the priviliged few filling their boots - and more sadly the terminally dim squeaking up on their behalf and decrying anyone who has the gumption to ask where are the 'Emperors new clothes ?'
R1200RT
says...
6:38pm Wed 20 Jan 10
tt52
says...
6:46pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Ramos wrote:From what i have read the surf reef cost 3 million plus developing the area around it so yes i was wrong but having said that spending even 3 million on this thing to cater for a very small minority is not justified.
@tt52 - since when did the surf reef cost anywhere near 12million?! The building of the artificial reef was a small part of the amount spent on developing the area around it.
That amount of money could have been better spent for the enjoyment of the majority of us who supply the money in the first place
Was Charlie
says...
6:48pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Knock the Imax down, but replace it with a lower more attractive bulding, having first considered what function would be most beneficial to both visitors and residents on the site. Difficult, but councillors are elected to do the best for the town.
jboris
says...
6:57pm Wed 20 Jan 10
twobigdogs
says...
7:01pm Wed 20 Jan 10
boardstiff
says...
7:04pm Wed 20 Jan 10
tt52 wrote:OK, I know that this is about the Waterfront building and I for one will be delighted to see it go.
boardstiff wrote:Because it cost far too much to serve a very small amount of people.
tt52 wrote:Why do you want the surf reef to be blown up?
GREAT NEWS, lets hope that what ever the council decide to do with the site they consult with the people who live here first instead of coming up with another of their dumd ideas, now all we need is for the surf reef to be blown up.
12 million should have been spent to serve everybody not just a few surfers.
It was just another imax only a few years later/ lets not forget we will have to continue paying to have this surf reef policed by health and safty wierdo's and lifeguards just for a select few.
However, the reef is only part of a regeneration scheme that has seen a major improvement to the Boscombe seafront. On its own, it did not cost £12 million. The overall scheme (whether by accident or not) will make a major contribution to the re-establishment of the area as a tourist destination for surfers and others. I for one saw more boats "parked" off the beach at the tail end of the summer, and more watersports activity by windsurfers etc than ever before.
The policing by "health and safety wierdo's" (weirdos) is supposition, and the "we" who seem to be paying for the lifeguards are members of the RNLI - like me - who pay our monthly subscription. I'm not aware that Bournemouth is paying the RNLI for this service, but no doubt someone suitably informed can enlighten us.
The scheme to regenerate Boscombe seafront (however it came about!) can only be for the good of the area.
Please don't blow up the reef!
Ranon
says...
7:10pm Wed 20 Jan 10
tt52
says...
7:19pm Wed 20 Jan 10
boardstiff wrote:Surf reef and sea front refurb £11.4 million, just checked it out, I have two arguments here, the surf reef is non profit making and will probably cost me even more in the long run, secondly the complex has been built for the rich and famous with my money, that really gets my back up
tt52 wrote:OK, I know that this is about the Waterfront building and I for one will be delighted to see it go.
boardstiff wrote:Because it cost far too much to serve a very small amount of people.
tt52 wrote:Why do you want the surf reef to be blown up?
GREAT NEWS, lets hope that what ever the council decide to do with the site they consult with the people who live here first instead of coming up with another of their dumd ideas, now all we need is for the surf reef to be blown up.
12 million should have been spent to serve everybody not just a few surfers.
It was just another imax only a few years later/ lets not forget we will have to continue paying to have this surf reef policed by health and safty wierdo's and lifeguards just for a select few.
However, the reef is only part of a regeneration scheme that has seen a major improvement to the Boscombe seafront. On its own, it did not cost £12 million. The overall scheme (whether by accident or not) will make a major contribution to the re-establishment of the area as a tourist destination for surfers and others. I for one saw more boats "parked" off the beach at the tail end of the summer, and more watersports activity by windsurfers etc than ever before.
The policing by "health and safety wierdo's" (weirdos) is supposition, and the "we" who seem to be paying for the lifeguards are members of the RNLI - like me - who pay our monthly subscription. I'm not aware that Bournemouth is paying the RNLI for this service, but no doubt someone suitably informed can enlighten us.
