HHP planning application recommended for approval

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

Quote :

Recommendation: Grant Conditionally Subject to a S106 Obligation, with
delegated authority to refuse in the event that the S106
Obligation is not completed by 23/08/2013

From what I understand that means that subject to Brent paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements then the coast is clear.

What's amazing is that if you put your self in the position of a neutral and then read the reasons for and against the development I think you would vote against.

Not surprised as this was always going through. The question was whether the council would place enough amendments on it to make it unworkable for Brent. It's the wrong decision. It won't stop me going when I'm home but it simply won't feel the same again. The football club will no longer be the dominant occupant of the park. Sad days.

Pokesdown wrote:

From what I understand that means that subject to Brent paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements then the coast is clear.

What's amazing is that if you put your self in the position of a neutral and then read the reasons for and against the development I think you would vote against.

Not surprised as this was always going through. The question was whether the council would place enough amendments on it to make it unworkable for Brent. It's the wrong decision. It won't stop me going when I'm home but it simply won't feel the same again. The football club will no longer be the dominant occupant of the park. Sad days.

Wait till the arselicking sycos start jigging - the club will never be the same for me after this!! As you, I will go when it suits now and I no longer care if the club does go bust!! Oh well the descision might come through the day after a rousing Scotland victory at Wembley - any luck, I'll still be numbed by the stupor of that day & night!!   

RIP Plymouth Argyle

Bound to go through, money talks.

Pokesdown wrote:

From what I understand that means that subject to Brent paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements then the coast is clear.

What's amazing is that if you put your self in the position of a neutral and then read the reasons for and against the development I think you would vote against.

Not surprised as this was always going through. The question was whether the council would place enough amendments on it to make it unworkable for Brent. It's the wrong decision. It won't stop me going when I'm home but it simply won't feel the same again. The football club will no longer be the dominant occupant of the park. Sad days.

 Does anyone know what these improvements are? I take it that is what the 15th August is for, apologies if i have missed anything

The problem with hhp is its all linked in with pavilions . If hhp does not get approval then Brent will not continue with the redevelopment of the millbay area. Plymouth city council needs Brent more than Brent needs the council.

punchdrunk wrote:

Pokesdown wrote:

From what I understand that means that subject to Brent paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements then the coast is clear.

What's amazing is that if you put your self in the position of a neutral and then read the reasons for and against the development I think you would vote against.

Not surprised as this was always going through. The question was whether the council would place enough amendments on it to make it unworkable for Brent. It's the wrong decision. It won't stop me going when I'm home but it simply won't feel the same again. The football club will no longer be the dominant occupant of the park. Sad days.

 Does anyone know what these improvements are? I take it that is what the 15th August is for, apologies if i have missed anything

I noticed within the report there were sums of money that Brent has to transfer to PCC to cover various costs such as increased parking controls. Here's an example from the report:

Report wrote:

Whereas it is the role of the Council to enforce parking control on its own land it is
considered appropriate to request a contribution towards any necessary
enforcement measures or controls that may be required as a direct result of the
overspill parking. The Life Centre, through its on- going parking strategy have
contributed £25,000 towards future parking control and therefore the PAFC
development will be required to match this.
This contribution should be secured through a Section 106 obligation

That's fairly standard for a development of this scale and it's what s106 is there for.

On the "what would you think if you were a neutral" point, I'd actually go the other way and say that if I was a neutral I'd be in favour of it. It will result in a nice little stadium fit for a lower division club and new retail, entertainment and leisure options for the Plymouth public. While I'd be annoyed at the potential loss of 18 lovely trees and be a bit concerned at the potential cost of parking (given the clarity about the development car park being run by a private company - match day parking charges?) and if I was a resident nearby be concerned about more traffic and general parkland encroachment, I'd probably see it as a bit of progress for a city that has been slow on the uptake.

If this had done properly, if the club had consulted in the right way and brought fans reps in to the process rather than doing it for a year or more with a handpicked group of yes men, if they'd been just a teensy bit professional and shown a touch of empathy for people who thought it lacked ambition, I'd probably edge in favour of it. It's a (very nice) lower league stadium for a lower league club. But they should probably be honest about that and that it's going to hinder rather than help in the long run if the club shows ambition to get to the Championship.

I'm surprised how easily satisfied the planning officers have been with the applicants assurances, almost as if they had started at the end with the recommendation and worked backwards.

