The Hotel End
May 22, 2019, 17:53:40 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

Pages: 1 ... 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 [1176] 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 ... 1251   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?  (Read 950734 times)
meccanostand
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


View Profile
« Reply #23500 on: December 14, 2018, 07:56:32 am »

I’m glad this is done finally. So well done for persistence with the applications.
With regards to the paragraph highlighted it is not easy to fully understand what this all means for the football club vs the CDNL element.

In the DC times the land had gotten to the point of full plans for housing and much of the needed surveys being submitted to NBC planning as they were/are visible on the planning pages.
 
Curious to know what agreement other than planning permission would be needed?

The merged council will be a bumpy ride but functional departments such as planning should carry on business as usual.


Not sure planning would pass for housing again on contaminated land or a developer would front the remediation costs.

Also the small matter of the Council wanting to recoup its £10.35 million ++ and getting a good deal for itself and the taxpayer.
Report Spam   Logged
Zen Master
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2140


Taxi to Kings Heath mate?


View Profile
« Reply #23501 on: December 14, 2018, 08:07:46 am »

Don’t disagree about them wanting to recoup as much as they can. I want them to do that as a local taxpayer.

It won’t be housing it’ll be commercial development I’d think.
 I wouldn’t think that a council could withhold planning permission on the basis of the loan as it wrote this off and CDNL agreed deals with creditors. Planning can only be agreed or not on planning issues but without anything submitted then it hasn’t been tested since all he change.

Who knows?
Report Spam   Logged

I think someone should just take this city of Peterborough and just... just flush it down the f***in' toilet
Vintage Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2267


View Profile
« Reply #23502 on: December 14, 2018, 08:49:32 am »

I am not criticising the Trust, in fact I think it deserves praise and our thanks for the effort it has made to achieve ACV status for the stadium. I can't imagine that DB/KT are best pleased. 

However, the granting of ACV limited status something of a Pyrrhic victory in that for unexplained reasons building work can only take place "pending agreement on the development of other land around the stadium".  I am not clear what "other land" means. The CDNL land?  If that is so we may be facing the prospect of the CDNL land/company being sold off by DB/KT with our present owners pocketing the money and then the club (whether under current of different ownership) dealing with CDNL and the Council with the CDNL controlled by powerful developers whose only aim will be profit not what was community land.
Report Spam   Logged
Vintage Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2267


View Profile
« Reply #23503 on: December 14, 2018, 08:59:40 am »

 am not criticising the Trust, in fact I think it deserves praise and our thanks for the effort it has made to achieve ACV status for the stadium. I can't imagine that DB/KT are best pleased.  

However, the granting of ACV limited status is something of a Pyrrhic victory in that for unexplained reasons building work can only take place "pending agreement on the development of other land around the stadium".  I am not clear what "other land" means. The CDNL land?  If that is so we may be facing the prospect of the CDNL land/company being sold off by DB/KT with our present owners pocketing the money and then the club (whether under current of different ownership) dealing with CDNL and the Council with the CDNL controlled by powerful developers whose only aim will be profit from what was community land.
Report Spam   Logged
BedsCobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


View Profile
« Reply #23504 on: December 14, 2018, 19:35:36 pm »

am not criticising the Trust, in fact I think it deserves praise and our thanks for the effort it has made to achieve ACV status for the stadium. I can't imagine that DB/KT are best pleased.  

However, the granting of ACV limited status is something of a Pyrrhic victory in that for unexplained reasons building work can only take place "pending agreement on the development of other land around the stadium".  I am not clear what "other land" means. The CDNL land?  If that is so we may be facing the prospect of the CDNL land/company being sold off by DB/KT with our present owners pocketing the money and then the club (whether under current of different ownership) dealing with CDNL and the Council with the CDNL controlled by powerful developers whose only aim will be profit from what was community land.

what we will get will be dependent on the amount of value the developers rake in and then willing to pay out, ie, 7 millions could see a token gesture of 400k for a few boxes and bit of cladding, less for the developers  will see cladding and not much else but you can be sure the cost will be grotesquely over exagerated in sums of millions😂😂 The trust must be involved in any negotiations between all parties in regards of what is available and how it's best spent to avoid the above.
Report Spam   Logged
SadOldGit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


View Profile
« Reply #23505 on: December 14, 2018, 19:39:34 pm »