The scheme to regenerate Boscombe seafront (however it came about!) can only be for the good of the area.
Please don't blow up the reef!
Haggis22
says...
7:22pm Wed 20 Jan 10
alumchineboy2 wrote:Good to see you don't miss an opportunity to exert your parochial biased views in addition to your pointless whinging !! You could have added that we also take your jobs whilst starting fights with bottles ?? Why don't we replace the Imax with a social centre where people who are different can meet ? A Gigantic Wetherspoons perhaps ???
How about something for residents there ? - yes, the people whohave paid for it. I'd imagine that there will be some sort of kiss me quick food outlet for all the chav's and northerners to get excited about . My point is that at least when the baths were there then they could be used by the people of Bournemouth. A lot of people will be upset if its just another tourist attraction for out of town stag and hen groups. Saying all this, I am happy its going to change but lets get something of quality not something thats going to be tatty within a short while.
Bournemouthstorm
says...
7:25pm Wed 20 Jan 10
gujelsnap wrote:No one went that is why it closed in the first place!
Ok, it it a clumsy building, but there's plenty of examples of bad architecture everywhere - the point is it is a FULLY OPERATIONAL IMAX CINEMA IN OUR OWN TOWN, all ready to go. Think very long and hard before wishing it gone, to be replaced by what exactly? Some pointless banal retail development with no value to anyone. If you've ever experienced Imax you know just how great it is - now VOTE FOR THE IMAX TO BE REOPENED!!!!
Bournemouthstorm
says...
7:29pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Account Suspended wrote:We still have the old ice rink intact above the shops down Westover Road. You can see the ice rink where the firedoors are open down Hinton Road.
Whilst I'm elated that the council is pulling this thing down, surely that £7.5m would have been better spent in repurchasing Dean Court for the community, and building an Ice Rink and fourth stand at the open end?
Bournemouthstorm
says...
7:34pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Hooky wrote:Not true. Just look at the voting on the Echo online poll.
..er... I don't remember there being an actual vote on this at all! Sure a lot of people moaned about it - but a lot of people didn't moan about it. I have enjoyed great times in the restaurant there, good times in the club downstairs, enjoyed summer and winter evenings in the pub and terrace with friends and family - now they want to take that away from visitors to bournemouth? What they should do is sort out a tenant for the un-occupied space and generate some revenue and jobs for the town this summer.. Our summer visitors want something to do this year - not look at a demolition/building site
Glashen
says...
7:40pm Wed 20 Jan 10
boardstiff wrote:Sorry more thread drift. I'm in general agreement with you Boardstiff. However you are mistaken regarding the RNLI lifeguards, this is a service provided by the RNLI for a charge paid by the council. Much of Bournemouth Beach is guarded through this system. The only thing really different about the lifeguards at Boscombe is that they operate 365 days a year. I suspect Bournemouth Beaches would lose their Blue Flag status if they weren't supervised in this way.
tt52 wrote:OK, I know that this is about the Waterfront building and I for one will be delighted to see it go.
boardstiff wrote:Because it cost far too much to serve a very small amount of people.
tt52 wrote:Why do you want the surf reef to be blown up?
GREAT NEWS, lets hope that what ever the council decide to do with the site they consult with the people who live here first instead of coming up with another of their dumd ideas, now all we need is for the surf reef to be blown up.
12 million should have been spent to serve everybody not just a few surfers.
It was just another imax only a few years later/ lets not forget we will have to continue paying to have this surf reef policed by health and safty wierdo's and lifeguards just for a select few.
However, the reef is only part of a regeneration scheme that has seen a major improvement to the Boscombe seafront. On its own, it did not cost £12 million. The overall scheme (whether by accident or not) will make a major contribution to the re-establishment of the area as a tourist destination for surfers and others. I for one saw more boats "parked" off the beach at the tail end of the summer, and more watersports activity by windsurfers etc than ever before.