I live in the vain hope that the Brents will be so delighted with the rewards they will have garnered from the "reluctant" purchase of the football club that they will feel a moral obligation to leave the club in a debt free position when they depart, having ensured the revival of on field fortunes as well. Some hope.

The thing with football clubs and future ambition , is that Plymouth is now the largest city club never to have reached the top flight and cemented a fanbase. In the 60's / 70's , the likes of Norwich, Ipswich and Southampton, who were historically on a par with Argyle support wise, made the leap and the resultant 20k fanbases, even when in the third tier[Ipswich a little lower as they've withered for longer] are evidence of this.
Moving forward to the likes of Hull, Swansea, Reading, Brighton and one constant in their rise has been the feelgood factor of building stadiums with obvious ambition.

The clusterfuck at Home Park will, as Gareth says, send out a 'lower league' message. The self promoting ones will love strutting around the basement divisions in their 'finished' stadium but no new support will be inspired to join in and many, self included, will lose interest completely.

How very, very sad.

While i expected the plans to be passed i was hoping for significant amendments, particularly to the ministand. This is a sad day for our football club which is clearly being used as leverage to open other development opportunities in this corrupt, retarded City. All most of us want is what's best for Plymouth Argyle which is sadly not what we are getting......BRENT/AKKERON/PCC......DO ONE.

and heres the reasoning behind a reduced capacity hp : Highways Agency
The submitted transport base is incomplete – does not assess the impact of the
development on the operation of the A38(T) as was requested or consider the
traffic implications of the expanded stadium capacity. However, the Agency are
content that the transport impact of the development would be unlikely to be
severe. This is on the basis that event attendance does not exceed current capacity
without an event specific traffic management plan.

what a winker.

away games for ever now, brent.com cant control my appearance at other football grounds

Tringreen wrote:

The thing with football clubs and future ambition , is that Plymouth is now the largest city club never to have reached the top flight and cemented a fanbase. In the 60's / 70's , the likes of Norwich, Ipswich and Southampton, who were historically on a par with Argyle support wise, made the leap and the resultant 20k fanbases, even when in the third tier[Ipswich a little lower as they've withered for longer] are evidence of this.
Moving forward to the likes of Hull, Swansea, Reading, Brighton and one constant in their rise has been the feelgood factor of building stadiums with obvious ambition.

The clusterfuck at Home Park will, as Gareth says, send out a 'lower league' message. The self promoting ones will love strutting around the basement divisions in their 'finished' stadium but no new support will be inspired to join in and many, self included, will lose interest completely.

How very, very sad.

But those arguments are based on history and while history is emotionally something we think affects the future, it really doesn't. At a rough guess I'd say having what many people wanted (a 20,000-25,000 minimum capacity - let's forget about the other development for a sec) maybe makes only a marginal increase to the likelihood that we end up in the Championship and become "established" (though given Wolves, Norwich, SOuthampton, Leeds, Bristol City etc I'm not sure what "established" means if anything). It adds virtually no certainty.

In a context where income for Championship clubs has massively increased in relation to income for L1 and L2 clubs, the addition of £1m per year in revenue (and I think that figure is not well-evidenced) is a drop in the ocean. It still would be with a 20K capacity.

The club's rationale on this is incrementalism (whether you believe it or not it up to you): build it > get the revenue streams going > pay off the debt > invest *some of the revenue* in the squad > get promotion > build again > wait until they're jam-packed in and you've reached your profit maximising level of output (*ECONOMICS A-LEVEL WIN!*) before adding to capacity.

And there isn't anything wrong with that. Except it assumes a linear process when a) football isn't like that and b) there is now because of the tv deal a reinforced glass ceiling between L1 and L2. If Bournemouth stay up this season and are sensible in doing so, they'll have revenue that will beat us for years.

The massive trauma of administration and the fallout from it hides one thing: we missed the boat massively somewhere around the SEB/Norris/Halmosi sell-offs. It's not Brent's fault that he's playing catch-up with an over-expectant fanbase. But what he does need to do is to start managing their expectations down. And that's the biggest risk of all.

Interesting arguments, Gareth. I have never been one who has got hung up on capacity - as one of my strap-lines below says. Like most people, I would dearly have loved the capacity to have been larger. The main grounds on which I have opposed the proposed development is what it will do to limit our future expansion possibilities as well as what I consider to be a gross invasion of Central Park. Those were the rationale behind my letter of objection.

