|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 3, 2016 12:37:35 GMT
Couldn't agree more citycentresaint
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker88 on Feb 3, 2016 12:44:19 GMT
Can anyone throw any light on why the proposal by the council to the club, for redevelopment of Westminster Lodge athletics stadium and the land adjacent to it was not a viable option for the club?
|
|
|
Post by casper on Feb 3, 2016 13:47:55 GMT
Glad that he has. My main issue is with the council. They are clueless and don't do anything to help the club. Look at Stevenage, they have a supportive council and they are now an established league side. There are quite a few differences between St Albans and Stevenage. St Albans have mainly a Conservative/Liberal council compared to Stevenage who are Labour. St Albans is a historic roman city and the council district covers other towns, such as Harpenden, and villages such as Wheathampstead with Green Belt land inbetween. Stevenage is new town with very little history. In planning terms it's far easier for Stevenage to build a stadium within a new town than it is for us to build a stadium, as the land is highly likely to be on the green belt and thus has inherent obstacles to overcome in Planning laws. Saying that, St Albans Council could do more to assist the club. If more voices were heard by the council in favour of a new ground it's more likely to be included in the Local Plan. Starting point to me is for all supporters to comment on the Local Plan and contact their local district councillor.
|
|
|
Post by scottishsaint on Feb 3, 2016 14:06:36 GMT
Clubs like Maidstone? Ex-football league, charging £12 to get in and averaging 2,200 for every home game, as well as having finances boosted by an FA Cup run? Not the best example. Eamsie knew only too well because he'd been at Clarence Park through the thick and thin over the past 20-odd years, and it hadn't fallen apart once. Perhaps it's a bad omen he left, a bit like the ravens leaving the tower. Any other examples, Appy?
|
|
|
Post by scottishsaint on Feb 3, 2016 14:07:05 GMT
Can anyone throw any light on why the proposal by the council to the club, for redevelopment of Westminster Lodge athletics stadium and the land adjacent to it was not a viable option for the club? No houses involved?
|
|
fatboy
Saints Youth Team Player
Posts: 200
|
Post by fatboy on Feb 3, 2016 16:12:30 GMT
And now for the Truro game. by the way we lost 1-0. but we played well losing,
|
|
yellowalf
Saints Reserve Team Player
Posts: 301
|
Post by yellowalf on Feb 3, 2016 16:24:57 GMT
Look at Stevenage, they have a supportive council and they are now an established league side. Nothing to do with the £3m Phil Wallace ploughed into the club or the additional £1m he got for naming rights to the ground then?
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 3, 2016 16:42:47 GMT
Can anyone throw any light on why the proposal by the council to the club, for redevelopment of Westminster Lodge athletics stadium and the land adjacent to it was not a viable option for the club? No houses involved? Same as for developing Clarence Park - how do you fund a £5/6m or more stadium development without favourable funding terms. Fans Forum said council would lend money but repayment over short space of time would make club unsustainable in the interim period.
|
|
porkypig
Saints Youth Team Player
Posts: 245
|
Post by porkypig on Feb 3, 2016 18:29:06 GMT
i can't see a new ground being developed anywhere around st. albans basically one is who pays for it and where would the site be? its just pie in the sky.even if it was built by housing developers,they are unlikely to want to cover the cost of the ground which would obviously run into millions. any development at clarence park also unlikely as those lovely people who call themselves friends of " clarence park" in york road,well i rest my case.
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker88 on Feb 3, 2016 18:51:37 GMT
scottishsaint and Appysaint, thank you for the reply to my query
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 3, 2016 18:58:33 GMT
i can't see a new ground being developed anywhere around st. albans basically one is who pays for it and where would the site be? its just pie in the sky.even if it was built by housing developers,they are unlikely to want to cover the cost of the ground which would obviously run into millions. any development at clarence park also unlikely as those lovely people who call themselves friends of " clarence park" in york road,well i rest my case. I don't know whether anything will come of it but at Fans Forum it was mentioned that an offer was being put in for a site in the next couple of weeks. Now is the time so to speak because the council has to allocate land for development as do many other councils currently - to meet government targets
|
|
|
Post by saintsdad on Feb 3, 2016 19:31:33 GMT
do you believe everything that was said at the forum?
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 3, 2016 19:35:17 GMT
I'd just rather listen and make up my own mind so that i can look at solutions rather than simply put up problems/negativity all the time
|
|
|
Post by Canary Saint on Feb 3, 2016 21:06:57 GMT
No houses involved? Same as for developing Clarence Park - how do you fund a £5/6m or more stadium development without favourable funding terms. Fans Forum said council would lend money but repayment over short space of time would make club unsustainable in the interim period. The new Maidstone Ground was only £2.5m. A bargain compared with the £5/6m proposed for the new City ground. Incidentally to find a solution you first have to have a problem(or negative situation.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 3, 2016 21:20:16 GMT
It was a phased development - initial construction cost was 2.8m. Extension to increase capacity to 3000 cost another £1m. Add in land costs (St Albans), pitch etc and you start getting £5/6m.
|
|
|
Post by saintsdad on Feb 3, 2016 21:58:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 3, 2016 22:06:22 GMT
The article says total construction cost £4m - to get it to National League South standard. For promotion to next level even more needs to be spent. And then there's land costs...
|
|
|
Post by St Michael on Feb 3, 2016 22:31:03 GMT
Why don't we merge with London Colney and start building up a stadium there.
|
|
|
Post by casper on Feb 3, 2016 22:43:19 GMT
Why don't we merge with London Colney and start building up a stadium there. We would be demoted to the league they are in if we merged. Would save on the running costs though. Better idea would be to buy their ground and have them as tenants on a 3G pitch.
|
|
|
Post by bob666 on Feb 4, 2016 5:05:57 GMT
I not oppossed to a new ground but I don't think supporters should offer unconditional support. There been serveral instances of new grounds making clubs sitution worse- so the devil is in the detail. St Albans is sustainable at some level at CP- serveral clubs have gone completely out of business after moving. Where will the new ground actually be? I really don't see the point if it not actually in St Albans (broadly defined). We are St Albans I think more important that we actually play in City than what league we play in. What will the ownership arrangement be etc? Also what do the owners what in terms of housing development. Are we discussing a sufficent number of houses to pay for the ground and insure a fair return or a huge number to secure supranormal profits? Would the owners be interested in a soultion that allowed a new ground to be funded but did not allow them to make substantial profits? Also if we are asking for housing are we effectively asking the council to pay for it? I no expert on planning but I almost certain that in high value areas like St Albans councils demand that developers pay a levy - the size of which depend on the project (more on green belt). I assuming that in St Albans the ground will presented as a social good and as a full or partial subsitute for this. I not oppossed it this but I am not comfortable with proposal that sees the owners substantially enrich by using the club to manipulate the planning process.
Finally, I not a fan of the council (I always vote Labour) but they are under intense pressure from government to build new houses and equally intense local pressure to try to limit erosion of green belt etc. So not as simply as saying they should simply allow development and support the club.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 4, 2016 7:31:55 GMT
I think that is why I wouldn't give unconditional support but absolutely support the desire for a new ground. I appreciate bob666 being a realist and accepting CP not supporting football at NLS level if the club is aiming to be self-sufficient. Look at Lewes FC at the foot of the Ryman Premier - they keep out of debt but do so with a limited playing budget yet can't build a competitive squad on that budget. That's despite their ground having some half decent facilities and a 3G training facility that they can hire out. They'll probably spend time in and out of Ryman Premier but will be very unlikely to survive above that level without further investment / much improved facilities.
|
|
|
Post by scottishsaint on Feb 4, 2016 7:46:20 GMT
The article says total construction cost £4m - to get it to National League South standard. For promotion to next level even more needs to be spent. And then there's land costs... Extensions always cost more. If they had set out to build a 3,000 capacity stadium, it would've cost less than the £2.9 million plus the £650,000. Also, the article says the cost was £4 million when the previous regime's debts are included. Found any more examples of non-league clubs turning a profit, by the way?
|
|
|
Post by scottishsaint on Feb 4, 2016 7:49:02 GMT
I think that is why I wouldn't give unconditional support but absolutely support the desire for a new ground. I appreciate bob666 being a realist and accepting CP not supporting football at NLS level if the club is aiming to be self-sufficient. Look at Lewes FC at the foot of the Ryman Premier - they keep out of debt but do so with a limited playing budget yet can't build a competitive squad on that budget. That's despite their ground having some half decent facilities and a 3G training facility that they can hire out. They'll probably spend time in and out of Ryman Premier but will be very unlikely to survive above that level without further investment / much improved facilities. Maybe the aim to be self-sufficient is misguided?
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 4, 2016 8:17:30 GMT
The article says total construction cost £4m - to get it to National League South standard. For promotion to next level even more needs to be spent. And then there's land costs... Extensions always cost more. If they had set out to build a 3,000 capacity stadium, it would've cost less than the £2.9 million plus the £650,000. Also, the article says the cost was £4 million when the previous regime's debts are included. Found any more examples of non-league clubs turning a profit, by the way? There are some people on this forum that aren't worth a response - will always criticise those that aim to do something positive or hold a different opinion
|
|
|
Post by scottishsaint on Feb 4, 2016 8:50:49 GMT
I thought the issues of self-sufficiency and the lack of similarity between our situation and Maidstone's might be worthy of something. Some people on this forum might have minor reservations about decisions made by the current owners, and as a result have reservations about what decisions could be made going forward. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker88 on Feb 4, 2016 9:06:22 GMT
Appysaint, what I would like to know is:-
1. Are the owners actively seeking to bring in other investors to the club?
2. If the answer to the above is yes. Why are they failing
3. If the answer is No. Then why not, we clearly need it to play at NLS level and also could lower admission costs
4. Who is actually on our Board? Who makes the decisions?
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Feb 4, 2016 9:34:52 GMT
Why don't you just go up to Lawrence or Nick Archer at a game and ask those questions - that is one of the appeals of non league after all...
|
|
|
Post by Canary Saint on Feb 4, 2016 9:52:41 GMT
Extensions always cost more. If they had set out to build a 3,000 capacity stadium, it would've cost less than the £2.9 million plus the £650,000. Also, the article says the cost was £4 million when the previous regime's debts are included. Found any more examples of non-league clubs turning a profit, by the way? There are some people on this forum that aren't worth a response - will always criticise those that aim to do something positive or hold a different opinion [/quote I'm pretty sure Napoleon was positive when he invaded Russia. (That went well)
|
|
|
Post by cityslicker88 on Feb 4, 2016 10:01:05 GMT
I have no need too ask them as I know the answers to the 4 questions, I was merely asking for your opinion on the matters
|
|
|
Post by casper on Feb 4, 2016 10:03:01 GMT
|
|