New Grandstand - 2 day public consultation

[Electronic]

I do share those concerns a little. I haven't studied the details, just skipped through the thread but what confuses me is that I thought originally we either had a 10 millionish new grandstand and the city a new ice rink provided by JB as part of other agreements or we had a share of profits on HHP or whatever. It now appears that there is likely to be nil or negligible profits or we have a refurbished rather than new stand but in the form of a 30 year loan rather than provided free? Maybe I am being a bit thick or have missed something and there is a simple explanation? Whatever the ins and outs I look forward to seeing the finished refurbishment and improved facilities as that side of the ground and the facilities in and around it have been so lacking for far too many years now.

The commitment made in 2012 is still current.
What has changed is that the proposed development now will not create the windfall profit that the original development would have. So there won't be enough to fund a new grandstand and therefore Argyle will receive 50% of any windfall profit from the development, which because of the type of development now proposed for HHP won't be very much if anything.

Cue the anti-Brent lot with their "i told you so" comments

The ironic thing is that the people on FB moaning about the proposed HHP development potentially not raising much finance for Argyle are the ones that moaned about the original scheme that would have and were jumping for joy when it didn't go ahead.

The reason that people were "jumping for joy" had nothing to do with any potential income that would have been lost [although IIRC the only income that the club would have received was from the conferencing facility] from the previous proposal and everything to do with some of us believing that Home Park was going to be terminally boxed in with an inadequate capacity especially in comparison to many other former contemporary clubs.

100% correct, Greenskin. The original HHP plans featured a road which would have boxed in the ground and prevented further development on any side, condemning HP to a capacity below 20K in perpetuity. Haven't seen anything suggesting this will be the case with the new plans (so far).

 

[Electronic]

I do share those concerns a little. I haven't studied the details, just skipped through the thread but what confuses me is that I thought originally we either had a 10 millionish new grandstand and the city a new ice rink provided by JB as part of other agreements or we had a share of profits on HHP or whatever. It now appears that there is likely to be nil or negligible profits or we have a refurbished rather than new stand but in the form of a 30 year loan rather than provided free? Maybe I am being a bit thick or have missed something and there is a simple explanation? Whatever the ins and outs I look forward to seeing the finished refurbishment and improved facilities as that side of the ground and the facilities in and around it have been so lacking for far too many years now.

The commitment made in 2012 is still current.
What has changed is that the proposed development now will not create the windfall profit that the original development would have. So there won't be enough to fund a new grandstand and therefore Argyle will receive 50% of any windfall profit from the development, which because of the type of development now proposed for HHP won't be very much if anything.

Cue the anti-Brent lot with their "i told you so" comments

The ironic thing is that the people on FB moaning about the proposed HHP development potentially not raising much finance for Argyle are the ones that moaned about the original scheme that would have and were jumping for joy when it didn't go ahead.

The reason that people were "jumping for joy" had nothing to do with any potential income that would have been lost [although IIRC the only income that the club would have received was from the conferencing facility] from the previous proposal and everything to do with some of us believing that Home Park was going to be terminally boxed in with an inadequate capacity especially in comparison to many other former contemporary clubs.

It always makes me chuckle when people say the development will box/hem in, stop future development of Home Park.

Makes me wonder how does the HHP development prevents future development of the Devonport, Lyndhurst and Barn Park stands.

As above, the original HHP plans would have prevented any future expansion to the whole ground. Hopefully, the new plans don't to that.

I think people who are healthily sceptic (not everyone is completely pro/anti James Brent) continue to wonder why any plan for PAFC/HP has to be wrapped up in something broader which benefits Akkeron and associated companies. It made sense in the original proposals when funding for one was linked to the other but this is not the case now: the funding for the grandstand refurb was already in place and the new HHP plans have been shoehorned into the same planning proposal....with no real tangible benefit to the football club.

I think Argyle supporters can legitimately question that without accusations of being hysterical or anti-board.

 

[Darren Stoneman]

Tradium, all looks similar to the Tradium plans of Mr McAuley, would be good to see some development, I have faith, Mr Hopwood is a great guy and an asset to JB, one of his projects is close to HP and is an excellent facility.

 

[Biggs]

Bristol Rovers no longer building a new stadium, a few people have been comparing our development to theirs in unfavourable terms!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-40811022

 

[PL2 3DQ]

The latest is that the 'Screening Opinion' deadline has been extended by two weeks until the end of the month.

Highways England have commented that when the planning application is submitted it should include an assessment of traffic at peak times at Manadon and Marsh Mills and there should be a travel Event Management Plan and Access Strategy for match days

 

[Stonehouse Mike]

The latest is that the 'Screening Opinion' deadline has been extended by two weeks until the end of the month.

Highways England have commented that when the planning application is submitted it should include an assessment of traffic at peak times at Manadon and Marsh Mills and there should be a travel Event Management Plan and Access Strategy for match days

That doesn't sound like an unreasonable request and a decent developer would hopefully look to do this anyway

 

[pafcdje]

You wouldn't have thought it would be that much different from the current.