The policing by "health and safety wierdo's" (weirdos) is supposition, and the "we" who seem to be paying for the lifeguards are members of the RNLI - like me - who pay our monthly subscription. I'm not aware that Bournemouth is paying the RNLI for this service, but no doubt someone suitably informed can enlighten us.
The scheme to regenerate Boscombe seafront (however it came about!) can only be for the good of the area.
Please don't blow up the reef!
To get back to the IMAX if they can get it demolished, I say Great! Well done! A big almost empty shed Right by the Pier, blocking the view really isn't doing Bournemouth any good at all.
jboris
says...
7:47pm Wed 20 Jan 10
The local Paper was falling over itself to see Imax built. That was a different lot running the paper I expect but to publish how the paper was behind it at the time and how the local media views have changed would be very interesting to read.
Haggis22
says...
7:48pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Haggis22 wrote:............. or somewhere I can walk my Greyhound !!!
alumchineboy2 wrote: How about something for residents there ? - yes, the people whohave paid for it. I'd imagine that there will be some sort of kiss me quick food outlet for all the chav's and northerners to get excited about . My point is that at least when the baths were there then they could be used by the people of Bournemouth. A lot of people will be upset if its just another tourist attraction for out of town stag and hen groups. Saying all this, I am happy its going to change but lets get something of quality not something thats going to be tatty within a short while.Good to see you don't miss an opportunity to exert your parochial biased views in addition to your pointless whinging !! You could have added that we also take your jobs whilst starting fights with bottles ?? Why don't we replace the Imax with a social centre where people who are different can meet ? A Gigantic Wetherspoons perhaps ???
............... get a deep fried mars bar
............ a strip club with big vulgar signs !!!
.......... or an up to date cinema where one can view state of the art movies, that has the added benefit of being made totally of plastic so you can see through it and observe the beautiful bay, with a really slippy walkway to satisfy our skaters and a big puddle for the bathers who find the sea a bit wet !!!
PokesdownMark
says...
8:41pm Wed 20 Jan 10
PokesdownMark
says...
8:50pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Bournemouthstorm wrote:Search for Bournemouth Ice Rink on YouTube for recent video inside the rink. It looks very far from intact to me!
Account Suspended wrote:We still have the old ice rink intact above the shops down Westover Road. You can see the ice rink where the firedoors are open down Hinton Road.
Whilst I'm elated that the council is pulling this thing down, surely that £7.5m would have been better spent in repurchasing Dean Court for the community, and building an Ice Rink and fourth stand at the open end?
oneshortleg
says...
8:54pm Wed 20 Jan 10
The Seasider
says...
8:56pm Wed 20 Jan 10
.
Dont forget that the Imax was either THE most hated (or second most hated) building in Britain- as voted by the public in a poll a year or two ago.
.
Whatever replaces it- PLEASE - NEVER COMPROMISE ON QUALITY, the public will grow to love something which has true quality, class, beauty and integrity.
.
This site (and the Exeter Road carpark site) have the potential to create a real buzz and put Bournemouth back on the map for all the right reasons- premium sites require premium architecture.
.
In the long slog ahead of committees, planning, funding, etc., as long as you (the council, and the public) accept no compromise on design quality: people will love it. Nothing but excellence will do.
raspberry
says...
8:57pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Bournemouthstorm
says...
9:04pm Wed 20 Jan 10
PokesdownMark wrote:Looks like it is still there to me. Obviously was not a demand for the ice rink otherwise it would not have closed...bit like BHS.
Bournemouthstorm wrote:Search for Bournemouth Ice Rink on YouTube for recent video inside the rink. It looks very far from intact to me!Account Suspended wrote: Whilst I'm elated that the council is pulling this thing down, surely that £7.5m would have been better spent in repurchasing Dean Court for the community, and building an Ice Rink and fourth stand at the open end?We still have the old ice rink intact above the shops down Westover Road. You can see the ice rink where the firedoors are open down Hinton Road.
old git 2
says...
