PCC Speaks!

I have nabbed this from a post made earlier. It deserves a thread of its own.

knecht wrote:

I've just received this reply from PCC, Head of Developments (or something like that....)

"I have been asked to respond as I am dealing with the above project, and I apologise for the long delay in replying.

Responding to each of your points in turn:

1. The capacity of the ground: the development cost of the new Grandstand of 4,800 seats is approximately £10m which drives the whole combined HHP/Grandstand project into a position in which it does not provide a proper commercial return. I understand that Akkeron are willing to proceed with the scheme, but requiring a larger Grandstand would make the financial position even more challenging. I would think that there is therefore little prospect of a larger Grandstand being provided. In fact a smaller Grandstand would make more commercial sense.

2. I understand that the intention is to segregate the apron around the north and east of the football Stadium into a vehicle access road and a pedestrian area serving the stands. It is not intended that this access road will be used during match days: on those occasions, the vehicular access to the commercial development will be stewarded and routed between the Stadium and the Life Centre, with a left-turn around the south of HHP and then back up into the car park entrance on the east side of the Stadium. These proposals are being considered by the Safety at Grounds Group comprising the Council, Police and other services.

3. The issue of payment to the Council for the use of its land is currently under discussion. I am afraid that I cannot speak for the Football Club’s position.

4. The policing of the commercial development during match days will be an issue for the developer and/or private landowner of the HHP site.

5. Discussions are under way between the Council’s Transport Service and the developer’s traffic consultants as to the impact on Outland Road and the junction at Segrave Road in particular.

6. I have not seen appraisal for the separate development of an ice rink on Cottage Field, but it stands to reason that a separate building would both cost more and would lessen the attractiveness of the restaurants etc in the HHP scheme. Both would be negative for the project. As outlined above, I do not think that a larger Grandstand is likely to be a consideration at all.

Again I apologise for the delay in replying, but the above responses are the up-to-date position on the proposed scheme."

Nothing about Cottage Field being unusable due to manifesto promises but because "a separate building would both cost more and would lessen the attractiveness of the restaurants etc in the HHP scheme".

Do you get the feeling that Cottage field is earmarked to make Brenty boy a few extra bob in the future!

Maybe not Brent but the suspicion is growing that something will go there.

Without a doubt!

Knecht: could you give a bit more detail about who this is from (by PM if necessary)? Only if it is from Development, that's a different department from Planning - and could be the first we've heard from PCC as landowner, as opposed to planning authority.

money talks if brent truly made an effort or wanted too he could have cottage field in a heartbeat.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Maybe not Brent but the suspicion is growing that something will go there.

As the supposed pcc communication states ..... it's all about aspect. I can't imagine any of these present developers wanting to spoil their own sunset in the future with another build.
Brent wants a small impact stadium. He does not want to be dominated by his unruly noisy neighbour... kinda defeats his object really. I would imagine he would be absolutely delighted if in say 5 to 10 years time, the new owners of Argyle wanted to move out of the park, and I would assume the mini stand is part of that. Once he has built his stuff, he will all of a sudden become the greenest protector of parkland the world has ever seen. No one else will get a look in between him and the uninterrupted Southerly view to the sea...

i wonder what the future of home park will be when the club moves out to a stadium more fitting to an ambiyious club.

only two alternatives i see happening is either the stadium becomes shops/green land or Plymouth Albion will made to play there and the brickfields gets ore houses and green land built.

ive mention this before but the club is going to have to move out if brent doesnt get with the program.

Angry of Mayfair wrote:

i wonder what the future of home park will be when the club moves out to a stadium more fitting to an ambiyious club.

only two alternatives i see happening is either the stadium becomes shops/green land or Plymouth Albion will made to play there and the brickfields gets ore houses and green land built.

ive mention this before but the club is going to have to move out if brent doesnt get with the program.

This Brent character seems to have played a blinder and I can see the club being ousted out of its longtime home in the future. Brent will rapidly become one of the most despised people in this city, just wished he'd f*ck off now!

As for the spineless council, what a bunch of cowards!

PCC speaks, but not on Pasoti

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I wonder if I'm even allowed to post this without their permission?

What is absolute classic 'Pyongyang style' there is the locking of the thread. They're desperate not to give anyone an opportunity to post that its available to read 'over here'.

Their huge problem is that ATD is now widely perused by hundreds of different people at different times, as a matter of course.

Fcuking knobends.