I do hope they won't use asbestos between the boxes. It will only cause complications in future refurbishment projects.
Report Spam   Logged
BedsCobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


View Profile
« Reply #23506 on: December 14, 2018, 21:24:48 pm »

Yes , but the KT consortium wouldn’t have been interested in us if it wasn’t for the land association .
No one realistically is going to be interested in a low level football club unless a knight in shining armour turns up from the West Stand that wins the Euro millions .
It’s a worrying situation really because I think KT has lost a bit of interest all round .
Thomas is only interested in making a killing from the ground our club stands on, its not a secret nothing will happen until he gets the freedom of the old weedon rd tip.
The council in my opinion would do well to resist his agressive requests and speak with oir the new objectionable  trust in order to to give our club a fair chance of a fair share at the onset, it could be the difference between 50/50 share out or £9 for us and £1 for you as I suspect if leaving it to outsiders to decide.
My reasoning for quoting your post is to highlight  our supporters 'its all or nothing'  stance even now the old belief of its Thomas/cardoza  or the Racecourse nonsence has been dispelled, we are still unable to see an alternative workable method of small sustainable growth programme  that is driven by civic pride and the will of all the football club of Northampton's catchment, fans, well wishers, local businesses and sponsors, all of which collectively would put 10 x times more investment into the clubs infrastructure than any time wasting  land speculators would
Yes it may take a year to fit out the East stand and another year or so to take the capacity upto 10,000, but it would still happen a damned sight quicker than if left with Cardoza and now Thomas.
Report Spam   Logged
Deepcut Cobbler
Administrator
*****
Online Online

Posts: 10124



View Profile
« Reply #23507 on: December 15, 2018, 00:00:45 am »

Thomas is only interested in making a killing from the ground our club stands on, its not a secret nothing will happen until he gets the freedom of the old weedon rd tip.
The council in my opinion would do well to resist his agressive requests and speak with oir the new objectionable  trust in order to to give our club a fair chance of a fair share at the onset, it could be the difference between 50/50 share out or £9 for us and £1 for you as I suspect if leaving it to outsiders to decide.
My reasoning for quoting your post is to highlight  our supporters 'its all or nothing'  stance even now the old belief of its Thomas/cardoza  or the Racecourse nonsence has been dispelled, we are still unable to see an alternative workable method of small sustainable growth programme  that is driven by civic pride and the will of all the football club of Northampton's catchment, fans, well wishers, local businesses and sponsors, all of which collectively would put 10 x times more investment into the clubs infrastructure than any time wasting  land speculators would
Yes it may take a year to fit out the East stand and another year or so to take the capacity upto 10,000, but it would still happen a damned sight quicker than if left with Cardoza and now Thomas.


You started early tonight? Was it happy hour?
Your world must be a wonderful place to reside.
Report Spam   Logged

“They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.” Laurence Binyon

The Hotelend Grand National Sweepstake Champion 2009
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2925


View Profile
« Reply #23508 on: December 15, 2018, 07:36:52 am »

A decent response from the club on what, to me at least, was a fairly unhelpful statement from the Trust.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/cobblers-supporters-frustrated-with-east-stand-delays-again-as-sixfields-is-given-protective-status-by-the-council-1-8740932

The ACV is clearly a good thing and the Trust should be applauded for achieving it, but then they do themselves no favours by couching the announcement in quite aggressive language and undermining the credibility of their point by including at least one fairly major factual inaccuracy.
Also, the fact they were trying to gain a degree of control over the surrounding land by trying to include the athletics track in the ACV could be seen as an attempt to actually block (or interfere with) the owner's plans.  And people wonder why KT and Bower want to keep the Trust at arm's length...
« Last Edit: December 15, 2018, 07:57:22 am by BackOfTheNet » Report Spam   Logged
barton cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3545


View Profile
« Reply #23509 on: December 15, 2018, 12:03:44 pm »



The ACV is clearly a good thing and the Trust should be applauded for achieving it, but then they do themselves no favours by couching the announcement in quite aggressive language and undermining the credibility of their point by including at least one fairly major factual inaccuracy.
Also, the fact they were trying to gain a degree of control over the surrounding land by trying to include the athletics track in the ACV could be seen as an attempt to actually block (or interfere with) the owner's plans.  And people wonder why KT and Bower want to keep the Trust at arm's length...
ALL the maps for the ACV were drawn up by the council NOT the Trust, the working plans have been in place for around 18 months and included with running track, which if you recall was part of the community owned Sixfields footprint. The Trust were told , around 9 months ago, that the ACV had all been approved but when we received the confirmation, the running track had been removed from the plan. There was no "attempt to actually block or interfere with the owners plans" as the Trust had no say and didn't attempt to have a say on the area of the ACV. The running track has been removed, make of that what you will.
Report Spam   Logged
Zen Master
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2140


Taxi to Kings Heath mate?