9:24pm Wed 20 Jan 10
as a whole, the council has to save £8million.
now they are spending £7.5 million on buying an empty building in order to spend more money on its demolition.
then there is the cost of the public consultation to decide what goes in there instead.
then the cost of drawing up plans.
then the cost of building.
prior to the Imax building there was a car park on the site which allowed for fantastic views across the bay for the residents of the Royal Bath. (if you didnt mind a few hundred cars in the foreground)
however before the car park, there was a beautiful swimming pool.
whatever goes in there, someone will complain but no one will consider the poor front line staff that lost their jobs / careers in order to fund it!
nigglygrilly
says...
9:26pm Wed 20 Jan 10
ferndownred
says...
9:38pm Wed 20 Jan 10
supermac
says...
9:40pm Wed 20 Jan 10
TinyLegacy wrote:Like buying Dean Court off of structadene and rent it back to the club.
£7.5M?! That could go to FAR better use.
Pineview
says...
9:57pm Wed 20 Jan 10
oh and all the people who are bemoaning the councils actions ,how many of you voted in the local elections???
Around 30% of us did!!
Hardly a mandate to do anything .
jdichio
says...
10:37pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Laurie H Marsh
says...
11:10pm Wed 20 Jan 10
I-H-S wrote:Have you any idea how collectable Edsel's are at this time?
This will go down as the Ford Edsel of architectecture
They cost a fortune (not 7.5 million though)!
I never could see the point of pier approach baths, I mean the sea is warm enough to swim in for at least 5 weeks in the year and with global warming the sky is the limit!
How about a new pool hall surrounded by a market with some rides and stuff?
You know, a touch of class!
dbass
says...
11:19pm Wed 20 Jan 10
Bob49
says...
11:21pm Wed 20 Jan 10
charley farley west parley
says...
12:21am Thu 21 Jan 10
Arjay
says...
1:48am Thu 21 Jan 10
If it is, HooBLOODYray!!!
I'll still only really believe it, when I can actually stand on top of the pile of rubble from the biggest mistake Bournemouth ever made!
Hmmmm... we'll see.......I'm not holding my breath!
jquain
says...
5:51am Thu 21 Jan 10
colmoor
says...
8:02am Thu 21 Jan 10
Johnedwards
says...
8:36am Thu 21 Jan 10
First we hear council staff wasting time at tax payers expense by sending personal messages to each other.
Then a senior figure is found to have and viewed lewd images on his works computer!
These people are still in their jobs. No doubt they will be awarding themselves a pay rise next!
The incompetent Conservatives, claiming to be in charge, are now trying to say they listened to the residents in deciding to take the Imax down! What a blazon sham! The residents did not want it in the first place!
We had half baked excuses that the Tories hands were tied and they could do nothing! Why? Who negotiated the contract? Why were there no Performance Benchmarks set out within the contract with get out clauses if the other side failed to comply?
Is the person who negotiated the deal still in a job? If so they should be fired - without the Golden Hand shake.
Look on the bright side, it will only cost you a further £7 million. Council Tax to rise again?
What an absolute disgrace. Doom Cameroon wants to stop Brown bashing and put his own house in order. Something about glass houses springs to mind!
Compared to this lot make the prime minister look brilliant!
Hopefully the people of Bournemouth will remember this. Bring on the election.
Grumpy Griff
says...
8:56am Thu 21 Jan 10
Square Old Codger
says...
9:19am Thu 21 Jan 10
Glashen
says...
9:28am Thu 21 Jan 10
Square Old Codger wrote:There is certainly plenty of cynicism to go round. The problem with finding commercially viable projects is that is what the IMAX was supposed to be. I note in the latest report it says partial demolition, so keep the clubs, bars and restaurants, demolish the cinema?. If you really want a wet weather attraction a swimming pool and or ice rink would fit the bill nicely, but I suspect money will shout too loudly for that to be a possibility.