Quote :

In fact a smaller Grandstand would make more commercial sense.

The superfans and brent lovers will be campaigning to downsize the ministand into a microstand

Just to clarify as I've been asked by more than one person:
I removed the person's details as he is simply an employee, I didn't think it fair to put his name into the public arena and the in-fighting.

The email I received wasn't labelled "private & confidential" so it seemed acceptable to share it in full.

Taking the above into consideration, I see no reason that pasoti should choose not to post this publicly. It ought to be part of the debate about these proposals. We can all choose whether to accept or reject the arguments & information conveyed. We are all grown-ups.

If I have got this wrong, I will apologise to the person who sent me the message.

Back up on Pasoti now. Well done Knecht for asking the questions.

Good stuff from the moderators. Where ATD leads, Pasoti comes shuffling afterward like a tired old man. Make no mistake, the existence of this forum puts pressure on Pasoti to relax it's iron and often arbitrary moderating culture.

As Richard Blight says, the access road deliberations going on for match days are weird considering all the professed care being taken. If the proposals go ahead, and an access road is ultimately built, I personally would rather that road actually impacted on the privately owned businesses it serves rather than the lovely parkland North and East of Home Park... as Cameron would say, that's only fair. Maybe this is an area the AFT WG could look at.

knecht wrote:

Just to clarify as I've been asked by more than one person:
I removed the person's details as he is simply an employee, I didn't think it fair to put his name into the public arena and the in-fighting.

Point taken absolutely, Knecht. My question wasn't so much about the individual as the department, though - is it definitely Development and not Planning? (Again, PM me if you'd prefer.)

The road could be the point of protest if it comes to it, hope the banker has a rethink but can see it ending in disruption.

The President speaks, which some might regard as unusual as he doesn't tinternet anymore, but just to reassure everyone that its nothing new and move along nothing to see here.

Dougie wrote:

The President speaks, which some might regard as unusual as he doesn't tinternet anymore, but just to reassure everyone that its nothing new and move along nothing to see here.

And a reply to the WG's £800k figures is imminent! Mind you Webby said that a reply to the Pasoti Q and A session was about to be revealed last week.

Someone's cage has been rattled. There is nothing to see but in weigh Leighlee Jameson to straighten the retards out and Mr Chowell to accompany the recently mute President.

Dougie wrote:

Someone's cage has been rattled. There is nothing to see but in weigh Leighlee Jameson to straighten the retards out and Mr Chowell to accompany the recently mute President.

And no one knows where the letter comes from......

Glad to see other posters coming on board with the idea that JB does actually want us to relocate in the future, I think JB is a long term planner and I think he knows we will outgrow the presently planned stadium with our next surge up the leagues ( I know don't laugh, but it will happen one day).
As for pasoti trying to ban that communication they have well and truly nailed their colours to the mast and tried to stifle debate on the most important issue for Argyle this side of Admin. can the rank and file not see that? It would be laughable if it weren't so worrying, where are the useless press of this country? Maybe if we got one of the wags to staple a copy of the email to her panties and get out of a low car wearing a minidress they might take a peek but other than that the editors seem to live in the same headspace as the readership, I'm off to lock myself in a dark room and have a little cry.

Iggy wrote:

Glad to see other posters coming on board with the idea that JB does actually want us to relocate in the future, I think JB is a long term planner and I think he knows we will outgrow the presently planned stadium with our next surge up the leagues ( I know don't laugh, but it will happen one day).
As for pasoti trying to ban that communication they have well and truly nailed their colours to the mast and tried to stifle debate on the most important issue for Argyle this side of Admin. can the rank and file not see that? It would be laughable if it weren't so worrying, where are the useless press of this country? Maybe if we got one of the wags to staple a copy of the email to her panties and get out of a low car wearing a minidress they might take a peek but other than that the editors seem to live in the same headspace as the readership, I'm off to lock myself in a dark room and have a little cry.

Don't do it Iggy ! Go to the pub, put the world to rights and call a spade a spade ! It'll make you feel better. Always works for me.

Peggy * wrote:

Knecht: could you give a bit more detail about who this is from (by PM if necessary)? Only if it is from Development, that's a different department from Planning - and could be the first we've heard from PCC as landowner, as opposed to planning authority.

We've changed to People, Place and Corporate Services for the Departments so the old ones like Development don't exist as they once did. Planning was in Development and now they're in Place. If Knecht sends me a pm, I can tell him how high up the chain the person was who sent him the info.