View Profile
« Reply #23510 on: December 15, 2018, 12:23:21 pm »

I think that as the running track was relocated to Moulton College as part of the original DC/CDNL deal and was delivered I understand, the derelict track would then not be seen as a Community Asset possibly.

 Given the wrangles about leases and trying to understand where one piece of controlled land starts and finishes is of a potential commercial interest rather than Community Asset.

Do a £3 land registry search to see if this shows any more clarity?

My preference would be that club control would be as you mention back to the original boundary as this gives a range of possibilities that would be directly linked to the club.

The rest of the CDNL controlled land has no direct benefit to the club unless the common factor of the same ownership of KT/DB choose to from any proceeds of sale or realised value from development.

Report Spam   Logged

I think someone should just take this city of Peterborough and just... just flush it down the f***in' toilet
Zen Master
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2140


Taxi to Kings Heath mate?


View Profile
« Reply #23511 on: December 15, 2018, 12:57:47 pm »

I think that as the running track was relocated to Moulton College as part of the original DC/CDNL deal and was delivered I understand, the derelict track would then not be seen as a Community Asset possibly.

 Given the wrangles about leases and trying to understand where one piece of controlled land starts and finishes is of a potential commercial interest rather than Community Asset.

Do a £3 land registry search to see if this shows any more clarity?

My preference would be that the club control be back to the original boundary, as you mention,  as this gives a range of possibilities that would be directly linked to the club.

The rest of the CDNL controlled land has no direct benefit to the club unless the common factor of the same ownership of KT/DB choose to do so from any proceeds of sale or realised value from development.


Report Spam   Logged

I think someone should just take this city of Peterborough and just... just flush it down the f***in' toilet
BedsCobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


View Profile
« Reply #23512 on: December 15, 2018, 17:52:41 pm »

I think that as the running track was relocated to Moulton College as part of the original DC/CDNL deal and was delivered I understand, the derelict track would then not be seen as a Community Asset possibly.

 Given the wrangles about leases and trying to understand where one piece of controlled land starts and finishes is of a potential commercial interest rather than Community Asset.

Do a £3 land registry search to see if this shows any more clarity?

My preference would be that club control would be as you mention back to the original boundary as this gives a range of possibilities that would be directly linked to the club.

The rest of the CDNL controlled land has no direct benefit to the club unless the common factor of the same ownership of KT/DB choose to from any proceeds of sale or realised value from development.


I'm unable to see anything conected to Thomas/Bower as being really part of our club.
Yes they may front the organisation but they are not in it for NTFC imo.
I just hope the council have the same reservations and protect the clubs intrests and the trust dont get charm offensived into bed this time.
These clowns have had it too easy for to long, protestations are long over due 🤣
Hill top protest anyone? The thought would have them shaking.
A definitive outline of whats planned, timescale , costs etc, would be declared immediately in one of those  embarrasing attempts to pacify the natives in a social media thingymegigs that usually is a load of 5hite.
Recently Thomas claimed he was spending more time stateside for family reasons but since then he's been popping up more regular than 50p Lill!
Report Spam   Logged
DrillingCobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4595


View Profile
« Reply #23513 on: December 15, 2018, 20:52:23 pm »

A decent response from the club on what, to me at least, was a fairly unhelpful statement from the Trust.

https://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/cobblers-supporters-frustrated-with-east-stand-delays-again-as-sixfields-is-given-protective-status-by-the-council-1-8740932

The ACV is clearly a good thing and the Trust should be applauded for achieving it, but then they do themselves no favours by couching the announcement in quite aggressive language and undermining the credibility of their point by including at least one fairly major factual inaccuracy.
Also, the fact they were trying to gain a degree of control over the surrounding land by trying to include the athletics track in the ACV could be seen as an attempt to actually block (or interfere with) the owner's plans.  And people wonder why KT and Bower want to keep the Trust at arm's length...

Im struggling to see how its unhelpful.