This is a cynical ploy, by an unpopular politician to curry favour with the electorate, this at a time of austerity when services essential to the well being of many are planned to be cut back. I will believe it when I see it. As for those who are suggesting an Ice Rink or Swimming Pool for the area, forget it, this is an expensive site and only commercially viable projects will be considered.
jboris
says...
9:32am Thu 21 Jan 10
MissLiberty
says...
9:42am Thu 21 Jan 10
antonw
says...
9:45am Thu 21 Jan 10
bernie@football
says...
10:48am Thu 21 Jan 10
Ef the ref
says...
11:11am Thu 21 Jan 10
greenhouse
says...
11:35am Thu 21 Jan 10
More rates income - satisfy our quota for "homes". I can remember the pier approach baths and greatly appreciated being able to use them. From memory noone thought it was a good idea to pull down the baths to"give us the view"!
Leonard Lodger
says...
11:57am Thu 21 Jan 10
Obviously I'm not an expert but in two or three days I will be.
In line with my earlier proposals we should think green on this one. My groundbraking research into wave powered piston generated electricity for Pier lighting and pointles sandbag coastal protection projects stand me in good stead to declare I have the experience and know how to pull this off as project director/bystander with an opinion.
Obviously I dont want any remuneration for my services and will probably, on completion, state it was never my idea and it needs tweaking. But here goes.
We knock down the fly-over and build a giant Ferris wheel that can accomodate over 60's visitors to walk on an internal moving track. The visitors provided with hankerchief hats and a soundtrack of Petula Clarks greatest playing non stop will be encouraged to board thinking they are boarding the Waverly. If enough Northerners walk fast enough, perhaps with an incentive of KFC Bargain Buckets or Ramsdens chips held in front of them just out of reach, they can, in theory, provide the power source and at no extra cost to the local tax payers. The scheme can provide endless hours of entertainment for bored visitors, a cheap meal, keeping them off the Sea Front getting in the way of local cyclists wanting to travel at 60 mph as well as bring positive publicity to the town.
The Space elevator will consist of a long rope held aloft by the electricity generated and the power of aged Fakir meditaion. My research shows that the project is viable, the effect of Fakir mysticism is well docummented in New Zealand I might add.
All I need to complete my preliminary projections is access to a group of old Fakirs.
Ideas anyone????
Wavid Date, Chairman of the Wessex Fakirs Are For Life Not Just Christmas Asociation. Bournemouth.
Danfox Davies
says...
12:25pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Furthermore, Bournemouth should probably apply for City status since it's so big.
Nickolai
says...
12:46pm Thu 21 Jan 10
gd58 wrote:Nothing wrong with that old tatty car park !
I wonder if history will repeat itself at this site? Once demolished will it be left to become a tatty car park as it was after the Pier Approach baths were demolished? Were we not promised a similar development at the Winter Gardens site which has become,yes you guessed it, a car park?!
We used to all go down there after Madisons and Remix had kicked out - raving till dawn, happy days !
Skono
says...
12:48pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Of course knowing their stratospheric stupidity of truly biblical proportions they will now no doubt spend a further £27,000,000 on a yacht marina made from toffee.
Gastines
says...
1:20pm Thu 21 Jan 10
time nor Tide
says...
1:31pm Thu 21 Jan 10
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=I32YYoH2I
g0
its not too much to expect that should not change? Leonard and bob49 , you are not suggesting that this wavetank was just a guise and trick to gain peoples confidence are you? I guess it may not be possible to have the real thing behave this way consistantly to be a relevent amenity? If that is the case then something may be amiss in the state of denmark?
you have got to admit it was a "classic sting" everyone taken "hook line and sinker" and a local inside man banging on for years totally besotted by the team? Then an almost perfect cover of being a legitimate enterprise -it actually may still qualify for that except ... it takes all and gives nothing except excuses and asking for more?
dayjon
says...
2:49pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Avengerboy
says...
5:09pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Haggis22
says...
5:25pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Leonard Lodger wrote:You sir, strike me as a genius philanthropist with an entrepreneurial talent that deserves world recognition.........
I for one see this as a Golden opportunity for the people of Bournemouth to be the first in the country if not the whole world to develop a Space Elevator on this site. Obviously I'm not an expert but in two or three days I will be. In line with my earlier proposals we should think green on this one. My groundbraking research into wave powered piston generated electricity for Pier lighting and pointles sandbag coastal protection projects stand me in good stead to declare I have the experience and know how to pull this off as project director/bystander with an opinion. Obviously I dont want any remuneration for my services and will probably, on completion, state it was never my idea and it needs tweaking. But here goes. We knock down the fly-over and build a giant Ferris wheel that can accomodate over 60's visitors to walk on an internal moving track. The visitors provided with hankerchief hats and a soundtrack of Petula Clarks greatest playing non stop will be encouraged to board thinking they are boarding the Waverly. If enough Northerners walk fast enough, perhaps with an incentive of KFC Bargain Buckets or Ramsdens chips held in front of them just out of reach, they can, in theory, provide the power source and at no extra cost to the local tax payers. The scheme can provide endless hours of entertainment for bored visitors, a cheap meal, keeping them off the Sea Front getting in the way of local cyclists wanting to travel at 60 mph as well as bring positive publicity to the town. The Space elevator will consist of a long rope held aloft by the electricity generated and the power of aged Fakir meditaion. My research shows that the project is viable, the effect of Fakir mysticism is well docummented in New Zealand I might add. All I need to complete my preliminary projections is access to a group of old Fakirs. Ideas anyone???? Wavid Date, Chairman of the Wessex Fakirs Are For Life Not Just Christmas Asociation. Bournemouth.
.... and like most, seem slightly touched by madness. Your proposition excites and terrifies me in equal measure !! Pass me my hankerchief and flip on Pet's greatest, I've always loved the Waverly
bkiddus
says...
6:26pm Thu 21 Jan 10
There will always be people like Megnon who are unable to recognise this. This is too valuable a site to put daft money losing ventures like ice rinks and swimming pools, we used to have a full time ice rink, it closed because it made no money!!. I was one of the VERY few people who used to use the old BIC pool, but I have to admit I have enjoyed seeing many bands there, that would never have come to Bournemouth when the venue was smaller. The council doesn't have a great track record with these sort of projects, but the BIC has been a success. The surf reef was obviously not going to bring any real money to the town, personally I would have liked to have seen a Marina there, that could have bought huge numbers of jobs, but would never have got past the eco-brigade.
Actually the wave roof of the IMAX is a good design but no one could see it as it was on top of a huge warehouse of a building. Maybe they could just take two floors out of it and lower the roof so you could actually see it :-). Then just use it as a flexible space for an arts centre.
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:21pm Thu 21 Jan 10
chaisara
says...
7:30pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Wimborneflyer
says...
8:13pm Thu 21 Jan 10
.
I don't care about the blocked view as I would never choose to go to Bournemouth pier area - unless I was a tourist, which I am not.
.
I go to Hengisbury. The sand is just the same but there are less screaming kids there and idiot cyclists there.
time nor Tide
says...