Also, like lots of people, I took exception to what appeared to be the blatant & crass manipulation of public opinion by the club and high-profile supporters (and the involvement of the latter in the so-called consultation). I don't like being patronised. Put that against the ineptitude of the PASB farrago and the failure to meet in any meaningful way the early commitment to engage with the fans. And, if I'm totally honest, a discomfort at an already rich man getting still richer at the club's expense.

I don't know how many times I've said in various ways, we probably should be grateful that Brent managed to save us from disappearing into the abyss of non-league but that certainly shouldn't mean we let that blind us to the possibility that he is doing things wrongly. I've always found that a critical friend is better than a fawning acolyte or even an habitual angry challenger. There have been questions raised about even whether he has actually saved us rather than merely postponed the time when the financial hammer hits again. Only time will tell. I genuinely hope that Brent pulls it off.

Brent is basically free now to build any shit development in plymouth with the full support of the council, The keep argyle small and village gang have won.

There is no keep Argyle small and village gang in this. Not one person would be objecting, including the super fans, if the proposals were for 25000 rather than as is. Brent has done his sums and plans on his own affordability best for himself and the Company. There is no evidence that anyone else would have built it bigger or better because they aren't here.

I want the ground completed. I am disappointed along with the majority that it isn't what I thought it could be or should be for Argyle. I have no objections to Brent or anyone else making money because that's what they are in business for primarily. I have no particular objection to changing the park footprint. Some do have and I respect that even if it doesn't matter so much to me. This was always going to get passed and I have consistently said as much because that was always my opinion. PCC wants something for the City and this provides it and planning always has a slightly hidden agenda for other things not directly connected to what is on the table. If we approve A then we get B as well. A is ok and can be made to fit in with somewhere near what we wanted and is worth taking up to get B. Object to A and B goes with it. It's fairly obvious when you look at it coldly without an Argyle head on which is what they will do. There is simply no real evidence that the capacity is too small. Figures prove more that it is about right than not. Ambition is only what you would like to happen without any evidence to back it up. In the end it probably won't put off that many from carrying on with their support of the team. It won't inspire that many to engage either but the ambition of the premiership is only a pipe dream currently anyway given where we are.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

There is no keep Argyle small and village gang in this.    Not one person would be objecting, including the super fans, if the proposals were for 25000 rather than as is.    Brent has done his sums and plans on his own affordability best for himself and the Company.    There is no evidence that anyone else would have built it bigger or better because they aren't here.

I want the ground completed.    I am disappointed along with the majority that it isn't what I thought it could be or should be for Argyle.    I have no objections to Brent or anyone else making money because that's what they are in business for primarily.    I have no particular objection to changing the park footprint.    Some do have and I respect that even if it doesn't matter so much to me.    This was always going to get passed and I have consistently said as much because that was always my opinion.    PCC wants something for the City and this provides it and planning always has a slightly hidden agenda for other things not directly connected to what is on the table.    If we approve A then we get B as well.    A is ok and can be made to fit in with somewhere near what we wanted and is worth taking up to get B.    Object to A and B goes with it.     It's fairly obvious when you look at it coldly without an Argyle head on which is what they will do.    There is simply no real evidence that the capacity is too small.    Figures prove more that it is about right than not.    Ambition is only what you would like to happen without any evidence to back it up.    In the end it probably won't put off that many from carrying on with their support of the team.    It won't inspire that many to engage either but the ambition of the premiership is only a pipe dream currently anyway given where we are.

As many have said SG it is not about the capacity today but the ease with which capacity can be increased. Most do not believe Brent has a sensible plan for this and probably doesn't care either way, it will be someone else's problem. Not only is the cost per seat high because we are restricted by the retail units but the planning report highlighted today suggests that any future increase in capacity would trigger major highway improvements.

You have absolutely diddly squat chance of maintaining a Championship presence challenging for promotion on a capacity of 17k. You may get there (see Yeovil/Bournemouth) but there's only way you'll leave the Championship.

My only point in saying that Pokesdown is that if you look at history over the last 10 to 15 years the numbers do not support the it's too small camp. You can pluck out some gates but overall they are less than 17000. I wanted a bigger capacity and grandstand as much as the next man but I'm looking at it coldly which is what the planning people will do and being honest. I agree that premiership promotion is unlikely and our history doesn't support the theory either. That could be argued with or without 25000.