Its about time the ownership had some pressure put on them. Thats not to say Im anti KC. But as things stand, other than carrying the very large wage bill he's bringing not a lot to the party. Whether thats his fault, the councils or another reason is quite irrelevant. Its clear as day that he will not spend a penny of his or his backers own money on sorting the ground out. We are very much where we were under DC. Its all about land. And until we have an owner/s that doesn't see NTFC as an opportunity to make a few bob, this saga will carry on and carry on.

Nice enough bloke, but for me he's served his time. And had done so a fair while back. I hope he sells us and sells us quick, we need fresh energy, new ideas and most importantly a few quid to chuck down the drain to help us out both off the pitch and on the pitch!!
Report Spam   Logged
Vintage Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2267


View Profile
« Reply #23514 on: December 16, 2018, 09:31:58 am »

I find the naivety of some of the posters on this topic staggering, the more so given the Cardoza legacy. I have to question when these supporters will learn anything.

Let me remind you that so far as the football club is concerned, David Bower owns 90% of Ventures, the holding company of NTFC through the BVI incorporated, Belle De Jour Ltd, one of those Caribbean offshore tax havens where no accounts are filed and no ownership details can be found out.  It could be that the ownership of Belle De Jour Ltd is not only with DB but that seems unlikely.  KT’s holding in Ventures has gone down this year from 22.5% to 10%.  So, when talking and writing about the football club let us understand that KT is a relatively small shareholder and acts as front man for DB.  Our owner is a solicitor (probably retired from day-to-day practice) resident in Dubai and very rarely seen at Sixfields.  I think he has attended one match this season and I cannot recollect any previous occasions he has been seen at home matches. 

In contrast the ownership of the CDNL with its only asset being its leasehold land (100+years term) is 50/50 DB/KT.  Ask yourselves whether or not this is the real interest of our owners, the reason they are here behind the front of owning NTFC.  Someone on this thread recently posted an article from the Chronicle written in 2016 which reported offers from major developers and investment funds for the land behind the East Stand amounting to over £20 million.  Those same funds would have known or have a good idea about the condition of the land. So perhaps the contamination issue is something of a red herring.

The CDNL land was obtained by DB/KT master-minding a deal with the Liquidator from under the noses of the Council whose intention was to foreclose the lease and sell on the land or make a development deal from which it could recover some or a large part of the “missing millions”.  CDNL has been ‘in liquidation” for most of the period since the Cardoza/Grossman scandal broke but as recently as last month the liquidation process was stopped and CDNL is now completely under the ownership and control of our owners.  So, the wily DB/KT have secured the CDNL land and for a very small sum of money relative to the sale/redevelopment value of that land.  All for the benefit of NTFC and its supporters?  I suggest not.

The only obstacle for DB/KT has been the Council which is, of course, the planning authority.  Clearly, KT has been mending broken fences with the Council in recent months i.e. the “good conversations” after the public spat between KT and the leader of NBC, Jonathan Nunn over which party was responsible for the on-going delay in the East Stand building works.  It is 6 months since peace broke out and we the supporters still have no idea where NTFC’s eastern boundaries lie and no plans or drawings for the East Stand have been revealed.  Some including myself have questioned if they exist in any real detail.  In my opinion we are being treated with contempt.

Now we have the announcement of further delays and it being reported that the East Stand will remain in its present condition until an agreement is made over undefined land (I assume it is the CDNL land). Further, out of the blue the Council has excluded from the ACV the running track without it seems any prior notice or consultation with the applicants, the Trust.  That is a disgrace.   In other words, the likelihood is that some deal has been struck with Nunn for planning consent on the CDNL land (including the running track)which will be pushed through the process with a Tory majority on the Council.  James Whiting has suddenly stepped up to be spokesman for KT/DB and is falling back on the old hoary chestnut of “confidentiality” which I recall was last relied on when Cardoza ducked the questions about the redevelopment he had invited in the first place.

What is staring us in the face is the prospect of KT/DB walking off with a very significant profit from the CDNL land, none of which will be for the benefit of the football club or its supporters, and we will be left at best with a shoddy East Stand and a club restricted by an inadequate land and poor infrastructure destined to remain lower league for our lifetimes. 

I nearly forgot, KT is his generosity has negotiated a larger footprint for the football club land behind the East Stand, omitting to say that this was the club’s land in the first place.

Think about what the late Brian Lomax said.