8:23pm Thu 21 Jan 10
Haggis22 wrote:leonard4lordprotecto
Leonard Lodger wrote: I for one see this as a Golden opportunity for the people of Bournemouth to be the first in the country if not the whole world to develop a Space Elevator on this site. Obviously I'm not an expert but in two or three days I will be. In line with my earlier proposals we should think green on this one. My groundbraking research into wave powered piston generated electricity for Pier lighting and pointles sandbag coastal protection projects stand me in good stead to declare I have the experience and know how to pull this off as project director/bystander with an opinion. Obviously I dont want any remuneration for my services and will probably, on completion, state it was never my idea and it needs tweaking. But here goes. We knock down the fly-over and build a giant Ferris wheel that can accomodate over 60's visitors to walk on an internal moving track. The visitors provided with hankerchief hats and a soundtrack of Petula Clarks greatest playing non stop will be encouraged to board thinking they are boarding the Waverly. If enough Northerners walk fast enough, perhaps with an incentive of KFC Bargain Buckets or Ramsdens chips held in front of them just out of reach, they can, in theory, provide the power source and at no extra cost to the local tax payers. The scheme can provide endless hours of entertainment for bored visitors, a cheap meal, keeping them off the Sea Front getting in the way of local cyclists wanting to travel at 60 mph as well as bring positive publicity to the town. The Space elevator will consist of a long rope held aloft by the electricity generated and the power of aged Fakir meditaion. My research shows that the project is viable, the effect of Fakir mysticism is well docummented in New Zealand I might add. All I need to complete my preliminary projections is access to a group of old Fakirs. Ideas anyone???? Wavid Date, Chairman of the Wessex Fakirs Are For Life Not Just Christmas Asociation. Bournemouth.You sir, strike me as a genius philanthropist with an entrepreneurial talent that deserves world recognition......... .... and like most, seem slightly touched by madness. Your proposition excites and terrifies me in equal measure !! Pass me my hankerchief and flip on Pet's greatest, I've always loved the Waverly
r! Bring on the revolution, he surely must be a descendent of Oliver Cromwell with such leadership traits showing. Where is the rottenfruit4thefakir
s. Wait a minute self levitation has never been discredited - its just never been tweaked and demonstrated properly. Wait a minute again - a self levitating group of kiwi fakirs demonstrated to a entire town how high they could all get on thinking they could be the first on the block with the flavour of the month - all self levitated as the coins were picked from their pockets relieving them of their excess weight. Its now a candidate for an award of "best tryon of the last millenia" common down team and get your just desserts ! if you really want to have a lot of fun - look back through the video inteviews of the team that bought you these adventures . The "confidence instilling words" coming from their mouths is enough to hang them all. "i dont get paid if this doesnt work" -lie! you got paid excessively well and it doesnt work. "Dust off your surfboards as the reef has already been making waves and will be soon finished" - lie as it will never be tweaked enough to be finished and surfboards are not suitable craft on it. "im going to get ready for my surfing lessons" - stupid and naive as you will drown if you go near it, if you want surfing lessons go to somewhere that has warm water all year round, has small waves all year round and has a long established surfing tradition - maybe Waikiki Hawaii? "We are cooperating with the EU to rollout this sucess throughout Europe" - perhaps a rear guard action whilst assets get put under shelter as the walls of deception are crumpling and the games almost up? nutters all? except some now are wealthy nutters? dooowntown4them?
T39
says...
6:20am Fri 22 Jan 10
.
.
How many people actually spend their whole day stood on the pavement outside the Royal Bath Hotel, trying to see the Purbecks? Does anyone see what I'm getting at here?
.
.
So the view from the bus on the journey to work might be spoiled. Is that such a big deal?
.
.Once you are on the beach the IMAX does not obscure your view of anything.
.
.
And it sure doesn't stop the tourists
visiting Bournemouth does it? They still come here in their droves.
..
So, WHY ALL THE FUSS?
Borninbournemouth
says...
6:56pm Fri 22 Jan 10
planetf1
says...
10:24am Tue 2 Feb 10
Not knowing the building & not having used it's facilities I can't comment too much, however as has been pointed out above 2010 could be "the year of 3D"
Sky is launching a 3D service, many TV manufacturers are lauching/demo-ing sets, more films are in 3D.
Surely pulling down the IMAX just at the time the medium has the potential to really take off is short sighted?
I'd certainly drive down from Southampton to see Avatar at the IMAX, and I expect there's many more movies to follow.
Having said that I guess the council's been burnt before, and where does the income come in-between.
oversixty says...
12:17pm Wed 20 Jan 10
There have been massive budget cuts across Council departments and Council leaders saying how little Goverment funding they get !
Is this to appease residents with next years elections coming up I ask ?