So that's it then, a poxy ministand for us and no realistic possibility of future expansion if we were to climb the leagues again.

Brent has made his fortune out of us and got his way.  

Instead of sacrificing a bit of his and the wifes profit and bulding a bigger and better stand that also left the club with the option to realistically expand in the future we're left with this.

Well I hope Mr and Mrs Brent enjoy spending their lovely bit of profit they've made out of us.

No ambition whatsoever to compete with the big boys again.

RIP PAFC.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

My only point in saying that Pokesdown is that if you look at history over the last 10 to 15 years the numbers do not support the it's too small camp.     You can pluck out some gates but overall they are less than 17000.    I wanted a bigger capacity and grandstand as much as the next man but I'm looking at it coldly which is what the planning people will do and being honest.    I agree that premiership promotion is unlikely and our history doesn't support the theory either.    That could be argued with or without 25000.

I understand where you are coming from but what cannot be quantified is the following:

1. There will be times in the next 5 years when 17,000 is not enough. For each of these games you are turning away money
2. Every time you turn someone away you lose the opportunity for them to "get the bug" and also they will be less likely to try and get a ticket next time
3. Attendances are still rising in England despite the recent economic conditions
4. As sure as eggs is eggs then if we do make the CCC and attendances are at 85%+, with some sell outs, then you watch the board as it will be then charge more and more to maximise their income. If you cannot improve turnover with more people then you need to increase the amount of income you receive from each supporter, particularly if large attendances for the bigger games are guaranteed.

Anyway this has been done to death, it's going ahead anyway. Watch it all kick off though should we go on a nice run.

knecht wrote:

Interesting arguments, Gareth. I have never been one who has got hung up on capacity - as one of my strap-lines below says. Like most people, I would dearly have loved the capacity to have been larger. The main grounds on which I have opposed the proposed development is what it will do to limit our future expansion possibilities as well as what I consider to be a gross invasion of Central Park. Those were the rationale behind my letter of objection.

Also, like lots of people, I took exception to what appeared to be the blatant & crass manipulation of public opinion by the club and high-profile supporters (and the involvement of the latter in the so-called consultation). I don't like being patronised. Put that against the ineptitude of the PASB farrago and the failure to meet in any meaningful way the early commitment to engage with the fans. And, if I'm totally honest, a discomfort at an already rich man getting still richer at the club's expense.

I don't know how many times I've said in various ways, we probably should be grateful that Brent managed to save us from disappearing into the abyss of non-league but that certainly shouldn't mean we let that blind us to the possibility that he is doing things wrongly. I've always found that a critical friend is better than a fawning acolyte or even an habitual angry challenger. There have been questions raised about even whether he has actually saved us rather than merely postponed the time when the financial hammer hits again. Only time will tell. I genuinely hope that Brent pulls it off.

I am 100% with Knecht on this. The only difference is that I hope that the Secretary of State puts his oar in.......... big time.

There is no such thing as an established Championship club. If that is the limit of visible ambition, as it will be with the ministand, the wider potential fanbase will simply not buy in and history will repeat itself yet again, if we ever return to the second tier.
The likes of Hull, Brighton, Reading and Swansea have built with an obvious eye towards the PL. The people can see that clearly and jump on board.

While we watch other clubs going forward with ambitious stadium plans (Southend, Bristol Rovers, Brentford etc) in the footsteps of Swansea, Cardiff, Hulll and Brighton we have to endure Argyle's massive permanent step backwards. And the deeply unpleasant sight of superfans and their thick followers who love brent becuase they think "eeeee saved us" crowing from the top of their dung heaps is more than I can stand right now. This is a very black day for the club. In fact it's the beginning of the end.

That said I still feel their might be a twist or two yet that will send the scumbag banker packing empty handed

Tringreen wrote:

There is no such thing as an established Championship club. If that is the limit of visible ambition, as it will be with the ministand, the wider potential fanbase will simply not buy in and history will repeat itself yet again, if we ever return to the second tier.
The likes of Hull, Brighton, Reading and Swansea have built with an obvious eye towards the PL. The people can see that clearly and jump on board.

This is so true, look ambitious look like a go ahead club aiming for the premiership one day, not a small time small town club playing in a little crap ground! brent and his rimmers have killed the dream.