Report Spam   Logged
Clint
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1136



View Profile
« Reply #23515 on: December 16, 2018, 10:14:12 am »

Brilliant post from Vintage.
Report Spam   Logged
cj
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1976


View Profile
« Reply #23516 on: December 16, 2018, 10:43:12 am »

Difficult to see past Vintages post. Makes complete sense to me.
Report Spam   Logged
cobblerwatch
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1992


View Profile
« Reply #23517 on: December 16, 2018, 11:29:56 am »

Brilliant post from Vintage.

I don’t entirely agree - certainly some indisputable facts interlaced with his or her own opinion - but two fundamentals still bother me - firstly what can actually be done about the situation by vociferous fans other than words, secondly there are the continued insults to fans who either don’t agree or perhaps have other things more important in their lives - the very essence of the better “solution” means bringing fans together and such posts don’t achieve that.
Report Spam   Logged
BedsCobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2364


View Profile
« Reply #23518 on: December 16, 2018, 14:18:54 pm »

I don’t entirely agree - certainly some indisputable facts interlaced with his or her own opinion - but two fundamentals still bother me - firstly what can actually be done about the situation by vociferous fans other than words, secondly there are the continued insults to fans who either don’t agree or perhaps have other things more important in their lives - the very essence of the better “solution” means bringing fans together and such posts don’t achieve that.
I'm afraid Gareth that worrying about causing hurty feelings has long past, the fans are very much together and are in the process of forcing the council not to sell our club down the river again by doing deals with speculators who haven't shown any workable plans for our club they happen to front.
Also notice, Angry words tends to smoke them out of their hiding as they cant afford bad publicity in their quest for whatever it is they intend on doing.
Report Spam   Logged
guest3114
Guest
« Reply #23519 on: December 17, 2018, 21:44:20 pm »

Personally I am still confused by this whole thing. When an outsider buys their way into the club they do so almost certainly because they believe there is an opportunity to make money. This was always going to probably involve the land in our case, and was so from day one? Match day revenue was never going to be the attraction in a million years. This is neither a surprise or revelation. It seems to me reading this that people feel they are unearthing some sort of conspiracy? This is the way almost without exception it works when an outsider buys a club. You just hope that the club gets some benefit on the playing side which it did by keeping the club in existence. Ask yourself this, at the time with the clock ticking and the club about to go down the toilet would you have offered the land as an incentive to entice KT to save the club. Or would you have got on a moral high horse and let the club fold on a point of principle? There are plenty on here talking wisely with hindsight whilst conveniently forgetting the plight at the time. Outsiders and cash investments coming in equals assets and profits going out, end of story. It has always been the case in the past, and it will always be the case in the future. That being said you are still getting into bed with the devil. And you know what they say, get into bed with the devil and you’ll get fcked in a way you’re probably not going to like?
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 [1176] 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 ... 1251   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Parental guidance is urged as this messageboard may not be suitable for all persons especially those under the age of 16 as the forums may contain words, phrases and expressions not considered appropriate for a younger audience so please express caution. If any posts in the forums offend you, please let us know and we will look at them and if we agree with your complaint, we will remove them. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and may be sued should your posting contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. We check the forums at various times of the day and remove offending posts. Other supporters are welcome but abusive or silly posts will be removed and the offenders potentially barred from future access to the site. We advise that you never reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: telephone number, home address or email address), and please do not include postal addresses of any kind. This messageboard is not endorsed or in any way affiliated with Northampton Town FC. All postings on this board become copyright of The Hotel End & may not be reproduced without the permission of the board administrator. By signing up to this message board you agree to this. The Hotel End cannot be held liable for the actions or postings of its members. The Hotel End reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. The Hotel End may disclose user information to government authorities at their discretion or when required by law. The Hotel End may also disclose user information when The Hotel End has reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with its rights or property, other The Hotel End users, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. By registering for The Hotel End, you agree to indemnify The Hotel End its representatives, and agents, and hold them harmless from any and all claims (including claims for legal fees) which may arise from your participation on the The Hotel End. You also agree that The Hotel End is not responsible for the materials posted by users of The Hotel End. In addition, you grant The Hotel End and its affiliates, worldwide, royalty-free perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display any message or content posted on The Hotel End and/or e-mail sent by you to The Hotel End (in whole or in part). The Hotel End reserves the right to make the rules up as it goes along. Thank you - The Hotel End I love Quidco
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMFServer.com - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy