Senor_Coconut Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Today rarely wrong Chron Athletic scale back flats development by MARTYN TORR OLDHAM Athletic are scaling back the number of properties to built around Boundary Park. Chief executive Alan Hardy told an Oldham meeting of Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce that the housing scheme is likely to be reduced from the proposed near 600-plus flats in the original submission to around 350 units, including some three and four-bed houses. “Everyone recognises the difficulty of trying to sell so many flats,” he declared. He also indicated that the Royal Oldham Hospital had shown an interest in taking space in phase three of the redevelopment — phase two is a hotel linked to a new Chadderton End stand — which involves replacing the main stand. Around 60 people were present at the Bower Hotel, Hollinwood, for Mr Hardy’s presentation. He should have been accompanied by co-owner Simon Corney and director Ian Hill but they were involved in talks with developers. Mr Hardy revealed that statutory legal agreements with the local authority, over what he called section 106 issues, would be signed off this week. This would allow potential developers around the 23-acre site, which is essentially funding the new-look stadium, to make firm offers. “Housing developers, and we have been talking to several, now know their commitments and this is a big step forward. “Unfortunately, land values have dropped since the scheme was first put together, but that is something we have to deal with,” he added. Mr Hardy confirmed that, until a legal document is in place for the housing development, work will not start on the new stand, which will house commercial offices, banqueting and hospitality suites, retail facilities and changing rooms. He said: “Since the new owners took over in 2005 they have spent around £11.5 million on Athletic and it is fair to say they will not commit the club to a multi-million contract for a new stand without an agreement in place for housing.” Assuming a contract is in place, work on the demolition of the New Start Mortgages Stand will start at the end of June ahead of construction of a £11.5 million, 5,000-seater replacement. Builders are due on site by the end of the year, according to Mr Hardy, who is expecting completion within 12 to 14 months, suggesting the first phase of the Oldham Arena redevelopment, will open in early 2010. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 So does this mean that there will now be even more of a shortfall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 So does this mean that there will now be even more of a shortfall? Make them twice as smart, double the price Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 So does this mean that there will now be even more of a shortfall? Shortfall - I was always lead to believe there would be a surplus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 It's possible then the Lookers stand may still be standing next season if that contract isn't signed ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Assuming a contract is in place, work on the demolition of the New Start Mortgages Stand will start at the end of June ahead of construction of a £11.5 million, 5,000-seater replacement. Builders are due on site by the end of the year, according to Mr Hardy, who is expecting completion within 12 to 14 months, suggesting the first phase of the Oldham Arena redevelopment, will open in early 2010. Thought that the Lookers was coming down after the last home game ? , now a delay of two months +/- Building work to start at the end of the year when the bad weather kicks in ? Got a feeling this could drag it's arse on longer than "Early 2010". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspiral_Carpet Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Shortfall - I was always lead to believe there would be a surplus. I think several believed that there would be a surplus as they seem convinced that TTA are only in this to make a profit. The numbers were always too tight though and with too much risk. £11.5m invested so far (plus more to come) with a "possible" profit of a couple of million - which now looks highly unlikely. Perhaps now people will start to believe that they are here because they want to own a football club and not just to make a profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 I posted a few weeks ago about us not being to suprised if the whole development doesn't come off. I think this is the first sign; the regeneration of the area will not be worth what TTA first thought so I reckon we will just end up with a new Broadway stand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddyblue Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 looks like the demolition has been postponed. The club will need legal commitment from developer(s) of the site before they can start the new stand, as per report. Wonder whether NSM is being demolished regardless ? If so its to be hoped that the next stage of the scheme falls into place otherwise we could end up with a 3 sided ground for a long time. I would imagine the revised mix of dwellings must still stack up revenue wise otherwise the whole scheme could be at risk....just to be cheerful like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 (edited) Three and four bed houses, now included, do have a higher value than flats so it's not such a cut back as it may at first appear. Unfortunatelly property speculation is just that - speculation - and land prices go down as well as up. Edited April 4, 2008 by LaticsPete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 I posted a few weeks ago about us not being to suprised if the whole development doesn't come off. I think this is the first sign; the regeneration of the area will not be worth what TTA first thought so I reckon we will just end up with a new Broadway stand. Cant see that mate £11.5M just for the New Broadway Stand , and who will pay for that ? It will be all or nothing ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 looks like the demolition has been postponed. The club will need legal commitment from developer(s) of the site before they can start the new stand, as per report. Wonder whether NSM is being demolished regardless ? If so its to be hoped that the next stage of the scheme falls into place otherwise we could end up with a 3 sided ground for a long time. I would imagine the revised mix of dwellings must still stack up revenue wise otherwise the whole scheme could be at risk....just to be cheerful like Think the key phrase here is that the demolition was always sheduled for after the season ends - didnt think they ever said the exact date??? Think everyone is juping predictably on the negativity badwaggon - all i see is that they have re-jigged the plans to make it more viable - something which always happens in these devlopments after planning... and the build shedule has stayed the same??? Nothing there that says for 1 second that the plans are in danger...? They have just made a more appealing plan for builders... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 looks like the demolition has been postponed. The club will need legal commitment from developer(s) of the site before they can start the new stand, as per report. Wonder whether NSM is being demolished regardless ? If so its to be hoped that the next stage of the scheme falls into place otherwise we could end up with a 3 sided ground for a long time. I would imagine the revised mix of dwellings must still stack up revenue wise otherwise the whole scheme could be at risk....just to be cheerful like lol I like the last bit I dont think they will drop the NSM unless it's definatly a goer , how much would the demolition cost just as a starters ? As we say "Owt's better than nowt" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddyblue Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Not a question of being negative, realistic. Without commitment to buy the development land Latics can't really move forward and I agree with the earlier post that it is all or nothing and may be a longer lead in time than first thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostofcecere Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Cant see that mate £11.5M just for the New Broadway Stand , and who will pay for that ? It will be all or nothing ! What I mean is that the money that TTA thought they would have available for the whole thing won't be there now, so they will scale back the plans for the Stadium. The housing development is being scaled back 45% (ion terms of units) so I bet the sale price for the land won't be far behind that. If they have already spent £11M on us they will want that back first and foremost, and then whatever is left over will be spent on the stadium. IMO of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Corney said at the Monday forum he reckoned the council messing around for so long and dragging their heels like they have meant the land had lost some of its value. The stage we're at now we really should have been at a year back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Corney said at the Monday forum he reckoned the council messing around for so long and dragging their heels like they have meant the land had lost some of its value. The stage we're at now we really should have been at a year back. Got a feeling this could drag it's arse on longer than "Early 2010". So just to re-cap , Simon agree's with me then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inspiral_Carpet Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 So just to re-cap , Simon agree's with me then Even a stopped clock is right twice a day you know Exile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danoafc Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Today rarely wrong Chron Less flats, more 3/4 bed houses. Much 'more in keeping with the surrounding area'. Wonder if this will please our Mr Hewitt or whether he'll still have his knickers in a twist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Even a stopped clock is right twice a day you know Exile. Think you will find that some who post on here will debate that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 I posted a few weeks ago about us not being to suprised if the whole development doesn't come off. I think this is the first sign; the regeneration of the area will not be worth what TTA first thought so I reckon we will just end up with a new Broadway stand. The reduced scale of the housing development should quieten the remaining 8 NIMBYs overlooking the BP car park. The crucial thing is to get the statutory Section 106 agreement with the Council signed, to implement all the conditions attached to the planning permissions already granted. Then detailed planning permission has to be obtained before a legal document can be signed for the housing development. By the time Bashforth and his mates have dragged their feet, the housing market might have picked up again, but TTA will be lucky to break even when their dream of a self-sufficient stadium is realised. When you hear of owners pulling out of clubs, it's remarkable that we've got three who have shown more loyalty than we could have dreamed of five years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 The reduced scale of the housing development should quieten the remaining 8 NIMBYs overlooking the BP car park. The crucial thing is to get the statutory Section 106 agreement with the Council signed, to implement all the conditions attached to the planning permissions already granted. Then detailed planning permission has to be obtained before a legal document can be signed for the housing development. By the time Bashforth and his mates have dragged their feet, the housing market might have picked up again, but TTA will be lucky to break even when their dream of a self-sufficient stadium is realised. When you hear of owners pulling out of clubs, it's remarkable that we've got three who have shown more loyalty than we could have dreamed of five years ago. Can you expand a little on that D_S , surely the numbers will have been re-juggled to accomodate the three/four bedroom houses. Added with Hospital coming onboard , which was part of the initial idea plus i would assume a "Major" Hotel chain behind phase two of the plan I would have thought that it's not all doom and gloom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 Can you expand a little on that D_S , surely the numbers will have been re-juggled to accomodate the three/four bedroom houses. Added with Hospital coming onboard , which was part of the initial idea plus i would assume a "Major" Hotel chain behind phase two of the plan I would have thought that it's not all doom and gloom. My post wasn't intended to be one of doom and gloom! It was intended to be realistic with the state of the housing market and to point out to those who think TTA are here for profit, that there will be no profit. In spite of that, TTA are sticking with us, which I think is fantastic, at the risk of being marked down as a 'happy clapper'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 My post wasn't intended to be one of doom and gloom! It was intended to be realistic with the state of the housing market and to point out to those who think TTA are here for profit, that there will be no profit. In spite of that, TTA are sticking with us, which I think is fantastic, at the risk of being marked down as a 'happy clapper'! The Doom and gloom wasn't directed at you D_S , as I posted I think that TTA will have re-addressed the numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted April 4, 2008 Share Posted April 4, 2008 (edited) I think several believed that there would be a surplus as they seem convinced that TTA are only in this to make a profit. The numbers were always too tight though and with too much risk. £11.5m invested so far (plus more to come) with a "possible" profit of a couple of million - which now looks highly unlikely. Perhaps now people will start to believe that they are here because they want to own a football club and not just to make a profit. Hmmm twist my words why don't you. I was making the point that TTA has correctly planned to make a surplus and so there was no planned shortfall that could impact on the clubs finances. I deliberately left out the word "profit" for the exact same reason you have stated above. Education is the key though, not jumping down peoples throats on the defensive. Edited April 4, 2008 by jimsleftfoot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.